Trumpkin Chumpkin for Halloween
September 16, 2018 at 1:00 pm | Posted in Abuse of Office, Conceited, Disinformation, Dysfunctional Politics, Enemies of Freedom, Presidential election | Leave a commentTags: and Trudeau, and Xi Jinping, Dana Milbank, Donald Trump Jr., Halloween, Hillary Clinton, John Baron, John Barron, John Miller, Macron, Merkel, New York Times, President Chump, President Obama, Putin's chihuahua, Rodrigo Duterte, Sergey Kislyak, Sergey Lavrov, Trump, Washington Post
A Trumpkin, a President Chumpkin, full of lies, cruelty, arrogance and ignorance. By thepoliblog .
Note the Trumpkin Chumpkin’s realistic features:
Lies issuing from both sides of his mouth.
Cruel teeth. This abominable person separates children from their parents, and then locks them up in a pantry, for later consumption.
Demented eyes, each looking anywhere except at the facts.
A nose for what his “base” wants to hear, regardless of its falsity.
President Chump tried to pin the label of treason on the anonymous White House official who wrote the OpEd in the New York Times.
Chump, it might be treason to your brand, but it is not treason to the United States.
Chump, treason is what occurred when you talked with Sergey Lavrov and Sergey Kislyak in what had formerly been the Oval Office of the White House, in May 2017. You pollute every person and every organization you touch. As long as your presence continues to pollute the White House, the Oval Office is transformed into the Offal Office, the Awful Office.
From President Chump’s mouth to Putin’s ear, via Lavrov and Kislyak.
Treason is Donald Jr’s “I love it!” in anticipation of the June 9, 2016 meeting in Trump Tower in 2016, where he expected to obtain damaging information that Russia had obtained about Hillary Clinton. Given Don’s expectations, his participation was treasonous, because he his statement indicates that he would have been willing to broadcast information obtained by Russian Intelligence Services: information whose broadcast was desired by Russian Intelligence Services, and whose broadcast would have constituted Russian interference in an American election. Don was therefore hoping to collude with a foreign power.
Treason is also Trump fabricating a cover-up story for Donald Jr about that meeting: Trump had Don Jr. claim that the discussion in Trump Tower was about American adoptions of Russian children, not about Don Jr. expected the meeting to discuss, nor about what it actually did discuss.
Treason is Presudent Chump attempting to abort and otherwise impede an investigation of Putin’s interference in the US Presidential election in 2016.
Treason is candidate Trump calling out, “Russia, if you’re listening …” In that July 27, 2016 statement, Trump begged for collusion by Russia, to help Trump win the Presidential election.
An instructive article by Dana Milbank in the Washington Post chronicles the remarkably many people who President Chump has accused of treason. Recall the story of the Emperor with no clothes, who had been flattered into believing that he was stunningly dressed. If that Emperor had been President Chump, he would have charged with treason the person who yelled out the truth.
President Chump often screams “Fake News!”, to devalue unfavorable news.
What a hypocrite!
He deliberately generates fake news. Pretending to sometimes be John Miller, sometimes be John Barron, and sometimes to be John Baron, he told lies about himself to the news media.
President Chump accused President Obama of spending to much time playing golf!
What a hypocrite!
Candidate Chump and President Chump tries to pin the label lyin’ on Hillary Clinton and on everyone else who opposes him.
Mirror, mirror, on the wall. Who is the biggest liar of them all?
Lets return to President Chump’s inability to distinguish between loyalty to himself and loyalty to the country.
This inability is due in part to Chump’s fragile ego. To preserve his self-esteme, Chump hides the fragility of his ego from himself by being an ego-maniac, who sees the world as revolving about himself.
But Chump’s inability to distinguish between loyalty to himself and loyalty to the country also because President Chump is the President who would be King.
Chump thought that being the President meant being a non-hereditary King – not a constitutional monarch, but like Henry VIII. Henry VIII didn’t have to to distinguish between loyalty to himself and loyalty to his country.
Chump boasts that while a student he didn’t read the assigned texts. He is proud of having gotten through by guessing, and takes that to be proof of a superior intelligence. So Chump didn’t know that the US President is not a King.
Chump’s desire to be an old-school King is why he admires authoritarian leaders like Putin, Duterte, and Xi. It is also why Chump thinks that Obama, Merkel, and May are weak.
Chump’s preference for authoritarian leaders is one reason for Chump having become Putin’s chihuahua.
Another reason is that Russian investors close to Putin bailed Trump out of his company’s latest bankrupcy. Putin bought Trump, and Trump knows it.
President Chump’s preference for authoritarian leaders is why he – unlike previous Presidents – is not the leader of the free world. The present leaders of the free world are Merkel, Macron, and Trudeau.
Defective Trump and Imperfect Hillary
October 17, 2016 at 10:45 am | Posted in Conceited, Disinformation, Enemies of Freedom, Enemies of Planet Earth, Fairness, Presidential election | 3 CommentsTags: Donald Chump, Donald Trump, Glen Kessler, Hillary Clinton, John Miller, John Oliver, Lyin' Donny
Line art representation of a quill pen. Archives of Pearson Scott Foresman, donated to the Wikimedia Foundation.
Hillary Clinton is an ordinary fibber, like you and me.
Trump is not an ordinary liar. Trump is a psychopathic liar.
Here is the evidence.
We are polite to people we don’t like. We invent a reason why we “can’t” accept an invitation. Again and again, we tell our children a suitably sanitized version of the truth about something. We tell a garishly dressed friend that they look good. “No, it doesn’t make you look fat.” A minister warmly greets a secretly less-liked member of the congregation. A teacher responds to an annoying question by saying “that is a good question”. An elected official enthusiatically welcomes a disliked constituent. A server in a restaurant, a sales person in a store, … The list is endless.
Probably no one can go through live without telling many fibs – at least, no one who keeps friends and a job. And that is true even in open societies, where saying what you believe would not lead to imprisonment or death.
Everyone who wants to influence policy and public life must fib.
George Washington understood that slavery was evil and unjust, and undermined the political principles he fought for. He and some of his friends brainstormed ways of ending slavery, and in his will he freed all of the slaves that he personally owned. (He could not legally free the slaves owned by his wife.) But Washington knew that he could not express his view openly, if he were to deal effectively with what were then the most pressing issues that he faced.
Lincoln likewise. Hence the limited position he took during his first Presidential campaign, and hence also the delay in issuing the Emancipation Proclamation, and its incomplete coverage.
FDR favored Britain and France over Hitler before the US entered the Second World War, but he could not say so, given the isolationist (indeed, Trumpian) mood in the US before we were attacked.
Lyndon Johnson favored increased fairness toward African Americans well before he was able to act upon his views. He urged the leaders of the Civil Rights movement to increase the poltical pressure on him, to provide him political cover while still leaving him politically effective.
By the way, these examples show the hypocrisy of those who fault Hillary for not always expressing her long term political goals out loud.
That brings us back to Trump.
Trump is not an ordinary liar. Trump is a psychopathic liar.
Trump lies as easily as he breathes, without guilt, with conviction. That is what distinguishes a psychopathic liar from an ordinary fibber.
Psychopathic lying is an essential trait of all great con men, since a person who does not feel guilty comes across as more convincing.
Trump might even really believe his own lies. Since Trump avoids the effort of critical thinking, he may unconciously and automatically swivel his beliefs to whatever would be convenient for him at the moment.
Of course you know about Trump’s lying birtherism, and his more recent lie that Hillary started birtherism.
You know about the many recent disproofs of Trump’s claim that no one respects women more than he does.
You probably remember how, during the second debate with Hillary, Trump attempted to immediately change the subject to ISIS.
You know about how Trump continues to deny that he favored the Iraq War, despite the videos that disprove his claim.
You might know that Trump is a champion earner of Four Pinnochios from Glen Kessler’s fact-checking columns in the Washington Post.
But that Trump is a psychopathic con-man is spectacularly proved by the multiple incidents in which he called newspapers, pretending to be someone else who was telling the newspaper about Trump.
Look at the following, which were found via this:
–
1. Donald Trump’s ‘John Miller’ interview is even crazier than you think …
May 16, 2016 – The name Trump assumed varied slightly — “John Miller,” John Barron,” and “John Baron” — but the goal didn’t: Tout Trump as a hyper-cool, …
–
2. Donald Trump masqueraded as publicist to brag about himself – The …
May 13, 2016 – The man on the phone vigorously defending Donald Trump says he’s a media spokesman named John Miller, but then he says, “I’m sort of new …
–
3. John Oliver – Donald Trump and John Miller – YouTube
May 16, 2016 – Uploaded by consumer
From HBO’s Last Week Tonight with John Oliver. … Mix – John Oliver – Donald Trump and John …
–
4. Donald Trump and the “John Miller” Tape: A Question of Character …
The New Yorker
May 13, 2016 – John Cassidy on the newly surfaced recording from the nineties in which Donald Trump apparently poses as his own spokesman.
–
5. Miller Time: Donald Trump Lied that he was ‘John Miller’ To Spread …
May 14, 2016 – When [People magazine’s] reporter called Trump’s office for an explanation, she was told that John Miller had gone home and that Trump …
Trump pretended that someone else said about Trump precisely what Trump wanted said about Trump.
That is a con.
That is just like a scammer who calls you up to tell you that your licence to the operating system on your computer has expired, or that your computer is full of malware that they will remove if you turn over complete control of your computer to them.
Doesn’t Trump’s masquerade remind you of Trump’s distinctive trick of claiming that un-named other people are saying what he would like said about one event or issue after another?
One of Trump’s many lies is that Hillary Clinton is a bigger liar than the rest of us. Trying to pin the label of liar on his competitors had been a theme of Trump’s campaign in the primaries. Now, in the general election, he is trying to pin it on Hillary. But Trump lies much more often than Hillary, and his lies are far more dangerous.
Even if Trump does believe his own lies, some part of his brain is uneasy about them.
That is probably why ‘liar’ is his favorite insult, and is why he uses it so promiscuously.
–
The present post should be regarded as part of what will be a series of replies to common but misguided assertions that Trump has tried to implant in the public’s discussion of the candidates for President. In particular, many of these assertions were usefully collected together in Greg Tag’s comment on the previous post, How to Vote Against Trump . These assertions implicitly rest upon Trump’s lie that Hillary Clinton is a bigger liar than the rest of us.
–
If you want to comment on this post, or if you want to see the comments by others, click here.
How to Vote Against Trump
September 27, 2016 at 12:56 pm | Posted in Disinformation, Enemies of Freedom, Enemies of Planet Earth, Fairness, Presidential election | 3 CommentsTags: Donald Trump, Gary Johnson, Green Party, Hillary Clinton, Jill Stein, Libertarian Party, Presidential election, Ralph Nader, spoiler
Twice the impact. Created 2016-09-26 by thepoliblog.WordPress.com.
How can you best fight against Trump?
How can you best protect
- the country,
- freedom of speech,
- political freedom here and world-wide,
- innocent persons,
- human fairness,
- the US Treasury,
- the human world,
- and the natural world,
against the damage that each of those would suffer if Mussolini-like Trump became President?
Some of the voters who are revolted by Trump are planning to vote against Trump without voting for Hillary.
They are planning to vote against Trump by voting for the Green candidate, or are planning to vote for the Libertarian candidate.
But a vote for anyone other than Hillary is only half a vote against Trump.
Here is why.
Although voting for one of the spoiler candidates doesn’t increase Trump’s tally, it also doesn’t increase his opponent’s tally. It has zero effect on the comparison of their two tallys, which is the comparison that will determine who becomes President.
A vote for Hillary doesn’t increase Trump’s tally by 1, but also does increase Hillary’s tally by 1.
That increases the difference between Hillary’s tally and Trump’s tally by 2 units.
That is two blows against Trump.
A vote for the Green or for the Libertarian candidate doesn’t increase Trump’s tally by 1, but that is only half the effect on the difference between Hillary’s tally and Trump’s tally that would be produced by a vote for Hillary.
Remember what happened when Ralph Nader acted (unintentionally) as a spoiler against Gore.
How did that turn out?
–
If you want to comment on this post, or if you want to see the comments by others, click here.
Putin => Wikileaks => Trump
July 24, 2016 at 5:16 pm | Posted in Disinformation, Dysfunctional Politics, Enemies of Freedom, Presidential election | 2 CommentsTags: Abby Phillip, Amber Phillips, Democratic National Committee, DNC, Hillary Clinton, Putin, Putinia, Russia, Trump, Washington Post, Wikileaks
Trump Approves of Putin. Image created by thepoliblog.WordPress.com.
(After writing this posting, I searched for URLs to cite as evidence for what is asserted in it. It immediately became evident that others had come to the same realizations: see the articles by Abby Phillip and by Amber Phillips in the Washington Post. But since different aspects are emphasized in what follows, it seemed non-redundant to go ahead and post it.)
Putin is the Tyrant of Putinia (which has replaced Russia).
Putin ordered his minions to hack into the computer files of the Democratic National Committee to steal the emails and plans of Hillary Clinton’s campaign.
Putin wanted to use that information to boost Trump’s chances in the US Presidential election in November.
Putin wants Trump to win.
Trump and Putin like each other’s philosophy and style. Both are authoritorian and greedy. Each hides his insecurity by projecting brazen self-confidence. Neither of them gives a hoot about the constraints imposed by laws, or even Constitutions.
Trump also drools over the potential for business opportunities in Putinia. So he is careful to always ‘make nice’ to Putin, and never challenges what Putin does.
Some leader of the free world Trump would be! He has a built-in conflict of interest.
Putin cannot legally afford to admit that he is responsible for the hacking.
Also, if it were known that the release of the information was intended to aid Trump, then the impact of the released information would be diminished.
So Putin had the stolen information forwarded to Wikileaks. Having Wikileaks release the information gave Putin deniability.
Wikileaks – having no sense of privacy and decency, and deserving none – eagerly made the stolen information public.
Releasing the stolen information can have had only one possible purpose: to embarrass and hamper Hillary Clinton’s campaign.
Trump is guilty of many things, but he had no knowledge of this.
–
If you want to comment on this post, or just want to add your name as endorsing or disputing its assertions, go here. To avoid cluttering the ‘latest postings’ page, WordPress includes the mechanism for commenting only on the page for the individual posting, never on the page that shows all of the recent postings. So click here, scroll to the bottom of the post, and submit your comment.
Bernie Sanders As Commander in Chief?
March 14, 2016 at 5:15 pm | Posted in Conceited, Fairness, Presidential election, Terrorism | Leave a commentTags: : Bernie Sanders, Commander in Chief, defense, Hillary Clinton, ISIS, Presidential election, refugees
Flag of the Islamic State.
This flag is also used by al-Shabaab, al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), and Boko Haram. Graphic by Yo.
Here are some questions about Bernie Sander’s fitness to be the Commander in Chief.
Does Bernie Sanders agree that we need a capable – hence adequately funded – Department of Defence?
What capabilities of the Department of Defence does Bernie Sanders want to enhance?
How does Bernie Sanders plan to respond to the non-traditional military sitiations posed by terrorism and by countries (Syria, Russia, China, North Korea) that sneer at international law?
What policies does Bernie Sanders think should govern the use of drones?
What are his thoughts on collateral damage?
What areas of defense R&D does Bernie Sanders think needs to be pursued? What new weapons and tactical capabilities are needed?
What is Bernie Sander’s rough estimate of the proper level of funding for the Department of Defense next year? How many Divisions and how many aircraft carriers should we have?
A Syrian soldier aims an AK-47 assault rifle wearing a Soviet-made, model ShMS nuclear–biological–chemical warfare mask.
Unknown author – http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/0JoLDPpw5WbYCMAmPsXL1g
When Assad used chemical weapons against peaceful Syrians, did Bernie Sanders support the idea of US participation in setting up a no-fly zone to protect Syrian civilians from attack by Assad’s military? (A no-fly zone was not set up after Asaad’s use of chemical weapons, despite our prior hollow talk of a ‘red line’. That created a vacuum. That vacuum helped catpult ISIS into becoming a priminent player. Our lack of follow-through, and the hollowness of our threat, bears a major responsibility for the flourishing of ISIS.)
What would Bernie Sanders do to protect the non-extremist anti-Assad groups in Syria from Assad, and from Putin?
What would Bernie Sanders do to protect the very effective Kurdish fighters against attacks by Erdogan’s authoritarian Turkey?
Yazidi refugees and American aid workers on Mount Sinjar in August 2014″
USAID U.S. Agency for International Development – https://www.flickr.com/photos/usaid_images/14783000490
What would Bernie Sanders do about the desparate refugees who have fled ISIS?
Any candidate who cannot come up with thoughful, practical answers to these questions is utterly unfit to be commander and chief.
Any candidate who has not already pondered these questions is utterly unfit to be commander and chief.
–
During the Presidential election, that will be obvious to anyone who values practical effects over wishful thinking.
Being good-hearted is not enough.
Economic fairness is important, but do not underestimate the importance that most voters assign to:
– adequate defense
– our role in supporting international fairness
– and to being respected internationally, and effective internationally.
Some of those latter urgeswere a major factor in the ability of Mussolini and Hitler to replace open political systems by authoritarian ones.
Those same aspects drive Putin’s high popularity in the face of the economic disaster he has brought to Russia.
The importance of same aspects are why China follows an aggressive, nationalistic policies in south-east Asia, despite the political and economic backlash from neighboring countries, and because of China’s falling rate of economic growth.
In the Presidential election, a candidate that lives in dream-land will lose to a candidate who at least cares about what is achievable, no matter how ill-considered are that candidate’s specific goals and paths to those goals.
So a vote in the primary for a well-intentioned candidate who does not care about defense and about foreign policy will inadvertantly aid the victory of the candidate of the opposite party, as long as that competing candidate does have strong opinions (however stupid) about defense and foreign policy.
Remember how votes for the egotist Ralph Nader first made George Bush president instead of Al Gore, and then four years later help George Bush win a second term. (Recall also Nader’s hypocritical claim that there would be no difference between Gore and Bush presidencies.)
–
If you want to comment on this post, or just want to add your name as endorsing or disputing its assertions, go here. To avoid cluttering the ‘latest postings’ page, WordPress includes the mechanism for commenting only on the page for the individual posting, never on the page that shows all of the recent postings. So click here, scroll to the bottom of the post, and submit your comment.
‘I Voted’ emblem
Blog at WordPress.com.
Entries and comments feeds.
thepoliblog 