|
Man, nothing like waking up to watching Trump scream at his underlings and appointees that they're fuckups
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 12:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 06:13 |
|
|
Mustached Demon posted:Extreme vettings where potential refugees have to compete in the x games, right? Most Extreme Immigration Challenge
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 12:07
|
|
|
skeleton warrior posted:Man, nothing like waking up to watching Trump scream at his underlings and appointees that they're fuckups I suspect there will be communications restriction for the President outside of official channels put in place in the next administration. It can easily be justified as a matter of national security.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 12:09
|
|
|
There Bias Two posted:I suspect there will be communications restriction for the President outside of official channels put in place in the next administration. It can easily be justified as a matter of national security. It would be otally unnecessary for any President that wasn't a stupid wang like Trump
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 12:16
|
|
|
I don't know about what might change in official channels; I'd just appreciate a President who doesn't open the morning triggering the PTSD my abusive father gave me
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 12:19
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Morning_Joe/status/871683678371536898 Here's what l sparked that tweetstorm, based on timing
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 12:19
|
|
|
I mean, at this point, I'm assuming that by August, he'll open the morning with "STUPID Jeff Sessions, who was always a disappointment to me, can't do anything right! SAD!"
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 12:22
|
|
|
shadow conspiracy: Trump wants the travel ban because he's pulled support for global anti-terrorism, wanting to focus on "america first"
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 12:23
|
|
|
whoo, okay, time for more xanax and a lie down eta: the man make a tweet, indeed skeleton warrior fucked around with this message at 12:27 on Jun 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 12:24
|
|
|
Trump's latest tweet storm really works well in that official press release format: https://twitter.com/RealPressSecBot/status/871674468896194560
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 12:26
|
|
|
skeleton warrior posted:I mean, at this point, I'm assuming that by August, he'll open the morning with "STUPID Jeff Sessions, who was always a disappointment to me, can't do anything right! SAD!" Nah, it'll be, "5-4 decision! I'm so glad I nominated Gorsuch! Got the job done! gently caress those Muslims, it's a Muslim ban, I can say that now!"
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 12:27
|
|
|
There Bias Two posted:All refugees have to stick at least a 1080 or it's a no-go. The new anti-immigrant rethoric will be all about them doing flips that are way too sick, neatly tying into healthcare cuts.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 12:27
|
|
|
meh
Eggplant Squire fucked around with this message at 12:40 on Jun 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 12:32
|
|
|
Mustached Demon posted:Extreme vettings where potential refugees have to compete in the x games, right? 
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 12:34
|
|
|
Thank you for that, sincerely
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 12:37
|
|
|
Melania can probably ride a mean BMX.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 12:41
|
|
|
There Bias Two posted:Why is he writing EXTREME VETTING in all caps like it's some sort of Xtreme Food advertisement from the 90's? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=geEVwslL-YY TL;DR: Even though it's not a conscious choice, or calculated in any way, Trump's, uh, "cadence" in speech is great for the exact kind of populism he embodies. His tweet's content can be absorbed without even actually reading it. People don't need to engage with the content, context, or reality of what he's proposing (which is good for him since he's not proposing anything) but can still get the idea. Look at that tweet again. Without actually reading it you see "EXTREME VETTING", which lets you recall his statements from the campaign, then as you're just coasting over it you get the ending "Courts slow and political!". That's all you need in order to know what he's saying. We need extreme vetting because it's a cure to slow and political courts which are a problem and blah blah blah the reader just fills in the rest themselves to match what they want. Which is why his supporters say "he gets me, he talks like I do, he thinks like I do". All he's doing is basically giving them a political "Mad Libs" to fill in themselves.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 12:41
|
|
|
Nice to know whatever slim chance of the travel ban surviving the court is now incredibly dead.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 12:54
|
|
|
I thought they were going to show this one, still my favorite Ban or No Ban video https://twitter.com/BraddJaffy/status/826790216493125632?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 12:56
|
|
|
"MUSLIMS are evil scum! That's why I want to ban them! PS Jeff Sessions is a pussy! America!" Could have just tweeted that out for brevity's sake donno
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 12:58
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 13:00
|
|
|
Trump's personal lawyer has to demand to be paid very very well to put up with this sort of poo poo. In advance, of course.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 13:00
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/neal_katyal/status/871698122409488385
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 13:01
|
|
|
Shifty Pony posted:Trump's personal lawyer has to demand to be paid very very well to put up with this sort of poo poo. Probably because this is going to heavily stain his career, and the only client he'll be able to get after this is Trump.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 13:01
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Probably because this is going to heavily stain his career, and the only client he'll be able to get after this is Trump. I dunno. As long as he isn't doing anything actually unethical I don't think it will matter much if he has the connections.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 13:02
|
|
|
Haha this is pretty rich, I missed this before https://mobile.twitter.com/OmarJadwat/status/871680375700856835
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 13:03
|
|
|
Radish posted:I dunno. As long as he isn't doing anything actually unethical I don't think it will matter much if he has the connections. He'll change his name to Saul and well..
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 13:04
|
|
|
Radish posted:I dunno. As long as he isn't doing anything actually unethical I don't think it will matter much if he has the connections. Maybe, but Trump is so self-sabotaging, that its likely to come back on the lawyer.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 13:04
|
|
|
Ramos posted:Nice to know whatever slim chance of the travel ban surviving the court is now incredibly dead. I hope I'm wrong but I'm pretty sure the only way the ban dies in SCOTUS is if they amend the constitution to include Trump's thoughts.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 13:05
|
|
|
Radish posted:I dunno. As long as he isn't doing anything actually unethical I don't think it will matter much if he has the connections. Normally I'd agree, but at this point is there anyone who has works for Trump in a way that involves personal contact of any kind and who isn't tainted by scandal as a result? Like, I'm sincerely asking; not merely being facetious. He really does seem to taint and corrupt anything he comes into contact with, in the few cases where the folks he's dealing with weren't criminals beforehand. Trump really is a completely toxic person in a way few people (thankfully) are. EDIT: Phoix posted:I hope I'm wrong but I'm pretty sure the only way the ban dies in SCOTUS is if they amend the constitution to include Trump's thoughts. This is another thing where normally I'd agree with you. But normally the way these things were done is that there would be the blatantly obvious subtext of [clearly unconstitutional and discriminatory thing] that however blatant remained the subtext rather than the text. Normally these things were able to be easily and somewhat quietly rubber stamped by the SCOTUS because there was just enough obfuscation of the intent that the Conservative justices could plausibly make up an excuse for why it's okay (except Scalia who needed no excuse). With Trump constantly sabotaging his own efforts and making the subtext text, who knows. Maybe the justices wont give a drat anyway, or maybe they will. Things are definitely weird and different enough that I could see it going either way. RoboChrist 9000 fucked around with this message at 13:11 on Jun 5, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 13:07
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Probably because this is going to heavily stain his career, and the only client he'll be able to get after this is Trump. CommieGIR posted:Maybe, but Trump is so self-sabotaging, that its likely to come back on the lawyer. yeah that's nonsense. he represented the loving president of the united states, even if he loses this case that's a massive boost to his professional standing. edit: which is as it should be, obviously. otherwise any defense lawyer who ever went to bat for a mass murderer would be out of a job and the whole justice system would be even worse than it currently is.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 13:08
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/BraddJaffy/status/871693071397904384 Phoix posted:I hope I'm wrong but I'm pretty sure the only way the ban dies in SCOTUS is if they amend the constitution to include Trump's thoughts. Please, elaborate.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 13:10
|
|
|
E: DP
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 13:10
|
|
|
botany posted:yeah that's nonsense. he represented the loving president of the united states, even if he loses this case that's a massive boost to his professional standing. He's been hiring and employing lawyers for decades that openly attack small buisinesses and generally actually lose when it comes to going to court. I have my doubt about the competency of the lawyers he employs. I wonder what happened to John Dean.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 13:11
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:He's been hiring and employing lawyers for decades that openly attack small buisinesses and generally actually lose when it comes to going to court. I have my doubt about the competency of the lawyers he employs. sure, but that's a different question. if his lawyer is incompetent, he will still get a boost from being retained by POTUS.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 13:15
|
|
|
Paracaidas posted:https://twitter.com/BraddJaffy/status/871693071397904384 Fuckin wow. This is right into the face of all the namby pamby "hurrr, why matter if he don't say the magic words" fucktards. Cosmoline-in-chief loving deleted the reaffirmation of Article 5 and I'm taking that as 100% proof of him planning on either pulling out of or trying to disband NATO.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 13:17
|
|
|
Paracaidas posted:
I think the current ban, as written with no outside context, is likely constitutional and I can't see the majority of sitting judges acknowledging Trump's tweets and interviews.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 13:18
|
|
|
botany posted:sure, but that's a different question. if his lawyer is incompetent, he will still get a boost from being retained by POTUS. ....let's be honest: Who really wants a lawyer who works with a client like the current POTUS who is largely considered inept? Phoix posted:I think the current ban, as written with no outside context, is likely constitutional and I can't see the majority of sitting judges acknowledging Trump's tweets and interviews. No. Because even Conservative judges on the Lower Courts have already said he's blown his own orders out of the water with his own tweets and claims. I doubt even the most conservative judge on the SCOTUS is going to ignore obvious pretense of what Trump and his allies say versus what the order says.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 13:19
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:....let's be honest: Who really wants a lawyer who works with a client like the current POTUS who is largely considered inept? Counterpoint: Pile of poo poo masquerading as a SCOTUS Justice Samuel Alito.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 13:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 06:13 |
|
|
TARDISman posted:Counterpoint: Pile of poo poo masquerading as a SCOTUS Justice Samuel Alito. Well, that is a special exception.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2017 13:26
|
|