A tragic day

[mrswdk]

Personally, I think the remarkable thing isn't that 50% of the country no longer bother voting, it's that 50% of the country do.

[nietzsche]

Woodruff!
Player!

I just skimmed through this thread and I just wanted to remind our non-US friends before they continue to make stupid generalizations about the American populace of the following statistics:


Total people in the US - 300,000,000 (approximate)
Total voters - 136,607,788 (approximate) or 45.5% of the total population
Hillary Clinton - 65,844,954 votes (48.2% of the total voters or 21.9% of the total population)
Donald Trump - 62,979,879 votes (46.1% of the total voters or 20.9% of the total population)

So, foreign friends, when you rail against the stupidity of the US people for electing Donald Trump, please keep in mind that approximately 48% of voters and 22% of the population voted for Hillary Clinton (basically a pro-choice Republican) and 46% of voters and 21% of the population voted for Donald Trump (basically a pro-worker hawk). Such low percentages (22% and 21%) don't even fit the definition of a generalization.

I also ask you for some introspection, foreign friends, in light of these numbers... how stupid you must be to make such a broad generalization about Americans.



http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/21/politics/ ... nal-count/

By that metric one could argue that the rest of the eligible voting population was just as stupid by not voting and thus allowing Trump to win.

Of course, we both know that's not the case, as it would always be a choice between blue and red, but yeah...

-TG

Yeah it's disappointing but not too disappointing since those people would likely have chose Red or Blue.

That being said, I wonder what our foreign friends would be complaining about vis-a-vis President Hillary Clinton? I have some thoughts:

"You fuckers are invading [insert country with a majority of non-white people]? What the f*ck!"
"You fuckers have a cabinet full of [insert term for businesspeople or rich people]? What the f*ck!"
"You fuckers are getting rid of trade agreements? What the f*ck!"

I would say someone should write an alternate history of the Hillary Clinton administration, but seems like it would not be that much different than what we're going to see over the next four years (other than the tweets, anger over tweets, protests by the Blue Team, and insults hurled at foreign dignatories (President Clinton probably more likely to hurl bombs, not insults)).

I respect your choices. This is from my point of view:

When Bush was president, I had the luck of travelling to many countries and you'll be surprised how hated and mocked at the same time the US was. And, being honest, as awful as Bush was (I kind of like him now, he's funny), Trump has gained so much more hate in less than a month.

I never understood the kind of anger that being bullied generates in you... believe me it's something.. and to some people it comes to the point that you don't care but you'll not stand for it.

[Symmetry]

We already know what a full march on DC by Trump supporters would look like:





No need for an alternative history, we have actual history.

[Woodruff]

That being said, I wonder what our foreign friends would be complaining about vis-a-vis President Hillary Clinton? I have some thoughts:

"You fuckers are invading [insert country with a majority of non-white people]? What the f*ck!"
"You fuckers have a cabinet full of [insert term for businesspeople or rich people]? What the f*ck!"
"You fuckers are getting rid of trade agreements? What the f*ck!"

I would say someone should write an alternate history of the Hillary Clinton administration, but seems like it would not be that much different than what we're going to see over the next four years (other than the tweets, anger over tweets, protests by the Blue Team, and insults hurled at foreign dignatories (President Clinton probably more likely to hurl bombs, not insults)).

I feel reasonably comfortable that Hillary wouldn't, at the very least, nominate an unadulterated and unqualified trainwreck for the Secretary of Education post. That one scares the shit out of me.

[Qwert]

tragic day? this its exaggeration, and nothing big will change. Its propaganda who make all this apocalipse news about Trump .
If some US news write that tomorrow will be end of word panic will erupted in US. In my country after every parlament or president election things stay same- political party who came to power continue with nepotism and coruption and we get used to this. We even dont have any public figure who we can vote, and this now happend to US to. Clinton or Trump --you ask now watch

[Woodruff]

tragic day? this its exaggeration, and nothing big will change. Its propaganda who make all this apocalipse news about Trump .
If some US news write that tomorrow will be end of word panic will erupted in US. In my country after every parlament or president election things stay same- political party who came to power continue with nepotism and coruption and we get used to this. We even dont have any public figure who we can vote, and this now happend to US to. Clinton or Trump --you ask now watch

Well, Trump is now moving to get rid of Dodd-Frank, which is oversight on the banking industry. But we all know they don't need oversight - what could possibly go wrong?

[notyou2]

I suspect that when Donnie is done, the corporations will be in 100% control of the US.

The United States of Exxon-McDonalds

[Symmetry]

tragic day? this its exaggeration, and nothing big will change. Its propaganda who make all this apocalipse news about Trump .
If some US news write that tomorrow will be end of word panic will erupted in US. In my country after every parlament or president election things stay same- political party who came to power continue with nepotism and coruption and we get used to this. We even dont have any public figure who we can vote, and this now happend to US to. Clinton or Trump --you ask now watch

So, if I'm reading you right, Trump's US is to be considered equal in terms of Serbia, in your mind?

[nietzsche]

hey! be nice to Qwert, Symmy. He makes the maps we play on.

[Symmetry]

hey! be nice to Qwert, Symmy. He makes the maps we play on.

That was me being nice!

[patches70]

tragic day? this its exaggeration, and nothing big will change. Its propaganda who make all this apocalipse news about Trump .
If some US news write that tomorrow will be end of word panic will erupted in US. In my country after every parlament or president election things stay same- political party who came to power continue with nepotism and coruption and we get used to this. We even dont have any public figure who we can vote, and this now happend to US to. Clinton or Trump --you ask now watch

Well, Trump is now moving to get rid of Dodd-Frank, which is oversight on the banking industry. But we all know they don't need oversight - what could possibly go wrong?

No, he's not getting rid of Dodd-Frank, he can't do that. Only Congress can do that.

Congress passes legislation. The Executive branch then has to come up with the rules and procedures to implement the legislation. I shouldn't have to explain this to a fellow American who is supposed to know how legislation and the roles between branches works. Trump's order is a review of the procedures.

Not only that, Dodd-Frank is a joke. If we really want to put the investment bankers on a muzzle then tell Congress to reinstate Glass-Steagal.

The fiduciary rule in regards to Dodd-Frank that Trump has decided not to implement hadn't ever been implemented yet. That rule wasn't due to go into effect until April 2017 and is one of the rules and procedures from the previous administration. It was kind of stupid anyway. It was redundant. Investment brokerages already have fiduciary laws. Not that those always work anyway, people should still do their due diligence.

You see the footprints of the advisers around Trump in this stuff. For instance, this executive order has the fingerprints of Mnuchin all over it. Former Goldman Sachs man, the same Goldman Sachs who sold mortgage back securities to their clients and at the same time shorted those very securities and didn't inform those same clients. Talk about violating one's fiduciary obligation! That's fraud and Sachs paid a fine for it. The fine was only a fraction of the money made from the scheme by Sachs, but that's typical from the Squid.

Anyway, this review is pretty routine in regards to new administrations coming into office. Every administration does this, they look at the stuff the previous administration did things and can and do change procedures and rules. Obama did it, Bush Jr did it, Willy "P P Flasher" Clinton did it, and so on and so on.

Maybe Trump would love to get rid of Dodd-Frank but he doesn't have the authority to do that. When he tries to execute an executive order that negates passed legislation from Congress, then you got a legit complaint. And I'll be right beside you raising hell for it, but this ain't like that. At least not yet. We'll have to see. But so far, this isn't anything.
The fiduciary rule is especially stupid. The "procedure" is that commission based brokers are required to look out for the best interest of their clients. That's it.
So who is to decide or how do you prove that the broker didn't look out for the retiree's best interests? If the retiree loses all his money, does that prove it? That happens you know, and it doesn't mean it was done on purpose. The fiduciary rule doesn't put limits on the commissions that are charged, it just says "look out for the clients best interests". That's it. Nothing else. It doesn't mean shit, the broker already has fiduciary obligations to disclose fees, risks, conflicts of interest and a whole bunch of other shit.
Trump (Mnuchin, actually) looks at that and says "how the f*ck are we supposed to do that?" How indeed. So f*ck it, omit it, get rid of it and doing so doesn't violate the Dodd-Frank act or it's implementation. That's just a rule Obama's administration came up with the typical meaninglessness that Obama was pretty famous for. It's was just a line written in the rules so Obama could say in speeches "we are looking out for you, the consumer". Pffftttt. It didn't mean shit, it never meant shit and it doesn't matter, because it's never been implemented anyway. Just now it never will and it doesn't change a thing, when was Dodd-Frank passed? 2010 and the "fiduciary rule" has never been implemented.

In fact the argument can be made and is made that the whole bill is an abortion of legislation and it's a valid argument. Small banks have been crushed by it, it's great for the big banks because it crushes any competition from any newcomers. The "Too Big to Fail" banks are bigger than ever.
The impetus of the bill, the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac debacles, the bill didn't do a thing to fix that mess. Nothing, zero nada and that was the whole reason why the bill had to be legislated in the first place, so the story went.

It's a big fucking mess. I don't know if Trump can do any better, but yelling at Trump about it doesn't make sense because he didn't cause this mess and believe me, Dodd-Frank is a big mess. It doesn't do what it promised, it's massively expensive and it needs a hell of a lot of work to fix.
Notyou2 might be right, when Trump is done the corporations might be 100% in control of the US, but the Dodd-Frank bill ain't gonna stop that.

[Symmetry]

tragic day? this its exaggeration, and nothing big will change. Its propaganda who make all this apocalipse news about Trump .
If some US news write that tomorrow will be end of word panic will erupted in US. In my country after every parlament or president election things stay same- political party who came to power continue with nepotism and coruption and we get used to this. We even dont have any public figure who we can vote, and this now happend to US to. Clinton or Trump --you ask now watch

Well, Trump is now moving to get rid of Dodd-Frank, which is oversight on the banking industry. But we all know they don't need oversight - what could possibly go wrong?

No, he's not getting rid of Dodd-Frank

Well folks, I'm going to have to cut off Patches before another of his trademark rants based on a misinterpretation of another poster's words.

Yes, Trump is indeed moving to get rid of Dodd-Frank.

Trump orders Dodd-Frank review in effort to roll back financial regulation

[nietzsche]

patches, with all due respect this is lame.

you've been celebrating him all this time and when he shows he's just like every other politician (except that worse) you avoid recognizing it and act in denial mode.

btw, wasnt bush who got rid of glass-steagal?

[BoganGod]

patches, with all due respect this is lame.

you've been celebrating him all this time and when he shows he's just like every other politician (except that worse) you avoid recognizing it and act in denial mode.

btw, wasnt bush who got rid of glass-steagal?

Wash out your lying whore mouth son. Make touba(repentence), then dua(pray) for the safety of the Donald. The Donald is not akin to other men or apes. He has a mane all his own, what a lion of a leader, a new King David or Solomon. A god king made flesh. Verily I say unto you my brother, The Donald shall make America into his own image, and it will be uuuge.

[Symmetry]

patches, with all due respect this is lame.

you've been celebrating him all this time and when he shows he's just like every other politician (except that worse) you avoid recognizing it and act in denial mode.

btw, wasnt bush who got rid of glass-steagal?

Wash out your lying whore mouth son. Make touba(repentence), then dua(pray) for the safety of the Donald. The Donald is not akin to other men or apes. He has a mane all his own, what a lion of a leader, a new King David or Solomon. A god king made flesh. Verily I say unto you my brother, The Donald shall make America into his own image, and it will be uuuge.

I'm gonna have to disagree with you on this one BG, Patches' argument was lame.

[thegreekdog]

Woodruff!
Player!

I just skimmed through this thread and I just wanted to remind our non-US friends before they continue to make stupid generalizations about the American populace of the following statistics:


Total people in the US - 300,000,000 (approximate)
Total voters - 136,607,788 (approximate) or 45.5% of the total population
Hillary Clinton - 65,844,954 votes (48.2% of the total voters or 21.9% of the total population)
Donald Trump - 62,979,879 votes (46.1% of the total voters or 20.9% of the total population)

So, foreign friends, when you rail against the stupidity of the US people for electing Donald Trump, please keep in mind that approximately 48% of voters and 22% of the population voted for Hillary Clinton (basically a pro-choice Republican) and 46% of voters and 21% of the population voted for Donald Trump (basically a pro-worker hawk). Such low percentages (22% and 21%) don't even fit the definition of a generalization.

I also ask you for some introspection, foreign friends, in light of these numbers... how stupid you must be to make such a broad generalization about Americans.



http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/21/politics/ ... nal-count/

By that metric one could argue that the rest of the eligible voting population was just as stupid by not voting and thus allowing Trump to win.

Of course, we both know that's not the case, as it would always be a choice between blue and red, but yeah...

-TG

Yeah it's disappointing but not too disappointing since those people would likely have chose Red or Blue.

That being said, I wonder what our foreign friends would be complaining about vis-a-vis President Hillary Clinton? I have some thoughts:

"You fuckers are invading [insert country with a majority of non-white people]? What the f*ck!"
"You fuckers have a cabinet full of [insert term for businesspeople or rich people]? What the f*ck!"
"You fuckers are getting rid of trade agreements? What the f*ck!"

I would say someone should write an alternate history of the Hillary Clinton administration, but seems like it would not be that much different than what we're going to see over the next four years (other than the tweets, anger over tweets, protests by the Blue Team, and insults hurled at foreign dignatories (President Clinton probably more likely to hurl bombs, not insults)).

I respect your choices. This is from my point of view:

When Bush was president, I had the luck of travelling to many countries and you'll be surprised how hated and mocked at the same time the US was. And, being honest, as awful as Bush was (I kind of like him now, he's funny), Trump has gained so much more hate in less than a month.

I never understood the kind of anger that being bullied generates in you... believe me it's something.. and to some people it comes to the point that you don't care but you'll not stand for it.

Yes, you make an excellent point. I mean this sincerely, the reality matters less than the perception. If people around the world believes Trump hates Muslims because he's banned immigrants from five countries, that matters more than the reality. And I do think that is relevant.

[thegreekdog]

That being said, I wonder what our foreign friends would be complaining about vis-a-vis President Hillary Clinton? I have some thoughts:

"You fuckers are invading [insert country with a majority of non-white people]? What the f*ck!"
"You fuckers have a cabinet full of [insert term for businesspeople or rich people]? What the f*ck!"
"You fuckers are getting rid of trade agreements? What the f*ck!"

I would say someone should write an alternate history of the Hillary Clinton administration, but seems like it would not be that much different than what we're going to see over the next four years (other than the tweets, anger over tweets, protests by the Blue Team, and insults hurled at foreign dignatories (President Clinton probably more likely to hurl bombs, not insults)).

I feel reasonably comfortable that Hillary wouldn't, at the very least, nominate an unadulterated and unqualified trainwreck for the Secretary of Education post. That one scares the shit out of me.

Yeah, she's not unqualified Woodruff. Her "unqualification" results from her support of school choice. The Blue Team, which supports public school teacher unions, has determined that school choice and vouchers are bad, even though they benefit poor and black Americans to the extent that they are largely in favor of school choice. To avoid having you post more, yes, I have read all the bad things about her (like the Christian stuff and the stupid things she says), and it's irrelevant. Think about why the Blue Team is posting all the bad stuff about her. Think about what school choice does for poor black kids. I've seen it real time and I know it's ad hominem, but private schools and charter schools help these kids get a good education. Any Democrat worth his or her salt should be in favor of school choice because it helps poor American kids. But they aren't because public school teacher unions give them loads of loot. As you can probably tell, this whole thing disgusts me more than anything that Trump is currently doing. I'm very happy she's on the verge of being confirmed.

[Symmetry]

If people around the world believes Trump hates Muslims because he's banned immigrants from five countries

Dude pull your other fingers out. Five can't be the number you've gotten to unless you're using one hand.

[thegreekdog]

If people around the world believes Trump hates Muslims because he's banned immigrants from five countries

Dude pull your other fingers out. Five can't be the number you've gotten to unless you're using one hand.

Seven? Twelve? How many Muslim countries can there be? I thought most people were against theocracies.

[Symmetry]

If people around the world believes Trump hates Muslims because he's banned immigrants from five countries

Dude pull your other fingers out. Five can't be the number you've gotten to unless you're using one hand.

Seven? Twelve? How many Muslim countries can there be? I thought most people were against theocracies.

Twelve, really? How many fingers do you have on your other hand?

Jeez- yeah seven-

Iraq
Iran
Syria
Yemen
Sudan
Libya
Somalia

[patches70]

patches, with all due respect this is lame.

you've been celebrating him all this time and when he shows he's just like every other politician (except that worse) you avoid recognizing it and act in denial mode.

btw, wasnt bush who got rid of glass-steagal?

Congress repealed Glass-steagall. They replaced it with the financial modernization act which Bill "splotches" Clinton signed into law.

Let me put this perfectly clear for all you non Americans. The President of the United States CAN NOT repeal any legislation that Congress passes. The President can only sign into law a bill or veto the bill. If the President vetoes the bill then Congress can still pass the bill by a 3/4's vote, in which case the bill becomes law, overriding the President's veto.

Once the bill becomes law, that's it, the President has to enforce the law. In enforcing the law the President, the Executive branch, determines the procedures by which the law is implemented.

Some of you might not understand how it works in the US, but it has always been like this. Trump cannot REPEAL Dodd-Frank. Any headline saying that is full of shit and is being deliberately obtuse. Likely because the source has an agenda.
I'll go ahead and find the actual EO, but all it says is that over the next 120 days Mnuchin has to meet with all the agencies that oversee the Dodd-frank regulations that can/should be amended or changed.
That's it.
It's not an order to actually eliminate any regulations.
It's not an order to repeal dodd frank.
It's not an order that targets any specific regulation or agency for amendment or change with the exception of the fiduciary rule which is stupid anyway and has never been implemented.

There is absolutely no reason to freak out about it yet without even hearing about what regulation changes are going to be made. Trump, President or not, can't deregulate to the point where the law isn't being enforced. I'm also fairly certain that the entire bill still hasn't be implemented yet because there are provisions in it that no one can figure out how regulate anyway. The end of the first year after the bill was signed into law only 10% of the bill had been implemented. That's how much of a monstrosity of a law Dodd Frank is. And that was under Obama.

[patches70]

Here is the actual executive order. Go ahead, read it for yourselves. After you've read it, quote any applicable part of the order in which you disagree and state clearly why you disagree with said part. If there is any part in which you believe that POTUS doesn't have the authority to issue said order, highlight it and cite which law, procedure or article in the Constitution that restricts the said part.

I fucking dare any of you to actually read the order and clearly state which parts are wrong and why and support your view with established legal precedents in AMERICAN law.

By the power vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. Policy. It shall be the policy of my Administration to regulate the United States financial system in a manner consistent with the following principles of regulation, which shall be known as the Core Principles:

(a) empower Americans to make independent financial decisions and informed choices in the marketplace, save for retirement, and build individual wealth;

(b) prevent taxpayer-funded bailouts;

(c) foster economic growth and vibrant financial markets through more rigorous regulatory impact analysis that addresses systemic risk and market failures, such as moral hazard and information asymmetry;

(d) enable American companies to be competitive with foreign firms in domestic and foreign markets;

(e) advance American interests in international financial regulatory negotiations and meetings;

(g) restore public accountability within Federal financial regulatory agencies and rationalize the Federal financial regulatory framework.

Sec. 2. Directive to the Secretary of the Treasury. The Secretary of the Treasury shall consult with the heads of the member agencies of the Financial Stability Oversight Council and shall report to the President within 120 days of the date of this order (and periodically thereafter) on the extent to which existing laws, treaties, regulations, guidance, reporting and recordkeeping requirements, and other Government policies promote the Core Principles and what actions have been taken, and are currently being taken, to promote and support the Core Principles. That report, and all subsequent reports, shall identify any laws, treaties, regulations, guidance, reporting and recordkeeping requirements, and other Government policies that inhibit Federal regulation of the United States financial system in a manner consistent with the Core Principles.

Sec. 3. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

DONALD J. TRUMP



https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-of ... ted-states

[patches70]

As is the case with almost all of Trump's executive orders, this one doesn't say much at all. Trump has done almost nothing since getting into office.

You people should really save your indignation until he actually does something important and relevant. If you can't see how he's using the left like a Thai whore then I can say with near certainty that the left is going to end up fucking itself. The credibility the left is losing each and every time it rails against the most insignificant of things only makes the left look that much unhinged and batty.

The time could well come when Trump does something truly wrong, and when that time comes and the left starts their screaming no one is going to listen because the left is always screaming about every little thing.

Ya gotta learn to pick your battles. So far there hasn't been a single battle worth fighting yet but the left is firing off every round like a gun ho Master Chief.

[nietzsche]

I'm aware of that. I mean about the powers of the president and congress.

I listened to a lot of analysis when the wall thing happened, which seems like months ago because everyday is something new.

That however shows Trump's intentions. And more than one thing will stick.

[patches70]

I'm aware of that. I mean about the powers of the president and congress.

I listened to a lot of analysis when the wall thing happened, which seems like months ago because everyday is something new.

That however shows Trump's intentions. And more than one thing will stick.

Are you going to admit you were wrong about Bush repealing Glass-Steagall? I mean, you say you know about the powers of the President and Congress and yet you are/were under the impression that Bush repealed Congressional legislation. How is this possible?


In denial about Trump, pffffttt. Trump is Trump, forget what he says, look at what he does. For example, Trump says "I believe torture works" and people lose their minds. Then he goes ahead and has Mattis as Sec of defense. Mattis is absolutely opposed to torture.

You talk about the Wall and Trump's "intentions". What intentions are you referring? His intention to protect the border?
The wall ain't gonna protect the border, IMO, but it's a symbol I suppose. Trump might wanna build a wall but I have to ask, where is he going to get the money to build it? Until someone shows me exactly where he is going to get appropriation for a wall, I'm not going to lose any sleep over it.
One of the President's jobs, btw, is to protect the border and sovereignty of the United States. That's in the Constitution.

I am fairly certain that you aren't aware of Trump's intentions. I have no idea what Trump's intentions are, I can't be sure until he actually does something. You, however, seem to be sure of your awareness of his intentions because you've created a story in your own mind, your imagination with proper prodding from external forces who have their own agendas, and take this as certainty of Trump's "intentions". At this point it's your imagination or at best your guess.

Enlighten me, what are Trump's intentions exactly?

If he does have some nefarious intentions, don't you think you should be wary of-

which seems like months ago because everyday is something new.

Have you ever heard of "rope a dope"? "Everyday is something new" and all of those "somethings" are actually nothings. If Trump does indeed have nefarious intentions, then you should be telling the shills to shut the f*ck up because their hysterics are only going to make it easier for Trump to carry out supposed nefariousness. Right now, though you may deny it, you may not believe it, but when hard left anarchists go around smashing, burning and screaming violence it makes the regular people hate them even more. You'll need us regular people later on but by that time the left will be so despised, so loathed that no one will listen to them anymore. Then they get trampled, badly and no one will give a shit because the regular people, like me, who they'd need to stand up for them will only think "they brought it upon themselves".

Like this current hysteria over the apparent "repeal of Dodd-Frank" which by God I hope I've shown that at least so far that's not the case. Maybe it is down the line, I don't know, but if you point to that above executive order which is presented for you word for word, and try to say "Look! Trump is exceeding his Presidential authority by trying to repeal Congressional Legislation" then you would be sadly delusional. Just read it for Christ's sake.
The President has regulatory powers. There is nothing abnormal about a review of regulations by an incoming administration.

Hell, you all should read the executive order that Trump put out before this review! Hahah that one is hilarious, I could post that for you and rip it to shreds. Not because I think it's some sort of nefarious plot to take over the world or some cartoon attempt to become a tyrant. I'd rip it apart for it's absurdity, it's absolute impossibility, even though I agree with the principle of it.

If you want a good laugh go ahead and read the EO on "reducing regulation and controlling regulatory costs". But you, nor the leftists infesting this forum have uttered a single word about it. Like they've never heard of it or something, which is baffling. It says it right in the title of the EO "reducing regulation" but it's this financial regulations review that sends everyone off the deep end because Trump is going to repeal Dodd-Frank. Bwahahahah!

Ridonkulous. C'mon, nietz, don't fall for that claptrap. Look at what the rest of these leftists are doing, they link to articles from their favorite propaganda source and decry Trump for his evils where as I post his exact orders, verbatim and ask where are these supposed evils located at in these official orders and all I get back is crickets.

Believe me, when, if, Trump attempts to do something that is outside of his authority to do, I'll be the first one to pitch a fit. I don't necessarily agree with how Trump has conducted himself, but to be honest, I can't remember when I've very much agreed with how virtually any politician conducts themselves. They are are all sociopaths as far as I'm concerned.