Summations Only

You should be. It's a gigantic deal. Humans will survive, most of our civilization will survive, after an economic crisis that makes the Great Depression look like a minor blip.There's some reason to believe it's too late to avoid that, but we could still take actions that would ameliorate it.

Probably not. We can't vaporize entire mountains yet. North Korea's Secret Strategy in a War with America: Go UndergroundBut we sure as hell could start a nuclear holocaust including near-total destruction of South Korea and millions of refugees from both Koreas. Since all Trump knows is bullying and suing, and he can't sue, we're well on our way.

Bullshit. Link to some sources that "don't have a problem with him".

A little slow on the uptake, hum?You got quite a bit of your requested line-by-line rebuttal. Were you honest you'd address those line-by-line rebuttals line-by-line. But you said it's too hard to do what you expect others to do. Hypocrisy.

Figured out what I meant?How's that line-by-line defense of your rebutted claims coming?Oh, you have none?Figures.

To which you did not respond. But you got significantly more than that. It's a response which you ignored. You could have argued why you think they are accomplishments. However, I was referring to Message 1027 to which you did reply but did not address the points NoNukes raised. Here it is again with some annotations.

quote:

---

01. Supreme Court Judge Gorsuch - Plus for Republican voters.
02. 59 missiles dropped in Syria. - Not a plus. Did not accomplish much of anything.
03. He took us out of ‘TPP' - We were never in it, but plus for base
04. Illegal immigration is now down 70% (the lowest in 17 years) - Plus for base
05. Consumer confidence highest since 2000 at index 125.6 - continued trend from Obama era; not a plus since Trump has not implemented any economic policy to speak of
06. Mortgage applications for new homes rise to a 7 year high. You might want to check the data on this one. Overall mortgage activity is headed down right now.

​

07. Arranged 20% Tariff on soft lumber from Canada. - Started a trade war with Canada when other administrations were able to negotiate a deal. Not a plus.

​

08. Bids for border wall are well underway. - Bids on something for which there is no budget. Not an accomplishment.

​

09. Pulled out of the lopsided 'Paris Accord'. Plus for wingnuts
10. Keystone pipeline approved. Mixed bag, but plus for base [May not ever be built because it's not economical - JonF]
11. NATO allies boost spending by 4.3% A trivial increase. If they were spending 1.5% of GDP, this would be a bump to 1.56%. In short, not an accomplishment.

​

12. Allowing VA to terminate bad employees. Plus

​

13. Allowing private healthcare choices for veterans. The president signed a bill extending a previous program. Not much of an accomplishment.

​

14. More than 600,000. Jobs created About the same number as were created over the same period last year. In fact somewhat fewer this year. [fewer than the preceding six months and fewer than the same six months one , two, three, and four years before. Not an accomplishment. - JonF]

​

15. Median household income at a 7 year high. Continuing an existing trend. How much of this, not having screwed things up yet are we going to call accomplishments.

​

16. The Stock Market is at the highest ever In its history. Apparently just a bit more.

​

17. China agreed to American import of beef. This was announced in September. Total nonsense that this is on your list.

​

18. $89 Billion saved in regulation rollbacks. Need some details.

​

19. Rollback of A Regulation to boost coal mining. An accomplishment that we will suffer for, but the base likes it. Call it an accomplishment for the base.

​

20. MOAB for ISIS An accomplishment of some sort. Allowed the generals to decide to drop a big bomb. Is this what makes you happy?

​

21. Travel ban reinstated. Partially reinstated. The portions we all knew were unconstitutional were not reinstated.

---

Item by item as you asked us to do, please.Edited by JonF, : Fix message link.

Well, the link is broken, but it looks as if it's this: U.S. Consumer Confidence Eases on Economic, Jobs ExpectationsOf course NoNukes never promised any breakdown. But it's pretty obvious to what he referred (enlarged slightly if you click on it): 109 in Novemeber? Check.
115 in December? Sort of check, it's close.
General upward trend? CheckBall's in yuor court.

Yup. No matter the history, Trump started a name-calling war. What color is the sky on your planet? War with Korea would in no way provide a path to get Trump out. (Personally I think Trump should stay; he's evil but incompetent. The next two, Pence and Ryan, are evil and really good at it.)

Oh Noes! Trump Never Said The Words 'Radical Islam' In Afghanistan Speech

quote:

---

When President Obama first took office, conservatives concocted a bogus talking point that since Obama refused to denounce "radical Islam" as purveyors of terrorism, the U.S. couldn't defeat them because we don't even know their name.

​

This nonsense was a constant refrain for eight years even during the 2016 presidential election:

​

quote:

---

Obama disgracefully refused to even say the words ‘Radical Islam’, Trump said in a statement Sunday. For that reason alone, he should step down.

---

​

Trump even said it soon after the terror attacks in Barcelona on August, 18th:

---

When they say "middle class tax cut" they mean "nominal middle class tax cut and gigantic tax cut for the rich and corporations." It's plain ol' trickle-down economics, the tax cut will sure unprecedented economic growth.It failed for Reagan.It failed for W.It failed for Walker in WisconsinIt failed for Jindal in Louisiana.And it failed spectacularly for Brownback in Kansas (hailed by right-wing economists as the perfect test bed) to the point where the Republican legislature overrode Brownback's veto of a tax increase.But this time for sure, right?Edited by JonF, : No reason given.

And you can't drain a swamp by stocking it with alligators and snakes.

Definition of Trump from a Brit

quote:

---

Someone on Quora asked, “Why do some British people not like Donald Trump?” Nate White, an articulate and witty writer from England wrote this magnificent response.

​

A few things spring to mind.

​

Trump lacks certain qualities which the British traditionally esteem.

​

For instance, he has no class, no charm, no coolness, no credibility, no compassion, no wit, no warmth, no wisdom, no subtlety, no sensitivity, no self-awareness, no humility, no honour and no grace - all qualities, funnily enough, with which his predecessor Mr. Obama was generously blessed.

​

So for us, the stark contrast does rather throw Trump’s limitations into embarrassingly sharp relief.

​

Plus, we like a laugh. And while Trump may be laughable, he has never once said anything wry, witty or even faintly amusing - not once, ever.

​

I don’t say that rhetorically, I mean it quite literally: not once, not ever. And that fact is particularly disturbing to the British sensibility - for us, to lack humor is almost inhuman.

​

But with Trump, it’s a fact. He doesn’t even seem to understand what a joke is - his idea of a joke is a crass comment, an illiterate insult, a casual act of cruelty.

​

Trump is a troll. And like all trolls, he is never funny and he never laughs; he only crows or jeers.

​

And scarily, he doesn’t just talk in crude, witless insults - he actually thinks in them. His mind is a simple bot-like algorithm of petty prejudices and knee-jerk nastiness....

​

If being a twat was a TV show, Trump would be the boxed set.

---

I am continuously astonished that this bullshit refuses to die. There's a fundamental and critical difference between the scenarios.Receiving or soliciting a donation of information of value is flat-out illegal. That's what Trump said he would do, and it's what many think Don Jr. did in that infamous June 2016 meeting. The reason is that when one party receives something of value and the other doesn't there's a good possibility it creates an undesirable debt owed to the second party. Ask a Mafia Don for a favor and he does it, but some day Vito Corleone's on the phone saying "remember when I did you a solid...".Hillary's campaign paid (in part) for the Steele dossier. A normal commercial transaction that all campaigns do. Some or all of it coming from foreign entities is no problem. One party gets (presumably) legally collected information and the other party gets money. Nobody's done anyone any favors and Vito is stymied.The mendacity of the right-wing media is sickening. I've looked at a half-dozen or so web sites and seen several more quoted. All of them say "Hillary did it so nyah nyah nyah!" and none of them mention the fundamental difference.As to the value of information, it can be a little fuzzy. From Is it actually illegal to accept “campaign dirt” from foreigners?:

quote:

---

“Campaign-relevant information from a foreign national definitely can be an illegal in-kind contribution, but it gets trickier when the information does not have obvious cash value and isn’t necessarily something that a campaign regularly needs to buy,” Michael Kang, a law professor at Northwestern University, told me in an email. “The policy concern is that any valuable advice or tip from a foreign national could, at least in theory, become an illegal in-kind contribution.”

​

...

​

And while the value of opposition research might be hard to gauge, experts said it’s difficult to argue that it doesn’t have some worth, as campaigns regularly pay for it. Jessica Levinson, a law professor at Loyola Law School, told me that practical considerations would suggest that, yes, campaign dirt does have value.

---

Edited by JonF, : No reason given.

U.S. Escalates Online Attacks on Russia’s Power Grid, at the end of the article:

quote:

---

Two administration officials said they believed Mr. Trump had not been briefed in any detail about the steps to place “implants” ” software code that can be used for surveillance or attack ” inside the Russian grid.

​

Pentagon and intelligence officials described broad hesitation to go into detail with Mr. Trump about operations against Russia for concern over his reaction ” and the possibility that he might countermand it or discuss it with foreign officials, as he did in 2017 when he mentioned a sensitive operation in Syria to the Russian foreign minister.

​

Because the new law defines the actions in cyberspace as akin to traditional military activity on the ground, in the air or at sea, no such briefing would be necessary, they added.

---

The Clinton Foundation is not a campaign. If you want to establish illegality, you have to demonstrate that money somehow being transferred to the campaign, or explicitly demonstrate a quid pro quo.Which nobody's done. Republicans oppose Democrats because of what Republicans say Democrats do. Democrats oppose Republicans because of what Republicans do.Your vivid fantasies are not evidence.

quote:

---

what Hillary did was probably far worse

---

What HIllary did was legal and accepted practice for campaigns. As I explained, it was a straightforward commercial transaction that all campaigns do.

quote:

---

But he couldn't prove them. So case closed.

---

Until Congress acts. Yes, the voters are watching, and the majority of them don't like what they see Trump and the Trumpettes doing.Edited by JonF, : No reason given.Edited by JonF, : No reason given.