When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
American Farms are a matter of National Security and should be treated as such. See: Dustbowl and Ukranian famines. The American Farm must be secure from all economic forces so that farmers will continue to plant crops and keep up their land.
American Farms are a matter of National Security and should be treated as such. See: Dustbowl and Ukranian famines. The American Farm must be secure from all economic forces so that farmers will continue to plant crops and keep up their land.
The same could be said for about 20 other industries. Try making weapons without steel. Or electricity. But wait, could it be that this particular pork has something to with all the electoral votes from the rural areas that put Cheeto Hitler in power?
I suppose an alternative to this would be to not impose stupid tariffs that wreck entire industries and necessitate huge welfare programs for the people hurt by the tariffs.
By the way, the "American Farm" is almost entirely corporations at this point. It's a great time to be holding some ADM or Monsanto stock, eh?
The same could be said for about 20 other industries. Try making weapons without steel. Or electricity. But wait, could it be that this particular pork has something to with all the electoral votes from the rural areas that put Cheeto Hitler in power?
I suppose an alternative to this would be to not impose stupid tariffs that wreck entire industries and necessitate huge welfare programs for the people hurt by the tariffs.
By the way, the "American Farm" is almost entirely corporations at this point. It's a great time to be holding some ADM or Monsanto stock, eh?
You will find those other industries have the backing of the US Government keeping them fat and happy. I find it funny that you compare agriculture to electricity generation, specifically, considering electricity generation is subsidized by likely billions of dollars a year for decades. Not to mention all of the grants the Feds give for renewables, energy saving programs, upgrading infrastructure, etc. And then the Military...yeah they aren't subsidized at all! So I guess we agree that the subsidies for farmers are normal and good?
And you can't have it both ways, you say Trump is only doing it for rural votes and then you say the farms are all corporate anyway. Which is it? And why would he have imposed tarriffs to affect these people if his only goal is votes, wouldn't it have been better to do nothing of the sort? Secondly, I work in agriculture and you are wrong. The "corporate farms" are family operations who have been expanding their operations as neighbor farm families were not able to compete and moved to the cities. Farming in America is still very much dominated by individuals and families no matter how scurred you are of big, bad Monsanto.
And please tell me more about why you call him "Cheeto Hitler." Were you living in America under the Bush administration? Do you remember the free-speech zones? The illegal mass encircling and arrests of thousands of peaceful protesters in NYC? Illegal detainment of peaceful protesters for days in make-shift holding centers in parking garages? Do you remember the truly fascist things that happened in this country during that time like the PATRIOT Act? Has Trump enacted any of that or does he let Antifa run around like idiots causing trouble and leave it up to the local cops? Please justify your hyperbole.
- the tariffs are a looming disaster for many U.S. industries, and I haven't yet seen a clear explanation of how we benefit from trade wars.
- The running thesis seems to be China and EU lose = America wins. But that's not how trade usually works, and not typically what conservatives support.
- The government plays an essential role in supporting the U.S. economy. However, arbitrarily doling out relief programs to undo the harm caused by unnecessary trade wars does not seem to follow the free-market economics or small government/entitlement reform typically espoused by conservatives.
- Every time the government chooses an economic "winner", there are many economic losers by consequence.
- Yes, I do believe the agriculture program is pandering to middle-US voters, whether doled out to individual family farms or corporate agricultural employers. Conservatives had a coronary over government sponsorship of clean energy under Obama, where is the conservative outrage over this?
- the suppression of freedoms under Bush were not OK, but I fail to see how that relates to the discussion at hand.
- I'm baffled by the widespread conservative support for Trump agendas that run completely counter to everything they say they stand for.
- Cheeto Hitler is derived from the concepts that a) he is in fact orange; b) the things that emanate from his mouth and Twitter feed are the statements of an aspiring fascist; and c) this is a troll thread, and I love to watch people who say things like "libtard" get their panties in a wad. Sadly, I can't claim inventorship of the phrase.
In summary- my opinions don't fall into a clear liberal/conservative pile, and I tend to be deeply distrustful of people who throw blind support behind a particular party/politician. I gave no free passes to Obama either. I try to vote for candidates that run on the platform of "let's do normal, sensible **** for once."
Last edited by Schroedinger; 08-29-2018 at 04:42 PM.
If you are paying attention to how this is playing out you've noticed that he's not interested in raising a bunch of tariffs. He's interested in them thinking he is raising a bunch of tarriffs so that it forces them to negotiate better deals. That is what has happened in every case with the other countries they have negotiated trade deals with so far. He is forcing them to negotiate from a position of great strength as opposed to begging and taking bribes like the previous administration. That's why it looks so different.
I find the comparison between Donald Trump and Adolf Hitler to be frighteningly denigrating, in much the same way that ultra-left-feminists using the word "rape" to describe concepts such as "a man brushed against me on the sidewalk" or "a man farted on the train in my presence this afternoon" devalues the word itself in a way which robs people who have actually been victims of rape.
That having been said, I also find the phrase "Cheeto Hitler" to be hilarious. So virtual +
I find the comparison between Donald Trump and Adolf Hitler to be frighteningly denigrating, in much the same way that ultra-left-feminists using the word "rape" to describe concepts such as "a man brushed against me on the sidewalk" or "a man farted on the train in my presence this afternoon" devalues the word itself in a way which robs people who have actually been victims of rape.
That having been said, I also find the phrase "Cheeto Hitler" to be hilarious. So virtual +
Chancellor Trump has wisely fired yet another of his senior staffers, via twitter, because he had a bad habit of telling the truth.
Don McGahn to Leave White House Counsel Job This Fall, Trump Says
Donald F. McGahn II, as the White House counsel, has been known for his willingness to say no to President Trump.
By Julie Hirschfeld Davis, Michael S. Schmidt and Maggie Haberman
Aug. 29, 2018
WASHINGTON — President Trump surprised Donald F. McGahn II, the White House counsel, on Wednesday by abruptly announcing that Mr. McGahn will be leaving his job this fall, effectively forcing the long-anticipated exit of a top adviser who has cooperated extensively in the investigation into Russian election interference.
The president made the declaration on Twitter without first informing Mr. McGahn, according to people close to both men. It came 11 days after The New York Times reported the degree to which Mr. McGahn — who was by Mr. Trump’s side at major moments as the president sought to keep control of the Russia inquiry — has emerged as a key witness in the investigation. Over the past nine months Mr. McGahn has given 30 hours of testimony in at least three voluntary interviews.
Mr. McGahn’s departure leaves the White House without one of the few senior advisers who have been willing to push back against Mr. Trump. It also raised the prospect of further West Wing exits, particularly in the White House Counsel’s Office, where Mr. McGahn has had a loyal staff, with several people staying in their jobs out of devotion to him.
Mr. McGahn had long discussed his intention to leave at some point, but the way Mr. Trump blindsided him with a tweet underscored how dysfunctional the relationship had become, even as the Russia inquiry appears to be reaching a critical phase, and the legal scrutiny is mounting for the president.Mr. Trump’s decision did not appear to be a direct response to the disclosure that Mr. McGahn had been cooperating closely with the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III — a fact his team was aware of — though its timing inevitably led to questions about whether the president was cutting loose an aide who he believed had provided damaging information about him.
But Wednesday afternoon at the White House, Mr. Trump praised Mr. McGahn and said he had nothing to fear about what his counsel had told Mr. Mueller, even as he appeared to confirm that he was not completely aware what that was.
“I don’t have to be aware,” he said. “We do everything straight. We do everything by the book. And Don is an excellent guy.”
In his tweet Wednesday morning, Mr. Trump said Mr. McGahn would leave after the Senate votes on the confirmation of Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh to fill the vacant seat on the Supreme Court, the culmination of a quiet but intensive effort he has directed to remake the federal courts by installing scores of conservative judges.
Donald J. Trump ✔@realDonaldTrumpWhite House Counsel Don McGahn will be leaving his position in the fall, shortly after the confirmation (hopefully) of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the United States Supreme Court. I have worked with Don for a long time and truly appreciate his service!
But the relationship between the president and Mr. McGahn has been rocky since he failed to stop the attorney general, Jeff Sessions, from recusing himself a year ago from the Justice Department’s investigation. The two men also clashed again last June after Mr. Trump asked Mr. McGahn to fire Mr. Mueller. Mr. Trump ultimately backed down after Mr. McGahn threatened to resign rather than carry out the president’s directive.
Mr. McGahn’s departure has been rumored for months, and he had told Mr. Trump earlier this year that he planned to step down soon but had not settled on a date. At the time, Mr. Trump told Mr. McGahn he was reluctant to let him go. But the two men have not discussed the matter recently.
The president’s tweet was precipitated by a report on the Axios website that Mr. McGahn planned to leave after the confirmation of Judge Kavanaugh. Hearings on the nomination will begin next week.
Mr. Trump had grown tired of seeing reports that Mr. McGahn might leave, according to people familiar with his thinking, and decided to take away any wiggle room he might have. Allies of Mr. McGahn said on Wednesday that he believed the story was planted by his critics to force the president’s hand and hasten the timeline of announcing his departure.
Among those critics have been Mr. Trump’s daughter Ivanka Trump and son-in-law, Jared Kushner. Ms. Trump complained bitterly to her father about The Times report this month, which detailed how some in the White House were unaware of the extent of Mr. McGahn’s cooperation with Mr. Mueller, according to a person briefed on the discussion.One person close to Ms. Trump insisted that she had not criticized Mr. McGahn over his appearance before Mr. Mueller and that she had not played a role in his departure. Mr. Trump himself weighed in on Thursday morning on Twitter.
Donald J. Trump ✔@realDonaldTrumpIvanka Trump & Jared Kushner had NOTHING to do with the so called “pushing out” of Don McGahn.The Fake News Media has it, purposely,so wrong! They love to portray chaos in the White House when they know that chaos doesn’t exist-just a “smooth running machine” with changing parts!
Mr. Trump and his White House counsel had already grown distant, with the president bristling at being advised not to take actions that could draw legal scrutiny, and Mr. McGahn becoming increasingly weary of serving a client who often refused to listen to legal reasoning.
Mr. McGahn had taken to telling people that a day without a summons to the Oval Office was a good day, and he preferred to spend as much time as possible in his upstairs corner office in the West Wing next to the presidential counselor Kellyanne Conway — like him a New Jersey native — which they called the “New Jersey corner.”
Within the White House, Mr. McGahn was seen as the protector of presidential institutions and someone not afraid to fight the president, and had several epic screaming matches to show for it.
Mr. Trump often griped that he wanted to get rid of Mr. McGahn, but the president never seemed willing to follow through on it. The president asked Rob Porter, then the staff secretary, several times last year if he would be willing to take over for Mr. McGahn, an idea supported by several of his aides and his children. But Mr. Porter told the president that he did not believe he was qualified for the role, felt it was the wrong fit for him and preferred focusing on policy, those briefed on the discussions said. He has since left the White House amid accusations of spousal abuse.
Mr. Trump often blamed Mr. McGahn for the cloud the special counsel’s investigation had cast over the White House.He said Mr. McGahn should have done more to stop Mr. Sessions from recusing himself from the investigation, the decision Mr. Trump believes cleared the way for Mr. Mueller’s appointment in May 2017. But there was one major decision Mr. McGahn did try to stop, and failed: firing the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey.
Mr. McGahn, who was the top lawyer for the Trump campaign, forged a strong bond with Republican congressional leaders, who regarded him as a rare island of political sense in a sea of White House officials whom they viewed as overly dramatic and politically inept. He had remained in the job, according to people who have spoken with him, in part at the urging of Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the majority leader, as well as to help execute a strategy he spearheaded to appoint conservative judges.
Mr. McGahn had tried to lay the groundwork for his resignation by persuading Mr. Trump to hire Emmet T. Flood — who was part of the legal team that represented President Bill Clinton in his impeachment proceedings — as his lead White House lawyer dealing with the special counsel inquiry, to position Mr. Flood to then succeed him, according to people close to the discussions.
Still, some Republicans reacted to the news of his impending departure with alarm. In a tweet, Senator Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, pleaded with Mr. Trump not to let him leave the White House.
But some members of conservative legal circles in which Mr. McGahn has worked suggested that he had grown frustrated with serving as the top lawyer in a White House that has drawn more than the usual share of legal scrutiny.
George T. Conway III, who withdrew last year as Mr. Trump’s choice for a top post in the Justice Department and is Ms. Conway’s husband,
- the tariffs are a looming disaster for many U.S. industries, and I haven't yet seen a clear explanation of how we benefit from trade wars.
- The running thesis seems to be China and EU lose = America wins. But that's not how trade usually works, and not typically what conservatives support.
- The government plays an essential role in supporting the U.S. economy. However, arbitrarily doling out relief programs to undo the harm caused by unnecessary trade wars does not seem to follow the free-market economics or small government/entitlement reform typically espoused by conservatives.
- Every time the government chooses an economic "winner", there are many economic losers by consequence.
- Yes, I do believe the agriculture program is pandering to middle-US voters, whether doled out to individual family farms or corporate agricultural employers. Conservatives had a coronary over government sponsorship of clean energy under Obama, where is the conservative outrage over this?
- the suppression of freedoms under Bush were not OK, but I fail to see how that relates to the discussion at hand.
- I'm baffled by the widespread conservative support for Trump agendas that run completely counter to everything they say they stand for.
- Cheeto Hitler is derived from the concepts that a) he is in fact orange; b) the things that emanate from his mouth and Twitter feed are the statements of an aspiring fascist; and c) this is a troll thread, and I love to watch people who say things like "libtard" get their panties in a wad. Sadly, I can't claim inventorship of the phrase.
In summary- my opinions don't fall into a clear liberal/conservative pile, and I tend to be deeply distrustful of people who throw blind support behind a particular party/politician. I gave no free passes to Obama either. I try to vote for candidates that run on the platform of "let's do normal, sensible **** for once."
I'm not going to get into a huge back and forth over details, I think that does more harm than good. You are making a big mistake thinking I am conservative. I am liberal and constitutionalist, not religious and definitely have never supported Republicans in my whole life until Trump. Trump truly is something different from the status quo. Like I said I am liberal as all hell, but I am not so stupid as to be a Leftist. At points in my life I have been weakened by the Leftists temptation, but luckily have been able to resist complete brainwashing and now I see Leftism for the racist, bigoted evil it really is. I urge you to resist the Leftist agenda as well.
- the tariffs are a looming disaster for many U.S. industries, and I haven't yet seen a clear explanation of how we benefit from trade wars. That's subjective. Why is this a bad time to review the trade disparity and seek adjustments?
- The running thesis seems to be China and EU lose = America wins. But that's not how trade usually works, and not typically what conservatives support. more accurately, they aren't "losing" - they'd just be winning at a different level than they were before. Do you feel US tariffs were equitable and fair? If yes, elaborate.
- The government plays an essential role in supporting the U.S. economy. However, arbitrarily doling out relief programs to undo the harm caused by unnecessary trade wars does not seem to follow the free-market economics or small government/entitlement reform typically espoused by conservatives. that isn't the role of the government unless you like socialism. Want more trade? change tariffs. Want more exports? Agree to higher tariffs. Land of opportunity is not Land of Handouts. In my personal opinion, we're going too far out of our way for the general US taxpayer to fund poor economic and life decisions of the citizenry.
- Every time the government chooses an economic "winner", there are many economic losers by consequence. also an argument for why the US Government shouldn't be playing "an essential role in supporting the US economy"
- Yes, I do believe the agriculture program is pandering to middle-US voters, whether doled out to individual family farms or corporate agricultural employers. Conservatives had a coronary over government sponsorship of clean energy under Obama, where is the conservative outrage over this? You mean that group of people that the press continually refer to as inbred and stupid?
- the suppression of freedoms under Bush were not OK, but I fail to see how that relates to the discussion at hand.
- I'm baffled by the widespread conservative support for Trump agendas that run completely counter to everything they say they stand for. His sophomoric approach aside, I'm fine with how he's changing the political gamesmanship in Washington. So, overall, I'm fine with what he's doing and far happier than if I would have to see HRC on a regular basis. Apathy is a bitch.
- Cheeto Hitler is derived from the concepts that a) he is in fact orange; b) the things that emanate from his mouth and Twitter feed are the statements of an aspiring fascist; and c) this is a troll thread, and I love to watch people who say things like "libtard" get their panties in a wad. Sadly, I can't claim inventorship of the phrase. Whenever anyone says that I always laugh. I laugh because it reminds me of how many people needed crying rooms the day after the election when they found out HRC didn't win
In summary- my opinions don't fall into a clear liberal/conservative pile, and I tend to be deeply distrustful of people who throw blind support behind a particular party/politician. I gave no free passes to Obama either. I try to vote for candidates that run on the platform of "let's do normal, sensible **** for once."
Ultimately, you can't get reasonable discourse about political topics these days because people don't know how to avoid being offended and somehow they feel perfectly fine vilifying anyone who has a different opinion. You don't have to debate anyone, just try not to act like a kindergartner when you don't like someone else's ideas.[/b]
Ultimately, you can't get reasonable discourse about political topics these days because people don't know how to avoid being offended and somehow they feel perfectly fine vilifying anyone who has a different opinion.
^ =
IMO, it's actually gone somewhat beyond simple intolerance. We (both We the Governed, and those who are doing the governing) have been losing the ability to consider centrist notions, and drifting further and further towards extremist viewpoints. We seem to be adopting the notion that every issue has an absolute right side, and an absolute wrong side, and no grey area in between.
08-29-2018, 12:24 PM
0
