The Trump Presidency

Statist fantasies that nothing is possible without a state disposed.

There is, indeed, a good reason to avoid this technology actually, namely that it would be based on the banking system of the state, thus, would allow the state to observe completely private things.

Not plausible, given that I have explained you many times that I do not care at all about this "information". I do not believe in ideas being derived, this is positivist nonsense. Ideas are free human inventions. Elementary Popper. Of course, I have own opinions, I do not follow any guru or Party line. But this does not mean that I do not use information and arguments from other sources. It means that I use a wide range of sources, and use own reasoning to make decisions what to accept and what to reject.

Information about the sources of some claims are, in some circumstances, useful. But these circumstances are quite restricted. Namely to factual information. If I evaluate claims about what happened in Syria, such information is important, because these are factual claims, and it makes a lot of sense to evaluate the reputation of various sources for providing accurate factual information.

Unfortunately, even for this your vague "this comes from rightwing sources" is not useful. There exist some correlations between the accuracy of factual information and political preferences, but it is not that strong to exclude whole directions completely. There may be a few exceptions - pro-Bandera Ukrainian sites, for example - but even from these sources one can extract useful factual information (the large amount of lies simply makes this job very difficult).

But factual information is only a part of what is really interesting. More important, and for me much more important, is argumentation. And the value of an argument can be evaluated without even knowing the source of the argument. Say, a mathematical proof is an example of an argument, and if the proof is correct or not can be established without knowing the origin, in principle even a program can do this.

I would recommend you also to care about the style. I would have no problem if your would write "I don't believe this claim, because it comes from a known right-wing propaganda source XYZ." This would be, indeed, information. Useful or not for me is my problem. But I would know that, without providing own factual evidence, it would not make sense to insist on this factual claim. This makes sense for factual claims. But to use this as a proof that the claim is wrong makes no sense. Even less to accuse me for using right-wing sources simply for believing this claim.

Learn to read. Exercise: Explain the difference between "X suggests defamatory intentions" and "X is a defamation".

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Strange things continue to happen at the White House. The White House continues to withdraw and become more insular. Today the White House announced the daily press briefing will not be televised. It's a very strange thing. I expect it's probably related to Trump's deteriorating mental state. Eventually the "Great and Magnificent Trump" implodes.

The other interesting thing about Trump is that he is increasingly relying upon in cabinet secretaries to speak for him rather than his press secretary. Historically, cabinet secretaries speak for their departments, but they haven't acted as the president's press secretary as we have seen with the Trump administration. It's odd. I'm not sure what to make of it other than Trump's fragile mental state is in an apparent state of decomposition.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Comey will testify before Congress as early as next Wednesday. I look forward to that hearing. I'm sure we drop a few bombshells. The case against Trump keeps growing. Comey's public rebuttal, under oath, will be something to see.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/31/politics/fbi-comey-testimony/index.html

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

If Comey testifies as expected next week that Trump attempted to suppress the investigation into his Russian connections, that's a very clear case for impeachment. Add to that whatever else these investigations reveal and Trump's goose is cooked.

 

If so we should see Trump attempt to suppress Comey' testimony to Congress...given his fragile mental state he will probably tweet something to the effect that attempts to discredit congress.
Totally sad and insane situation about to be further exasperated.

 

Indeed, it is a very sand and insane situation. When Comey testifies I expect he will debunk everything Trump has said about his dismissal and the events leading up to his dismissal. I particularly look forward to the story about personal loyalty oaths.

Trump's fragile mental state will not be getting better anytime soon. I expect Trump's erratic behaviors to worsen. I expect his crazy midnight tweets to continue. At some point, Republicans in Congress need to get rid of the guy for the sake of the world, country, and their asses. Republicans don't care about the world or the country, but they sure the hell care about their asses.

For weeks now there have been rumors of a White House shake up as if that will somehow make things better for Trump. The problem isn't the White House staffers; it's "The Donald": the one person Trump will never blame.

 

Trump has already attempted to discredit Comey by referring to him as a "nut job" yes?
We can anticipate more attempts to consider everyone other than Trump to be nuts. This is the nature of NPD in extreme form. To maintain and prop up a failing and false self esteem he can only do so by slandering someone else.

 

#traitors | #WhatTheyVotedFor​

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Click for an American lamentation.​

It is worth noting that, following the three percent drop↑ in Donald Trump's approval numbers among Republicans in the 8-14 May period, the president finally recovered the lost ground in the 22-28 May period, which brought him back to eighty-seven percent↱.

Rattling allies with dangerously uneducated puffery, coddling tyranny, outing our nuclear subs for the benefit of his buddy, Phillippine President Rodrigo the Rapemonger—apparently such behavior thrills Republicans.

Okay, so ...

• The prospect that the "opposition" is "betraying the country" is one of those notions that is supposed to be somewhere "beyond the pale". But, what, really? What is the kind interpretation, that Trump was showing off for his pal the rapemonger? And something about Russia goes here. Really? That's the week Trump gets his three percent back?​

... things are a bit weird, here, as you might imagine.
____________________

Notes:

Gallup. "Presidential Approval Ratings—Donald Trump". 2017. Gallup.com. 31 May 2017. http://bit.ly/2nfn8xS

 

Your ideas posted here are the free human inventions of hired rightwing authoritarian propagandists and marketers in the US, who developed them as media agitprop for gulling low-information targets in the US, thereby obtaining Republican votes and other political leverage.
They were and are designed for inculcation in people who lack information, who cannot defend themselves against deception and hypnosis because they have no base of knowledge to think with.

You are incapable of evaluating US fascist propaganda, because you lack basic knowledge of US reality.

You posted blather about how you use all kinds of sources, and claimed you were capable of assessing their arguments without knowing anything about their context. Then you said Clinton was a psychopath who wanted to kill people and was likely to start a war with Russia, something you had discovered by looking at videos featuring Clinton.

When a simple and completely accurate description of your posting suggests defamatory intentions, maybe you should take a minute to think things over.
- - - -
Meanwhile, anyone puzzled about Trump's frequent fallbacks to his electoral college win, brags about his millions of votes, campaign - style rhetoric and photo ops, etc, can look at this:

It's going to be almost impossible to remove Trump from office while the Republicans in Congress are looking at numbers like that. It would require courage from Republicans.

 

Found nothing worth to reply in iceaura's posting - the usual "you are wrong" and "you use evil sources" without arguments.

 

Have you considered the implications of this:

You keep claiming to be able to evaluate media stuff without information about the reality behind it. You can't. You are being played.

 

Long ago. Considered and identified as a simple variant of the old well-known "you should not read evil sources" propaganda. You know, I have seen variants of this already in my childhood. At that time, it was somehow plausible for me, I was yet a child. But it was, at that time, directed toward adults too.

The rights are developing media agitprop, you are developing media agitprop, but the old techniques I have learned in my communist childhood work nicely. They allow to detect right-wing propaganda as well as left-wing propaganda.

 

It had nothing to do with what you read. It was about what you post. This is the quote: "Your ideas posted here are the free human inventions of hired rightwing authoritarian propagandists and marketers in the US, who developed them as media agitprop for gulling low-information targets in the US, thereby obtaining Republican votes and other political leverage."
Nobody has made the slightest objection to your reading anything - or even believing that crap, in your spare time (you don't vote here). But when you post it here as your ideas, that is what you are doing: posting easily recognized US rightwing authoritarian agitprop from the standard feedstock, as your ideas.

And yet we have proof, in your posts, that you are unable to "detect" even the crudest and least sophisticated US rightwing propaganda (I warned you about the impossibility of walking back the Hillaryhate with Americans - we can now add AGW et al to the topics on which you freely post blind nonsense with the one source)

and you consistently misrepresent my posts in ways which indicate either utter failure to comprehend or dishonest rhetorical technique (accusations of lying, changing the subject, etc), either of which invalidates your claim of ability to "detect".

And so we come to your take on the Donald, which is interesting because of your claimed overall position: you favor a weakening of the US and a reduction of its prosperity, as the only realistic way to curb its bad behavior. And in that context, you favor Trump in the White House, and post Republican rhetorical and campaign bs - the same lies and slanders being fed to the US media to abet Republican political control, among other causes.

 

Now it's being reported Sessions has another forgotten another meeting with Russian intelligence officers. Given how badly Trump's appointees remember things, how can they do their jobs? http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/31/polit...essions-russian-ambassador-meeting/index.html

 

What you are talking about? I have never made claims about own priority for the ideas posted.

The only person obsessed with identifying sources of the ideas and arguments proposed here is you. For the obvious totalitarian reason - evil sources are forbidden, to use them is evil, and if the evil source of an idea has been identified, using it is evil.

ROTFL, I'm yet waiting for a liar who would admit that the accusations of lying made against him are justified.

Even this is not accurate. If, say, the United States would become separate states, each of them caring only about securing its own borders, this would increase their prosperity, and I would support it.

 

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Click because it's probably easier.​

So ... this is still about you?

 

Obsessed? - it's immediately obvious. No obsession required. It's the single most striking and significant feature of your posting on US topics. And then you claim to be thinking for yourself, evaluating various sources, detecting propaganda, etc.

Your latest elaboration of that claim takes up most of post 1481 on this page.

You have been calling me a liar for a long time in several venues, without being correct once yet. It shows signs of becoming a rhetorical habit, one increasingly common in the authoritarians around here - which you resemble in other ways as well.

That doesn't change the facts as described - you claim to favor a weakening of the US and a reduction of its prosperity. And that claim coincides with your continual posting of agitprop from US rightwing authoritarian media feeds, your support of Trump for President, and your favorable assessments of Putin - all standard Republican core voter characteristics.

Which is an interesting feature of the Trump Presidency and its support among the American people - the governance and welfare of the country as a whole is not their primary concern.

 

In this case, "learn to read" is all what remains to say.

You have never supported your lies with evidence in form of a quote, with link, to one of my statements. Once your lies have become a rhetorical habit long ago, my replies will have to become a habit too, until you stop lying.

No, this completely distorts my aims. I do not care at all about prosperity of the US population. My aim is that the world gets rid of US aggression. If some loss of prosperity of the US population would decrease US aggression, then this loss would be positive. If it would lead to an increase of US aggression, it would be negative.

 

I just did. Post 1481, I pointed out, where you once again as often before describe how you arrive at the ideas you post here - reasoned from evidence, evaluation of media, etc.
You told me to learn to read. You see why I don't put much work into providing evidence for you.

So the "weaker" is mutually agreed.

Re prosperity: Remains your earlier postings, well remembered by me and about to be denied by you, in which you said (in association with news of US economic reversals, in response to claims that Trump would be incompetent, in passing commentary on the influence of big oil on US foreign policy, and so forth) that you favored such injury to US prosperity as making aggression less likely. I responded at least twice with the observation that an injured and less prosperous US under Trump (or any fascist) would be more likely to be aggressive, rather than less. I posted that at least once as an example of your blind spot for fascism.

Look it up? I've already been told to learn to read twice by your denial-crippled phrase generator.

The interesting point in all this is the concordance between the overt and open enemies of the US, and the core Republican voter, in the nature, role, and value, of Trump.

 

Putin must have workshopped that phrase. but anyone with half a brain can see through the KGB propaganda. Multipolar world! LOL. From the country that recently annexed a neighbor like the Sudetenland. Good luck with that comrade.