US US Politics General 2 - Discussion of President Trump and other politicians

General Trump Banner.png​

Should be a wild four years.

Helpful links for those who need them:

Current members of the House of Representatives
https://www.house.gov/representatives

Current members of the Senate
https://www.senate.gov/senators/

Current members of the US Supreme Court
https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/biographies.aspx

Members of the Trump Administration
https://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Winner
  • Like
  • Semper Fidelis
Reactions: the aging locust., Hassou Tobi, Based Downie and 145 others
Click to expand...
@Rudolf's Friend -angry and generic retort against my "You won't do shit" comment-
Click to expand...
You missed the point entirely and magnified that part to seethe at me. Is it any wonder you have resident baiters here when you can't even discuss things without autistic meltdowns?

USPG1 and 2 eventually equate to:
NOTHING EVER HAPPENS. SOMETHING ALWAYS HAPPENS. TOO MUCH IS HAPPENING. EVERYTHING IS OKAY. IT JUST IS. I'M NOT COPING. SHUT UP PANICAN. FUCK YOU LIBSHIT/NEOCON/ZOOMER/GROYPER FOR DEFYING OUR NEW ESTABLISHMENT. HOW ABOUT YOU DO IT INSTEAD? WHY DON'T YOU GET INTO OFFICE INSTEAD? WHY DON'T YOU FEDPOST IT INSTEAD?
It's silly, but that's what happens all the time. People hated Indians but initially even your most cherished posters defended the fuck out of them and sperged about H1Bs and how this will affect the poor wittle immigrants that suddenly everyone hates because it's been OK'd by a fag like Asmongoloid. This admin is divisive enough to have even a guy like Fapcop get on with the "panican" shit. Clearly some things aren't working too well.

My main points against South African immigrants being forced into our society is suddenly OK'd by some schizo retards because Elon Musk is being a typical spineless South African cunt. It's insane and genuinely entertaining to see all the 180s here.
 
Last edited:
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: spiritofamermaid
Clyde Cash's Left Teste said:
Yeah, I never got the sense the Soviets themselves were really involved
Click to expand...
I've looked into it pretty deep and I don't get the impression that the Soviets wanted to go anywhere near that evil. I also don't believe it was the CIA because the CIA got a lot of work because of Kennedy - he used them extensively in Southeast Asia and the CIA Secret War in Laos began with Kennedy and the training of the montagnards and Hmong in 1961. It had to be either anti-Castro Cubans as revenge using Oswald as a useful idiot (and he was an idiot), anti-communist hardliners in the US government who thought Kennedy was too weak (again using idiot Oswald), or Oswald was a schizo who got lucky and no one in the security side of things wanted to get caught holding the bag.

I'm not even certain about US involvement because that would mean a literal military coup happened for... no change or notable difference. LBJ did not change any of Kennedy's military or foreign policies. He kept pushing good relations with Nasser, for example. The only major difference was LBJ pushed his major anti-poverty programs which is what won him his election in 1964 against Barry Goldwater. The idea that people behind the scenes helped LBJ win to curtail Kennedy does not hold water when LBJ didn't do anything different. Maybe Kennedy wouldn't have committed to Vietnam, maybe he would have, but I think he would have because - throughout his presidency - he escalated US support for Vietnam. The Michigan State Advisory Group/MAAG Vietnam was a rag-tag operation until Kennedy boosted it in 1961.

Edit to add: also, a major reason Johnson won in 1964 was because Goldwater was seen as too aggressive and militaristic. Kennedy was likewise a "dove" compared to Republicans at the time, so this was another significant way that Kennedy and Johnson were the same. Why would hardline anti-communists in the US military industrial establishment conspire to kill Kennedy only to get Johnson, who was likewise against total war with the Soviet Union?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: spiritofamermaid, Fanatical Pragmatist, Hazard Crab and 2 others
Nameless One said:
You missed the point entirely and magnified that part to seethe at me. Is it any wonder you have resident baiters here when you can't even discuss things without autistic meltdowns?

USPG1 and 2 eventually equate to:
NOTHING EVER HAPPENS. SOMETHING ALWAYS HAPPENS. TOO MUCH IS HAPPENING. EVERYTHING IS OKAY. IT JUST IS. I'M NOT COPING. SHUT UP PANICAN. FUCK YOU LIBSHIT/NEOCON/ZOOMER/GROYPER FOR DEFYING OUR NEW ESTABLISHMENT. HOW ABOUT YOU DO IT INSTEAD? WHY DON'T YOU GET INTO OFFICE INSTEAD? WHY DON'T YOU FEDPOST IT INSTEAD?
It's silly, but that's what happens all the time.
Click to expand...
Nah I think it's a perfect example of everything about your posts, it basically says "Please other people do the work that I want to happen guys."
 
  • Feels
  • Autistic
Reactions: pwnest injun and Nameless One
Sneed Lurker said:
Back then if there was undeniable proof that the Soviets were the sole party responsible, the Cold War would've became the Hot War
Click to expand...
The Soviets were extremely concerned at JFK's assassination because JFK was a known entity and due to the Cuban Missile Crisis had developed robust lines of communication with him. The Soviets most definitely did not want JFK dead and privately reassured the US that, despite Oswald being a communist and Soviet sympathizer, they had absolutely no idea who the fuck he was and had nothing to do with him.

Buried in the declassed CIA documents was a bunch of stuff about the CIA knowing who Oswald was and originally being concerned that he could be turned as a Soviet asset, but they (rightly) surmised that he was too much of an unreliable, unpredictable schizo to be of any use to anyone so they stopped monitoring him a while before the assassination. Interestingly this is the real coverup with regards to the JFK thing. The CIA went to great lengths to bury their involvement with Oswald, not because they manipulated him into killing Kennedy, but because it's absolutely fucking humiliating that the guy that killed Kennedy was being monitored by the CIA and they determined he was too uninteresting and let him drop off the radar.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Pomegrenade, spiritofamermaid, mold and 7 others
Breadbassket said:
Unfortunately for anyone looking for new developments to the Epstein situation, this is the same information that was already released to the public years ago.
Click to expand...
We could always have assembled our own "Epstein client list" from press coverage of him (and, later, from criminal filings and leaks). He was a socialite, mentioned in the news almost as often as Trump. Being seen hanging out with him was a celebrity rite of passage. He was always known as the procurer to the stars. "Everyone knew," including every literate reader of celebrity gossip, just like with Weinstein.

No version of the "client list" has any power. We know who's on it and we've known for years. What wrath has that brought down on them? None. For one, we "won't do shit," as the feds say—because we can't (see above). But also, about half of everybody really likes the idea of being ruled by "satanic pedophiles" (or whatever), and especially the idea of other people being ruled by them. Mocking the weak is vicarious strength. Etc.

The smart fraction of the bad guys understand all this. If they're in charge, that's why the Epstein case is the peculiar mess it is. The "chaos" is the op. Adopting any attitude toward it is falling for it. Changing your attitude toward it as it becomes less legible is fully falling for it.
 
  • Like
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: spiritofamermaid, Hazard Crab, BullfrogBill and 2 others
BullfrogBill said:
I assume because everyone made up their minds that it's fake and they don't want to waste their time, but I'd expect people here to at least want to have some fun conspiracy conversations about it.
Click to expand...
I ignored it because it's his contact list and doesn't have anything new besides the numbers and emails not being censored. It isn't that helpful because he had contacts with a lot of people but it doesn't mean they did anything.
The flight logs or tapes or some other evidence showing people going to the island and engaging in illicit activity is what I want. Proof of wrong doing.
This is not that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AmateurComedicTaxidermist, spiritofamermaid, FlappyBat and 3 others
No-Eyed Square Guy said:
We could always have assembled our own "Epstein client list" from press coverage of him (and, later, from criminal filings and leaks). He was a socialite, mentioned in the news almost as often as Trump. Being seen hanging out with him was a celebrity rite of passage. He was always known as the procurer to the stars. "Everyone knew," including every literate reader of celebrity gossip, just like with Weinstein.

No version of the "client list" has any power. We know who's on it and we've known for years. What wrath has that brought down on them? None. For one, we "won't do shit," as the feds say—because we can't (see above). But also, about half of everybody really likes the idea of being ruled by "satanic pedophiles" (or whatever), and especially the idea of other people being ruled by them. Mocking the weak is vicarious strength. Etc.

The smart fraction of the bad guys understand all this. If they're in charge, that's why the Epstein case is the peculiar mess it is. The "chaos" is the op. Adopting any attitude toward it is falling for it. Changing your attitude toward it as it becomes less legible is fully falling for it.
Click to expand...
That's what I always thought was weird about people wanting it because I got the sense we more or less knew everybody who was there.

Like Prince Andrew and stuff
 
  • Like
Reactions: spiritofamermaid and ThisIsGonnaBeGood
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back