Not on Trump's side but in this case he had no choice. The AG forced his hand
Of course he had a choice. He just chose to take the dictatorial route.
This is the swearing in oath that Trump took just eleven days ago:
"[i]I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States.[/i]"
So he sacks someone who is holding him to that oath?
Note that her replacement is also an Obama appointee, Congress has yet to approve Trump's nominee for the post.
She deliberately (and correctly) forced his had. He was not in control, she was. She is the winner there.
Hmm...
Sacking members of the judiciary who you don't agree with.
I'm not sure what chapter of Fascism for Dummies that is from but its one of the first ones, its beside controlling the media I think.
Not bad after less than a fortnight in office
Meanwhile Hague & Johnson have said that it's fine for the Queen to host Trump because she met Mugabe and Caucescu
As if that's some kind of example that this is a good idea 😯
As if that's some kind of example that this is a good idea
So neither Hague nor Johnson have very high opinions of The Doughnut either. 😆
it's simply using the ninfan logic that everyone has done something so you can't criticise anyone....
Scottish protesters getting a bit of humour in. He ain't even been to Scotland as Potus yet.
Best signs
"Oi Trump - gonnae no do that" ( chewin the fat reference)
"Chapati tae yer heid ya bam" ( held by a chap of asian subcontinent descent)
"Yer Maw was an immigrant you absolute roaster"
"Bams against the ban"
"away and shite donald"
"Trumps heart is colder than Scotland"
[quote=kimbers ]Meanwhile Hague & Johnson have said that it's fine for the Queen to host Trump because she met Mugabe and Caucescu
A fine piece of whataboutery, which almost matches anything I've seen on FB (replied last night to somebody who was saying "give him a chance, and what about Watergate" 🙄 )
I was amused to see that boneheaded nitwit currently in charge of presenting to the press corps, whilst announcing that anybody who didn't agree with Trump should "get with the programme", sounded almost exactly like...
[img] 
[/img]
[quote=whitestone ]Shall we have a sweepstake on how long it is before someone tries to impeach Trump? The Huffington Post (OK, pretty left wing for a US paper) seems to think it's inevitable
I was minded to think such talk was just hopeful but unrealistic, however having seen the way he is acting I now tend to agree with THP.
[quote=Mr Woppit ]I was amused to see that boneheaded nitwit currently in charge of presenting to the press corps, whilst announcing that anybody who didn't agree with Trump should "get with the programme", sounded almost exactly like...
I'm thinking more of:
[img] 
[/img]
[i]She deliberately (and correctly) forced his had. He was not in control, she was. She is the winner there. [/i]
Totall agree @thm. She made a great move with big impact. Yet again, shows he's a total novice in this role.
All jokes aside though about him...he has the potential to create quite a nasty situation. I've even wondered if he'll be 'taken out' (somehow) by his own nations security to avoid catastrophic problems. His actions could create seriously nasty responses from different areas of the world since he's already playing into the hands of the anti-Amnerican propoganda machine.
And then there's this...
now we have the chief of LAPD police signalling his readiness to refuse Trumps instructions
http://usuncut.com/news/lapd-police-chief-just-openly-rebelled-trumps-immigration-orders/
A fine piece of whataboutery
Here's a bit more whataboutery. If the UK was willing to join in the destabilizing of Iraq and the obviously unwinnable fight in Afghanistan purely to keep on the right side of the USA, why wouldn't we grant a State visit to Trump?
Is keeping the States onside a sensible Foreign policy aim? If so we have to suck it up.
That's a assuming a visit is desirable to either side given the protests.
If the UK was willing to join in the destabilizing of Iraq and the obviously unwinnable fight in Afghanistan purely to keep on the right side of the USA, why wouldn't we grant a State visit to Trump?
As said before, we look at events now not the past. If you go back far enough you will be able to justify anything because somebody did something. Since that war the UK has had 3 PM's and a few elections.
[URL= http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v734/vwempi/Mobile%20Uploads/2017-01/9B2FD0A9-7BA5-4FA9-B2DB-E41BE7E315B1.pn g" target="_blank">
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v734/vwempi/Mobile%20Uploads/2017-01/9B2FD0A9-7BA5-4FA9-B2DB-E41BE7E315B1.pn g"/> [/IMG][/URL]
Nice vacuum to push your crazy ideas through
If the UK was willing to join in the destabilizing of Iraq and the obviously unwinnable fight in Afghanistan purely to keep on the right side of the USA, why wouldn't we grant a State visit to Trump?
As said before, we look at events now not the past. If you go back far enough you will be able to justify anything because somebody did something. Since that war the UK has had 3 PM's and a few elections.
I'm not justifying a state visit - I'm saying that if we look at the past we can predict that a state visit is probably going to happen unless Trump decides it's too embarrassing to run the gauntlet of protests.
Nice vacuum to push your crazy ideas through
Isn't it normal in the states to replace top Civil servants when the Administration changes?
If so, I think the UK system is better - the Civil servants are a-political and stay on.
"Yer Maw was an immigrant you absolute roaster"
Applause!
I must say it's awfully civilised here without the Trump fans 😉
Isn't it normal in the states to replace top Civil servants when the Administration changes?
Yes but in a more organised way normally.
Cue the Yes Minister scene about the opposition (might have been Yes Prime Minister).
The delay between election and inauguration is partly due to time taken to get the old apparatchiks out and the new ones in. However this is usually only the top levels of management in any particular department, once you get down to those doing the implementing rather than deciding policy not much changes.
It looks like a lot of experience has been removed. Even with new staff their must be a learning curve of some sort and it's only running the most powerful country in the world.
What could go wrong eh
so now that the American government has been pretty much highjacked by an imperialist dictatorship, bordering on fascist regime, surely the US army will have to invade themselves to invoke a regime change? 🙂
Isolationist and imperialist. It's a good trick to do both those at the same time.
The official line being that The Doughnut is great for standing up to these people. For the love of god! 🙄 I guess people really are stupid enough to swallow this crap.
Luckily the yanks have the right to shit loads of guns to keep oppressive government in check.
Fancy a trip to Dallas mr t?
Isolationist and imperialist. It's a good trick to do both those at the same time.
The same with most of his policies, confused and conflicting
The same with most of his policies, confused and conflicting
Well he has spent months promising different things to different demographics.
None the less, I don't think Trump has an imperialist agenda. (But then Bush was the archetypal isolationist until 9/11.)
Perhaps Bannon is the key to power......?
mikewsmith - Member
I must say it's awfully civilised here without the Trump fans
I feel we should refer to them as the trumpets! 😆
From Sally Yates' confirmation hearing.
and to fill in the blanks that gent asking the tough questions will be moving into the desk shortly
On November 18, 2016, it was announced that President-elect Donald Trump planned to nominate Sessions for United States Attorney General.
Let's hope that video is left on repeat all over the building
Back to the visit...
"Lord Ricketts, who was permanent secretary at the Foreign Office from 2006 to 2010, said it was unprecedented for a US president to be invited for a state visit in their first year in the White House.
In a letter to the Times, he questioned whether Mr Trump was "specially deserving of this exceptional honour" and described the invitation as "premature".
"It would have been far wiser to wait to see what sort of president he would turn out to be before advising the Queen to invite him.
"Now the Queen is put in a very difficult position," he said."
What's Trump doing while everyone's going mental over the travel ban?
tweeting about how unfair life is
What's Trump doing while everyone's going mental over the travel ban?
That's my worry too. At least it's distracted everyone away from the pipeline stupidity.
Indeed. He's all smoke and mirrors.
slowoldman - Member
From Sally Yates' confirmation hearing.
If the [url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38805944 ]news from BBC [/url] is correct than the decision is absolutely right for Sally Yates to be fired.
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
Just for you chewkw, thankfully it was her job to question the legality of the order. Remember she is actually the lawyer (who's department they didn't consult)
I don't think there is anything substantive behind the façade. The simplistic slogans to solve complex issues is the reality.
The simplistic slogans to solve complex issues is the reality.
exactly, its what unites trump & brexit -
2 cheeks of the same shiity arse
mikewsmith - Member
Just for you chewkw, thankfully it was her job to question the legality of the order. Remember she is actually the lawyer (who's department they didn't consult)
It is legal hence she is fired.
She knows absolutely well that her decision is a political one rather than a legal one.
As a person of law she should know better than anyone else by not abusing her position, yet she is swayed by her political and emotional bias.
15 district attorneys also saying publicly they will not implement these illegal instructions
