ALL HAIL PRESIDENT TRUMP

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

Turtledove wrote:

Any comments on the NY Times Op ed from an anonymous highly placed Trump administration official?

From the op-ed in question:

"

The dilemma — which he does not fully grasp — is that many of the senior officials in his own administration are working diligently from within to frustrate parts of his agenda and his worst inclinations…

This isn’t the work of the so-called deep state. It’s the work of the steady state.

This is mere wordplay. There is no Illuminati; that's tinfoil bullshit. When any reasonable person talks about the Deep State, we're (because I am a member of that group) talking about people like James Comey — unelected "nonpartisan" appointees who on paper serve at the pleasure of the President but in practice form alliances within the media to run continuous, retaliatory, and/or coercive counterpropaganda operations against the Office of their "boss", regardless of who is elected to that position — in their own words — "to insulate their operations from his whims," dissociating (to the extent their efforts are successful) their federal agencies from the oversight of elected officials. Anon's "steady state" is but a euphemism, a rebranding of the Deep State concept.

This op-ed, if genuine and not invented whole-cloth by NYT, is the Deep State — or more accurately, a member of it — putting out a formal press release.

As I alluded to before, the most likely cause for major Deep State leaking is retaliation, against Trump for crossing a line drawn in the sand. I wouldn't look to what Trump is about to do so much as to something he's recently done. Quite possibly involving his trade wars.

The so-called "deep state" as used by president Trump is basically conspiracy theory mumble jumble. James Comey is a Republican. All of the senior administration appointees that might have written the Op-Ed are Republicans that were appointed by the current President. Almost all of the people that Trump attacks on twitter in his own administration are Republicans that he appointed like Jeff Sessions.

In any other sane administration, if the President chastised his own DOJ for bringing charges against congressman in his own party, there would have been headlines and discussions for days, if not weeks.

Michael Wolf's book, Omarosa's book, Bob Woodward's book, the Op-Ed, and countless newspaper articles all paint the same picture. Our president is erratic, in over his head, flip-flops on issues constantly, and a poor leader. His administration is chaotic and unfocused.

Heck, there never has been a real coordinated response national program to protect the 2018 election from Russia hacking. Probably because the President assumes that Russia wants to help him.

"

Turtledove wrote:

The so-called "deep state" as used by president Trump is basically conspiracy theory mumble jumble. James Comey is a Republican. All of the senior administration appointees that might have written the Op-Ed are Republicans that were appointed by the current President. Almost all of the people that Trump attacks on twitter in his own administration are Republicans that he appointed like Jeff Sessions.

In any other sane administration, if the President chastised his own DOJ for bringing charges against congressman in his own party, there would have been headlines and discussions for days, if not weeks.

Michael Wolf's book, Omarosa's book, Bob Woodward's book, the Op-Ed, and countless newspaper articles all paint the same picture. Our president is erratic, in over his head, flip-flops on issues constantly, and a poor leader. His administration is chaotic and unfocused.

Heck, there never has been a real coordinated response national program to protect the 2018 election from Russia hacking. Probably because the President assumes that Russia wants to help him.

When you accuse other people of "Conspiracy Theory Mumble Jumble", while repeating conspiracy theories and fictitious/unproven stories that you agree with your point is kinda lost in the wind. Because when it aligns with your interest it is the inherent truth, but when it goes against your interests it is obviously a conspiracy theory.

The easiest way to convince people that a certain propaganda is true is to repeat it from multiple sources ad-nauseam so that the people ingesting it can be like "see all these different sources, same thing!" when really it is all the same wholly owned source with subsidiaries acting as pseudo-separate sources.

The media has been repeating and hammering the points you are making for almost 3 years now, and it's clearly working on some people. It's all part of the script.

No matter how good the economy is going, no matter how many people are employed, the detractors only want you to be exposed constantly to the same script from the past 3 years, destabilization is the goal, because the powers didn't get their preferred candidate who would push their globalist agendas they are doing all they can to shove illusionary disarray down peoples throats every day, because few look past the surface level to the facts. They want headline readers and line regurgitators, and the script has been well drilled into many heads by now as we can see on this forum, especially from foreign forum members who get their news through many filters.

"

Manocean wrote:

"

Turtledove wrote:

The so-called "deep state" as used by president Trump is basically conspiracy theory mumble jumble. James Comey is a Republican. All of the senior administration appointees that might have written the Op-Ed are Republicans that were appointed by the current President. Almost all of the people that Trump attacks on twitter in his own administration are Republicans that he appointed like Jeff Sessions.

In any other sane administration, if the President chastised his own DOJ for bringing charges against congressman in his own party, there would have been headlines and discussions for days, if not weeks.

Michael Wolf's book, Omarosa's book, Bob Woodward's book, the Op-Ed, and countless newspaper articles all paint the same picture. Our president is erratic, in over his head, flip-flops on issues constantly, and a poor leader. His administration is chaotic and unfocused.

Heck, there never has been a real coordinated response national program to protect the 2018 election from Russia hacking. Probably because the President assumes that Russia wants to help him.

When you accuse other people of "Conspiracy Theory Mumble Jumble", while repeating conspiracy theories and fictitious/unproven stories that you agree with your point is kinda lost in the wind. Because when it aligns with your interest it is the inherent truth, but when it goes against your interests it is obviously a conspiracy theory.

What exactly is fictitious/unproven? Were you referring to "Michael Wolf's book, Omarosa's book, Bob Woodward's book, the Op-Ed, and countless newspaper articles all paint the same picture."?

"

MrCoo1 wrote:

What exactly is fictitious/unproven? Were you referring to "Michael Wolf's book, Omarosa's book, Bob Woodward's book, the Op-Ed

We've come full circle

"You can't prove God doesn't exists therefore it is real because you can't prove it's false!!!" is now a genius political argument.

I could make something up about you right now, and many things I could make up there would be literally zero way for you to disprove them.

If I get enough forum members to repeat them there is now a pattern, and anyone who does not believe you did what I made up is clearly crazy.

That's what happens in real life, in elite circles, but as a small example.

Let's be real here.

Take what you do know of Trump:

- Hold a grudge over very petty things.
- Get mad at anything that portray him negatively
- Has a giant ego, as seen with his need for positive reports.
- Has a very fragile ego, as seen with him getting mad at everything that goes against him.
- Incredible amount of opposition within his own camp
- Attacks from Trump against his own appointed people
- Very high amount of people in his camp quitting


All of this leads to a very high credibility when multiples investigators take testimonies from the surroundings of Trump.

Could it be that his surroundings are lying? Yes. But it is very VERY unlikely when you consider his behavior, the amount of quitting and that there's 3 different books that all paint the same behavior.

I was just listening to NPR’s Fresh Air on my way home. Today’s interview with Norm Eisen is a great example. The amount of pure fiction that came out of that guy’s mouth was unreal.

"

Manocean wrote:

"

MrCoo1 wrote:

What exactly is fictitious/unproven? Were you referring to "Michael Wolf's book, Omarosa's book, Bob Woodward's book, the Op-Ed

We've come full circle

"You can't prove God doesn't exists therefore it is real because you can't prove it's false!!!" is now a genius political argument.

I could make something up about you right now, and many things I could make up there would be literally zero way for you to disprove them.

If I get enough forum members to repeat them there is now a pattern, and anyone who does not believe you did what I made up is clearly crazy.

That's what happens in real life, in elite circles, but as a small example.

But the things you make up about me wouldn't be credible because you know nothing about me and haven't interacted with me in any way ever. Same would be true for other forum members. The reason these people are credible is they have person experiences with Trump as well as there being a pattern between independent sources.

Also what faerwin said.

LOOK AT THOSE EYES...!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ne_wFdA-1oU

"

faerwin wrote:

Let's be real here.

Take what you do know of Trump:

- Hold a grudge over very petty things.
- Get mad at anything that portray him negatively
- Has a giant ego, as seen with his need for positive reports.
- Has a very fragile ego, as seen with him getting mad at everything that goes against him.
- Incredible amount of opposition within his own camp
- Attacks from Trump against his own appointed people
- Very high amount of people in his camp quitting


All of this leads to a very high credibility when multiples investigators take testimonies from the surroundings of Trump.

Could it be that his surroundings are lying? Yes. But it is very VERY unlikely when you consider his behavior, the amount of quitting and that there's 3 different books that all paint the same behavior.

None of the stuff on this list even matters, for considering how good/bad of a job Trump is doing as President.

Sure I wouldnt be friends with a person like this, but this stuff shouldnt even be news.

Trump lowered taxes and has picked 2 excellent supreme court judges. He may get a D- in personality, but he gets an A+ at being President.

People used to complain that Obama smokes cigarettes, those people are just as ridiculous as people complaining about Trumps personality.

Actually, being ego driven is extremely bad when you are running as head of office. It drives you to make decision based on yourself rather than the company (or in this case, country).

Same with grudge holding.

Attacking your own people/firing them for opposing you is also EXTREMELY bad for many reasons. But most of all, if everyone around you becomes either too to oppose an idea they consider bad (for various possible reasons), then you lose more and more width of perception, to the point that it becomes a tunnel vision. This is an extremely bad trait for any leader and honestly, it's enough reason to destitute a leading figure.


All in all, I find all of the traits I listed as terrible traits to be found in a leader.


The tax cut might sound good on paper, but the reality is that all it did is increase the spending by reducing the income. It won't be long until it catch back to you.


Obama smoking cigarettes is silly reporting. Same as with Trump eating KFC or about his hair. Those are irrelevant news about him.