Enemies of the People? Trump's Assault on the Press

[Heathen Hammer]

I find it quite ironic how it turn out to be that there is no Trump's assault on free press, but we just witnessed corporate media's assault on independent journalism. (i.e. the whole IW thing)

Is he a billionaire, I dunno he is rather tight with his personal data. But seeing the sting of failed business ventures he has, and the well know fact that simply investing in a S&P basket would have made him as rich as he claims to be now based on his initial endowment of money from his father.

Um, you do realize that corporate bankruptcy is rather common thing for businesses, right?
Like if you think that those are some kind of testament to Trump's fiscal ineptitude, then you have no idea what you are talking about.

You need only have watched his little love fest with Putin. Seemed embarrassingly obvious but whatever there is really no point in talking to you about it.

What "love fest" LMAO? Was he supposed to start a nuclear war with Russia to prove to senile rhino retards such as McCain that there is no secret conspiracy with Russia?

[conon394]

Um, you do realize that corporate bankruptcy is rather common thing for businesses, right?
Like if you think that those are some kind of testament to Trump's fiscal ineptitude, then you have no idea what you are talking about.

To quote Oscar Wilde: To lose one business may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose two looks like carelessness, too lose four is well indicative of somebody who maybe should not be in real estate. Yes I quite realize bankruptcy is a 'tool' but I have to ask how many have Ford, Toyota, Apple, IBM, BMW or Goldman Sachs had? Yep 4 each?

But I was speaking to his broader ineptitude anyway. The fact his company can't float a loan with an honest bank also contradicts your theory. You avoided the basic point that he could be as rich as he claims with simply letting his endowment sit in a market fund when he got it. Intelligent people actually crate wealth beyond what that started with - say Rockefeller, Ford, Jobs. The condition of starting wealthy does not equal intelligence. The condition of Building a business does not make you a good political leader - it might but there is no one to one correlation. And even if there were Trump is clearly not a good business leader. He is simply a representation of the fact that if you are rich in America at birth its not to not stay that way.

What "love fest" LMAO? Was he supposed to start a nuclear war with Russia to prove to senile rhino retards such as McCain that there is no secret conspiracy with Russia?

Publicly asked to defend the finding of his own government and sided with ex-KGB man? Stopped a bi - partisan bill to invest in the integrity of the the US election system (deficiencies which can be demonstrated to have been facts before the the Russia event)? Provides rather bizarre wavers to for Russian companies to his tariff war, while attacking Canada on National security fake grounds? What ever enjoy your daily RT feed. Got any more slanders about South African politicians to post?

[Heathen Hammer]

To quote Oscar Wilde: To lose one business may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose two looks like carelessness, too lose four is well indicative of somebody who maybe should not be in real estate. Yes I quite realize bankruptcy is a 'tool' but I have to ask how many have Ford, Toyota, Apple, IBM, BMW or Goldman Sachs had? Yep 4 each?

But I was speaking to his broader ineptitude anyway. The fact his company can't float a loan with an honest bank also contradicts your theory. You avoided the basic point that he could be as rich as he claims with simply letting his endowment sit in a market fund when he got it. Intelligent people actually crate wealth beyond what that started with - say Rockefeller, Ford, Jobs. The condition of starting wealthy does not equal intelligence. The condition of Building a business does not make you a good political leader - it might but there is no one to one correlation. And even if there were Trump is clearly not a good business leader. He is simply a representation of the fact that if you are rich in America at birth its not to not stay that way.

So you do not understand the difference between individual and corporate bankruptcies. Gotcha.

Publicly asked to defend the finding of his own government and sided with ex-KGB man? Stopped a bi - partisan bill to invest in the integrity of the the US election system (deficiencies which can be demonstrated to have been facts before the the Russia event)? Provides rather bizarre wavers to for Russian companies to his tariff war, while attacking Canada on National security fake grounds? What ever enjoy your daily RT feed. Got any more slanders about South African politicians to post?

There were no findings to begin with, just random mutually contradicting claims made by electoral losers as a form of damage control.
If Trump colluded with Russia he'd end illegal American occupation of Syria and recognize Crimea's decision to join Russia, lift sanctions, pressure Poroshenko's regime to end occupation of Donbass, etc. But sure, Trudeau starting trade war with US is somehow Trump's fault, because CNN said so. Gotcha.

[Basil II the B.S]

It's actually funny how little you guys understand of the free market.

Here's why it's by far the most successful system out there: because it's the closest thing to replicating the scientific method in human economic interactions: trial and error. You set up 6 business, 5 fail, one makes you a billionaire. What do you think counts in the end? The 5 failures or the billions you made at the 6th attempt? And it's like this in every little interactions. How do you get a job? You apply to multiple places, some will ignore you, some will interview you and you'll fail, then eventually one works and you get a job. What counts in the end? The hundreds of flops or the 1 that got you a job?

This is actually the core flaw of your policies, you want to shield people from failure, this is why you give them participation trophies and you create safe spaces. It's also why your societies Always implode. When people accept their failures, they seek ways to learn from them and improve. Self-improvement is the driving force of human progress and you stop it. When you fail you go in full denial then look for scapegoats until everything falls apart. And when it does it's simply another ''true socialism has never been tried''. Trump's failures don't make him weak, they make him resilient, and this is why he won against all odds.

[Aexodus]

The condition of starting wealthy does not equal intelligence. The condition of Building a business does not make you a good political leader - it might but there is no one to one correlation. And even if there were Trump is clearly not a good business leader. He is simply a representation of the fact that if you are rich in America at birth its not to not stay that way.

The majority of his wealth is self made, no?

It's actually funny how little you guys understand of the free market.

You do realise no-one actually has a completely free market. Even America has moved away from that pretty much since Roosevelt I’d say.

Replace ‘free market’ with ‘market economy’

More unregulated doesn’t always mean better (often it does, and I feel it’s better to err on the side of deregulation), however generally the free-er the market the higher growth there shall be. That includes the labour market (aka borders). However there’s welfare to consider.

Trump is not a free markets guy. Bannon is not a free markets guy, your Italian prime minister isn’t a libertarian either.

[Basil II the B.S]

You do realise no-one actually has a completely free market. Even America has moved away from that pretty much since Roosevelt I’d say.

Replace ‘free market’ with ‘market economy’

More unregulated doesn’t always mean better (often it does, and I feel it’s better to err on the side of deregulation), however generally the free-er the market the higher growth there shall be. That includes the labour market (aka borders). However there’s welfare to consider.

Trump is not a free markets guy. Bannon is not a free markets guy, your Italian prime minister isn’t a libertarian either.

Most of Roosevelt reforms were shut down by the Supreme Court, nonetheless I agree there's no such thing as pure free market in reality. Not sure why you mention Conte since he hardly ever expresses a political position though.

[Love Mountain]

The majority of his wealth is self made, no?

That depends on how you would classify self-made. He didn't start from scratch in any sense whatsoever. He had a large amount of resources and expertise surrounding him.

Bill Gates is a self-made man. Jeff Bezos is a self made man. Bloomberg, Buffett, Musk, etc. Trump? He's a few pegs down, along with a number of others like Koch, Walton, and a few other inheritors. There's Trump and Kylie Jenner "self-made", and then there's actual self-made.

More unregulated doesn’t always mean better (often it does, and I feel it’s better to err on the side of deregulation), however generally the free-er the market the higher growth there shall be. That includes the labour market (aka borders). However there’s welfare to consider.

Labor market isn't "aka borders", it's simply the availability of employment. This also isn't an issue of which side it's better to "err" on. There are regulations that are outdated or simply ineffective, and there are regulations that are necessary to either promote sustainable growth or to achieve specific objectives. I.e. major healthcare reform may very well result in a significant economic recession, yet it may be the only way to control healthcare spending in the long run.

[conon394]

So you do not understand the difference between individual and corporate bankruptcies. Gotcha.

His Bankruptcies were in his corporate real estate bankruptcies. He is just not very good at being rich. I don't recall any Warren Buffet bankruptcy.

There were no findings to begin with, just random mutually contradicting claims made by electoral losers as a form of damage control.

Really I did not know that all the US intelligent agencies were up for re election. Man I must have missed the check box for the election the head of National Security or the Director of CIA on my ballet.

If Trump colluded with Russia he'd end illegal American occupation of Syria and recognize Crimea's decision to join Russia, lift sanctions, pressure Poroshenko's regime to end occupation of Donbass, etc.

That would be a bit obvious. The Manchurian candidate needs only destabilize US alliances, engage in reckless trade wars with allies. Subtly provide waviers to the Czars friends, refuse to investigate hacking or protect the US electoral system.

But sure, Trudeau starting trade war with US is somehow Trump's fault, because CNN said so. Gotcha.

Canada started a trade war what are you taking?

[Heathen Hammer]

His Bankruptcies were in his corporate real estate bankruptcies. He is just not very good at being rich. I don't recall any Warren Buffet bankruptcy.

We already know that you don't understand (or pretend to not understand) that difference. You don't have to repeat yourself.

Really I did not know that all the US intelligent agencies were up for re election. Man I must have missed the check box for the election the head of National Security or the Director of CIA on my ballet.

Except that, you know, there was no physical evidence that would tie Trump to anything that would prove that he colluded with Russia in any way. Or that FBI investigation was conducted by fanatical supporters of loser side.

That would be a bit obvious. The Manchurian candidate needs only destabilize US alliances, engage in reckless trade wars with allies. Subtly provide waviers to the Czars friends, refuse to investigate hacking or protect the US electoral system.

So... leading a sane and rational foreign policy (at least in comparison to his last several predecessors) is a sign of Trump being Putin's puppet? Holy crap, more countries need to elect people approved by Putin, the man should receive Nobel peace prize!

Canada started a trade war what are you taking?

Reality. That's what happens when you elect a substitute drama teacher as your country's leader. Then again, in that election our other choice was Canadian version of John McCain, although at least he wasn't senile.

[Cyclops]

We already know that you don't understand (or pretend to not understand) that difference. You don't have to repeat yourself...

It's actually funny how little you guys understand of the free market.

Cool so you have a list of Buffet's failed companies? Or banckruptcies for Ford, Toyota, Apple, IBM, BMW or Goldman Sachs? Because that would win you the point.

Of course there's a difference between personal and corporate bankruptcies, but its a characteristic of well run businesses that they don't go banckrupt. Tactical bankruptcies may be cool and profitable but they're also unethical. Its the same thinking behind the sub-prime catastrophe that smashed the world economy.

Trump's failures don't make him weak, they make him resilient, and this is why he won against all odds.

"Son of a very wealthy man grows up to be wealthy" yeah, real "against the odds" story there.

Trump is a showbiz person, a crude clown. He's good at TV, which turned no chance into a slim chance in the election. Bending the knee to the requisite billionaires also helped: he's only a pleb tier billionaire. The Koch brothers, I don't think they've filed for corporate bankruptcy have they?

[Heathen Hammer]

Cool so you have a list of Buffet's failed companies? Or banckruptcies for Ford, Toyota, Apple, IBM, BMW or Goldman Sachs? Because that would win you the point.

Of course there's a difference between personal and corporate bankruptcies, but its a characteristic of well run businesses that they don't go banckrupt. Tactical bankruptcies may be cool and profitable but they're also unethical. Its the same thinking behind the sub-prime catastrophe that smashed the world economy.

That can be only said from a perspective where capitalism itself is unethical. So don't hate the player, hate the game.

"Son of a very wealthy man grows up to be wealthy" yeah, real "against the odds" story there.

Trump is a showbiz person, a crude clown. He's good at TV, which turned no chance into a slim chance in the election. Bending the knee to the requisite billionaires also helped: he's only a pleb tier billionaire. The Koch brothers, I don't think they've filed for corporate bankruptcy have they?

He is a billionaire, who now occupies one of the most powerful political titles in the world, election to which he won against all the odds (including so-called free press" spouting negative "propaganda about him 24/7). Calling him a failure just makes no sense, regardless of how much media taught you to hate him.

[conon394]

We already know that you don't understand (or pretend to not understand) that difference. You don't have to repeat yourself.

I really don't understand your point here. A man has 4 (or maybe six business bankruptcies (*)). I don't really care the type I am not loaning him money, and surprise banks generally will not. It does not demonstrate much business acumen. Add in the failure of Trump Vodka, Trump Streaks, Trump University, Trump Vodka (you know there a celebrate brands that do well are not overpriced and have a decent story about why they have the cross label). So six bankruptcies, 3 failed named products or services, a charity that was a slush fund. Yep Business genius.

Except that, you know, there was no physical evidence that would tie Trump to anything that would prove that he colluded with Russia in any way. Or that FBI investigation was conducted by fanatical supporters of loser side.

The FBI really fanatically supported Clinton that's amusing.

So... leading a sane and rational foreign policy (at least in comparison to his last several predecessors) is a sign of Trump being Putin's puppet? Holy crap, more countries need to elect people approved by Putin, the man should receive Nobel peace prize!

What part of his policy is sane? Lets see reckless trade war with allies. More war in Somalia, Yemen, Still in Syria, Pathetic non useful missile attacks in Syria, Still in A-stan, pointlessly pulling out the Paris accords, pursuing a policy toward North Korea that kinda needs China's help but than instigating a unilateral trade war, adding Chad to the US travel ban even though its one the US strongest African supporters in the Endless War on Terror (Africa edition), Note still doing that so can't see how Hillery was a warmonger, generally just using twitter on a level of teens arguing about going to the mall.

Reality. That's what happens when you elect a substitute drama teacher as your country's leader. Then again, in that election our other choice was Canadian version of John McCain, although at least he wasn't senile.

I have no ideal what you are talking about - really. How did Canada start Trump's Trade war, I care what think about the PM, Trump started a completely and unjustified trade war, not Canada. Find me a real link or source and not some facebook drivel.


* https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...=.1685af9b1608

[tgoodenow]

Opinion article in the Washington post, printed on september 10th (day before September 11th) titled; “Trump is harming the dream of America more than any foreign adversary ever could”.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...253_story.html

Headline picture? The collapsed twin towers.

The implication that Trump is worse for America than 9/11, article by MSNBC anchor Joe Scarborough. Absolute propaganda. Some of these journalists really are enemies of the people.

[Cyclops]

That can be only said from a perspective where capitalism itself is unethical. So don't hate the player, hate the game.
[COLOR=#000000][FONT=Verdana]
He is a billionaire, who now occupies one of the most powerful political titles in the world, election to which he won against all the odds (including so-called free press" spouting negative "propaganda about him 24/7). Calling him a failure just makes no sense, regardless of how much media taught you to hate him.

Don't credit him with business skills he refuses to confirm. He refuses to release the tax records, itself a pretty unethical thing to do, so we don't know if he is a billionaire. Any success he has had is in a cosy little club of rich sons of rich fathers.

His strong TV clown skills won him the election, stuff like gross hypocrisy, making promises he could not keep, abusing disabled people and crass mockery. Also bowing down before the Koch brothers like a slave, that helped too.

As for capitalism being unethical, not if you have morals. Any system can be rorted by liars and cheats but in my family declaring bankruptcy would be considered terribly shameful, even as a last resort. Hearing Trump boast about how much money he made from his casino deals which included tactical bankruptcy makes me sick. His behaviour is deplorable in that regard.

[Heathen Hammer]

Don't credit him with business skills he refuses to confirm. He refuses to release the tax records, itself a pretty unethical thing to do, so we don't know if he is a billionaire. Any success he has had is in a cosy little club of rich sons of rich fathers.

His strong TV clown skills won him the election, stuff like gross hypocrisy, making promises he could not keep, abusing disabled people and crass mockery. Also bowing down before the Koch brothers like a slave, that helped too.

As for capitalism being unethical, not if you have morals. Any system can be rorted by liars and cheats but in my family declaring bankruptcy would be considered terribly shameful, even as a last resort. Hearing Trump boast about how much money he made from his casino deals which included tactical bankruptcy makes me sick. His behaviour is deplorable in that regard.

Nice recap of CNN talking points, too bad it doesn't correspond with reality.
What won Trump the election is the fact that Americans don't trust media and lost faith in establishment politicians.
We all remember how Obama was advertised with dumb slogans about "hope" and "yes we can", then as soon as he got into the office he forgot his platform and doubled-down on neocon BS that Bush did. It became painfully obvious, that 2008 and 2012 elections were a sham, where no matter who you vote for, you'd get the same neocon policies with slightly different leanings towards pretend social liberalism or pretend social conservatism. All while candidates who offered real change, like Ron Paul, were pushed to the sidelines by corporate muppets like McCain or Romney (both of which later became the biggest anti-Trumpers).
Trump broke that wheel and turned it into establishment vs. the people. Whether Trump himself is establishment's pawn, as some unfortunate events indicate, is irrelevant. What matters is that hating establishment is now the norm. 2016 election changed the overtone window forever.
And thats why establishment hates Trump - they will never go back to those years when they could form public opinion through media. Trump is probably the best politicians US had since Kennedy, in a sense that he brought back real politics after decades of corporate media coma.

[Cyclops]

Nice recap of CNN talking points, too bad it doesn't correspond with reality.
What won Trump the election is the fact that Americans don't trust media and lost faith in establishment politicians.
We all remember how Obama was advertised with dumb slogans about "hope" and "yes we can", then as soon as he got into the office he forgot his platform and doubled-down on neocon BS that Bush did. It became painfully obvious, that 2008 and 2012 elections were a sham, where no matter who you vote for, you'd get the same neocon policies with slightly different leanings towards pretend social liberalism or pretend social conservatism. All while candidates who offered real change, like Ron Paul, were pushed to the sidelines by corporate muppets like McCain or Romney (both of which later became the biggest anti-Trumpers).
Trump broke that wheel and turned it into establishment vs. the people. Whether Trump himself is establishment's pawn, as some unfortunate events indicate, is irrelevant. What matters is that hating establishment is now the norm. 2016 election changed the overtone window forever.
And thats why establishment hates Trump - they will never go back to those years when they could form public opinion through media. Trump is probably the best politicians US had since Kennedy, in a sense that he brought back real politics after decades of corporate media coma.

I agree with most of what you say. I like the comparison with Kennedy, there's the same brain dead hero worshipping from his cultists for a despicable and incompetent individual. I think he had Kennedy's media savvy, a crass heavy handed alternative to pre-digested rubbish.

I disagree McCain was a muppet, but he sold part of his soul for a slice of power like they all do. Its sad Trump has bent the knee because if he had got a hold of some of the nasty inside corruption (and I'm not talking fantasy paedophile rings, I mean serious stuff like Congress voting money for Wall Street when Wall Street screwed the entire world economy) it would have been glorious. imagine if he'd put the Kochs and Soros and the rest through the courts. it would have been a great day.

Its a real shame about Obama, I think he has a good heart but like every president he's had to swallow buckets of slime just to get in the door. I think he did a little good, but putting Hilary in the State Dept was a disaster and he continued idiot Bush's transfer of public money to private schemers who smashed the economy (apparently we're all set for the next one,Wall Street has blown out its debt yet again, because they know the tax payer will be billed for their stupidity): that's the sort of devil you have to deal with.

I agree with Obama that Trump is not the problem. Nor is he the solution. He's a symptom as you say of popular discontent. He had enough brazen clownish reality TV chutzpah to appear different, and fell over the line. Maybe he would have even won with the Russians. He's not the chosen one, he's just a very naughty boy.

The shame here is his enemies seem to want to get him out of the Oval Office without changing the system too much: I mean its broken enough for him to get in, you might want to fix that. I think the establishment will probably let a little recession happen to punish the public for going rogue. "Naughty electorate. It votes for the establishment person or it gets the hose!".

I hope you're right and they punish the swamp, but its hard to see how.

[Harith]

The shame here is his enemies seem to want to get him out of the Oval Office without changing the system too much: I mean its broken enough for him to get in, you might want to fix that.

It would be quite treacherous at this point if the Democrats win Congress and dont pass sweeping anti-corruption bills and ethic laws, not guidlines. Get rid of lobbyist, get rid of conflict of interest, all businessmen divest or get kicked immediately, disclosure alone shouldn't be ok.

Next would be to scrap the electoral college, gerrymandering and all other nonsense "traditions". Make all judicial appointments term-limited and all judges must retire at age 69 (or whatever age is considered appropriate, just keep it under 75). Appointment of judges must be confirmed by a 2/3 majority always. Make it a constitutional amendment while we are it.

[conon394]

It would be quite treacherous at this point if the Democrats win Congress and dont pass sweeping anti-corruption bills and ethic laws, not guidlines. Get rid of lobbyist, get rid of conflict of interest, all businessmen divest or get kicked immediately, disclosure alone shouldn't be ok.

Next would be to scrap the electoral college, gerrymandering and all other nonsense "traditions". Make all judicial appointments term-limited and all judges must retire at age 69 (or whatever age is considered appropriate, just keep it under 75). Appointment of judges must be confirmed by a 2/3 majority always. Make it a constitutional amendment while we are it.

If the Dems just win back the house there is not much they will be able to do with listed goals. Several of your items are Constitutional adjustments and getting that is rather difficult.

[Heathen Hammer]

I agree with most of what you say. I like the comparison with Kennedy, there's the same brain dead hero worshipping from his cultists for a despicable and incompetent individual. I think he had Kennedy's media savvy, a crass heavy handed alternative to pre-digested rubbish.

I disagree McCain was a muppet, but he sold part of his soul for a slice of power like they all do. Its sad Trump has bent the knee because if he had got a hold of some of the nasty inside corruption (and I'm not talking fantasy paedophile rings, I mean serious stuff like Congress voting money for Wall Street when Wall Street screwed the entire world economy) it would have been glorious. imagine if he'd put the Kochs and Soros and the rest through the courts. it would have been a great day.

Its a real shame about Obama, I think he has a good heart but like every president he's had to swallow buckets of slime just to get in the door. I think he did a little good, but putting Hilary in the State Dept was a disaster and he continued idiot Bush's transfer of public money to private schemers who smashed the economy (apparently we're all set for the next one,Wall Street has blown out its debt yet again, because they know the tax payer will be billed for their stupidity): that's the sort of devil you have to deal with.

I agree with Obama that Trump is not the problem. Nor is he the solution. He's a symptom as you say of popular discontent. He had enough brazen clownish reality TV chutzpah to appear different, and fell over the line. Maybe he would have even won with the Russians. He's not the chosen one, he's just a very naughty boy.

The shame here is his enemies seem to want to get him out of the Oval Office without changing the system too much: I mean its broken enough for him to get in, you might want to fix that. I think the establishment will probably let a little recession happen to punish the public for going rogue. "Naughty electorate. It votes for the establishment person or it gets the hose!".

I hope you're right and they punish the swamp, but its hard to see how.

Kennedy was a great president, but his intention to cull CIA and keep Israel under his heel cost him his life.
McCain has always been a sellout. He was Hillary of GOP before she even married herself into politics.
Obama was just a lazy attempt by Democrats to scoop power after Bush years, but at the same time his two terms gave public (which already had at large access to Internet and alternative opinions from media narratives) a huge antidote against pro-establishment politics. Whether Trump flops or not is now irrelevant - public will always lean towards the one who will want to stick it to the establishment, so it would have to either curb democracy like they did in UK and Germany, thus leaving only revolutionary solution, or eventually give up political power bit by bit, which means that sooner or later we will see Kochs and Soros put through the courts, of sorts. I can see former scenario as much more realistic.
If establishment decides to "punish" public, it will only create even more dissent. At the same time it is too corrupt to remain in power either. I'm pretty sure that we will see drastic changes in North America and Western Europe within the next 2 decades.

It would be quite treacherous at this point if the Democrats win Congress and dont pass sweeping anti-corruption bills and ethic laws, not guidlines. Get rid of lobbyist, get rid of conflict of interest, all businessmen divest or get kicked immediately, disclosure alone shouldn't be ok.

Next would be to scrap the electoral college, gerrymandering and all other nonsense "traditions". Make all judicial appointments term-limited and all judges must retire at age 69 (or whatever age is considered appropriate, just keep it under 75). Appointment of judges must be confirmed by a 2/3 majority always. Make it a constitutional amendment while we are it.

Scrapping electoral college ca not be done without dividing US into 3 or 4 countries. Nerw York, LA and other overpopulated urban hubs should not dictate the rest of the nation, and thats what electoral college would do.

[Aexodus]

In a democracy, by definition, the majority dictates the minority. It is imperative that government reflects the attitudes and opinions of the majority of voters, not a select group of voters.

I’m not American, but as I understand it, America is a collection of states first, and a country second, rather like the EU is. Even on the old world maps America was a number of states not a single bloc. The founding fathers warned against the Tyranny of the majority.

Americans feel American and are loyal to a single flag and a single entity.

I can tell you that in the UK a lot of people feel more English/Welsh/Scottish/Northern Irish than British and are more loyal to that, Americans are probably even more so loyal to their state as we’re not even federalised.