Topic: Typhoid Trump: the not-smart, corrupt, coward, loser, thread

[Zeb]

THere's a live stream here: https://www.justice.gov/live

CNN saying that it's definitely related to Mueller, although that's still a wide field of candidates. It's late but journalists there saying 5 minutes til it starts.

edit: lmfao the live feed has a mic turned on - a journo just read out the embargoed press release. It's for 12 Russian hackers.

[Not that Gareth]

THere's a live stream here: https://www.justice.gov/live

CNN saying that it's definitely related to Mueller, although that's still a wide field of candidates. It's late but journalists there saying 5 minutes til it starts.

edit: lmfao the live feed has a mic turned on - a journo just read out the embargoed press release. It's for 12 Russian hackers.

That some great timing with putin and trump meeting on Monday. Of course trump wont say shit apart from fake news whilst cupping putins balls.

[ShakaHislop]

Nato gave no concessions did they ?  All they did was reaffirm previous targets and told him that those targets would be met.

I'm not sure myself. NATO's failure to quickly and clearly answer the questions about this has let Trump claim success. I'm presuming they're actually fine with letting him think he's had a win because they believe it will keep him happy and reduce the threat of him pulling out of the alliance altogether but it's only a short-term fix. He's already making demands for spending commitments of 4% of GDP and from his and his supporters view, why not? NATO has already agreed with his core idea that other countries need to spend more and lessen the burden on the US, so why not go further in those aims? If NATO says no in this instance, then the US can threaten to pull out again. If NATO gives in again, what's to stop Trump subsequently asking for 6%; 8%, 10% of GDP?

They've not nipped this issue in the bud, they've kicked the can down the road and given Trump something to parade in front of his supporters. Where's the benefit for NATO in all of this?

[WhereAngelsPlay]

THere's a live stream here: https://www.justice.gov/live

CNN saying that it's definitely related to Mueller, although that's still a wide field of candidates. It's late but journalists there saying 5 minutes til it starts.

edit: lmfao the live feed has a mic turned on - a journo just read out the embargoed press release. It's for 12 Russian hackers.

12 Russian officers by name,just in time for his handler meeting.


FAKE NEWS !!!! FBI HATES AMERICA,WHY DON'T THEY WANT US TO BE GREAT LIKE THE RUSSIANS ? SAD !!!

[Zeb]

That some great timing with putin and trump meeting on Monday. Of course trump wont say shit apart from fake news whilst cupping putins balls.

Maggie Haberman's made an interesting point in addition to that good one that the  Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee hack wasn't followed by any big release, and obviously midterms ahead.

[Alan_X]

In the past they have argued that the 2% figure wasn't relevant, so it could be argued that the whiny little bitch has got something out of them.

It still isn't - it's a target same as it was before the orange baby arrived. The best thing to do with Trump is let him shoot his mouth off because it's such obvious garbage and anyone who knows anything knows he has no understanding of detail and is as has been said by many - a fucking moron.

When Trump walks away from a meeting saying he's achieved denuclearisation in Korea or a NATO commitment to 2% GDP on defence, it's safe to assume that the opposite is true.

Watch the videos on the other threads where the commentators on he European trip can't wipe the smiles off their faces at the sheer idiocy on show. He told the rag that he's increased US GDP 200%, 300% since the election. He obviously doesn't know what GDP is.

[WhereAngelsPlay]

I'm not sure myself. NATO's failure to quickly and clearly answer the questions about this has let Trump claim success. I'm presuming they're actually fine with letting him think he's had a win because they believe it will keep him happy and reduce the threat of him pulling out of the alliance altogether but it's only a short-term fix. He's already making demands for spending commitments of 4% of GDP and from his and his supporters view, why not? NATO has already agreed with his core idea that other countries need to spend more and lessen the burden on the US, so why not go further in those aims? If NATO says no in this instance, then the US can threaten to pull out again. If NATO gives in again, what's to stop Trump subsequently asking for 6%; 8%, 10% of GDP?

They've not nipped this issue in the bud, they've kicked the can down the road and given Trump something to parade in front of his supporters. Where's the benefit for NATO in all of this?

They came straight out and called the 4% claim a lie.

[Trump's tiny tiny hands]

The number of former/current Russian government officials indicted  (agents of the Russian intelligence service GRU) appears to be 12. Hacking involved DNC, DCCC, and Clinton campaign.

1 of the new indictments involves attempted hacking of U.S. electoral infrastructure (defendant is connected to Russian intelligence, GRU).

New Mueller indictments say "DCLeaks" and "Guccifer 2.0" were Russian intelligence service (GRU) front operations

Indictment also mentions (unnamed) "pass-through" organization, quite possibly WikiLeaks

[WhereAngelsPlay]

 Rosenstein with the smackdown

[leroy]

In this exchange, Stephanie Grisham is FLOTUS's spokeswoman:

@BBCJonSopel
Bizarre. @realDonaldTrump says he came to Turnberry the day before Brexit and he told everyone that he thought Brexit would happen. And that he predicted correctly what would happen the next day. Umm. Not true. He came the day after Brexit. I was there. June 24

@StephGrisham45
Stephanie Grisham Retweeted Jon Sopel
He did. It actually is true. I was there. June 23.

@BBCJonSopel
Stephanie - I hate to argue as we were there together. He was NOT at Turnberry on the day before the referendum, as he said at the news conference. He was not there on polling day itself. He was there the day after, on Friday 24th. These are indisputable facts


@StephGrisham45
Nope. I have photos. I also have a newspaper from the morning after Brexit. I remember sitting in a pub the night before, watching the results come in.‏

Someone dug out her own tweet too which confirms his side!

https://twitter.com/OMGrisham/status/746252396041502720

[Red Beret]

That some great timing with putin and trump meeting on Monday. Of course trump wont say shit apart from fake news whilst cupping putins balls.

No way is the timing an accident.  This is some payback from Mueller.  Trump's been getting it in the ass from advisers saying he shouldn't meet with Putin alone and this will pile further pressure on him.  Few days for it to build as well.

[Alan_X]

I'm not sure myself. NATO's failure to quickly and clearly answer the questions about this has let Trump claim success. I'm presuming they're actually fine with letting him think he's had a win because they believe it will keep him happy and reduce the threat of him pulling out of the alliance altogether but it's only a short-term fix. He's already making demands for spending commitments of 4% of GDP and from his and his supporters view, why not? NATO has already agreed with his core idea that other countries need to spend more and lessen the burden on the US, so why not go further in those aims? If NATO says no in this instance, then the US can threaten to pull out again. If NATO gives in again, what's to stop Trump subsequently asking for 6%; 8%, 10% of GDP?

They've not nipped this issue in the bud, they've kicked the can down the road and given Trump something to parade in front of his supporters. Where's the benefit for NATO in all of this?

I think you're massively overstating things there. Trump claims success regardless of what happens because he's an egotistical liar. There was an existing agreement to aim for 2% and that hasn't changed.  The 4% is ridiculous and will just be ignored.

A great bit of advice is to not get into an argument with an idiot. It gets you nowhere and just gives their argument a veneer of credibility.

Who do you think believes anything anything he says apart from his base? And they wouldn't be persuaded by anything anyone else says if it's anti-Trump.

[ShakaHislop]

They came straight out and called the 4% claim a lie.

I've only read reports of Macron placing doubt on the 4% claim. I've read/seen nothing from an official NATO spokesperson, nor any of the other leaders apart from May, who vaguely backed Trump's claims on the issue at today's press conference. Whereas I've seen lots of coverage of Trump patting himself on the back for his great success. If I'm a member of the public who doesn't already loathe Trump, and I'm not hearing widespread denial of his claims, why wouldn't I believe him?

[stoa]

They've not nipped this issue in the bud, they've kicked the can down the road and given Trump something to parade in front of his supporters. Where's the benefit for NATO in all of this?

Stoltenberg has clearly said that they'll stay with what they've agreed a while ago: 2 percent until 2024. Trump claimed beforehand that that's not good enough, but Nato still stood by it. How could Stoltenberg have made it more clear?
Trump will always claim victory. It's what he does. He could get kicked in the bollocks by Putin in Monday and he'd say that that was his plan all along. And his supporters would still believe it.

[WhereAngelsPlay]

I've only read reports of Macron placing doubt on the 4% claim. I've read/seen nothing from an official NATO spokesperson, nor any of the other leaders apart from May, who vaguely backed Trump's claims on the issue at today's press conference. Whereas I've seen lots of coverage of Trump patting himself on the back for his great success. If I'm a member of the public who doesn't already loathe Trump, and I'm not hearing widespread denial of his claims, why wouldn't I believe him?

Drumpf is a liar who is detached from reality,Macron didn't just place doubt on the claim he all but called it bullshit.

[TepidT2O]

Question:
Can I be censured if I am filmed making wanker gestures towards trumps motorcade.  Would it constitute me not upholding British values and lead to action against me?

Asking for a friend obviously

[Zeb]

So Mueller's proving DCLeaks/Guccifer were GRU agents who stole the information and then gave it to a cutout (Wikileaks) which in turn gave it to Roger Stone (?) who in turn handed it to the Trump campaign.


edit: also a US congressman asked for, and received, stolen information from Guccifer on August 15, 2016. Oops.

And this case is now passed over to a team in the DoJ, so it doesn't vanish by sacking Mueller.

[rafathegaffa83]

The number of former/current Russian government officials indicted  (agents of the Russian intelligence service GRU) appears to be 12. Hacking involved DNC, DCCC, and Clinton campaign.

1 of the new indictments involves attempted hacking of U.S. electoral infrastructure (defendant is connected to Russian intelligence, GRU).

New Mueller indictments say "DCLeaks" and "Guccifer 2.0" were Russian intelligence service (GRU) front operations

Indictment also mentions (unnamed) "pass-through" organization, quite possibly WikiLeaks

Magnificent timing

So Mueller's proving DCLeaks/Guccifer were GRU agents who stole the information and then gave it to a cutout (Wikileaks) which in turn gave it to Roger Stone (?) who in turn handed it to the Trump campaign.


edit: also a US congressman asked for, and received, stolen information from Guccifer on August 15, 2016. Oops.

And this case is now passed over to a team in the DoJ, so it doesn't vanish by sacking Mueller.

Great stuff

[Djozer]

In this exchange, Stephanie Grisham is FLOTUS's spokeswoman:

@BBCJonSopel
Bizarre. @realDonaldTrump says he came to Turnberry the day before Brexit and he told everyone that he thought Brexit would happen. And that he predicted correctly what would happen the next day. Umm. Not true. He came the day after Brexit. I was there. June 24

@StephGrisham45
Stephanie Grisham Retweeted Jon Sopel
He did. It actually is true. I was there. June 23.

@BBCJonSopel
Stephanie - I hate to argue as we were there together. He was NOT at Turnberry on the day before the referendum, as he said at the news conference. He was not there on polling day itself. He was there the day after, on Friday 24th. These are indisputable facts


@StephGrisham45
Nope. I have photos. I also have a newspaper from the morning after Brexit. I remember sitting in a pub the night before, watching the results come in.‏

It was only a little lie. Look, look over there! He solved the Korean War all by his lonesome. And taxes!

[Mumm-Ra]

Question:
Can I be censured if I am filmed making wanker gestures towards trumps motorcade.  Would it constitute me not upholding British values and lead to action against me?

Asking for a friend obviously

It would be beautiful if everyone lining the route just have him a silent thumbs-down

[Not that Gareth]

edit: also a US congressman asked for, and received, stolen information from Guccifer on August 15, 2016. Oops.

Nunes? Dana? Gowdy? Moneys on Nunes.

[rafathegaffa83]

Nunes? Dana? Gowdy? Moneys on Nunes.

Nunes?  Rohrbacher? Gaetz?

[Zeb]

Just on the congressman, should rephrase really - my mistake. This is the actual phrasing:



'Candidate'.

[Red Beret]

It would be beautiful if everyone lining the route just have him a silent thumbs-down

turn their backs.  Preferably with obscene slogans on the backs of their tshirts.

[Zeb]

Just take this in a moment.





(Julian Sanchez' twitter)

[Red Beret]

[TepidT2O]

Fucking hell

That is utter genius.





Britain is a brilliant country sometimes

[rafathegaffa83]

[Millie]

That's brilliant 

[Alan_X]

I've only read reports of Macron placing doubt on the 4% claim. I've read/seen nothing from an official NATO spokesperson, nor any of the other leaders apart from May, who vaguely backed Trump's claims on the issue at today's press conference. Whereas I've seen lots of coverage of Trump patting himself on the back for his great success. If I'm a member of the public who doesn't already loathe Trump, and I'm not hearing widespread denial of his claims, why wouldn't I believe him?

How many members of the general public have a fucking clue (or give a fuck) what 2% of GDP means? Like his ‘contract’ with Kim Jong Un, a comment is not a binding commitment.

No offence but Trump is the massive c*nt here. One of the ways he gains advantage is by people bigging up his ridiculous claims and doing down those on ‘our’ side.

[Buggy Eyes Alfredo]

https://twitter.com/sureduck/status/1017719685255716865

   

[Mutton Geoff]

Dual Purpose we can use it for Boris as well

[BabuYagu]

Josh Barro
✔
@jbarro

Deep in that Sun interview, Trump brags that his poll numbers with Republicans are even better than Lincoln's were. Lincoln died a decade before the telephone was invented and about eight decades before presidential approval polling began.

--------------------

On behalf of the 60% of Americans who possess a functioning brain, I apologize that this disgusting a-hole is currently staining your British soil. So embarrassed to be an American these days, my god.

So he is technically right then. Winning on a technicality. Like me saying I am a better boxer than Muhammed Ali. We both know I am full of shite, but technically you can't prove me wrong.

[Alan_X]

So he is technically right then. Winning on a technicality. Like me saying I am a better boxer than Muhammed Ali. We both know I am full of shite, but technically you can't prove me wrong.

One factor in his high popularity rating among Republicans is the party is losing support from people who can’t stand him.

[ShakaHislop]

I think you're massively overstating things there. Trump claims success regardless of what happens because he's an egotistical liar. There was an existing agreement to aim for 2% and that hasn't changed.  The 4% is ridiculous and will just be ignored.

A great bit of advice is to not get into an argument with an idiot. It gets you nowhere and just gives their argument a veneer of credibility.

Who do you think believes anything anything he says apart from his base? And they wouldn't be persuaded by anything anyone else says if it's anti-Trump.

How has his approval rating increased if there aren't some people outside of his base who are still open-minded towards him?

Stoltenberg has clearly said that they'll stay with what they've agreed a while ago: 2 percent until 2024. Trump claimed beforehand that that's not good enough, but Nato still stood by it. How could Stoltenberg have made it more clear?
Trump will always claim victory. It's what he does. He could get kicked in the bollocks by Putin in Monday and he'd say that that was his plan all along. And his supporters would still believe it.

I didn't read/hear anything about Stoltenberg's comments until this evening, although these comments are the type from US "allies" that piss me off.

Mr Stoltenberg said members had had a "frank and open discussion" which "created a new sense of urgency", and that the "clear message from President Trump" was "having an impact".

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-44808077

So which is it? Is Trump taking entirely undeserved credit for something that was agreed years ago as the likes of Macron have said, or is he actually due some praise as Stoltenberg is suggesting? How hard is it to take a fucking consistent line?

How many members of the general public have a fucking clue (or give a fuck) what 2% of GDP means? Like his ‘contract’ with Kim Jong Un, a comment is not a binding commitment.

No offence but Trump is the massive c*nt here. One of the ways he gains advantage is by people bigging up his ridiculous claims and doing down those on ‘our’ side.

Yes, Trump is the biggest c*nt here but others can do better in opposing him, such as "allies" who are so wedded to diplomacy that they allow Trump far too much leeway to claim success. The South Korean government has been doing the same with his approach to North Korea. He's achieved fuck all, so why not say it?

[Mimi]

What evidence is there that Trump’s approval rating is increasing?

[Banquo's Ghost]

Yes, Trump is the biggest c*nt here but others can do better in opposing him, such as "allies" who are so wedded to diplomacy that they allow Trump far too much leeway to claim success. The South Korean government has been doing the same with his approach to North Korea. He's achieved fuck all, so why not say it?

I think you are confused. It is not up to treaty organisations or alliances to campaign against the duly elected leaders of their members. In private, they may well push back firmly. In public, they all need to be aware of the long term damage of delegitimising each other.

Trump's position is a matter for the people of the United States and their elected representatives. It is not up to NATO leaders to do Congress' job for them. If you are unlucky enough to be the leader of a democratic nation dealing with Trump, you need to sup with a very long spoon.

[ShakaHislop]

I think you are confused. It is not up to treaty organisations or alliances to campaign against the duly elected leaders of their members. In private, they may well push back firmly. In public, they all need to be aware of the long term damage of delegitimising each other.

Trump's position is a matter for the people of the United States and their elected representatives. It is not up to NATO leaders to do Congress' job for them. If you are unlucky enough to be the leader of a democratic nation dealing with Trump, you need to sup with a very long spoon.

I'm not asking them to campaign against him. I'm just asking them to tell the truth, and if that involves having to directly contradict Trump, so be it. Allowing Trump to get away with lies about what happens in NATO meetings and allowing him to portray the rest of them as schoolchildren scared of the bully is what undermines NATO.

[ShakaHislop]

What evidence is there that Trump’s approval rating is increasing?

[Crosby Nick]

What caused the massive spike for Bush?