Donald J Trump Fox News Approved Presidential Thread

[UncleKG]

Second, sanctions were not loosened on Russia, #fakenews I heard Trump say this myself today.

http://twitchy.com/gregp-3534/2017/02/0 ... on-russia/

Third, Mexico is a hell of a problem we've got. Drugs, especially heroine is killing our inner city and some suburbs youth and adults. Illegals working everywhere and sending the cash back home and not paying taxes on it here. I just read that in Denver alone 20% of restaurant workers are illegal. How does that happen? There are many other problems and they need cleaned up. Trump will do his best.

Germany is now a hot mess and Angela will be lucky if she only loses an election. Plus France may elect Le-Pen and then we will really see shit broken and burnt cars and Starbucks.

You guys seem afraid that someone is actually trying to fix these messes, why is that? I really want to know.

Tell you what. You trust "Twitchy.com." I'll trust Reuters. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-cyber-russia-idUSKBN15H244

How much have we wasted on the drug war and what effect has it had? It's been proven time and again, the only way to reduce the drug problem is to reduce DEMAND. Nothing that we're doing with Mexico affects that part of the issue in any way.

Seems to me the problem with illegal workers is with those hiring them, aka all of our neighbors who own restaurants, lawn care services, construction companies, etc. Getting rid of the illegals means those jobs can go to Americans, but that begs the question, are Americans willing to work for the same pay an illegal gets? If not, the cost of doing business increases, which means your costs to purchase increase. So, you can argue you save by not paying for the social services illegals consume, but how much will it cost us on the other end?

Consider the points presented here as to what removing illegals from America could do to the economy and wages. I'm all for getting illegals off the public teet, because they do consume billions every year in social services, but we need to be very clear there could well be a number of negative side effects that might just outweigh the good.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-08-18/here-s-what-the-u-s-economy-would-look-like-if-trump-deported-undocumented-immigrants

[UncleKG]

What's the refrain we always hear?
"America doesn't have a gun problem, it has a mental illness problem." Fair enough. I'll go along with that reasoning.

So, with that in mind, House Republicans just voted to roll back a rule that would help prevent the severely mentally ill from buying guns.

Drump supporters, based on the "it's a mental illness problem" argument, please explain to me how this is in any way, shape or form a good idea.

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2017/02/03/House-votes-to-roll-back-rule-to-prevent-mentally-ill-from-buying-guns/9061486102963/

[UncleKG]

So, one crazy says she wants to kill Americans. A crazy Drump supporter actually just shot up a Mosque in Canada (by the way, I notice Drump, who tweets about terrorism all the time, has somehow managed not to say a word about the Canadian domestic terrorist attack).

What's your point? Seems to me this just illustrates exactly what experts have said. The more America ties Islam to terrorism and portrays all (or most) Muslims as being radical, the more fodder it provides radical groups to help bring moderate Muslims into their fold.

[Boomchild]

What's your point? Seems to me this just illustrates exactly what experts have said. The more America ties Islam to terrorism and portrays all (or most) Muslims as being radical, the more fodder it provides radical groups to help bring moderate Muslims into their fold.

So your saying there isn't a link between terrorism and Islam\Muslims but Muslims can convince other Muslims to join their movement which is based on their interpretation of Islam. Sure there isn't a link.

[UncleKG]

What's your point? Seems to me this just illustrates exactly what experts have said. The more America ties Islam to terrorism and portrays all (or most) Muslims as being radical, the more fodder it provides radical groups to help bring moderate Muslims into their fold.

So your saying there isn't a link between terrorism and Islam\Muslims but Muslims can convince other Muslims to join their movement which is based on their interpretation of Islam. Sure there isn't a link.

Where did I say that? I said the more America portrays all (or most) Muslims as being radical, it pushes more and more moderate Muslims toward the cause. If all you hear about someone is how much of an asshole they think you are and that's been drummed in your head all your life, are you more likely to have a positive or negative attitude toward that person?

[UncleKG]

"Trump lurches out of starting gate with unprecedented actions, executive orders."

First 12 days..

Obama 19 Executive Orders
Trump 18 Executive Orders

#fakenews #ctrl-left

First off, share your source. Secondly, learn to read a headline. It doesn't say the number of his executive orders are unprecedented. It says he's had some unprecedented actions (which he has), and has signed some executive orders. Now, had it said "unprecedented actions, more executive orders than Obama," you'd have a case. It's not the best written headline by any means. Does it say somewhere in the article this headline is associated with that the number of executive orders are unprecedented?

#notfakenews #misunderstoodheadline #rightwingoutrage

[UncleKG]

The Bowling Green Massacre. #NeverForget #AlternativeFactsAGAIN

As someone said on Twitter, the reason there wasn't more coverage of the massacre is because it occurred at the same time as the Des Moines tsunami.

Not sure which one's the least credible: Conway, Spicer or their boss? All three have spewed some doozies.

[UncleKG]

Donald J. Trump
Donald J. Trump – Verified account ‏@realDonaldTrump

Thank you to Prime Minister of Australia for telling the truth about our very civil conversation that FAKE NEWS media lied about. Very nice!

3:34 AM - 3 Feb 2017
16.1K RETWEETS65.4K LIKES

Well, if Drump says it was "civil"...of course, his definition of civil could greatly differ from EVERYONE else's, correct?

Three sides to every story, right? IF Drump did say it was the "worst phone call" he'd made that day (as sources have alleged), how would it benefit Australia to confirm that? Keep beating that "fake news" drum, Drump.

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/feb/03/big-personality-australian-pm-puts-brave-face-on-phone-call-with-trump

[verslibre]

^Analogous to our nation's treatment of the Native American peoples, right here in our own backyard. But f**k Standing Rock, right? Because BIG OIL.

So you want some feedback about what Australia's doing? I figured you wouldn't care, because you think this new administration is what Heaven must be like, to paraphrase your own words.

So you're totally cool with Bannon, huh?

[Boomchild]

There is an interesting observation made in this video about the protests that occurred inside U.S. airports. It starts at time mark 5:40.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVXBd8k2i_M

[UncleKG]

[quote="Fact Finder]

Yeah, Heaven would be like someone finally asking "hey, why are these people not good enough for Australia, so the US MUST take them?" Where is the logic in that. Someone answer that?

Bannon has done nothing yet that would make me disqualify him, and I am not listening to Pelosi's white supremacy bs. Give me proof.

As far as Milo goes, give the dude his free speech, if you don't like it don't listen to him.

You have the right to free speech. You have no right to be heard.[/quote]

Get ready for a slice of Heaven. "Why are these people not 'good enough' for Australia?" This article should explain it for you. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/02/02/heres-what-the-dumb-deal-on-refugees-with-australia-actually-says/?utm_term=.2c40117d1645

[UncleKG]

That doesn't answer a damned thing..

The measure was necessary because of Australia's draconian immigration policies. Asylum seekers who reach the country by boat are never settled in Australia proper.

-snip-

Despite these reports, the Australian government has remained resolutely unwilling to resettle refugees in Australia.

Answer me, why are they allowed to be draconian, and resolutely unwilling to accept any refugee?

You can't.

Really? It tells you why Australia feels they're not "good enough." They have a blanket policy that if you arrive by boat, you can't be considered for refugee status. They're allowed to be draconian because they can make whatever laws they want...even if they come off as human rights-abusing assholes. Question answered. Boom.

"The refugees are unable to go home, but cannot come to Australia – even when their right to protection as refugees is confirmed – because they travelled to Australia by boat. The vast majority of those in Australia’s offshore detention regime have been confirmed to have a valid claim to refugee status, meaning they are legally owed Australia’s protection."

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/feb/02/qa-what-is-the-australian-refugee-deal-and-why-has-it-angered-trump

[UncleKG]

"(D)rump will use a memorandum to ask the labor secretary to consider rescinding a rule set to go into effect in April that orders retirement advisers, overseeing about $3 trillion in assets, to act in the best interest of their clients, Cohn said in the White House interview. He said the rule limits consumer choice."

Because why should a retirement advisor need to act in the best interest of his/her clients, right?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/02/03/donald-trump-plans-to-undo-dodd-frank-law-fiduciary-rule.html

[JBlake]

If Muslims were the way you believe, India would be in chaos right now....since it has more Muslims than any other nation.

Incorrect.

Indonesia (209.1 million)
Pakistan (176.2 million) ...
India (167.4 million) ...

Hahaha. Yeah, I didn't even do any research but logic tells me the vast majority in India would be Hindu. And this is why I don't even waste my time with Monker. Total moron with ridiculous claim - facts.

[verslibre]

Jorge Pérez, a Miami-based billionaire real estate developer, has declined President Donald Trump’s offer to build his proposed Mexican border wall, calling the proposal “the most idiotic thing I have ever seen.” Pérez is a long-time friend of Trump and is responsible for building several Trump-branded buildings in southern Florida. It was natural for Trump to approach him to lead the infamous wall project.

However, Pérez, unlike Trump, is a canny businessperson who sees through the populist xenophobia rhetoric that is motivating the construction of a border wall. He told the press, “[The wall] is the most idiotic thing I have ever seen or heard in my life.” Beyond understanding the futility and waste of taxpayer funds, Pérez knows better than to believe Trump can somehow ‘make Mexico pay for the wall.’

Since Mexico has stated multiple times that they will in fact not be paying for the wall, Trump has proposed a border tariff on Mexican imports. A tariff is a tax added to foreign goods to discourage consumers from buying them. In other words, the ‘make Mexico pay for it’ tax would make Americans pay more for imported goods. Taxpayers would pay for the wall through normal taxes – and then pay for it a second time through the tariff. Pérez also noted that taxpayers would be further hurt by a potential trade war between America and Mexico.

http://occupydemocrats.com/2017/02/02/trump-asked-contractor-build-wall-response-perfect/

[verslibre]

https://thinkprogress.org/watch-20-lies-the-trump-administration-told-this-week-f1dc810c5d67#.ioctw7wym

[verslibre]

^Analogous to our nation's treatment of the Native American peoples, right here in our own backyard. But f**k Standing Rock, right? Because BIG OIL.

So you want some feedback about what Australia's doing? I figured you wouldn't care, because you think this new administration is what Heaven must be like, to paraphrase your own words.

So you're totally cool with Bannon, huh?

Yeah, Heaven would be like someone finally asking "hey, why are these people not good enough for Australia, so the US MUST take them?" Where is the logic in that. Someone answer that?

Bannon has done nothing yet that would make me disqualify him, and I am not listening to Pelosi's white supremacy bs. Give me proof.

As far as Milo goes, give the dude his free speech, if you don't like it don't listen to him.

You have the right to free speech. You have no right to be heard.

Who said anything about Pelosi? I first mentioned it a few pages back.

Maybe this will jog your memory.

[Boomchild]

Get ready for a slice of Heaven. "Why are these people not 'good enough' for Australia?" This article should explain it for you. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2017/02/02/heres-what-the-dumb-deal-on-refugees-with-australia-actually-says/?utm_term=.2c40117d1645

So according to the article the crux of the matter is this:

Despite these reports, the Australian government has remained resolutely unwilling to resettle refugees in Australia. Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull campaigned in 2013 on a vow to "stop the boats." His posters bore slogans like, "No Way: You will not make Australia home." Instead, his government looked to other countries willing to accept the refugees.

So let me get this straight, the main narrative has been that "The refugee crisis is everyone's problem and everyone needs to do their fair share to help". Except Australia I guess. So where's is the same level of outrage that has be given to Americans that are concerned about accepting these refugees? What special "free pass" does Australia have?

[verslibre]

Verslibre and Uncle SFB still posting Fake News I see, and less then 12 hours after I call Monker, yet again, a liar, AR catches him.

Fake, my ass. Disprove it. Any of it. Breitbart is exactly that.

[Boomchild]

Stanford study examines fake news and the 2016 presidential election

Of all the heated debates surrounding the 2016 presidential race, the controversy over so-called “fake news” and its potential impact on Donald Trump’s victory has been among the fiercest.
Matthew Gentzkow

Now there’s concrete data proposing that false news stories may not have been as persuasive and influential as is often suggested. But the economists behind the research do not conclude one way or the other whether fake news swayed the election.

http://news.stanford.edu/2017/01/18/sta ... -election/

[Monker]

So, one crazy says she wants to kill Americans. A crazy Drump supporter actually just shot up a Mosque in Canada (by the way, I notice Drump, who tweets about terrorism all the time, has somehow managed not to say a word about the Canadian domestic terrorist attack).

What's your point? Seems to me this just illustrates exactly what experts have said. The more America ties Islam to terrorism and portrays all (or most) Muslims as being radical, the more fodder it provides radical groups to help bring moderate Muslims into their fold.

Actually, it is Boomy posting a meme. Considering the amount of spam posted here as being truth, I would not assume that lady said anything. It could be a Trump fan manufacturing hate.

[Monker]

If Muslims were the way you believe, India would be in chaos right now....since it has more Muslims than any other nation.

Incorrect.

Indonesia (209.1 million)
Pakistan (176.2 million) ...
India (167.4 million) ...

Yep, you're right...third largest...and growing.

But, point still stands...167,000,000 Muslims and no issues like we see in Syria, etc.

The problem is not the religion. It is the political history of the country you are talking about.

[Monker]

kc, Boomer, jBlake..Trump could fart rainbows and it would be seen as an attack on the colorblind.

That much is clear.

No...it would be an attack on LGBT's.

[Monker]

Verslibre and Uncle SFB still posting Fake News I see, and less then 12 hours after I call Monker, yet again, a liar, AR catches him.

Here's a shot of truth about liberals, and Oh My God ! He's gay.

http://video.foxnews.com/v/530871946300 ... show-clips

Actually, you're a liar.....you did not even comment on my post.

[Boomchild]

[trekman]

https://thinkprogress.org/watch-20-lies-the-trump-administration-told-this-week-f1dc810c5d67#.ioctw7wym

http://www.dailywire.com/news/13001/omg-list-last-week-msm-spread-much-fake-news-john-nolte

[verslibre]

Sounds about right.

Stern said he considers Trump a friend, but is opposed to his politics.

"I like Donald very much personally. I was shocked when he decided to run for president, and even more shocked that sort of, people took it seriously," Stern said.

"I remember saying to him when he announced his presidency, I remember being quite amazed, because I remember him being for Hillary Clinton," Stern added.

"And I remember him being very--I mean he was pro-abortion. So the new Donald Trump kind of surprised me."

Stern said he doesn't believe Trump has had a change of heart on issues like abortion, but is instead playing to his base.

The radio host said he also believed Trump ran for president solely to get a larger contract from NBC for "The Apprentice."

http://money.cnn.com/2017/02/02/media/kfile-stern-on-trump/

[Boomchild]

Sounds about right.

Stern said he considers Trump a friend, but is opposed to his politics.

"I like Donald very much personally. I was shocked when he decided to run for president, and even more shocked that sort of, people took it seriously," Stern said.

"I remember saying to him when he announced his presidency, I remember being quite amazed, because I remember him being for Hillary Clinton," Stern added.

"And I remember him being very--I mean he was pro-abortion. So the new Donald Trump kind of surprised me."

Stern said he doesn't believe Trump has had a change of heart on issues like abortion, but is instead playing to his base.

The radio host said he also believed Trump ran for president solely to get a larger contract from NBC for "The Apprentice."

http://money.cnn.com/2017/02/02/media/kfile-stern-on-trump/

Stern and CNN. Now that's funny. Like we are supposed to take a "shock jock" and a biased "news organization" seriously.

[verslibre]

Stern and CNN. Now that's funny. Like we are supposed to take a "shock jock" and a biased "news organization" seriously.

Yeah, you are, because Stern knows Trump rather well. And you have a problem because it was posted on CNNMoney? How foolish.

[Boomchild]

Yeah, you are, because Sterns knows Trump rather well. And you have a problem because it was posted on CNNMoney? How foolish.

Sorry but I'm not taking seriously a guy who's target audience are about as "low brow" as you can get and think "fart jokes" are still funny. Also Stern has a unusual fixation on people's sexual habits. Baba Booey!