AuthorTopic: 🤡 Trumpty-Dumpty POTUS Thread  (Read 218859 times)

Offline JRM

  • Sous Chef
  • ****
  • Posts: 4046
    • View Profile
"Eddie doesn't deny he is right winger." -- says agelbert
« Reply #240 on: February 02, 2017, 11:26:47 AM »

Just curious, Eddie but why were you the champion posting articles about Trump on those forum for the last YEAR (BEFORE the election  ;)  :evil4:) when nobody was really interested in what that cheap evil clown had to say?  I'm sure he and Bannon are grateful to you for all that free advertising to KEEP TRUMP'S NAME in front of people's eyes....

Congratulations on your successful propaganda efforts. The far right wing can be proud of you.

Misdirected anger / resentment here.  Eddie is certainly not a supporter of Trump, nor has he ever been.
What makes you say that? I'm not angry. I just stated a fact. I watched Eddie do that for a year and kept scratching my head about it. Eddie doesn't deny he is right winger. What's your problem, JRM?

Have you ever seen how Eddie comes down on left wing stuff? Talk about mockery (Leon Trotsky type snipes come up reflexively) and he does get quite exercised about "fighting to defend Capitalism". YET, you never labelled THAT as "misdirected anger", did you? How come? aren't we all supposed judge each other equally?

Or are some MORE EQUAL than others? And if a fellow like me has the temerity to question anybody's sainthood, why do I get labelled as "too sensitive" or having "misdirected anger". Take your time and don't rush your answer.  ;)

Reasonably speaking, someone who thinks the USA is falling into a Fascist dictatorship should not be posting about the future behavior of some right wing whacko like the latest Trump SCOTUS pick as a ho hum type of thing to be studied and commented on but not to get too excited about.

The fact is, JRM, you can tell how somebody REALLY feels about things by their FAILURE to get exercised about certain types of politics. If you haven't noticed, it's because you aren't paying attention. For example, that CRAP about a "muslim" doing the Quebec shooting. WHO in this forum jumped out there to agree with me that Trump DIRECTLY caused this crap (it WAS a WHITE NATIONALIST!) and the propaganda LIE through Fox news. Uh, nobody.

YET, you come at me with this bit of irrelevance when I am pointing out a fact. There is a propaganda war going on. Too many times I watch people PRETEND to side a certain way on an issue but notice they simply have energy for OTHER issues of far less importance. Actions speak, BUT SO DO INACTIONS.

And JRM, I am disappointed in you for not celebrating the fact that the FOX news item demonizing muslims was proven to be a lie.  :(
My "avatar" graphic is Japanese calligraphy (shodō) forming the word shoshin, meaning "beginner's mind". --  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoshin -- It is with shoshin that I am now and always "meeting my breath" for the first time. Try it!

Offline Eddie

  • Global Moderator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 18983
    • View Profile
Re: Trumpty-Dumpty POTUS Thread
« Reply #241 on: February 02, 2017, 12:34:03 PM »
Did you bump this up for me?

I read it last night and decided not to respond. I suppose I am to the right of AG, since he's very far on the bleeding edge of the left. I consider the whole Left v. Right paradigm to be fairly irrelevant anymore since all sides serve the corporate masters. As I've said, many times now, I don''t think it matters if you have a social democracy or a monarchy. What matters is having people in charge who are genuinely benevolent, which we haven't had in an awful long time, if ever.

I do believe in protecting the environment and cutting our dependence on fossil fuels, and many of the same things AG believes in, and I would love to see universal health care. I find Trump to be scary, and American politics to be sickening.

Honestly, I think AG's problem with me is two-fold. On one hand he takes every comment I leave on his threads as an attack, which I never intend for them to be...and second, he just has a big problem with high earning professionals. Like RE, he hates dentists as a group because of his own personal experiences.
« Last Edit: February 02, 2017, 12:40:24 PM by Eddie »
What makes the desert beautiful is that somewhere it hides a well.

Offline JRM

  • Sous Chef
  • ****
  • Posts: 4046
    • View Profile
Re: Trumpty-Dumpty POTUS Thread
« Reply #242 on: February 02, 2017, 01:07:28 PM »
Did you bump this up for me?

Yes, and I'm glad you responded.  I actually like both of you guys, and that's why I did.  He seemed to treat you unfairly with his words.  I won't say that's "sad," 'cause trump ruined that word for me. He places it at the end of sentences like this.  Sad.   Which itself is sad.  Sad.
My "avatar" graphic is Japanese calligraphy (shodō) forming the word shoshin, meaning "beginner's mind". --  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoshin -- It is with shoshin that I am now and always "meeting my breath" for the first time. Try it!

Offline JRM

  • Sous Chef
  • ****
  • Posts: 4046
    • View Profile
Re: Trumpty-Dumpty POTUS Thread
« Reply #243 on: February 02, 2017, 01:22:22 PM »
I think we humans are prone to act out our anger and resentment toward the real bullies and assholes against those who more properly ought to be either our friends or our allies.  I think this is an example of that.
My "avatar" graphic is Japanese calligraphy (shodō) forming the word shoshin, meaning "beginner's mind". --  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoshin -- It is with shoshin that I am now and always "meeting my breath" for the first time. Try it!

Offline Eddie

  • Global Moderator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 18983
    • View Profile
Re: Trumpty-Dumpty POTUS Thread
« Reply #244 on: February 02, 2017, 01:25:52 PM »
I do not feel that I posted anything here during the election cycle that was calculated to be in support of Trump.

I found the Scott Adams stuff to be relevant and informative. I wanted to understand Trump. To me he was a dark horse, and a little hard to parse. I was blindsided when he won.

I wrote many disparaging posts about H.Clinton, because I found her disgusting. But in the end I actually did vote for her. My reasoning is hard to explain.

Basically I was afraid that the situation would end up being the exact reverse of what happened. I thought Hillary might win the election but lose the popular vote, and I hoped a Clinton vote would keep that from happening. My concern was that Trump supporters would get violent in such a circumstance. In retrospect, it appears my concern was misplaced.
« Last Edit: February 02, 2017, 02:10:32 PM by Eddie »
What makes the desert beautiful is that somewhere it hides a well.

Offline JRM

  • Sous Chef
  • ****
  • Posts: 4046
    • View Profile
Re: Trumpty-Dumpty POTUS Thread
« Reply #245 on: February 02, 2017, 02:32:44 PM »
Basically I was afraid that the situation would end up being the exact reverse of what happened. I thought Hillary might win the election but lose the popular vote, and I hoped a Clinton vote would keep that from happening. My concern was that Trump supporters would get violent in such a circumstance. In retrospect, it appears my concern was misplaced.

Yeah. It was sensible enough a thought.  trump and his supporters, after all, were violence advocates before the election ... and continue to be.  Neither would have been (or are) good for the job.  To say the least.
My "avatar" graphic is Japanese calligraphy (shodō) forming the word shoshin, meaning "beginner's mind". --  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoshin -- It is with shoshin that I am now and always "meeting my breath" for the first time. Try it!

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 40705
    • View Profile
Re: Trumpty-Dumpty POTUS Thread
« Reply #246 on: February 02, 2017, 04:44:30 PM »
Like RE, he hates dentists as a group because of his own personal experiences.

I already explained the reasons, and that's only a small part of it.  That statement is untrue. I will not go into it again.  Let's stay off that topic please.

RE
Save As Many As You Can

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 40705
    • View Profile
Re: Trumpty-Dumpty POTUS Thread
« Reply #247 on: February 04, 2017, 12:38:40 AM »
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/02/03/513306413/state-department-says-fewer-than-60-000-visas-revoked-under-travel-order

 America
Federal Judge Stays Trump Travel Order, But Many Visas Already Revoked

February 3, 20174:42 PM ET

Rebecca Hersher


Ali Vayeghan (left), an Iranian citizen with a valid U.S. visa, arrived at Los Angeles International Airport on Thursday after initially being turned away. He was allowed to come back under a federal judge's order.
Damian Dovarganes/AP

Updated at 10:40 p.m. ET

A federal judge in Seattle has issued a nationwide temporary stay against President Trump's executive order that prevented citizens of seven mostly Muslim countries from entering the United States. Judge James Robart acted to stop implementation of the order while a case brought by the states of Washington and Minnesota is heard.

The White House issued a statement Friday night, saying the Justice Department will appeal the Seattle judge's action:
Where Does Your Member Of Congress Stand On Trump's Immigration Order?
Politics
Where Does Your Member Of Congress Stand On Trump's Immigration Order?
Trump's Executive Order On Immigration, Annotated
Politics
Trump's Executive Order On Immigration, Annotated

    "At the earliest possible time, the Department of Justice intends to file an emergency stay of this outrageous order and defend the executive order of the President, which we believe is lawful and appropriate. The president's order is intended to protect the homeland and he has the constitutional authority and responsibility to protect the American people.

    "As the law states, 'Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.' "

The White House soon amended the statement, deleting the word "outrageous."

The State Department said earlier Friday that it had already revoked some 60,000 visas, so even if the stay survives appellate review, it's not clear whether many travelers from those countries will be immediately free to enter the country.

The State Department said today "roughly 60,000 individuals' visas were provisionally revoked" as a result of Trump's Jan. 27 executive order barring refugees from seven countries.

That number is considerably lower than the number given by a Justice Department attorney, who said today in federal court in Virginia that 100,000 visas were revoked as a result of the order, as Carmel Delshad of NPR station WAMU reported.

Both numbers are much larger than the figure provided by the Department of Homeland Security earlier this week. Kevin McAleenan, acting commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, told reporters on Tuesday that 721 people with visas had not been allowed to board airplanes to the U.S. in the first 72 hours after the order went into effect. An additional 1,135 people with visas were granted waivers to enter the country, he said.

The 100,000 figure came out during a hearing for two lawful permanent residents from Yemen who filed a lawsuit after arriving at Dulles International Airport last Saturday. The two men allege they were detained and coerced into giving up their immigrant visas before being put on a return flight to Ethiopia, Delshad reported.

"U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema said that it was clear to her the temporary travel ban on seven majority-Muslim countries went into effect too quickly, and not a lot of thought went into it," and she issued a seven-day extension of a temporary order barring the deportation of green card holders from Dulles Airport, Delshad reported.

The executive order bans people from traveling to the U.S. from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen for three months, suspends new-refugee admissions for 120 days and bars Syrian refugees indefinitely.

State Department spokesman Will Cocks says the executive order doesn't mean a visa holder already in the U.S. is in the country illegally.

Asked, by way of example, about a hypothetical Iranian student currently in the U.S., he said such a student "likely has a visa that could have been revoked. However this has no impact on legal status on those in the U.S. So they are not here illegally."

New York, Massachusetts, Virginia, Minnesota and Washington state all have sued the federal government regarding the order. Eric Schneiderman, the New York state attorney general, described the order signed a week ago as "unconstitutional, unlawful, and fundamentally un-American," reported The Guardian.
Save As Many As You Can

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 40705
    • View Profile
Trumpty-Dumpty Phone Calls (SNL Version)
« Reply #248 on: February 05, 2017, 02:17:19 AM »
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/a4HJwwyOtow" target="_blank" class="new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/a4HJwwyOtow</a>
Save As Many As You Can

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 40705
    • View Profile
Trump Clashes Early With Courts, Portending Years of Legal Battles
« Reply #249 on: February 05, 2017, 06:43:29 PM »
Politics
Trump Clashes Early With Courts, Portending Years of Legal Battles

By PETER BAKERFEB. 5, 2017


President Trump speaking with reporters on Air Force One on Friday. He has quickly pushed into a confrontation with the courts as he tests the limits of executive power. Credit Stephen Crowley/The New York Times

WASHINGTON — President Trump is barreling into a confrontation with the courts barely two weeks after taking office, foreshadowing years of legal battles as an administration determined to disrupt the existing order presses the boundaries of executive power.

Lawyers for the administration were ordered to submit a brief on Monday defending Mr. Trump’s order temporarily banning refugees from around the world and all visitors from seven predominantly Muslim countries from entering the United States. An appeals court in California refused on Sunday to reinstate the ban after a lower court blocked it.

As people from the countries targeted by Mr. Trump struggled to make their way to the United States while they could, the president for the second day in a row expressed rage at the judge in the case, this time accusing him of endangering national security. Vice President Mike Pence defended the president’s tone, but lawyers and lawmakers of both parties said Mr. Trump’s comments reflected a lack of respect for the constitutional system of checks and balances.

Late in the day, Mr. Trump took to Twitter to pre-emptively blame the judge and the judiciary for what the president suggested would be a future terrorist attack.
Continue reading the main story
The Trump White House
Stories about President Trump’s administration.

    Trump Says Health Law Replacement May Not Be Ready Until Next Year
    FEB 5
    Jim Mattis Seeks to Soothe Tensions in Japan and South Korea
    FEB 5
    Scott Pruitt Is Seen Cutting the E.P.A. With a Scalpel, Not a Cleaver
    FEB 5
    Trump’s F.C.C. Pick Quickly Targets Net Neutrality Rules
    FEB 5
    Where Trump’s Travel Ban Stands
    FEB 5

See More »

Advertisement
Continue reading the main story

“Just cannot believe a judge would put our country in such peril,” Mr. Trump wrote, a day after referring to the “so-called judge” in the case. “If something happens blame him and court system.”

Even before the latest post, Republicans joined Democrats in chiding him. Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the majority leader, said it was “best not to single out judges.”

“We all get disappointed from time to time,” he said on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “I think it is best to avoid criticizing judges individually.”

The White House offered no evidence for Mr. Trump’s suggestion that potential terrorists would now pour over the border because of the judge’s order. Since Sept. 11, 2001, no American has been killed in a terrorist attack on American soil by anyone who immigrated from any of the seven countries named in Mr. Trump’s order.

The impassioned debate over the immigration order brought to the fore issues at the heart of the Trump presidency. A businessman with no experience in public office, Mr. Trump has shown in his administration’s opening days that he favors an action-oriented approach with little regard for the two other branches of government. While Congress, controlled by Republicans, has deferred, the judiciary may emerge as the major obstacle for Mr. Trump.
Politics By DAVE HORN, MEG FELLING and DAPHNE RUSTOW 2:13
Fact Check: Trump’s Immigration Order
Video
Fact Check: Trump’s Immigration Order

President Trump blocked travel from seven Muslim-majority countries, and cut refugee admissions by more than half. We checked the facts. By DAVE HORN, MEG FELLING and DAPHNE RUSTOW on Publish Date February 3, 2017. Photo by Al Drago/The New York Times. Watch in Times Video »

    embed

    ShareTweet

Democrats and some Republicans said Mr. Trump’s attack on the courts would color the battle over the nomination of Judge Neil M. Gorsuch to the Supreme Court as well as the president’s relationship with Congress.

Other presidents have clashed with the judiciary. The Supreme Court invalidated parts of Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal, forced Richard M. Nixon to turn over Watergate tapes and rejected Bill Clinton’s bid to delay a sexual harassment lawsuit.

The last two presidents battled with courts repeatedly over the limits of their power. The judiciary ruled that George W. Bush overstepped his bounds in denying due process to terrorism suspects and that Barack Obama assumed power he did not have to allow millions of unauthorized immigrants to stay in the country.

Charles Fried, solicitor general under Ronald Reagan, said the ruling by a Federal District Court in Washington state blocking Mr. Trump’s order resembled a ruling by a Texas district court stopping Mr. Obama from proceeding with his own immigration order.

But rarely, if ever, has a president this early in his tenure, and with such personal invective, battled the courts. Mr. Trump, Mr. Fried said, is turning everything into “a soap opera” with overheated attacks on the judge. “There are no lines for him,” said Mr. Fried, who teaches at Harvard Law School and voted against Mr. Trump. “There is no notion of, this is inappropriate, this is indecent, this is unpresidential.”

Other Republicans brushed off the attacks, noting that judges have lifetime tenure that protects them from criticism. But even some Republicans said Mr. Trump’s order raised valid legal questions for the courts.

“If I were in the White House, I’d feel better about my position if the ban or moratorium or whatever you call it were based on an actual attack or threat,” former Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales, who served under Mr. Bush, said in an interview. Still, he said, when it comes to noncitizens overseas, “the executive has enjoyed great deference from the courts.”

Judge James Robart, a Federal District Court judge in Seattle appointed by Mr. Bush, on Friday issued a nationwide suspension of Mr. Trump’s order while its legality was debated. The administration quickly asked the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit to overrule the judge, but it refused early Sunday and instead ordered the government to file a brief on Monday. The quick briefing schedule indicated that the appeals court could issue a ruling on the merits of the president’s order within days.

In the meantime, refugees vetted by the government can proceed to the United States, as can any travelers with approved visas from the seven targeted nations: Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.
Get the Morning Briefing by Email

What you need to know to start your day, delivered to your inbox Monday through Friday.
Receive occasional updates and special offers for The New York Times's products and services.

    See Sample Privacy Policy

Still, widespread confusion and anger were reported at overseas airports on Sunday. Unsure which orders to follow, airlines stopped even some of the people named in the lawsuits who were technically cleared to come to the country, according to a government official.

The assertion of broad latitude by the president in areas of national security resembles the struggles of the Bush years, when in the months after the Sept. 11 attacks the administration claimed sometimes sweeping power in the name of fighting terrorism.

Jack Goldsmith, who as head of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel under Mr. Bush argued that some of the initial orders went too far and forced them to be rolled back, said on Sunday that there were similarities. “But Bush’s legal directives were not as sloppy as Trump’s,” he said. “And Trump’s serial attacks on judges and the judiciary take us into new territory. The sloppiness and aggressiveness of the directives, combined with the attacks on judges, put extra pressure on judges to rule against Trump.”

This was not the first time Mr. Trump has castigated a judge who ruled against him. As a candidate last year, Mr. Trump asserted that Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel, who was presiding over a fraud lawsuit by former students of Trump University, had a conflict of interest because his family was of Mexican heritage and he therefore would be biased because of Mr. Trump’s promise to build a border wall.

Such comments from a sitting president, however, were unusual and triggered consternation in the legal community. Bartholomew J. Dalton, the president of the American College of Trial Lawyers, called Mr. Trump’s “insulting language” inappropriate.

“It is wrong for the chief executive of the executive branch to demean a member of the judiciary with such language,” Mr. Dalton said in a statement. “This undermines judicial independence, which is the backbone to our constitutional democracy.”

Senators of both parties appearing on Sunday talk shows concurred. “I’ll be honest, I don’t understand language like that,” Senator Ben Sasse, Republican of Nebraska, said on “This Week” on ABC. “We don’t have so-called judges. We don’t have so-called senators. We don’t have so-called presidents. We have people from three different branches of government who take an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution.”

“The president is not a dictator,” Senator Dianne Feinstein of California, the Judiciary Committee’s top Democrat, said on “Fox News Sunday.” “The framers of our Constitution wanted a strong Congress for the very reason that most of these kinds of things should be done within the scope of lawmaking. This is done within the scope of executive power.”

It fell to Mr. Pence to defend Mr. Trump. “Well, look, the president of the United States has every right to criticize the other two branches of government. And we have a long tradition of that in this country,” he said on “Meet the Press” on NBC.

“The judge’s actions in this case,” he added, “making decisions about American foreign policy and national security, it’s just very frustrating to the president, to our whole administration, to millions of Americans who want to see judges that will uphold the law and recognize the authority the president of the United States has under the Constitution to manage who comes into this country.”

Nicholas Fandos contributed reporting.
Save As Many As You Can

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 40705
    • View Profile
Sean Spicer Press Conference (SNL Version)
« Reply #250 on: February 05, 2017, 10:52:29 PM »
The SNL writers are just having a FIELD DAY with Trumpty-Dumpty!  :icon_mrgreen:

RE

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/UWuc18xISwI" target="_blank" class="new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/UWuc18xISwI</a>
Save As Many As You Can

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 40705
    • View Profile
Trumpty-Dumpty International Travel Guide Map
« Reply #251 on: February 05, 2017, 11:08:46 PM »

RE
Save As Many As You Can

Offline Palloy2

  • Global Moderator
  • Sous Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 6113
    • View Profile
    • Palloy's Blog
Re: Trumpty-Dumpty POTUS Thread
« Reply #252 on: February 06, 2017, 07:36:04 PM »
In an incredible act of rudeness, the Speaker of the Commons goes out of his way to put himself on record as opposing Trump speaking to Parliament.  Have they all taken leave of their senses?

https://www.rt.com/uk/376509-speaker-bercow-trump-parliament/
Trump should not address UK parliament - House of Commons speaker
6 Feb, 2017

John Bercow, the House of Commons Speaker, has voiced strong opposition to US President Donald Trump addressing the Houses of Parliament during his state visit to the UK because he said "opposition to racism and sexism" are "hugely important considerations"

In a forceful statement, Bercow told MPs that being invited to address parliament was "not an automatic right" but "an earned honor."

“Before the imposition of the migrant ban I would myself have been strongly opposed to an address by President Trump in Westminster Hall," Bercow told his fellow MPs.

“After the imposition of the migrant ban by President Trump I am even more strongly opposed to an address by President Trump in Westminster Hall."

"We value our relationship with the United States. If a state visit takes place, that is way beyond and above the pay grade of the Speaker.

"However, as far as this place [the House of Commons] is concerned I feel very strongly that our opposition to racism and to sexism and our support for equality before the law and an independent judiciary are hugely important considerations in the House of Commons."

Whether Trump should address the UK parliament has been a source of heated debate. Bercow said he was one of the three “keyholders” to Westminster Hall and he will not permit an invitation to the parliament to be made in his name.

The statement comes following Prime Minister Theresa May’s invitation to Trump to make a state visit to the UK. May revealed that Trump will visit Britain before the end of the year.

Several politicians, including Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn, have said that the visit should be canceled until Trump repeals his executive order which bans people from seven majority Muslim nations from travelling to the US. Some 40,000 people marched in London against the so-called “Muslim ban” and 1.8 million people have signed an online petition objecting to the visit.

Bercow was a Conservative MP before taking up the impartial speaker role which he has held since 2009. His words were met with a chorus of spontaneous applause from around the chamber. Speaking after Bercow’s statement, stalwart Labour MP Dennis Skinner said: "Further to that point of order, two words: Well done.” Corbyn also took to Twitter to commend Bercow.

    Well said John Bercow. We must stand up for our country's values. Trump's State Visit should not go ahead. https://t.co/nd9NWpwCeY
    — Jeremy Corbyn MP (@jeremycorbyn) February 6, 2017

Trump himself is reportedly not interested in speaking in parliament and instead wants to focus on the pomp and ceremony the visit will entail. The Guardian cite government officials in saying that Trump has expressed no interest in speaking at Westminster. However, it’s understood that he is attracted to “high visibility visits with key members of the Royal Family.”
"The State is a body of armed men."

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 40705
    • View Profile
Re: Trumpty-Dumpty POTUS Thread
« Reply #253 on: February 06, 2017, 08:02:29 PM »
In an incredible act of rudeness, the Speaker of the Commons goes out of his way to put himself on record as opposing Trump speaking to Parliament.  Have they all taken leave of their senses?

The Speaker is just making Political Hay.  Trump doesn't even want to make a speach to Parliament

Quote
Trump himself is reportedly not interested in speaking in parliament and instead wants to focus on the pomp and ceremony the visit will entail. The Guardian cite government officials in saying that Trump has expressed no interest in speaking at Westminster. However, it’s understood that he is attracted to “high visibility visits with key members of the Royal Family.”

All Trump cares about is getting Photo Ops with the Royal Family.  What would be the point of speaking to the MPs?  They would just Boo him.

RE
Save As Many As You Can

Offline Palloy2

  • Global Moderator
  • Sous Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 6113
    • View Profile
    • Palloy's Blog
Re: Trumpty-Dumpty POTUS Thread
« Reply #254 on: February 06, 2017, 08:15:51 PM »
But it has NEVER been that the Commons have boo'ed a President, never.  Even someone like Corbyn wouldn't actually boo him, he might not turn up, or more likely sit there stoney-faced.

Something is different.  Maybe Rupert Murdoch has told all his British and Australian editors to drum up a "I hate Trump" campaign.
"The State is a body of armed men."

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
6 Replies
2258 Views
Last post January 13, 2017, 04:34:48 PM
by RE
1 Replies
2350 Views
Last post January 18, 2017, 12:55:29 AM
by RE
3 Replies
1888 Views
Last post June 02, 2018, 09:43:37 AM
by agelbert