a reply to: CB328
Proof and examples? Where are they, then? Yawn. Citing a bunch of sources that use circular confirmation is equally boring.
Simony- Appointing his unelected and unqualified children to run government offices- www.washingtontimes.com...
His government, his staff, his decision. And unqualified by whom's standard? Yours? Doesn't seem like a very high bar to me, in that instance.
Besides, a majority of government employees are "unelected" so what exactly is your point? That you have no point? It is the only valid point I see in
this entire post.
Proof? He's allowed to earn money, provided he doesn't engage in illegal activities. One doesn't have to sell their business and every personal asset
simply because they're elected to public office. There is also no requirement he turn it over to a blind trust, that is merely a "norm" not law.
Proof? Because the "good word" of Gloria Allred and her typical parade of accusers won't do it. We're going to need more than talking heads before
this one is believed. So, again, burden of proof = rests on accusers = no proof presented = not guilty
Proof? Funny he's never been charged with bribery. Almost like whoever wrote this article just really, really dislike the PRESIDENT and decided to run
with a bunch of unconfirmed allegations. Seems par for the course with you folks though. Real high standards of evidence, eh? How shameful.
Undermining the government- Underfunding agencies and leaving positions vacant. constantly attacking other agencies, politicians,
even his own appointees. Attacking and possibly trying to influence courts and other government agencies doing their jobs.
Your point? His government, his agencies, his decision. He can influence/attack/order/whatever he chooses with any federal agency under his
jurisdiction (that is every single federal agency, FYI). Furthermore, independence from the DOJ is merely a norm
not codified in law. How could
it be? POTUS is chief law enforcement officer, and has the legal right to instruct his DOJ how he sees fit. As far as courts go, where is the evidence
he's tried to influence them? Again, prove your allegations. Linking to a new article is not proof, it is conjecture/opinion.
Appointing Unqualified and fringe, highly partisan people to government positions. He has had several people remove themselves from
consideration for appointments, or resign or be fired from positions-
Your point? I'm getting tired of explaining this: his government, his staff. They can be as fringe as he chooses, that is why we elected him after
all. To be the first POTUS to actually make major changes in DC and deconstruct the bureaucracy/deep state/Democrat welfare state. Looks to me like
he's carrying out our mandate to a "T"
These are all pluses, not negatives.
Escalating tensions with North Korea
Wrong again, bucko. That was NK who decided to escalate tensions by illegally developing nuclear weapons and threatening us with them. Lazy saps like
Obama/Bush should've handled NK, but that buck was passed to Trump. Rest assured, he'll handle them though. Unlike the former cowardly Dem.
administration, Trump doesn't pull punches and kiss the feet of dictators.
Too bad you don't approve of it, but the thinking people of this country realize ending NK now would be easier than ending them once they develop
hundreds of nuclear weapons. It is called exploiting an enemy while they're weak/down, get used to it.
Supporting the Saudi Government including their immoral coup-
You mean like Obama/Nuland's coup in Ukraine? Libya? Egypt? Were those "more moral" ? Hypocrisy. Sickening hypocrisy, but not unexpected from a
The war on science-
You mean the "battle" where he allowed the climate change paper to be published? That war on science? Few doubt that conclusion. Rather, we doubt that
mere humans have any significant impact on the planet. I know it hurts, but you/we just aren't that big & important.
Needlessly declaring Jerusalem the capital if Israel increasing tensions across the muslim world
Wasn't needless. He can't help a bunch of death-cult worshipers decide to engage in violent/threatening acts when they don't get their way. FACT is,
this was a law passed decades ago by mandate of the American people. Jerusalem is the capital of Israel, not Palestine. Trump merely carried out the
will of the American people which decades of past Presidents refused to do. There were no negotiations, only Palestinian radical Islamic terror
attacks. Palestinians wouldn't sit at the table with realistic expectations (much like the Dems won't) so Trump simply removed their seat. Sounds
perfectly reasonable to me.
And if "the Muslim world" decides to commit acts of violence and terrorism...well, that is why they invented firearms, fighter jets/bombs and armies.
Self Agrandizement- Trump spends a lot of his time speaking talking about himself and how wonderful he thinks he is
Free speech. Read the bill of rights and get over it. Moving on.
Again, no law against not being a tree hugger. Some people give a damn about the environment, others do not. I care more about paying less at the gas
pumps than I do about some hippy pinko cause celebre.
Deregulation and serving the wealthy and big business
Deregulation is good. Takes the incompetent government out of the picture, and puts the "onus" back where it should be: the individual. This country
is about personal freedom, independence and rugged individualism. Nowhere in that founding vision does having a nanny-state hold your hand and hang
nebulous "safety nets" pop up. And you have to help the wealthy/big business to create jobs and most importantly bring jobs back to this country.
Otherwise, we'll just be providing jobs for non-Americans instead of Americans. Clearly a US President should be looking out for THIS country and THIS
people. I'm sorry you don't approve, but it changes nothing.
Pushing Religious Right agendas at the expense of everyone else-
So now you criticize him for religion? Freedom of religion. He has the duty to pursue an agenda as mandated by the American people who elected him to
carry out our will. He's doing that task, spot on. Here's to hoping he doubles, and then re-doubles his efforts though. From your reaction here, it
appears to be working exactly as intended.
You mean like how the Democrats energize the far left including communists and socialists?
Energizing the far right including Neo Nazis and other extremists-
Your point? Do those clowns (who are just as bad as
the neo-nazis) represent the Democrats? Of course not. Just as neo-nazis do not represent the Republicans. That is a false equivalency. He can't help
who is "energized" by him. Our agenda has nothing to do with neo nazis or extremists, and everything to do with patriotism/nationalism/etc and MAKING
AMERICA GREAT AGAIN. We can't help that people on the left use & need groups like neo-nazis to maintain their victim status and manufactured
outrage/scare mongering. It has zero/zilch to do with us, however. Zero to do with the President or our party, for that matter.
edit on 2/4/2018 by JBurns because: (no reason given)