I think its an anti-Trump group here?
Absolutely not - Fake news
I think its an anti-Trump group here?
Could be interesting. I'm sure he'll have a "plausible" explanation though.My cousin used to play for Clemson. I’ll be there in SC next week so I’ll ask him - a staunch Trump supporter - to talk me through this.
Because some White House catering staff are out because of the government shutdown, Trump boasted about how he was paying for the food himself.
View attachment 158748
But hey, at least they apparently brought out the nice plates for the players to eat their cold burgers off.
Also how he makes a big song and dance about how he paid for it all himself...
Forgive me for being dense but I'm clearly missing the significance of Big Macs and the Clemson football team. Can someone explain?
genius Trump
I have doubts that he paid for it. Great product placement.Ok, thanks for the explanations.
I was reading a cultural significance into it which wasn't there.
I bet you a shiny new pound coin that Trump didn't pay for it all out his own pocket.
Generosity - even token generosity - is completely alien to him.
Clemson University - WikipediaAlso, what is a Clemson?
Clemson University (/ˈklɛmsən/[5]) is an American public, coeducational, land-grant research university in Clemson, South Carolina, United States. Founded in 1889.
The Clemson Tigers, known traditionally as the "Clemson University Fighting Tigers", represent Clemson University in the sport of American football.
Any resemblence to the current brexitshambles is purely . . . deliberate, I'm sure.Although some here were keen to piss on everything she said during and after the election, Sarah Kendzior has been pretty spot on in her insights and predictions about the shit storm. Even now, I think there are people in American still vainly hoping Mueller will save the day, or clinging to the belief that "it can't happen here," when it already is. Grim stuff, but I still say, take every thing you see and read with this in the back of your mind. All the stuff is either to draw attention away from this, or make further steps to achieve this.
People are perplexed that "money for a wall" is his red line, his deal breaker, but I can see how this was a perfect device for this. Trump (by that I mean him and his "team") knows a wall, concrete or steel, won't make a difference to halting drugs, terrorism or immigrants. They know it would take at least a decade to build even after appropriating the land. The cost is enormous. I think this was picked because it is so absurd that Democratic legislators will never buy it, literally. So, it gives him the "rationale" for leaving the Government shut down indefinitely. And of course, he'll still try and blame the Democratic party led House for that.
He genuinely doesn't give a shit if national parks are trashed - all the better for selling them off. He doesn't care if public workers are starving, or the businesses linked to them go bust. Mass food poisoning due to no food safety checks? Air crashes due to lack of staff and safety checks? Arrangements for the census halted? All this is "good" because it breaks down the institutions, social structures, creates chaos, and chaos can be very profitable.
Original threads here and here.
View attachment 158784
View attachment 158783
A federal judge in New York has ruled against the Trump administration's decision to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census.
U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman ordered the administration to stop its plans to include the controversial question on forms for the upcoming national head count "without curing the legal defects" the judge identified in his opinion released on Tuesday.
Furman's decision marks a significant milestone in a legal battle that began shortly after the Trump administration announced last year that the 2020 census would include a controversial question about U.S. citizenship status. The added question was: "Is this person a citizen of the United States?" All U.S. households have not been asked such a question on the census since 1950.
Senior administration officials told The New York Times that several times over the course of 2018, Mr. Trump privately said he wanted to withdraw from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Current and former officials who support the alliance said they feared Mr. Trump could return to his threat as allied military spending continued to lag behind the goals the president had set.
At the time, Mr. Trump’s national security team, including Jim Mattis, then the defense secretary, and John R. Bolton, the national security adviser, scrambled to keep American strategy on track without mention of a withdrawal that would drastically reduce Washington’s influence in Europe and could embolden Russia for decades.
Now, the president’s repeatedly stated desire to withdraw from NATO is raising new worries among national security officials amid growing concern about Mr. Trump’s efforts to keep his meetings with Mr. Putin secret from even his own aides, and an F.B.I. investigation into the administration’s Russia ties.
Retired Adm. James G. Stavridis, the former supreme allied commander of NATO, said an American withdrawal from the alliance would be “a geopolitical mistake of epic proportion. Even discussing the idea of leaving NATO — let alone actually doing so — would be the gift of the century for Putin,” Admiral Stavridis said.
American national security officials believe that Russia has largely focused on undermining solidarity between the United States and Europe after it annexed Crimea in 2014. Its goal was to upend NATO, which Moscow views as a threat.
Russia’s meddling in American elections and its efforts to prevent former satellite states from joining the alliance have aimed to weaken what it views as an enemy next door, the American officials said. With a weakened NATO, they said, Mr. Putin would have more freedom to behave as he wishes, setting up Russia as a counterweight to Europe and the United States.
When Mr. Trump first raised the possibility of leaving the alliance, senior administration officials were unsure if he was serious. He has returned to the idea several times, officials said increasing their worries.
Mr. Trump’s skepticism of NATO appears to be a core belief, administration officials said, akin to his desire to expropriate Iraq’s oil. While officials have explained multiple times why the United States cannot take Iraq’s oil, Mr. Trump returns to the issue every few months.
Forgive me for being dense but I'm clearly missing the significance of Big Macs and the Clemson football team. Can someone explain?