US Politics Mega-thread - Page 6965

On February 25 2017 07:14 Nyxisto wrote:
Declaring the media an 'enemy of the people' is a much, much stronger statement than picking a personal fight with them. The latter happens frequently with boneheaded leaders, what Trump is doing is painting them as a fifth column inside the country.

On February 25 2017 07:37 On_Slaught wrote:
So where do you draw the line? What does Trump have to do before you start getting worried? For me the question I would ask Conway or Priebus is if the media is the enemy and Trump has made clear we need to defeat our enemies where they are then what does he plan on doing about the media?

On February 25 2017 08:01 Gahlo wrote:

That didn't work out to so well for the Trans people.

On February 25 2017 08:00 radscorpion9 wrote:


I think at the end of the day, unless Trump takes clear action on limiting the freedom of the press, his statements can be treated as harmless rhetoric. Trump frequently lashes out against people that criticize him, but he has never indicated that any journalists will or could be jailed, or that CNN will be shut down etc.

I think that people are generally not used to a president like Trump, so they treat everything he says as 100% serious. While we know some things he says are true (like the wall with Mexico; though he isn't exactly making Mexico pay for it), other things are false, like his promise to investigate Hillary Clinton or put her in jail. Other things we don't know about, like his claims on global warming and whether it is man made and whether action should be taken to reduce the harmful effects of CO2 in the atmosphere.

So the point is we don't really understand how his mind works, whether he means what he says, or what is going to happen next. But people tend to treat him as any ordinary politician, even though he has shown time and time again that he is anything but a politician, and his mind regularly vacillates from one topic to the next in a somewhat chaotic way (Sam Harris talks about this on his podcast). To me it is not clear that he is completely mentally stable, and I know a number of psychologists have diagnosed him with narcissistic personality disorder.

So I would treat his comments with a grain of salt, maybe a block of salt. He lashes out because that's what he does...is it any more than that? Should we really be taking it seriously? I honestly doubt it. We should wait and see for clear evidence rather than judging him (again) on his emotionally unstable moments.

On February 25 2017 08:00 radscorpion9 wrote:
So I would treat his comments with a grain of salt, maybe a block of salt. He lashes out because that's what he does...is it any more than that? Should we really be taking it seriously? I honestly doubt it. We should wait and see for clear evidence rather than judging him (again) on his emotionally unstable moments.

The State Department legal office prepared a four-page memo for Secretary of State Rex Tillerson warning of the dangers of leaking by State Department employees. It promptly leaked, to me. That’s only the latest sign that the relationship between the Trump administration political appointees and the State Department professional workforce is still very much a work in progress.

The Feb. 20 memo by State Department acting legal adviser Richard Visek to Tillerson is entitled “SBU: Protecting Privileged Information.” The SBU stands for Sensitive But Unclassified, a designation used on documents that are not technically secret but also not supposed to be shared. The memo itself is marked SBU and begins with detailed explanation of how and when Tillerson has the privilege of protecting certain types of information from public disclosure, such as anything that has to do with internal State Department deliberations.

“When such information is leaked … It chills the willingness of senior government officials to seek robust and candid advice, which ultimately is to the detriment of informed policymaking and the reputation of the institution from which the leak emanated,” the memo states.

On February 25 2017 08:00 radscorpion9 wrote:


I think at the end of the day, unless Trump takes clear action on limiting the freedom of the press, his statements can be treated as harmless rhetoric. Trump frequently lashes out against people that criticize him, but he has never indicated that any journalists will or could be jailed, or that CNN will be shut down etc.

I think that people are generally not used to a president like Trump, so they treat everything he says as 100% serious. While we know some things he says are true (like the wall with Mexico; though he isn't exactly making Mexico pay for it), other things are false, like his promise to investigate Hillary Clinton or put her in jail. Other things we don't know about, like his claims on global warming and whether it is man made and whether action should be taken to reduce the harmful effects of CO2 in the atmosphere.

So the point is we don't really understand how his mind works, whether he means what he says, or what is going to happen next. But people tend to treat him as any ordinary politician, even though he has shown time and time again that he is anything but a politician, and his mind regularly vacillates from one topic to the next in a somewhat chaotic way (Sam Harris talks about this on his podcast). To me it is not clear that he is completely mentally stable, and I know a number of psychologists have diagnosed him with narcissistic personality disorder.

So I would treat his comments with a grain of salt, maybe a block of salt. He lashes out because that's what he does...is it any more than that? Should we really be taking it seriously? I honestly doubt it. We should wait and see for clear evidence rather than judging him (again) on his emotionally unstable moments.

On February 25 2017 08:12 On_Slaught wrote:


He's the fucking president. We're supposed to just not take what he says seriously? How do we know when to take him seriously then?

On February 25 2017 08:08 Plansix wrote:

Words have the power to inspire people to do things and take action, especially when the authority of the oval office is behind those words. Words from the president can tank stocked, ruins lives and put an entire nation on high alert. Calling reporters the "enemy of the people" is straight up irresponsible. Some unstable person is going to believe they are a true patriot and shoot a reporter.

On February 25 2017 08:12 On_Slaught wrote:


He's the fucking president. We're supposed to just not take what he says seriously? How do we know when to take him seriously then?

On February 25 2017 08:08 Nyxisto wrote:


This sounds like one of these Bannon things again because he literally threw that line around at CPAC and he is definitely a crazed ideologue and means this stuff.

And we're not just talking about a rant here, Trump has actually denied completely standard news organisations access. Functionally as a president he has serious power no matter how comically he behaves.

On February 25 2017 08:00 radscorpion9 wrote:


I think at the end of the day, unless Trump takes clear action on limiting the freedom of the press, his statements can be treated as harmless rhetoric. Trump frequently lashes out against people that criticize him, but he has never indicated that any journalists will or could be jailed, or that CNN will be shut down etc.

I think that people are generally not used to a president like Trump, so they treat everything he says as 100% serious. While we know some things he says are true (like the wall with Mexico; though he isn't exactly making Mexico pay for it), other things are false, like his promise to investigate Hillary Clinton or put her in jail. Other things we don't know about, like his claims on global warming and whether it is man made and whether action should be taken to reduce the harmful effects of CO2 in the atmosphere.

So the point is we don't really understand how his mind works, whether he means what he says, or what is going to happen next. But people tend to treat him as any ordinary politician, even though he has shown time and time again that he is anything but a politician, and his mind regularly vacillates from one topic to the next in a somewhat chaotic way (Sam Harris talks about this on his podcast). To me it is not clear that he is completely mentally stable, and I know a number of psychologists have diagnosed him with narcissistic personality disorder.

So I would treat his comments with a grain of salt, maybe a block of salt. He lashes out because that's what he does...is it any more than that? Should we really be taking it seriously? I honestly doubt it. We should wait and see for clear evidence rather than judging him (again) on his emotionally unstable moments.

On February 25 2017 08:14 radscorpion9 wrote:


Okay you're right, perhaps its not harmless rhetoric. Its just that I wouldn't take him seriously, that's all.

On February 25 2017 08:15 Danglars wrote:

Sensible opinion. His supporters take him seriously but not literally. His opponents take him literally, but not seriously.

Working as a deputy assistant to President Donald Trump is not counterterror lightweight and apparent hothead Sebastian Gorka's first rodeo in politics.

The Forward on Friday detailed Gorka's time in Hungarian politics in the aughts, which included trying to get a new political party off the ground alongside former members of the Jobbik party, whose leaders have been accused of stoking anti-Semitism, as well as publishing articles in a newspaper the U.S. State Department says "published anti-Semitic articles and featured articles by authors who have denied the Holocaust.”

Gorka founded the New Democratic Coalition with Tamás Molnár and Attila Bégány in early 2007, just a few months after Molnár and Bégány parted ways with Jobbik, according to The Forward. When asked about those associates' affiliation with the far-right party, Gorka played coy.

“I only knew Molnár as an artist and Bégány as a former conservative local politician (MDF if I recall),” Gorka told The Forward. “What they did after I left Hungary is not something I followed.”

Gorka also said he wasn't familiar with the anti-Semitic editor of the Magyar Demokrata newspaper, where he published articles from 2006-2007, and talked about his family when The Forward asked about the anti-Semitism evinced by some of the far-right groups and individuals he associated with in Hungary.

"My parents, as children, lived through the nightmare of WWII and the horrors of the Nyilas puppet fascist regime,” he told the publication in an email, referring to the Arrow Cross party that was allied with the Nazis and controlled Hungary toward the end of World War II.

The Forward noted that Gorka defended the an adopted symbol of the Arrow Cross party, the red-and-white striped Arpad flag, which dates back to medieval times, in a 2006 interview with JTA.

“If you say eight centuries of history can be eradicated by 18 months of fascist distortion of symbols, you’re losing historic perspective," he said.

The Arpad flag, like the World War II-era admiral and statesman Miklós Horthy, who is associated with a medal Gorka wears to honor his late father's anti-Communist efforts, now is a popular symbol among Hungarian ultranationalists.

Chelgren has a history in Iowa of courting controversy. Since his election in 2010, Chelgren has taken heat for likening state-funded preschool to Nazi indoctrination, calling for the executions of illegal aliens who commit felonies, and for backing legislation that would require teachers to carry guns in schools.

Before wading into politics, the married father of four who represents blue collar Ottumwa, Iowa, was best known as "Chickenman," a fun-loving party animal who would often take part in an annual bike ride across the state wearing just a hat with a little beak on the bill.

Chelgren would also park a van full of beer kegs along the route of the RAGBRAI (the Des Moines Register's Annual Great Bicycle Ride Across Iowa) and dispense suds to thirsty riders.

On February 25 2017 08:21 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:
Also this banning of the media in the USA is news now all over the world. Just the picture it paints is already damaging.