Donald J. Trump: President of the USA Part III Covfefe

buka001

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
3,004
Aren't you the lot who say that AR 15 are dangerous weapons that are capable of mass killing?

The opposite actually happens. The army wouldn't want to engage in firing on armed people, especially when they can fire back and are outnumbered.


They will fire back because that is what someone with a gun will do.


Which is why allowing people to have a piece of reality like a gun to protect themselves is a safeguard against it. The right exists right, which means that people have the force to protect themselves.

If the government led by AOC or some radical moron tried to radically disarm people, there would be a real fight on the government's hands. Which means that they would try and break down that right in small pieces. Which is EXACTLY what the Democrats do.

Exactly the same thing is happening in South Africa with regards to property. The government will change the constitution, but won't do much with it. Then slowly they will push the overton's window, like what happened in Venezuela.

Mmm technically the US National Guard already has fired on "armed" protesters. I present to you the debacle that was the Kent State Shooting in May 1970.

The students were protesting the totalitarian acts of the US Government, the involvement of the USA in the Vietnam war and the illegal bombing of Cambodia.

The National Guard were called in to disperse the protesters.

Anyway during the protest, four students were shot dead by the National Guard and several were wounded.

The National Guard fired on protesters, after they believed they were shot at by a sniper in the amongst the protesters. It has never been fully determined if they were actually shot at by a protester and this is highly debated and disputed.

Did 2A protect these protesters? No, they got shot, because the Guard believed that at least one of them were armed. Had they all been armed, there would have been even more dire consequences. Is the National Guard just going to retreat? They would call in more resources.

It took a school professor to beg the students to disperse, after the shooting, because he was told if they don't, they will shoot the rest (watch Ken Burns Vietnam War documentary for a chilling account of this shooting). Guns would not have saved them at this protest, it would have made it several times worse.

None of the National Guardsmen were held to account for the deaths of 4 students. The protesters were the ones who were charged, although never convicted due to lack of evidence.

Assuming someone did actually shoot at the Guardsmen, do you think he could have used the 2nd Amendment as defence, as to why he shot at them?

It is something I have always wondered about. 2A had a reasonably good intention back when Revolutionary Wars were the flavour of the month, however in modern context, is it as practical as it set out to be?

Who determines the government is totalitarian? Who is going to enforce that right, if the government is in actual fact totalitarian?
 

buka001

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
3,004
Even in SA, the protesters disperse if the Army arrives. They play by their own rules. If you protest and continue to do so once the army arrives, God speed to you :D
Those kids were brave. Actually stood up for what they believe in. Even after 4 kids were shot, they wanted to charge at the National Guard and a professor convinced them not too.
 

buka001

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
3,004
Wardrums beating again in the middle east.

I think after Bolton decided he can't get his war in Venezuela, they are going after Iran.

A carrier and a detachment of B-52's are being sent to the Middle East to guard against "credible threats" against US forces in the area by Iran and its proxies.
 

Pitbull

Verboten
Joined
Apr 8, 2006
Messages
61,388
Those kids were brave. Actually stood up for what they believe in. Even after 4 kids were shot, they wanted to charge at the National Guard and a professor convinced them not too.
You call them brave, I call them stupid.

No way in hell, should anyone anywhere on earth Stand face to face with an Army of any sort unless there is conflict. Else innocent people will die.
 

buka001

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
3,004
You call them brave, I call them stupid.

No way in hell, should anyone anywhere on earth Stand face to face with an Army of any sort unless there is conflict. Else innocent people will die.
Brave people are generally stupid. Running into a burning building to save a kid is stupid as you could kill yourself, but ultimately the act is brave and morally correct.

Those kids never expected the Guards to shoot them. In the late 60's there were thousands of protests in the USA and something like this had never happened.

Their loss was not for nothing. It brought on wider international pressure to the US government to pull out of Vietnam and stop bombing Cambodia. It changed the way police etc dealt with protests going forward. So those kids did bring about real change, even if it meant dying for that change.
 

cerebus

Honorary Master
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
34,812
Mike Pompeo pleased as punch about the business opportunities opened up by the melting Arctic ice:

The Arctic is at the forefront of opportunity and abundance. It houses 13 percent of the world’s undiscovered oil, 30 percent of its undiscovered gas, an abundance of uranium, rare earth minerals, gold, diamonds, and millions of square miles of untapped resources, fisheries galore. Its centerpiece, the Arctic Ocean, is rapidly taking on new significance. Offshore resources, which are helping their respective coastal states on the subject of renewed competition. Steady reductions in sea ice are opening new passageways and new opportunities for trade. This could potentially slash the time it takes to travel between Asia and the West by as much as 20 days. Arctic sea lanes could become the 21st century Suez and Panama Canals.
 

cerebus

Honorary Master
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
34,812
Kemp just signed the harshest abortion bill in the US into law.

https://www.ajc.com/blog/politics/b...eartbeat-bill-tuesday/SMN1lGQHqWBEsnRhXPGa7I/

On Tuesday, Georgia Republican Gov. Brian Kemp signed a “fetal heartbeat” bill that seeks to outlaw abortion after about six weeks. The measure, HB 481, is the most extreme abortion ban in the country—not just because it would impose severe limitations on women’s reproductive rights, but also because it would subject women who get illegal abortions to life imprisonment and the death penalty.
 

Techne

Honorary Master
Joined
Sep 28, 2008
Messages
10,765
Kemp just signed the harshest abortion bill in the US into law.

https://www.ajc.com/blog/politics/b...eartbeat-bill-tuesday/SMN1lGQHqWBEsnRhXPGa7I/

On Tuesday, Georgia Republican Gov. Brian Kemp signed a “fetal heartbeat” bill that seeks to outlaw abortion after about six weeks. The measure, HB 481, is the most extreme abortion ban in the country—not just because it would impose severe limitations on women’s reproductive rights, but also because it would subject women who get illegal abortions to life imprisonment and the death penalty.
Women's reproductive rights... Makes it sound like women must have the right to kill their offspring.
 

cerebus

Honorary Master
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
34,812
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/05/07/us/politics/donald-trump-taxes.html

Decade in the Red: Trump Tax Figures
Show Over $1 Billion in Business Losses

The data — printouts from Mr. Trump’s official Internal Revenue Service tax transcripts, with the figures from his federal tax form, the 1040, for the years 1985 to 1994 — represents the fullest and most detailed look to date at the president’s taxes, information he has kept from public view. Though the information does not cover the tax years at the center of an escalating battle between the Trump administration and Congress, it traces the most tumultuous chapter in a long business career — an era of fevered acquisition and spectacular collapse.

The numbers show that in 1985, Mr. Trump reported losses of $46.1 million from his core businesses — largely casinos, hotels and retail space in apartment buildings. They continued to lose money every year, totaling $1.17 billion in losses for the decade.




Who ever thought it would be a good idea to let this serial loser and con artist into the White House?
 

OrbitalDawn

Ulysses Everett McGill
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
40,890
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/05/07/us/politics/donald-trump-taxes.html

Decade in the Red: Trump Tax Figures
Show Over $1 Billion in Business Losses

The data — printouts from Mr. Trump’s official Internal Revenue Service tax transcripts, with the figures from his federal tax form, the 1040, for the years 1985 to 1994 — represents the fullest and most detailed look to date at the president’s taxes, information he has kept from public view. Though the information does not cover the tax years at the center of an escalating battle between the Trump administration and Congress, it traces the most tumultuous chapter in a long business career — an era of fevered acquisition and spectacular collapse.

The numbers show that in 1985, Mr. Trump reported losses of $46.1 million from his core businesses — largely casinos, hotels and retail space in apartment buildings. They continued to lose money every year, totaling $1.17 billion in losses for the decade.




Who ever thought it would be a good idea to let this serial loser and con artist into the White House?
lol.

"While Donald Trump reported hundreds of millions of dollars in losses for 1990 and 1991, Fred Trump’s returns showed a positive income of $53.9 million, with only one major loss: $15 million invested in his son’s latest apartment project."

What a pathetic failson.
 

cerebus

Honorary Master
Joined
Nov 5, 2007
Messages
34,812
https://boingboing.net/2019/05/07/justice-department-asks-white.html

Justice Department asks White House to invoke executive privilege over Mueller report

Multiple reporters tweeted late Tuesday night the Department of Justice is asking the Trump White House to invoke executive privilege over the entire report by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, along with all underlying evidence. It's a new defensive move as the House Judiciary Committee prepares a contempt vote against Attorney General Bill Barr.

DOJ says in the letter, “In the face of the Committee's threatened contempt vote the Attorney General will be compelled to request that the President invoke executive privilege with respect to the materials subject to the subpoena,” if the House moves forward with contempt process.
This is pretty much exactly how I saw it playing out. Trump will go nuclear on congress to prevent them from getting access to the full report or having Mueller testify. It's a full-blown constitutional crisis already IMO, and I don't understand why congress are being so reticent to move to impeachment.
 

Emjay

Executive Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2005
Messages
6,488

Emjay

Executive Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2005
Messages
6,488
https://boingboing.net/2019/05/07/justice-department-asks-white.html

Justice Department asks White House to invoke executive privilege over Mueller report



This is pretty much exactly how I saw it playing out. Trump will go nuclear on congress to prevent them from getting access to the full report or having Mueller testify. It's a full-blown constitutional crisis already IMO, and I don't understand why congress are being so reticent to move to impeachment.
I think a Constitutional crisis is unfounded spying on a presidential candidate sanctioned by US institutions. But, keep holding out. Any day now. The walls are closing in. It's quite amusing to watch.
 

Whright

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2017
Messages
496
Top