Trump 2017: Year Zero

[Louie_Cypher]

hey tiny hands we're laughing at you not with you, your a bad joke, loser
-louie

[Louie_Cypher]

i bwt ole spicer is regretting his career choices
-louie

[Mantra]

So heart warming to see him talking about how effective torture is. What a great guy.

[allegro]

I've only seen Intel reports indicating that torture DOESN'T work (people tell you bullshit to get you to stop torturing them). Either he's lying or people are blowing smoke up his ass or he asked the Spanish-speaking housekeeper if torture works and she didn't understand English and said "si" and that's the only confirmation Trump needed.

[Mantra]

He claims that he asked various generals/intelligence leaders and that they swear by it.

[Jinsai]

He claims that he asked various generals/intelligence leaders and that they swear by it.

He also makes shit up more often than he tells the truth.

[allegro]

He claims that he asked various generals/intelligence leaders and that they swear by it.

Generals aren't the ones torturing. The CIA is generally doing the torturing.

Trump said he spoke with "people" about torture.

He also said that he'd rely on Pompeo and Mattis.

But he said he would rely on the advice of Pentagon chief James Mattis and Central Intelligence Agency director Mike Pompeo.

"I’m going to go with what they say,” Trump told ABC. “And if they don’t want to do, that’s fine. If they do wanna do, then I will work toward that end. I want to do everything within the bounds of what you’re allowed to do legally.”

“But do I feel it works? Absolutely, I feel it works.”

A Trump spokesman said the draft seen by the newspaper did not originate at the White House.

In February 2016, Trump said “torture works” and pledged to bring back waterboarding and “much worse.”

However, in December, after meeting with Mattis, Trump said he was “impressed” with Mattis’s argument that building trust and rewarding cooperation by detainees worked better than waterboarding.

During his confirmation hearing before a Senate committee, Pompeo promised he would “absolutely not” comply with any order to revive the “enhanced interrogation techniques” employed by the CIA after 9/11.

[allegro]

All this voter fraud shit that Trump is spewing came from a pro golfer who's not a US Citizen but who tried to vote. Cool story, bro.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/n...125-story.html

[Jinsai]

ProPublica staying strong with the solid analytical reporting: The mood is dark as Trump takes over the environmental agency he pledged to reduce to “little tidbits.”

[baudolino]

a new day and IT is still "president"?! inconceivable.

btw IT stands for Indubitable not Imbecile Trump!

[Louie_Cypher]

this whole voter fraud is about voter suppression, stay awake it starts with voter fraud then you no longer have voting rights
-louie

[botley]

His lawyers are pretty heavy-hitters. He has teams of lawyers to get away with shit. It's why people here in Cook County are pissed at how he keeps getting huge property tax reductions at his Trump building in Chicago without including profit valuation in the property assessment (which is customary for everybody else) and has politicians in his pocket, even DEMS.

In other words

[allegro]

In other words

Pretty much, yeah.

[Louie_Cypher]

instead of wining about the results, how about the we do it over how about that you tiny handed little bitch
-louie

[allegro]

Have you seen the Girandoni Air Rifle from the late 1700s? Jefferson bought them and gave some to Lewis & Clark. It's pretty much the reason Lewis & Clark managed to go across the country without being instantly killed by hostile tribes.

Anyway, the point is that the founders absolutely knew gun tech was advancing well beyond single shot rifles.

(1) I said "civilian." The Lewis and Clark Expedition was commissioned by the U.S. Government, and L&C did demonstrations of said gun to scare the Natives.

(2) "While the detachable air reservoir was capable of around 30 shots it took nearly 1,500 strokes of a hand pump to fill those reservoirs." That's not an AR-15 in the hands of civilians.

The Heller decision agrees. Oh, and if your short attention span allowed you to read the ENTIRE Heller page on the ACLU site, you would come to a section that makes perfect sense from the legal analysis (and ACLU) perspective:

Gun Control

Updated: 1/17/2013
The Second Amendment provides: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

ACLU POSITION
Given the reference to "a well regulated Militia" and "the security of a free State," the ACLU has long taken the position that the Second Amendment protects a collective right rather than an individual right. For seven decades, the Supreme Court's 1939 decision in United States v. Miller was widely understood to have endorsed that view. This position is currently under review and is being updated by the ACLU National Board in light of the U.S. Supreme Court decision in D.C. v. Heller in 2008.

In striking down Washington D.C.'s handgun ban by a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court's decision in D.C. v. Heller held for the first time that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to keep and bear arms, whether or not associated with a state militia. The ACLU disagrees with the Supreme Court's conclusion about the nature of the right protected by the Second Amendment. However, particular federal or state laws on licensing, registration, prohibition, or other regulation of the manufacture, shipment, sale, purchase or possession of guns may raise civil liberties questions.

ANALYSIS
Although ACLU policy cites the Supreme Court's decision in U.S. v. Miller as support for our position on the Second Amendment, our policy was never dependent on Miller. Rather, like all ACLU policies, it reflects the ACLU's own understanding of the Constitution and civil liberties.

Heller takes a different approach than the ACLU has advocated. At the same time, it leaves many unresolved questions, including what firearms are protected by the Second Amendment, what regulations (short of an outright ban) may be upheld, and how that determination will be made.

Those questions will, presumably, be answered over time.

Drift = Off

[allegro]

You literally just got done quoting me, calling me a moron, only to agree with the proposed implementation

I think you have a condition that affects your reading comprehension. THE GREAT BIG FUCKING GIANT NORTH CAROLINA CAVEAT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE PARAGRAPH should be a fucking clue.

I've known guys like you, fake Libertarians who give a fuck about civil rights only relative to their own lily white upper middle class gun-toting ass. Everybody else? "FUCK 'EM!"

[theimage13]

Wouldn't it be hilarious if it turned out that there actually was massive voter fraud, and that it changed the outcome of swing states from red to blue?

I know that didn't happen. But just as a hypothetical, because I love learning new things: if, after a president is sworn in, there is proof that voter fraud conclusively cost the other party the election, what would the consequence be? Anyone know? An impeachment doesn't seem right, since it doesn't seem to address the larger issue. Nor does it seem like they'd simply toss the affected votes and declare a new winner. Would there be a special election held? Is this even a scenario that we have a written ruling on? Or would we have to make something up on the fly?

[allegate]

The State Department’s entire senior management team just resigned
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.12fce986814e

Good for them.

[Volband]

You are babbling utter nonsense and profess to have gleaned your understanding of how militarized police detain crowds in protests from a fucking Reddit comment. Please by all means continue telling me how to respond to that.

No, I reflected on your ignorance and how you rather jump to fear mongering, than think critically.

Also, the fact that I could found a counter-argument in a reddit post to the "TRUMP IS JAILING OUR JOURNALISTS, RUN!!!" shows how ridiculous you were/are.

In many ways, Trump is the best thing that could have happened to you, because you will need these 4 years if you don't want it to be 8.

[Your Name Here]

instead of wining about the results, how about the we do it over how about that you tiny handed little bitch
-louie

Thank you, Louie_Cypher that made me laugh.

[Kodiak33]

I'm a conservative, and I hate Trump and think he will be one of the worst presidents we've ever had. However, the only positive I can see from this entire shitstorm is that people might wake the fuck up for once and quit being so passive about everything that has been going on for awhile. Maybe this is the moment where we finally wake up, but who knows...we put Trump in the most powerful leadership position in the world.

[allegate]

I'm a conservative, and I hate Trump and think he will be one of the worst presidents we've ever had. However, the only positive I can see from this entire shitstorm is that people might wake the fuck up for once and quit being so passive about everything that has been going on for awhile. Maybe this is the moment where we finally wake up, but who knows...we put Trump in the most powerful leadership position in the world.

It's rapidly becoming something else though.

[Jinsai]

the fact that I could found a counter-argument in a reddit post

What in the hell are you even trying to infer here? Would you like me to post a ridiculous nonsense counter-argument on Reddit to demonstrate how ridiculous you were/are?

In many ways, Trump is the best thing that could have happened to you, because you will need these 4 years if you don't want it to be 8.

And that made no fucking sense.

[Swykk]

After this election. And after the way people are post-election? Yup! Fuck them. Fuck them with their own hypocrisy.

The Dem's unequal application of "civil rights for all" was my entire point. It's this exact hypocrisy that makes me say "fuck em!" Because at this point, they all deserve what they get due to their lack of principles. I'm ready to start weaponizing their hypocrisy. It'll help push this machine into the wall faster. Just like Trump is doing.

And don't pretend it doesn't work. And don't pretend it isn't exactly what is needed for people to actually consider action. Where were the mass protests when Hillary fucked the DNC? That's right. It took Trump. Bring on the angry revolution. Because they won't do it themselves.

You're all in for "revolution" but you don't seem to have much of a plan outlined here other than "GUNS IS ALL I TALK ABOUT. I CAN MAKE ANY THREAD ABOUT GUNS AND RIDICULE ANY OTHER ACTION." That thread is your one man show. And you must've noticed.
So what's the strategy in a nation where you'll be wiped out in four seconds from a drone or hell, let's make it messy and assume the police and/or SWAT and/or Feds and/or national guard are the ones who obliterate you. They have more weapons. They have better weapons. You'll be a Crazed Lone Gunman story and gone. Or if you are lucky enough to find other unorganized anarchist gunnuts, they'll die too. Congrats! "Push this machine into the wall faster." Fucking lame. Are you 15?

I'd like to assume you're wiser than this. I know you know tech. What is your real plan? Convince us with something more than smarm and guns. I promise I'll be objective.

My opinion is any revolution needs to involve masses and kept as non-violent as possible. The Women March was a start. It did rattle Trump. It wasn't perfect. But it was a start.

[Swykk]

What in the hell are you even trying to infer here? Would you like me to post a ridiculous nonsense counter-argument on Reddit to demonstrate how ridiculous you were/are?



And that made no fucking sense.

He is a troll who semi-regularly disrupts the Feminism thread with "questions" he then turns into full on troll jobs. He's doing it here. Ignore it.

[Deepvoid]

Doomsday Clock has been set at 2 minutes and half to midnight for the first time since 1953.
http://thebulletin.org/timeline

[Khrz]

I'm ready to start weaponizing their hypocrisy.

Because of course you would.

[Swykk]

So you don't really have a plan, which is not the same as controlling. You need an outline and some goals.

[theimage13]

But no, the women's march wasn't a start. At best, it's simply a sign that something COULD happen. Emoting in the middle of the street and then going home isn't going to change anything.

https://www.womensmarch.com/100

I have a very small social media profile, but dozens of my friends have been keeping up with this. The website didn't suddenly die the day after the rallies. People didn't "emote in the middle of the street then go home". Not only is the original organizing continuing on with future steps, but other rallies are popping up left and right. Three million people banding together wasn't a "sign" of something that "could" happen, it was as clear of a fucking start as you could possibly ask for.

[Swykk]

Great. I like it. Let's expand so we can figure out how best to achieve.

How will that get done? You'll have to get the word out in a way that paints a broad stroke, where the majority of the US recognizes they're being negatively impacted by this and will benefit from helping achieve this. Get the message out so that it resonates. It would be beneficial but not easy to get the people who just don't care about politics. I personally don't know how to reach them or how you'd get through the blind ignorance of the right, who seem unmoved by facts. But you might not need the right. You would need to know how to deal with them getting in the way, though (nope, still not guns, which will pollute the movement and get you killed).