President Trump: Making America Great Again...

[creekster]

Exactly. It's tactics-- raise the burden of proof to that of a murder trial, rather than say-- 'hey he's pretty obviously unfit for office- all in favor? AYE!'

But that's also my point. This is not a criminal trial and criminal evidentiary standards do not apply. Moreover, the unfitness for office you are claiming relies not a medical conclusion but on a political one. This being true, you cant seek to exclude evidence based on a criminal trial standard. Instead it is all political, in all of its rolling in the mud glory .

[Bo Diddley]

I guess war crimes are ok now.

[myboynoah]

I guess war crimes are ok now.

Yeah, what an asshole.

[frank ryan]

I guess war crimes are ok now.

He has more esteem for war criminals than POWs.

[myboynoah]

What a bunch of jokers.

Forget the best and brightest. Trump chooses the dim and disgraceful.

It is one of the more minor — and yet more telling — scandals of a scandal-plagued administration: NBC News reports that Mina Chang, the deputy assistant secretary of state for conflict and stability operations, has brazenly falsified her background. She claims to be an alumna of Harvard Business School and a graduate of the Army War College even though she did not receive any degree from either institution. (She apparently attended an unaccredited Christian college called the University of the Nations.) She says she was part of a United Nations panel, but the U.N. has no record of her participation. She even went so far as to create a fake Time magazine cover with her face on it.

Chang would never have been appointed by any other president, yet she fits right into an administration headed by a president who notoriously created his own phony Time magazine cover. A grifter himself, Trump has filled his administration with people who either lack professional qualifications or ethical standards — and often both.

[SeattleUte]

For me, the democratic primary is interesting for only one all-consuming reason--I want a centrist to defeat those two socialists. If that happens, I'll be pleased to vote for whoever runs against Trump.

The latest, great hope is Mayor Pete, who's leading Iowa now. Maybe next week it will be Hillary. Optimally, Bloomberg, but I'm not holding my breath. Anybody but the two sociaists.

For some reason unfathomable to me, conservatives like the WSJ editorial page, Ben Shapiro and others are now attacking Pete's record as mayor of South Bend. Does anybody really care that South Bend has a lot of problems? I think there are bigger fish to fry. And does anybody really blame Peter for that?

Some people say that the country would never nominate or elect an LGBT. But fifteen years ago I'd have told you an AA or a Mormon would never be president, and we had a Mormon vs. an AA in the general election.

Hope springs eternal form me. I'm an optimistic guy.

[myboynoah]

For me, the democratic primary is interesting for only one all-consuming reason--I want a centrist to defeat those two socialists. If that happens, I'll be pleased to vote for whoever runs against Trump.

The latest, great hope is Mayor Pete, who's leading Iowa now. Maybe next week it will be Hillary. Optimally, Bloomberg, but I'm not holding my breath. Anybody but the two sociaists.

For some reason unfathomable to me, conservatives like the WSJ editorial page, Ben Shapiro and others are now attacking Pete's record as mayor of South Bend. Does anybody really care that South Bend has a lot of problems? I think there are bigger fish to fry. And does anybody really blame Peter for that?

Some people say that the country would never nominate or elect an LGBT. But fifteen years ago I'd have told you an AA or a Mormon would never be president, and we had a Mormon vs. an AA in the general election.

Hope springs eternal form me. I'm an optimistic guy.

Pete has 0 polling among African Americans in South Carolina. Nice guy, moderate, I like him. But he's only been mayor of a small city. I don't see it. He's polling well now in Iowa, but I question how lasting that will be.

Agree on beating the two socialists. Klobuchar is the real answer. I fear the Dems are going screw this up.

[PaloAltoCougar]

For me, the democratic primary is interesting for only one all-consuming reason--I want a centrist to defeat those two socialists. If that happens, I'll be pleased to vote for whoever runs against Trump.

The latest, great hope is Mayor Pete, who's leading Iowa now. Maybe next week it will be Hillary. Optimally, Bloomberg, but I'm not holding my breath. Anybody but the two sociaists.

For some reason unfathomable to me, conservatives like the WSJ editorial page, Ben Shapiro and others are now attacking Pete's record as mayor of South Bend. Does anybody really care that South Bend has a lot of problems? I think there are bigger fish to fry. And does anybody really blame Peter for that?

Some people say that the country would never nominate or elect an LGBT. But fifteen years ago I'd have told you an AA or a Mormon would never be president, and we had a Mormon vs. an AA in the general election.

Hope springs eternal form me. I'm an optimistic guy.

Although I disagree with some of his lefty positions, I like Mayor Pete a lot at the personal level and he'd be an acceptable alternative to Trump, certainly. I wish he were ten years older with a term of Senate experience, but oh well. He's the first Democratic presidential candidate to whom I have made a donation, albeit a small one.

If he ends up the candidate, it will be interesting to see how the Evangelicals and, for that matter, MOTCOJCOLDS, deal with his sexual orientation and husband (I'll predict "not tolerantly"), even though he's a decorated veteran in a committed relationship. But they'll rip on him while supporting a draft dodger who has cheated many times on each of his three wives. What a world.

[SeattleUte]

Although I disagree with some of his lefty positions, I like Mayor Pete a lot at the personal level and he'd be an acceptable alternative to Trump, certainly. I wish he were ten years older with a term of Senate experience, but oh well. He's the first Democratic presidential candidate to whom I have made a donation, albeit a small one.

If he ends up the candidate, it will be interesting to see how the Evangelicals and, for that matter, MOTCOJCOLDS, deal with his sexual orientation and husband (I'll predict "not tolerantly"), even though he's a decorated veteran in a committed relationship. But they'll rip on him while supporting a draft dodger who has cheated many times on each of his three wives. What a world.

I think a lot of Americans are like us. I don't see one of the socialists getting a majority. Democrats may screw this up.

[SeattleUte]

Pete has 0 polling among African Americans in South Carolina. Nice guy, moderate, I like him. But he's only been mayor of a small city. I don't see it. He's polling well now in Iowa, but I question how lasting that will be.

Agree on beating the two socialists. Klobuchar is the real answer. I fear the Dems are going screw this up.

The socialists don't have any support in the south, that is, among black Americans, either.

[Uncle Ted]

This explains everything...

Is Donald Trump an Alien? This must be the most important question of our time. Our entire independence and freedom as a species depends on it. If Donald Trump is an Alien, what does that mean for America and the World. Will it mean the end of life as we know it or will it be the dawn of an intergalactical trade relation that benefits the universe.

https://www.amazon.com/Donald-Trump-.../dp/B01NBWZLQI

[myboynoah]

I find her to be pretty gross.

Melania Trump’s Christmas decorations are lovely, but that coat looks ridiculous

She is the mistress of the house inspecting the work of others.

[Moliere]

Unemployment is at 3.5% which is a 50 year low, which is incredible given that the world economy has been slowing. LOL at all the economists and CSers that derided the Trump tax cuts.

[imanihonjin]

Unemployment is at 3.5% which is a 50 year low, which is incredible given that the world economy has been slowing. LOL at all the economists and CSers that derided the Trump tax cuts.

The tax cuts should be derided because of how fiscally reckless they are. Democrats and Republicans treat taxing and spending as two completely separate and unrelated issues. To cut taxes and do nothing about spending was irresponsible.

[Moliere]

The tax cuts should be derided because of how fiscally reckless they are. Democrats and Republicans treat taxing and spending as two completely separate and unrelated issues. To cut taxes and do nothing about spending was irresponsible.

The personal tax cuts, yes. The corporate tax cuts were and still are a good idea and quite possibly the reason the economy isn’t in a recession.