• Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.You can use your Twitter or Facebook account to sign up, or register directly.

General political chat

draybook

Well-Known Member
Advertisement
From Brexit to jury sentences, there are many topics on which we all offer our own non-expert “armchair” opinions. That’s the nature of a discussion forum.
Except that I've worn the uniform and earned the Infantry cord yet you seem so offended that I think a traitor should be put to death...
 

Tony the Tigger

Well-Known Member
If you just dig anywhere, you’ll find Trump did something wrong.

More breaking swamp news:


A666FF2E-3AD9-47A6-B40B-B208476F23BA.jpeg

President Donald Trump pressed then-Secretary of State Rex Tillerson to help persuade the Justice Department to drop a criminal case against an Iranian-Turkish gold trader who was a client of Rudy Giuliani, according to three people familiar with the 2017 meeting in the Oval Office.

Tillerson refused, arguing it would constitute interference in an ongoing investigation of the trader, Reza Zarrab, according to the people. They said other participants in the Oval Office were shocked by the request.

**Crooked is as crooked does!

Very hard to maintain a moral case for continuing to support this guy, isn’t it?
 

BuddyThomas

Well-Known Member
If you just dig anywhere, you’ll find Trump did something wrong.

More breaking swamp news:


View attachment 417204

President Donald Trump pressed then-Secretary of State Rex Tillerson to help persuade the Justice Department to drop a criminal case against an Iranian-Turkish gold trader who was a client of Rudy Giuliani, according to three people familiar with the 2017 meeting in the Oval Office.

Tillerson refused, arguing it would constitute interference in an ongoing investigation of the trader, Reza Zarrab, according to the people. They said other participants in the Oval Office were shocked by the request.

**Crooked is as crooked does!

Very hard to maintain a moral case for continuing to support this guy, isn’t it?
I mean......he’s just so completely corrupt. I do not have the slightest idea how anyone can still support him and then look themselves in the mirror. It makes no sense.
 

Laketravis

Premium Member
I mean......he’s just so completely corrupt. I do not have the slightest idea how anyone can still support him and then look themselves in the mirror. It makes no sense.
Ah! There you are! I was hoping we could continue our earlier discussion. It never really got past your first proclamation about Trump supporters (as you've once again done above).

Here's where we left off in regards to the current Supreme Court gay rights issue. If you remember, you provided a link with the statement "Very concerned. Are the gay Trump supporters on here happy now?" I'm really interested in your thoughts but for some strange reason you've offered none:

I'm genuinely curious how you could lump a possibly negative outcome on Trump and his supporters, gay or otherwise? If I'm reading the article correctly, speculation is that the justices are almost evenly divided and that the controlling vote could turn out to be Neil Gorsuch (a Trump appointee) who seemed receptive to the argument that no matter what Congress had in mind in 1964, the words of the law would apply to sexual orientation, if not transgender status as well.

Trump has only appointed two justices. Gorsuch seems tilted in your favor (unless I'm reading it incorrectly?) and the only other Trump appointee hasn't given many clues as to what his position is. So for the court to be almost evenly divided it would require mostly non-Trump appointees for such dissension.

Again, I'm not supporting or defending Trump, I'm simply trying to figure out how you would equate a negative outcome as being primarily due to Trump?
 

Dead2009

Well-Known Member
So who here is now going to publicly proclaim they will boycott Facebook? Anyone?

You can almost bet that the left will do just that, but what's good for the goose is good for the gander as they say as far as Trump ads.
 

BuddyThomas

Well-Known Member
Ah! There you are! I was hoping we could continue our earlier discussion. It never really got past your first proclamation about Trump supporters (as you've once again done above).

Here's where we left off in regards to the current Supreme Court gay rights issue. If you remember, you provided a link with the statement "Very concerned. Are the gay Trump supporters on here happy now?" I'm really interested in your thoughts but for some strange reason you've offered none:

I'm genuinely curious how you could lump a possibly negative outcome on Trump and his supporters, gay or otherwise? If I'm reading the article correctly, speculation is that the justices are almost evenly divided and that the controlling vote could turn out to be Neil Gorsuch (a Trump appointee) who seemed receptive to the argument that no matter what Congress had in mind in 1964, the words of the law would apply to sexual orientation, if not transgender status as well.

Trump has only appointed two justices. Gorsuch seems tilted in your favor (unless I'm reading it incorrectly?) and the only other Trump appointee hasn't given many clues as to what his position is. So for the court to be almost evenly divided it would require mostly non-Trump appointees for such dissension.

Again, I'm not supporting or defending Trump, I'm simply trying to figure out how you would equate a negative outcome as being primarily due to Trump?
As Darth Marmelade loves to say: “We’ll see what happens.”

But hopefully, you might possibly understand why the LGBTQ community is concerned about this.
 

raven24

Well-Known Member

LittleBuford

Well-Known Member
I support peace, but I have ZERO sympathy for the vast majority of the Palestinian population.
Do you know them personally to make such a determination?

That’s a rhetorical question, by the way. I’m not having this particular debate again.

I’ll leave it at something I’ve said many times before: it is wrong and dangerous to make sweeping statements about whole groups of people. History has shown us time and again why this is so; we really ought to know better by now.
 
Top Bottom