Deleted
Posts: 0
May 18, 2024 22:35:52 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 16, 2017 15:23:52 GMT
There will be no impeachment or even the Republicans telling trump no as long as they feel the way McConnell expressed himself this morning on Morning Joe. A recap is in this tweet. "McConnell explains that a little Russian subversion and presidential corruption is a small price to pay for business-friendly regulation." So to line the pockets of the billionaires he's prepared to sell the country's soul to the devil..........got it
|
|
rodeomom
Pearl Clutcher
Refupee # 380 "I don't have to run fast, I just have to run faster than you."
Posts: 3,661
Location: Chickasaw Nation, Oklahoma
Jun 25, 2014 23:34:38 GMT
|
Post by rodeomom on Feb 16, 2017 15:25:22 GMT
There will be no impeachment or even the Republicans telling trump no as long as they feel the way McConnell expressed himself this morning on Morning Joe. A recap is in this tweet. "McConnell explains that a little Russian subversion and presidential corruption is a small price to pay for business-friendly regulation."
|
|
|
Post by gar on Feb 16, 2017 15:27:52 GMT
There will be no impeachment or even the Republicans telling trump no as long as they feel the way McConnell expressed himself this morning on Morning Joe. A recap is in this tweet. "McConnell explains that a little Russian subversion and presidential corruption is a small price to pay for business-friendly regulation." lucyg - I'll just save you the trouble and say "You're doomed!"
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Feb 16, 2017 15:29:27 GMT
There will be no impeachment or even the Republicans telling trump no as long as they feel the way McConnell expressed himself this morning on Morning Joe. A recap is in this tweet. "McConnell explains that a little Russian subversion and presidential corruption is a small price to pay for business-friendly regulation." Who exactly tweeted that? Mitch McConnells actual comments on Morning Joe:
|
|
|
Post by micheley on Feb 16, 2017 15:29:32 GMT
There will be no impeachment or even the Republicans telling trump no as long as they feel the way McConnell expressed himself this morning on Morning Joe. A recap is in this tweet. "McConnell explains that a little Russian subversion and presidential corruption is a small price to pay for business-friendly regulation." Pardon my French, but Holy Fucking Shit. DOOOOOOOOOOMED.
|
|
|
Post by redrulz on Feb 16, 2017 15:32:31 GMT
Also from what I understand and somebody please correct me if I'm wrong, NPD is a personality disorder and not a mental illness. So could he even be declared incapacitated? NPD is particular type of personality disorder which is one category of mental disorders. Just like "cancer" is one category of physical disorders and lung cancer is a particular/specific type. So, yes, NPD is just as much a mental disorder as schizophrenia or antisocial personality disorder (Ted Bundy). That's really interesting, thanks for sharing. I didn't realize it was actually listed as a mental disorder. Can you clarify something that was brought up earlier in the thread about having Trump removed for being mentally unfit, especially as another poster listed a link where two Harvard psychologists were labeling him as having a mental illness. No one can actually diagnose someone unless they have examined the person, correct? I despise Trump and think he acts crazy and recklessly, but I think people announcing via the press and "diagnosing" him with mental illness might be a little....rude? I was just wondering what your opinion is on that is as a psychologist.
|
|
|
Post by micheley on Feb 16, 2017 15:36:11 GMT
Here's a tweet from &@$! Mitch:
|
|
|
Post by cade387 on Feb 16, 2017 15:41:21 GMT
NPD is particular type of personality disorder which is one category of mental disorders. Just like "cancer" is one category of physical disorders and lung cancer is a particular/specific type. So, yes, NPD is just as much a mental disorder as schizophrenia or antisocial personality disorder (Ted Bundy). That's really interesting, thanks for sharing. I didn't realize it was actually listed as a mental disorder. Can you clarify something that was brought up earlier in the thread about having Trump removed for being mentally unfit, especially as another poster listed a link where two Harvard psychologists were labeling him as having a mental illness. No one can actually diagnose someone unless they have examined the person, correct? I despise Trump and think he acts crazy and recklessly, but I think people announcing via the press and "diagnosing" him with mental illness might be a little....rude? I was just wondering what your opinion is on that is as a psychologist. I'm not elaine but they don't have to have him officially diagnosed to enact the 25th amendment. If the vice-president and 8 of the cabinet members deem him unfit (subjectively) they write a letter to Congress and then the process starts. He would most likely have himself examined to prove that he IS fit. Or maybe Congress can demand he is seen? This article explains it a bit more.
www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/2/9/14488980/25th-amendment-trump-pence
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Feb 16, 2017 15:42:08 GMT
|
|
pudgygroundhog
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,643
Location: The Grand Canyon
Jun 25, 2014 20:18:39 GMT
|
Post by pudgygroundhog on Feb 16, 2017 15:44:37 GMT
There will be no impeachment or even the Republicans telling trump no as long as they feel the way McConnell expressed himself this morning on Morning Joe. A recap is in this tweet. "McConnell explains that a little Russian subversion and presidential corruption is a small price to pay for business-friendly regulation." Who exactly tweeted that? Mitch McConnells actual comments on Morning Joe: Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) says he approves of President Trump’s overall job performance so far. “He’s different,” McConnell said Wednesday on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe." "But I like what he’s doing. I like the attack on over-regulation. I like the Cabinet appointments.” -------- thehill.com/homenews/senate/319610-mcconnell-on-trump-i-like-what-hes-doing
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 18, 2024 22:35:52 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 16, 2017 15:47:05 GMT
There will be no impeachment or even the Republicans telling trump no as long as they feel the way McConnell expressed himself this morning on Morning Joe. A recap is in this tweet. "McConnell explains that a little Russian subversion and presidential corruption is a small price to pay for business-friendly regulation." Who exactly tweeted that? Mitch McConnells actual comments on Morning Joe: That is why I like twitter. You can't spin stuff in 140 characters. If you read between the lines of what McConnell said and has been saying the tweet catches it perfectly. The Republicans in Congress are not going to do any real oversight on trump. As long as he signs the bills they put in front of him they don't care what he does. And they don't care how he won the election. As Ryan said in an interview about something trump had done " We don't care. We won". (And yes I heard him say it.)
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Feb 16, 2017 15:47:53 GMT
Who exactly tweeted that? Mitch McConnells actual comments on Morning Joe: Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) says he approves of President Trump’s overall job performance so far. “He’s different,” McConnell said Wednesday on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe." "But I like what he’s doing. I like the attack on over-regulation. I like the Cabinet appointments.” -------- thehill.com/homenews/senate/319610-mcconnell-on-trump-i-like-what-hes-doingI saw his comments on over-regulation. But there's absolutely nothing in his comments on Russia that makes that "summary" tweet anything other than propaganda designed for reshares and outrage instead of actually INFORMING people.
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Feb 16, 2017 15:49:23 GMT
Who exactly tweeted that? Mitch McConnells actual comments on Morning Joe: That is why I like twitter. You can't spin stuff in 140 characters. If you read between the lines of what McConnell said and has been saying the tweet catches it perfectly. The Republicans in Congress are not going to do any real oversight on trump. As long as he signs the bills they put in front of him they don't care what he does. And they don't care how he won the election. As Ryan said in an interview about something trump had done " We don't care. We won". (And yes I heard him say it.) You can't spin in twitter? 140 characters is pure propaganda and for those not intelligent enough to actually read and comprehend information - I'm utterly shocked that you'd admit that's where you obtain your news - but thanks for finally answering my question from several weeks back.
|
|
Sarah*H
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,978
Jun 25, 2014 20:07:06 GMT
|
Post by Sarah*H on Feb 16, 2017 15:51:36 GMT
Since two separate and independent news organizations reported basically the same thing, I would say it's up to the "person" on tv to explain how he or she knows isn't "vetted as true." And what does that mean exactly? Reporters reported what multiple sources in the intelligence community had to say but some random tv personality who didn't talk to those sources decides it shouldn't be reported. Seems legit. The Wall Street Journal is one of those independent news organizations which reported on this by the way. I wonder if its going to be fake news now too. Spies keep intelligence from Trump
|
|
pudgygroundhog
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,643
Location: The Grand Canyon
Jun 25, 2014 20:18:39 GMT
|
Post by pudgygroundhog on Feb 16, 2017 15:57:11 GMT
I saw his comments on over-regulation. But there's absolutely nothing in his comments on Russia that makes that "summary" tweet anything other than propaganda designed for reshares and outrage instead of actually INFORMING people. No, he did not make direct comments on Russia. My inference is that if he likes what Trump is doing - then he doesn't seem to mind the Russian interference. I'm not on Twitter so most of my news comes from articles and my general impression from everything I've read is that most of the GOP isn't interested in investigating the Russia issue and are more interested in pushing their legislative agenda through before anything else.
|
|
cycworker
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,375
Jun 26, 2014 0:42:38 GMT
|
Post by cycworker on Feb 16, 2017 16:00:30 GMT
Still think he can resign in a way that lets him save face. He's resigning because y'all don't deserve him, dontcha know? He's been disrespected and unappreciated. That's the media's fault. And his enemies
|
|
|
Post by crazy4scraps on Feb 16, 2017 16:01:09 GMT
I saw his comments on over-regulation. But there's absolutely nothing in his comments on Russia that makes that "summary" tweet anything other than propaganda designed for reshares and outrage instead of actually INFORMING people. No, he did not make direct comments on Russia. My inference is that if he likes what Trump is doing - then he doesn't seem to mind the Russian interference. I'm not on Twitter so most of my news comes from articles and my general impression from everything I've read is that most of the GOP isn't interested in investigating the Russia issue and are more interested in pushing their legislative agenda through before anything else. My guess is they know **** is getting real and they need to hurry to push their agenda as fast as they can before the house of cards comes tumbling down.
|
|
|
Post by gmcwife1 on Feb 16, 2017 16:06:40 GMT
There will be no impeachment or even the Republicans telling trump no as long as they feel the way McConnell expressed himself this morning on Morning Joe. A recap is in this tweet. "McConnell explains that a little Russian subversion and presidential corruption is a small price to pay for business-friendly regulation." Who exactly tweeted that? Mitch McConnells actual comments on Morning Joe: It's amusing to watch one side do exactly what they have been mocking the other side for doing.
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Feb 16, 2017 16:11:09 GMT
I saw his comments on over-regulation. But there's absolutely nothing in his comments on Russia that makes that "summary" tweet anything other than propaganda designed for reshares and outrage instead of actually INFORMING people. No, he did not make direct comments on Russia. My inference is that if he likes what Trump is doing - then he doesn't seem to mind the Russian interference. I'm not on Twitter so most of my news comes from articles and my general impression from everything I've read is that most of the GOP isn't interested in investigating the Russia issue and are more interested in pushing their legislative agenda through before anything else. He did make direct comments on Russia, please see my link above - it even contains the video of his remarks. ETA I'll even repeat the link here: www.politico.com/story/2017/02/mitch-mcconnell-russia-hacking-morning-joe-interview-235034
|
|
pudgygroundhog
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,643
Location: The Grand Canyon
Jun 25, 2014 20:18:39 GMT
|
Post by pudgygroundhog on Feb 16, 2017 16:15:22 GMT
No, he did not make direct comments on Russia. My inference is that if he likes what Trump is doing - then he doesn't seem to mind the Russian interference. I'm not on Twitter so most of my news comes from articles and my general impression from everything I've read is that most of the GOP isn't interested in investigating the Russia issue and are more interested in pushing their legislative agenda through before anything else. He did make direct comments on Russia, please see my link above - it even contains the video of his remarks. ETA I'll even repeat the link here: www.politico.com/story/2017/02/mitch-mcconnell-russia-hacking-morning-joe-interview-235034I can't read that full article because of some weird pop up, but from what I could see, I'm glad he's finally changed his tune on Russia.
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Feb 16, 2017 16:17:22 GMT
I can't read that full article because of some weird pop up, but from what I could see, I'm glad he's finally changed his tune on Russia. Just so we're clear - he DIDN'T change his tune. That was the actual Morning Joe interview that @fred provided the summary tweet for - see why I find it more than a little misleading.
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Feb 16, 2017 16:20:18 GMT
I'm not sure why politico isn't working for you - their website is one of the least annoying to me (thank you for no autoplay video!) Here are McConnell's direct quotes pulled from the article:
|
|
pudgygroundhog
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,643
Location: The Grand Canyon
Jun 25, 2014 20:18:39 GMT
|
Post by pudgygroundhog on Feb 16, 2017 16:33:24 GMT
I'm not sure why politico isn't working for you - their website is one of the least annoying to me (thank you for no autoplay video!) Here are McConnell's direct quotes pulled from the article: I'm not sure either - some weird pop up at the top. I hate autoplay videos with a passion. I do think McConnell has changed his views on Russia. In an earlier statement he released he blamed Obama for lax cybersecurity ( Russia is not our friend). I honestly don't know enough to know the ins and outs of policies regarding Russia during Obama's terms - so maybe there is some truth in that. But simply blaming Obama while ignoring security briefings as early as September ( Security briefings) doesn't indicate to me he took this seriously. Granted, a lot more info has come out and Flynn's scandal has definitely accelerated things. This is purely my opinion, but I still believe most of the GOP are only coming out more strongly on the issue now because they pretty much have to - it's reached a point that they can't continue to ignore or downplay it.
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Feb 16, 2017 16:36:19 GMT
I'm not sure why politico isn't working for you - their website is one of the least annoying to me (thank you for no autoplay video!) Here are McConnell's direct quotes pulled from the article: I'm not sure either - some weird pop up at the top. I hate autoplay videos with a passion. I do think McConnell has changed his views on Russia. In an earlier statement he released he blamed Obama for lax cybersecurity ( Russia is not our friend). I honestly don't know enough to know the ins and outs of policies regarding Russia during Obama's terms - so maybe there is some truth in that. But simply blaming Obama while ignoring security briefings as early as September ( Security briefings) doesn't indicate to me he took this seriously. Granted, a lot more info has come out and Flynn's scandal has definitely accelerated things. This is purely my opinion, but I still believe most of the GOP are only coming out more strongly on the issue now because they pretty much have to - it's reached a point that they can't continue to ignore or downplay it. Gotcha - I misread your comment to changing his tune from yesterday. I don't think there's any doubt EVERYONE is taking Russia a lot more seriously now. Remember way back to 2012 when Romney named Russia as our biggest threat and many mocked him?
|
|
pudgygroundhog
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,643
Location: The Grand Canyon
Jun 25, 2014 20:18:39 GMT
|
Post by pudgygroundhog on Feb 16, 2017 16:52:15 GMT
I'm not sure either - some weird pop up at the top. I hate autoplay videos with a passion. I do think McConnell has changed his views on Russia. In an earlier statement he released he blamed Obama for lax cybersecurity ( Russia is not our friend). I honestly don't know enough to know the ins and outs of policies regarding Russia during Obama's terms - so maybe there is some truth in that. But simply blaming Obama while ignoring security briefings as early as September ( Security briefings) doesn't indicate to me he took this seriously. Granted, a lot more info has come out and Flynn's scandal has definitely accelerated things. This is purely my opinion, but I still believe most of the GOP are only coming out more strongly on the issue now because they pretty much have to - it's reached a point that they can't continue to ignore or downplay it. Gotcha - I misread your comment to changing his tune from yesterday. I don't think there's any doubt EVERYONE is taking Russia a lot more seriously now. Remember way back to 2012 when Romney named Russia as our biggest threat and many mocked him? Yes, the news is moving quickly these days and I think everybody as a whole is taking it more seriously. I would be curious to know when the intelligence communities knew what they knew and why it's really now that much more info is coming out. I vaguely remember the Romney incident. I know that many Republicans were critical of Obama of being too soft on Russia. I also wonder how many citizens would've cited Russia as our number one foe back then? I think overall people were more concerned with terrorism or countries like North Korea. Given the actions Russia has taken (Ukraine, Syria) - I think we probably underestimated them.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 18, 2024 22:35:52 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 16, 2017 16:53:11 GMT
That is why I like twitter. You can't spin stuff in 140 characters. If you read between the lines of what McConnell said and has been saying the tweet catches it perfectly. The Republicans in Congress are not going to do any real oversight on trump. As long as he signs the bills they put in front of him they don't care what he does. And they don't care how he won the election. As Ryan said in an interview about something trump had done " We don't care. We won". (And yes I heard him say it.) You can't spin in twitter? 140 characters is pure propaganda and for those not intelligent enough to actually read and comprehend information - I'm utterly shocked that you'd admit that's where you obtain your news - but thanks for finally answering my question from several weeks back. People who discount twitter as a new source are naive to put it politely. Major news agencies, newspapers, and magazines are all on twitter. It's another medium that they can use. And more often then not in that tweet are links to articles. As in everything in life it's about choices. And that includes whom I chose to follow on twitter. While under no obligation I will list a few of the news agencies I follow... Press Democrat - Local Newspaper SF Gate - Online version of the SF newspaper the Chronical Local TV News Stations - KTVU, KGO, KPIX KGO Radio KCBS Radio The Washington Post The New York Times The New Yorker Magazine The Atlantic BBC News MSNBC ABCNews National CBS News National Various reporters associated with the news agencies listed above. The only blog I follow is the Maddow Blog. I also "like" the local news agencies on Facebook and they are starting to use Facebook Live. It was through Facebook Live that I watched the drama of the concrete slab/crane on top of a building in SF that officials were afraid was going to fall off the building and so they had to evacuate the buildings around it. What twitter and Facebook does is allow news agencies like I listed above to provide true "breaking news" and another way to get the news out. These are all agencies I read or watched prior to twitter. Only difference before I had to either watch them on TV, read a newspaper or magazine. Now I have it all at my fingertips on my iPad, phone, or laptop. And I don't have to recycle or kill a tree to get the information. And on TV no annoying commercials. As to the McConnell tweet. That recap I believe is accurate based on what I have heard McConnell say in past interviews. That is why I liked that tweet. So quite being some sort of snob about something you clearly don't understand. Edited to add CNN Breaking News is another one I follow on twitter.
|
|
|
Post by micheley on Feb 16, 2017 16:54:00 GMT
|
|
|
Post by micheley on Feb 16, 2017 16:57:31 GMT
From @derekcnel:
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Feb 16, 2017 17:12:07 GMT
You can't spin in twitter? 140 characters is pure propaganda and for those not intelligent enough to actually read and comprehend information - I'm utterly shocked that you'd admit that's where you obtain your news - but thanks for finally answering my question from several weeks back. People who discount twitter as a new source are naive to put it politely. Major news agencies, newspapers, and magazines are all on twitter. It's another medium that they can use. And more often then not in that tweet are links to articles. As in everything in life it's about choices. And that includes whom I chose to follow on twitter. While under no obligation I will list a few of the news agencies I follow... Press Democrat - Local Newspaper SF Gate - Online version of the SF newspaper the Chronical Local TV News Stations - KTVU, KGO, KPIX KGO Radio KCBS Radio The Washington Post The New York Times The New Yorker Magazine The Atlantic BBC News MSNBC ABCNews National CBS News National Various reporters associated with the news agencies listed above. The only blog I follow is the Maddow Blog. I also "like" the local news agencies on Facebook and they are starting to use Facebook Live. It was through Facebook Live that I watched the drama of the concrete slab/crane on top of a building in SF that officials were afraid was going to fall off the building and so they had to evacuate the buildings around it. What twitter and Facebook does is allow news agencies like I listed above to provide true "breaking news" and another way to get the news out. These are all agencies I read or watched prior to twitter. Only difference before I had to either watch them on TV, read a newspaper or magazine. Now I have it all at my fingertips on my iPad, phone, or laptop. And I don't have to recycle or kill a tree to get the information. And on TV no annoying commercials. As to the McConnell tweet. That recap I believe is accurate based on what I have heard McConnell say in past interviews. That is why I liked that tweet. So quite being some sort of snob about something you clearly don't understand. Edited to add CNN Breaking News is another one I follow on twitter. [ Oh please following breaking news on facebook and twitter for legitimate news and repeating some random tweets are wholly different as I'm sure you know and you still haven't provided the source for the tweet was that breaking news on cnn or Washington post?
|
|
|
Post by cade387 on Feb 16, 2017 17:14:24 GMT
I'm not sure why politico isn't working for you - their website is one of the least annoying to me (thank you for no autoplay video!) Here are McConnell's direct quotes pulled from the article: But talking about involvement on the election vs talking about Flynn and sanctions is totally different. They seem much more concerned over leaks than what Flynn has done.
|
|