Everybody seems to trust the government but me. I'm such a horrible person!1111

I was trying to curb the back patting but it backfired.

Is anyone else incredibly fatigued by all this? Seriously, at this point I'm willing to just ride this out if Trump would just stop doing things that antagonize people. He could be sneakier and probably get away with all the shady **** he wants to do if he would just tone it down, because if all I want is an excuse to forget about all this for a little while I'm sure a lot of other people feel the same way.

People need to realize that as much as the GOP is the party of feelings, the Dems are the party of appearances. They are willing to let a lot of things slide if you just put up the appearance that you are making an effort to work with them. Obama was able to drone the hell out of the middle east because he was a super polite guy when he told everyone about it. So we all went "He said it so well...this must be necessary." Trump could learn from this.

Only problem is that 113 of them were released by Bush and only 9 by Obama.

Fact-checking Trump's tweet about Guantanamo Bay detainees - ABC News

Obama is getting ready to hop in a car, drive to the white house, and kick Trump's ass.

Obama irked and exasperated in response to Trump's wiretapping claims, sources say - CNNPolitics.com

Completely agreed. One of the reasons I'm not as hard on Trump as I am on Obama is because to me, Trump is like an overgrown kid. A smart kid maybe, but not really savvy in the way politicians tend to be. How can someone with as little nuance as Trump even begin to collaborate with Russia and then cover it up? He's a reality TV star and a real estate mogul for God's sake, not a schemer. He shoots himself in the foot so much that the latest Wikileaks seems that much more logical of an explanation than the current allegations against Russia. People give the GOP way too much credit. The Democrats are a different story: as you said, they are the party of appearances.

Compare how Trump says and does things to Obama, who always sounded so nice and measured on T.V. but continued to commit mindboggling invasions of privacy against U.S. citizens and atrocities against other countries under the nose of the media...yet pretty much got away with it for eight years because his party is aligned with the guys who fund most of these organizations. There's so many different agendas at play.

You pretty much just admitted that Donald Trump is an incompetent who has no business being President of the United States.

Pretty much. He's learned the hard way that you can't run the country like a CEO runs a corporation. But he's just one symptom of a greater set of problems that extends back several administrations.

Easy all of the people that he surrounds himself with. They are so good at what they do that they have you thinking that obviously he can't be in collusion with Russia because he's a dunce and not a savvy politician. It's the perfect guise really.

I still don't understand how the CIA and Russia can't both be hacking or attempting to influence elections.

from here on out we're calling it Bruhssia

Trump's been in bed with Russia for decades. Long before he decided to play politician. The meetings and phone calls between Trump's camp and Russia during the election have been verified. You trying to dismiss them as Trump not being competent enough is just more of your Trump apologism.

Did ya hear about this one?

'The New Yorker' Uncovers Trump Hotel's Ties To Corrupt Oligarch Family : NPR

Russia is just a strawman. They don't have a fraction of the resources available to our intel agencies. Remember France back in 2011?

That's a nice article and all Chula, but you have to present information that, you know, actually has something to do with what I've said previously. You aren't much of a "big picture" thinker after all when the stuff coming out of Wikileaks is a million times scarier than a country who'd suck us off for those sanctions to get lifted.

Americuck.

Bruhmerica
Canabruh

For anyone who doesn't feel like reading this: Trump did business with a company where all he took care of was branding which is not entirely true because (???). One of the people involved with the business deal has speculated ties to Azarpassillo, who are speculated to be a front company for the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps. So this deal (which was cancelled) means that Trump violated the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (assuming that all of the assumptions that we made to get to this point aren't just wishful thinking).

I'm here to help.

Because everything Wikileaks puts out is 100% credible.

And you want to talk about sucking someone off? You've been doing that with Trump for months.

Are you ****ing serious?

Me too.

They were involved with it until they cancelled the deal, which means that they didn't make a profit off of it.

Smart move from NPR for doing it as an interview with the journalist who wrote the story instead of writing one themselves. Maintains their cred as far as reliable sourcing goes.

Trump backed out at the last minute to save face. Doesn't erase his involvement, and it's a safe assumption that if he'd lost the election he would have kept the deal going.

He followed the law to save face well how about that let's indict him.

Nah his scandals are like a bed of nails. One would've punctured anyone else's campaign but they kept him afloat.

I wonder, is this the new Benghazi?

You're a real class act huh. :rofl:

Wikileaks has more credibility than most of what I've seen from you so far. After all, anyone who presents information that doesn't gel with your particular brand of paranoia HAS to be a Trump apologist. You have no trouble when someone cites anonymous sources in regards to Trump in some of the articles I've seen you share...yet you protest when I bring up Wikileaks.

He decided to follow the law only when it mattered to him playing president.

Ever hear of something called "due dilligence"? When you own a company and are thinking about partnering with another business, you are suppose to do due diligence to fully understand what your potential liabilites may be up front, and further on down the road.

I'm certain Trump's people did due diligence and decided "**** it". Lots of money to be made. Damn the torpedoes.

That doesn't really sound like anything but him not giving a **** who buys his name, which I'm pretty sure was nothing new. Trump's an unscrupulous douche, what's the scoop?

Source please.

Muslim ban 2.0 is a brewing

"Trumpcare" in its proposed state will end in literal deaths due to a basic necessity being harder to acquire

Square up dems this is round 2 of hoard mode on expert

Trump Tower Baku may be President's worst deal ever | Daily Mail Online

Read slowly.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/...8814027991.jpg

Nobody care

So...the same info as earlier from a worse source. Thanks.

I want a source on this that is more than bitter assumptions that he is the evil caricature that you know him as.

Google: "Trump Baku"

You'll get a ton of hits. And you don't have to revert back to your D-self once again. Things were going well. I guess you just can't help yourself.

Edit: Over half a million hits. All not relevant but tons are.

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourcei...mp+baku+deal&*

You should consider that maybe your discussion style is genuinely bad instead of just assuming that anyone who disagrees with you is an *******.

Do you think that the Daily Mail is a good source? And do you think that the higher the number of google hits you get in a search means that the information is of a higher quality? Search Pizzagate is Real and get back to me on that.

No, you're just an *******.

Good, because it's a terrible source.

Phew, that's good that you don't think that either because that's a bandwagon fallacy and you're better than that. Not really, it's just an expression.

Don't suppose you bothered to check any of the dozens of other links. Maybe just this once, stop trying to just volley me and actually check the damn content.

I went deep into the content. Observe.

Sometimes you can legitimately be wrong, just like how *******s can legitimately be right and dicks at the same time. It is a baffling idea, I am aware.

Talk about watering the content down to fit your snark.

I am wrong how? Be precise.

It's how I saw the points of the article. I'm glad that's you think I am hilarious though.

That Trump broke the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. I've stated my reasons and I don't want to get dizzy going in circles. Please actually prove me wrong in your own words, I would really enjoy that because it would be like a respectful discussion.

Be precise in how you are right, that is what is known as the burden of proof when you are making a claim.

Right about what? Please point to where I made the claim that Trump broke the Foriegn Corrupt Practices Act. I'm just posting articles. Doesn't mean I subscribe to every damn word in them.

The whole Baku thing stunk to high heaven. He only backed out after he won the election. And it wasn't just branding. He was going to have his own hotel included as part of the deal.

Do you guys just enjoy arguing so much with me that you lose sight of the forest because the tree with my name on it gets in your way?

Source please. You've yet to provide one that backs this sentence up.

You ask for a source yet your gun is already loaded ready to poke holes in it.

Donald Trump

Trump also had signed a contract to manage the hotel once it opened, for an undisclosed fee tied to the hotel’s performance.