America under President Trump

[Omni]

I'm glad I don't live in Flint Michigan, they poison your water with lead and then threaten to foreclose on your home for not paying for water you can't drink. And to top it off Trump threatens to take away your healthcare. 

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/04/us/flint-water-home-foreclosure.html

[dialamah]

Just now, Omni said:

I'm glad I don't live in Flint Michigan, they poison your water with lead and then threaten to foreclose on your home for not paying for water you can't drink. And to top it off Trump threatens to take away your healthcare. 

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/04/us/flint-water-home-foreclosure.html

It takes time and determination to make a country great (for corporations and rich people) again.

[Omni]

5 minutes ago, dialamah said:

It takes time and determination to make a country great (for corporations and rich people) again.

It seems his "health care" plan will provide some hefty tax incentives for those people so he's trying hard.

[OftenWrong]

9 hours ago, kimmy said:

And the same conversation he clearly says that Andrew Jackson SAW the Civil War.   Your cherry-picked quote indicates that he wished that Jackson was president a few years later, and doesn't give any indication that Trump actually understood that Jackson was long dead by then. And clearly he didn't understand that. The guy is, as usual, just talking out of his hat.

The whole quote is “Had Andrew Jackson been a little later, you wouldn’t have had the Civil War. He was a very tough person, but he had a big heart, and he was really angry that he saw what was happening with regard to the Civil War. He said, ‘There’s no reason for this."

Not that I would second-guess him, but it seems clear he was aware that AJ was not around during the civil war.

What he meant by the "he was really angry..." part is a little unclear. However he did not say he actually SAW the civil war.

[Omni]

46 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

The whole quote is “Had Andrew Jackson been a little later, you wouldn’t have had the Civil War. He was a very tough person, but he had a big heart, and he was really angry that he saw what was happening with regard to the Civil War. He said, ‘There’s no reason for this."

Not that I would second-guess him, but it seems clear he was aware that AJ was not around during the civil war.

What he meant by the "he was really angry..." part is a little unclear. However he did not say he actually SAW the civil war.

And how the hell could he have been "really angry" about something that occurred 16 years after his death? Sheesh.

[OftenWrong]

27 minutes ago, Omni said:

And how the hell could he have been "really angry" about something that occurred 16 years after his death? Sheesh.

Man, I am no expert on US history. Years ago I read a few pages of some book on the civil war. Big book, I did not finish it. But one thing I recall, threats of secession were being made by various states in the years leading up to the war. The war did not happen just suddenly, it was the final step after years of unresolved conflict. I suppose Donald Trump felt that the right person could have resolved those conflicts before a civil war broke out.

Here's a link about Jackson and secession.

http://www.civilwarcauses.org/jackson.htm

Andrew Jackson is the only President, other than Lincoln, to have to deal with a serious threat of secession (as well as nullification), so his reaction, nearly 30 years prior to the Civil War is illuminating.  We present here two documents:

- A private letter written by Jackson to Rev. A.J. Crawford
- President Jackson's Proclamation on Nullification.

Sounds interesting. A quick read reveals Jackson's concern about the threat of civil war.
I have had a laborious task here; but nullification is dead, and its actors and courtiers will only be remembered by the people to be execrated for their wicked designs to sever and destroy the only good government on the globe, and that prosperity and happiness we enjoy over every other portion of the world. Haman's gallows ought to be the fate of all such ambitious men, who would involve the country in civil war, and all the evils in its train, that they might reign and ride on its whirlwinds, and direct the storm.

Edited May 8, 2017 by OftenWrong
added relevant quote

[Omni]

3 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

Man, I am no expert on US history. Years ago I read a few pages of some book on the civil war. Big book, I did not finish it. But one thing I recall, threats of secession were being made by various states in the years leading up to the war. The war did not happen just suddenly, it was the final step after years of unresolved conflict. I suppose Donald Trump felt that the right person could have resolved those conflicts before a civil war broke out.

Here's a link about Jackson and secession.

http://www.civilwarcauses.org/jackson.htm

Andrew Jackson is the only President, other than Lincoln, to have to deal with a serious threat of secession (as well as nullification), so his reaction, nearly 30 years prior to the Civil War is illuminating.  We present here two documents:

- A private letter written by Jackson to Rev. A.J. Crawford
- President Jackson's Proclamation on Nullification.

Sounds interesting.

And that's all very interesting stuff, but it doesn't resolve Trump's comment on the issue. He may have been trying to make some sort of valid point, however, he does seem to have an ongoing problem with speaking without the aid of his teleprompter, as he does tend to put his foot in his mouth when he does so.  

[OftenWrong]

1 minute ago, Omni said:

And that's all very interesting stuff, but it doesn't resolve Trump's comment on the issue. He may have been trying to make some sort of valid point, however, he does seem to have an ongoing problem with speaking without the aid of his teleprompter, as he does tend to put his foot in his mouth when he does so.  

After reading some of that link, especially the part where Andrew Jackson mentions civil war, I suggest that Donald Trump knows more about him than the average dumbo.

[OftenWrong]

11 hours ago, kimmy said:

And what solution do you think Trump imagines Jackson-- a slave-owning dirtbag of a man-- would have had to the Civil War?

 -k

The solution is to allow slavery to continue.

[Omni]

20 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

After reading some of that link, especially the part where Andrew Jackson mentions civil war, I suggest that Donald Trump knows more about him than the average dumbo.

Perhaps he read a little bit of American history to try and appear "presidential" but he kinda blew it with regard to chronology. I'm sure he could have hired a tutor to properly educate him.

[OftenWrong]

6 hours ago, Omni said:

Perhaps he read a little bit of American history to try and appear "presidential" but he kinda blew it with regard to chronology. I'm sure he could have hired a tutor to properly educate him.

Actually Trump's fascination with Jackson goes back before this.

President Donald J. Trump’s admiration for Andrew Jackson is well known. He hung his portrait in the Oval Office, and last spring criticized the Treasury Department’s decision to take Jackson off the front of the $20 bill.

And on Wednesday (Mar 15 2017), Jackson’s 250th birthday, Mr. Trump visited the Hermitage, Jackson’s home in Nashville, where he laid a wreath at his tomb and paid tribute to Old Hickory’s populism.

A History of Presidents, Mostly Democrats, Paying Homage to Jackson

[kimmy]

7 hours ago, OftenWrong said:

The solution is to allow slavery to continue.

GREAT SOLUTION!!!!

 -k

[Omni]

I must say I sometimes feel a touch of sympathy for Sean Spicer. He currently has to squirm around at the press briefing trying to shore up Trump's claim that it was Obama's fault for the Flynn debacle. Especially since Obama had already fired him, warned Trump not to hire him, and then Trump turned around and hire him, without vetting, which is clearly against protocol. And of course Trump could very well be taking a completely different tack in a tweet while Spicer is talking. Oh to be a fly on the wall in the Oval Office just now. I bet it gets noisy.   

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Omni said:

I must say I sometimes feel a touch of sympathy for Sean Spicer.

 

What's he paid? 

[Omni]

Just now, bcsapper said:

What's he paid? 

Oh I don't feel a lot of sympathy for him. 

[OftenWrong]

8 hours ago, kimmy said:

GREAT SOLUTION!!!!

 -k

I thought you would like that. There might have been other means to dismantle slavery in the US without going to war, though they would have taken longer.

[Omni]

Wow, Trump just fired James Comey from the FBI. I guess he wants the investigations into the Russian connection to go away, but obviously a lot too late. This should get interesting.

Edited May 9, 2017 by Omni

[Guest]

Apparently it was at Jeff Sessions suggestion. 

[Omni]

Trump claims he fired him over the exact same issues that he praised him for back when he was running against Hillary. Oh well, it's certainly not the first idiotic flip flop for this moron, but this one will stick around a while I bet.  

[bush_cheney2004]

Good for President Trump...Comey made himself a media distraction and easy target.   Maybe the leaks will stop.

[GostHacked]

Only if they stop the leaks at Hanford!

[Omni]

2 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

Good for President Trump...Comey made himself a media distraction and easy target.   Maybe the leaks will stop.

Ha ha ha, nice attempt at deflection only you could do. Comey was in the middle of an investigation into Trump's actions regarding Russia. But maybe you don't give a fart if Putin can mess with your votes under the nose of your own president. AMAZING!

[Argus]

The real question is why he fired Comey. I don't think anyone believes he fired him because of his investigation into Clinton. He greeted him after the election like a long lost brother. The Justice Department Inspector General is investigating that and hasn't even finished his investigation yet. 

Should be interesting to hear what Comey has to say. Was he told to do something and refused? Or was he ordered not to do something and did it anyway?

Edited May 9, 2017 by Argus

[Omni]

2 minutes ago, Argus said:

The real question is why he fired Comey. I don't think anyone believes he fired him because of his investigation into Clinton. He greeted him after the election like a long lost brother. The Justice Department Inespector General is investigating that and hasn't even finished his investigation yet. 

Should be interesting to hear what Comey has to say. Was he told to do something and refused? Or was he ordered not to do something and did it anyway?

Oh it's not hard at all to figure out why he fired him. He was getting to close to the Russian connection.

[Hal 9000]

57 minutes ago, Omni said:

Oh it's not hard at all to figure out why he fired him. He was getting to close to the Russian connection.

OOOH, I love a good conspiracy theory.