They're already walking back their dumb 20% tax threat.  His big mouth has him in a jam because now he can't rest until he finds a way to convince everyone that he made Mexico pay for a useless wall.  His Trumpkins are too dumb to get that his big bad tweet about paying for the wall or cancel the meeting was done because to make him look tough after he knew the meeting would be cancelled. 

 

He still does not get that a country is not a corporation and that he cannot use his bullying negotiation tactics to intimidate countries into doing what he says. 

 

GM laid off 2000 workers last Friday and they said some may be offered other positions but nothing specific.  So all his big talk has not done anything but a few companies to let him take credit for moves they already had in the works.

 

Maybe he's working on bankrupting the government.

28 minutes ago, Juliajms said:

Sure, but I'm not going to judge countries on their past. If we do that it's going to be mighty hard to find anyone with anything approaching clean hands and there is nothing anyone can do to change the past.  I'm a lot more worried about who is violating human rights right now because that can be changed. I'm not suggesting anyone dismiss China. They were going to have a huge impact on world affairs no matter who was elected in the US this year. Trump is just giving them an even bigger opening.

 

There's not a country on this earth without ties to some ancient evil. We need to focus on the here and now. 

This is probably why they're walking back the threat. The Dummies probably just found out...

 

 

Mexico supplies 69% of America's fresh vegetables and 37% of its fresh fruit. But Trump wants to start a trade war with them.

— Ian Millhiser (@imillhiser) January 26, 2017

1 hour ago, Khan said:

 

I think the former president of Mexico just got Black on everybody.

 

I'd trust the ladies who attend Mama Khan's church over CNN.

 

Forgot to add:

 

The hastag, of course, is the best part.  It's such a me thing to do.

That's my point Khan. Very few hands are clean.....but WP started calling him out months before CNN decided to confront him with his lies and slander. when net news sites, newspapers and news mags were trying to do their jobs....what was CNN, FN & MSNBC doing? every time they started a new hour, their anchors had these gigantic smiles on their faces proclaiming how Trump won some primary or how he's racking up the delegates and states or what he said in an interview. they were giddy about his rise...until he called a reporter a sleaze. other than Rachel, Joy, Lawrence and Chris (the majority of the time) all the others ignored his misogyny, bigotry, lies and hatred untl he attacked one of their own...then they spent the next 3 months FINALLY calling him out, after they sold their souls for ratings and access. 

45 minutes ago, marceline said:

 

There's not a country on this earth without ties to some ancient evil. We need to focus on the here and now. 

For sure, because if not, "we" sure as hell aren't the good guys either.  Just look at the Dakota Access Pipeline.  People talk about how we stole land from Native Americans in the past. No one alive now did that and there is not a damn thing we can do to change it. Meanwhile it's happening again and I'm still not sure it can be stopped.  Of course, I know it's not the exact same thing, but it's still a situation where "we" are f*cking "them" over when it should be unthinkable to ever step on their rights again. 

 

Same thing with voter suppression.  I know so many people who think they would have stood up to slavery or Jim Crow, but it's happening again. I'm not saying individuals are powerless or blameless, but it goes to show how incredibly powerful the system (for lack of a better word) really is.

Edited January 27, 20178 yr by Juliajms

1 hour ago, Wales2004 said:

They're already walking back their dumb 20% tax threat.  His big mouth has him in a jam because now he can't rest until he finds a way to convince everyone that he made Mexico pay for a useless wall.

 

Go back to what JaneAusten said upthread.  This could be from the same page in TrumpCo.'s handbook: make some preposterous threat or allegation, then walk it back, all with the goal of creating confusion within the people and distrust with the media.

 

It's a lot like what I saw yesterday on FB: specifically, the suggestion that Trump keeps bringing up allegations of voter fraud in order to get citizens to distrust the voting process and to disenfranchise large sections of this country from participating in future elections.

 

That's why I STILL won't take off the table the possibility of Trump rewriting laws that restrict all presidents to two terms.

35 minutes ago, Khan said:

 

Go back to what JaneAusten said upthread.  This could be from the same page in TrumpCo.'s handbook: make some preposterous threat or allegation, then walk it back, all with the goal of creating confusion within the people and distrust with the media.

 

It's a lot like what I saw yesterday on FB: specifically, the suggestion that Trump keeps bringing up allegations of voter fraud in order to get citizens to distrust the voting process and to disenfranchise large sections of this country from participating in future elections.

 

That's why I STILL won't take off the table the possibility of Trump rewriting laws that restrict all presidents to two terms.

 

You have to undo a constitutional amendment for that, don't you?

 

I think the thing with the wall is anyone with a brain knows it's stupid and destructive in many ways, but it's something he wants, and something his most racist supporters want. So he keeps pushing whether it makes sense or not. I wouldn't be that surprised if we end up with a scenario where lip service is paid and people end up lying to him for most of his Presidency about what is actually being done when it's really just a few bricks in mud.

Yes, you do have to undo an amendment.  But I will not put it past some Congressman, probably working on Trump's orders, doing just that.

14 minutes ago, Khan said:

Yes, you do have to undo an amendment.  But I will not put it past some Congressman, probably working on Trump's orders, doing just that.

 

Based on how freaked out they've reportedly been by him I don't think that will happen, but of course I can see why you'd worry.

2 hours ago, DRW50 said:

 

You have to undo a constitutional amendment for that, don't you?

 

I think the thing with the wall is anyone with a brain knows it's stupid and destructive in many ways, but it's something he wants, and something his most racist supporters want. So he keeps pushing whether it makes sense or not. I wouldn't be that surprised if we end up with a scenario where lip service is paid and people end up lying to him for most of his Presidency about what is actually being done when it's really just a few bricks in mud.

Thing is is that out of I believe the 38 congress people in Texas, none of them want the wall. I was looking for the link to the story can't find it but I am pretty certain the majority of the people in the states on the border don't want it. But there also already is a border wall of sorts anyway other than the areas across the Rio that are unworkable to build on.

Edited January 27, 20178 yr by JaneAusten

It just never ends.

I don't think any Democrats in California want the border wall. 

 

Anyway, I don't think the border obsession is part of any playbook for him.  I think he seriously wants to build this wall and find any little thing he can to claim that Mexico paid for it.  And I don't think he's going to get anywhere with that.  I guess the form of negotiations that he uses in business is not the best approach but he has yet to figure out that only his base and some wimpy individuals in the media and on the hill will give in to him. 

 

It was positively idiotic for him to say that the president of Mexico has to say that he won't pay for the wall, as if there is no way that anyone in Mexico would know he said that. 

 

He may actually end up weakening the global position of the U.S.

 

The media seems to be pretty quiet about it being called the opposition party and being told to keep its mouth shut.

7 hours ago, Roman said:

That's my point Khan. Very few hands are clean.....but WP started calling him out months before CNN decided to confront him with his lies and slander. when net news sites, newspapers and news mags were trying to do their jobs....what was CNN, FN & MSNBC doing? every time they started a new hour, their anchors had these gigantic smiles on their faces proclaiming how Trump won some primary or how he's racking up the delegates and states or what he said in an interview. they were giddy about his rise...until he called a reporter a sleaze. other than Rachel, Joy, Lawrence and Chris (the majority of the time) all the others ignored his misogyny, bigotry, lies and hatred untl he attacked one of their own...then they spent the next 3 months FINALLY calling him out, after they sold their souls for ratings and access. 

Hayes or Matthews?

7 hours ago, Wales2004 said:

I don't think any Democrats in California want the border wall. 

 

Anyway, I don't think the border obsession is part of any playbook for him.  I think he seriously wants to build this wall and find any little thing he can to claim that Mexico paid for it.  And I don't think he's going to get anywhere with that.  I guess the form of negotiations that he uses in business is not the best approach but he has yet to figure out that only his base and some wimpy individuals in the media and on the hill will give in to him. 

 

It was positively idiotic for him to say that the president of Mexico has to say that he won't pay for the wall, as if there is no way that anyone in Mexico would know he said that. 

 

He may actually end up weakening the global position of the U.S.

 

The media seems to be pretty quiet about it being called the opposition party and being told to keep its mouth shut.

 

CEN Scott Pelley started off the newscast last night with this.  It was the first I had heard of what Bannon said and I was floored.  But you're right, I haven't seen much about it since, even on social media.  IMO, this is shocking.  A senior WH official emphatically states that the press is the opposition and there's no widespread outcry?  

 

News agencies worldwide should be putting this at the top of their broadcasts, but most of them are still preoccupied with the inauguration and The Wall.  I don't get it.

 

4 hours ago, cassadine1991 said:

Hayes or Matthews?

Hayes. Matthews is a POS who helped lie us into war in Iraq.