Did Trump Libel Obama (over the wiretapping tweets)?

[Geoist]

I'm not a dogmatic libertarian.

Neither am I... but it makes absolutely no sense for a libertarian to support someone who takes advantage of eminent domain, says the internet should be shut down, supports torture/death penalty, advocates for war crimes, promotes stealing the natural resources of other countries, fawns over dictators, etc. There is nothing libertarian about that guy.

 

[Geoist]

Do you see me defending everything Trump does?
Nope.
I'm very selective in what I defend.

I have never once seen you criticize him. Not to just pick on you. There are a lot of so-called 'libertarians' on DP who love Trump.

 

[grip]

Neither am I... but it makes absolutely no sense for a libertarian to support someone who takes advantage of eminent domain, says the internet should be shut down, supports torture/death penalty, advocates for war crimes, promotes stealing the natural resources of other countries, fawns over dictators, etc. There is nothing libertarian about that guy.

To defend Harry a little, I don't remember seeing him supporting those ideas?

 

[lurchadams]

I have tried & tried to impress upon people that Trump is not fit to be President, and typically people reply with the usual BS

What Trump did this past Saturday with the Tweets accusing Obama of wire tapping is over the top

Not only was Trump's Twitter attack on Obama a despicable act, Trump basically committed a partial political suicide via such asinine acusations

This in itself demonstrates for EVERYONE to see that Trump is unstable to the point of seriously injuring himself politically; what a dumb***

Trump's actions via his Tweets have proven my point concerning the FACT that Trump is not fit to serve as President

Trump is a known serial liar, he suffers from multiple mental issues, he is unstable (duh), he is pretty much everything one would not desire in a POTUS

Maybe this will FINALLY wake the Trumpetteers from their sleep & their blind support for such a tyrant but probably not

NO DOUBT we will see more self immolation by Trump; he will just keep burning his own ***

The REALY SAD PART = as long as Trump remains POTUS America will continue down the long flush into the proverbial toilet

The carnage that Trump spoke of in his campaign is nothing compared to the utter destruction Trump will leave in his wake as POTUS

and no, I am not kidding ................ enjoy the ride folks .............

I think many of his supporters know Trump's Saturday morning tweet storm was sick B.S. They have no shame. There hatred for the left is so intense that they're just loving our responding to it like you just did.

We can't ignore it though. Our president is a childish buffoon and his supporters will follow him down the toilet like lemmings.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

Neither am I... but it makes absolutely no sense for a libertarian to support someone who takes advantage of eminent domain, says the internet should be shut down, supports torture/death penalty, advocates for war crimes, promotes stealing the natural resources of other countries, fawns over dictators, etc. There is nothing libertarian about that guy.

Well, to a degree some of his enemies are mine.
The people pushing the "Russia hacked the elections" thing, I think it's a lie.
I'm not in favor of increasing hostilities with that country, to boot.

The current set of FTAs, I don't agree with those.
He seems to be the only one who (at least nominally) disagrees with them as well.

Many of the things you listed are bad, but his opposition believes they're acceptable as well.
I'm pragmatic to a degree and go with someone who at least nominally supports a few things I believe.
I won't/didn't vote for him though.

 

[Geoist]

To defend Harry a little, I don't remember seeing him supporting those ideas?

He supports a president who advocates those things. It's like a hippie supporting Reagan. It makes no sense, policy-wise. The only reason he has made apparent for supporting him is to troll the left and msm.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

I have never once seen you criticize him. Not to just pick on you. There are a lot of so-called 'libertarians' on DP who love Trump.

I see no point.
There are a litany of people already doing so.
Rather, I expend my effort, where I believe there are short comings for his defense.
Most notably the Russian conspiracy and news bias.

 

[grip]

He supports a president who advocates those things. It's like a hippie supporting Reagan. It makes no sense, policy-wise. The only reason he has made apparent for supporting him is to troll the left and msm.

That's nuts. Harry a hippie? More like an ex super conservative turned moderate. He's using reason and rationale, instead of stupid emotional bias. There is no less troll than someone who practices practical pragmatism.

 

[haymarket]

I have never once seen you criticize him. Not to just pick on you. There are a lot of so-called 'libertarians' on DP who love Trump.

To be fair - I think you are talking about right libertarians.... people who are on the far right and who are so possessed with an all consuming hatred for anything progressive that they see Trump as somebody attacking their enemies so they embrace him for that.

And there are far too many of those here. And they really are no different than hardcore Trump supporters since they end up on the same wrong side of the dividing line.

 

[Geoist]

Well, to a degree some of his enemies are mine.
The people pushing the "Russia hacked the elections" thing, I think it's a lie.

Soooo... pretty much the entire intelligence community? They say the hacks came from Russia. Do you have evidence they are wrong?

I'm not in favor of increasing hostilities with that country, to boot.

Neither am I.

Instead, Trump would rather increase hostilities with almost every other country.

The current set of FTAs, I don't agree with those.
He seems to be the only one who (at least nominally) disagrees with them as well.

Bernie Sanders was the most outspoken against the FTAs. I do agree, Clinton was horrible on the issue and it was one of many reasons I could not vote for her. But while he was right to be against them, Trump was against the FTAs from a protectionist perspective, not a libertarian one.

Many of the things you listed are bad, but his opposition believes they're acceptable as well.

While Clinton and other opposition were guilty of war crimes, they do not usually actively and publicly promote torture, shutting down the internet, or stealing another nation's resources. Trump is setting a dangerous precedent with his upfront embrace of authoritarianism/imperialism.

 

[Geoist]

To be fair - I think you are talking about right libertarians.... people who are on the far right and who are so possessed with an all consuming hatred for anything progressive that they see Trump as somebody attacking their enemies so they embrace him for that.

You are correct, it tends to be right libertarians who embrace Trump, although I don't want to throw them all under the bus on this topic. There are also some on the right who reject him (you can see some of their articles on Reason and other libertarian sites). Obviously, left libertarians almost unanimously reject him.

And there are far too many of those here. And they really are no different than hardcore Trump supporters since they end up on the same wrong side of the dividing line.

Hatred can be a powerful motivator, so much so it can blind some to their own hypocrisy.

 

[Henrin]

Soooo... pretty much the entire intelligence community? They say the hacks came from Russia. Do you have evidence they are wrong?

What evidence have they presented? Anything at all? They released a report a while back, but it was just more accusations. What is taking them so long to pull the trigger if they know the hacks came from Russia? Is it perhaps that they didn't happen at all?

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

Soooo... pretty much the entire intelligence community? They say the hacks came from Russia. Do you have evidence they are wrong?

If there is one group, anyone who claims "left" should be highly skeptical of, it's the IC.
They have in the near past lied to us, they have no obligation to tell the truth.
In addition, they've done things that have been straight up illegal or things of questionable legality.
An example, See Frank Church hearings, Snowden leaks, among other things.

Neither am I.

Instead, Trump would rather increase hostilities with almost every other country.

I've yet to see credible evidence for this.

Bernie Sanders was the most outspoken against the FTAs. I do agree, Clinton was horrible on the issue and it was one of many reasons I could not vote for her. But while he was right to be against them, Trump was against the FTAs from a protectionist perspective, not a libertarian one.

His reasoning for being against them, is immaterial to me.
Our interests aligned, regardless of his intent.

I do agree with free trade, but these FTAs are not free trade, my biggest beef with them is the further solidification of current IP law.
Which I believe is both unconstitutional and economically/intellectually harmful, as we're slowly marching towards an "idea economy."

His opposition, while many including Hillary, were guilty of war crimes, they do not actively and publicly promote torture, shutting down the internet, or stealing another nation's resources. Trump is setting a dangerous precedent with his upfront embrace of authoritarianism/imperialism.

Meh, we're well past the embrace of authoritarianism and imperialism.
Most folks fail to realize we're already an empire, with possibly half the world as client states (half is not accurate, just a rough guess).

 

[Henrin]

To be fair - I think you are talking about right libertarians.... people who are on the far right and who are so possessed with an all consuming hatred for anything progressive that they see Trump as somebody attacking their enemies so they embrace him for that.

And there are far too many of those here. And they really are no different than hardcore Trump supporters since they end up on the same wrong side of the dividing line.

If I had to pick between Trump and a progressive I would pick Trump every single time. Oh and yes, progressives are my enemy and I have very good reasons to consider them as such.

 

[Geoist]

What evidence have they presented? Anything at all? They released a report a while back, but it was just more accusations. What is taking them so long to pull the trigger if they know the hacks came from Russia? Is it perhaps that they didn't happen at all?

https://www.crowdstrike.com/blog/bears-midst-intrusion-democratic-national-committee/

 

[Geoist]

If there is one group, anyone who claims "left" should be highly skeptical of, it's the IC.
They have in the near past lied to us, they have no obligation to tell the truth.
In addition, they've done things that have been straight up illegal or things of questionable legality.
An example, See Frank Church hearings, Snowden leaks, among other things.

Private intelligence companies have confirmed Russian ties.
https://www.crowdstrike.com/blog/bears-midst-intrusion-democratic-national-committee/

I've yet to see credible evidence for this.

Who is he getting along with besides countries with whom he has strong personal economic ties (e.g. Russia, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates)?

I do agree with free trade, but these FTAs are not free trade, my biggest beef with them is the further solidification of current IP law.
Which I believe is both unconstitutional and economically/intellectually harmful, as we're slowly marching towards an "idea economy."

You cannot honestly think he has any interest of reforming IP laws in any way close to libertarian...

Meh, we're well past the embrace of authoritarianism and imperialism.
Most folks fail to realize we're already an empire, with possibly half the world as client states (half is not accurate, just a rough guess).

Our authoritarianism/imperialism has room to go a lot further, but the fact you can shrug it off speaks volumes.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

Private intelligence companies have confirmed Russian ties.
https://www.crowdstrike.com/blog/bears-midst-intrusion-democratic-national-committee/

I'm very well versed on the Crowdstrike information.
I'll ask you this and thus far, no one has been able to give me a good answer.

Why was the DNC allowed to decline the FBI doing forensics on the DNC's server?
If this is supposed to be an issue of national security, why was it even allowed?
We usually don't let potentially biased third parties conduct the investigations of crimes, why was it allowed now?

There are other things that undermine the credibility of this report, but this is the most glaring.

Who is he getting along with besides countries with whom he has strong personal economic ties (e.g. Russia, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates)?

The primary military threats to the US are China and Russia.
Thus far, I've yet to see any serious saber rattling towards either.

You cannot honestly think he has any interest of reforming IP laws in any way close to libertarian...

Neither can I, it doesn't matter though.
IP law extended via those FTA would entrench it even more.
Given that no candidate had any, this is just a situation where our interests align.
FTAs were extending something I don't think should be extended.

Our authoritarianism/imperialism has room to go a lot further, but the fact you can shrug it off speaks volumes.

I'm pragmatic.
I know it exists and I know very little will be done to stop it, regardless of who is in office.
Trump has a partially hostile congress to deal with, better than a partially agreeable congress.

 

[grip]

I'm very well versed on the Crowdstrike information.
I'll ask you this and thus far, no one has been able to give me a good answer.

Why was the DNC allowed to decline the FBI doing forensics on the DNC's server?
If this is supposed to be an issue of national security, why was it even allowed?
We usually don't let potentially biased third parties conduct the investigations of crimes, why was it allowed now?

There are other things that undermine the credibility of this report, but this is the most glaring.



The primary military threats to the US are China and Russia.
Thus far, I've yet to see any serious saber rattling towards either.




Neither can I, it doesn't matter though.
IP law extended via those FTA would entrench it even more.
Given that no candidate had any, this is just a situation where our interests align.
FTAs were extending something I don't think should be extended.



I'm pragmatic.
I know it exists and I know very little will be done to stop it, regardless of who is in office.
Trump has a partially hostile congress to deal with, better than a partially agreeable congress.

Mark my words, Trump will implode by month sixth to eighth due to his lack of what a POTUS authority realistically extends. He will try to run over Congress and make unilateral decisions that are not within his normal historical purview. He will probably even invoke Martial Law when the Left goes bonkers in the streets with demonstrations. The 'End of Days' are near if he's as unbalanced as I think on top of the global instability already in place. The DPRK and Iran are already postulated to go nuclear and start WWIII, not including what he'll provoke with China and Russia. Our Father which art in heaven will be sooner than later.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

Mark my words, Trump will implode by month sixth to eighth due to his lack of what a POTUS authority realistically extends. He will try to run over Congress and make unilateral decisions that are not within his normal historical purview. He will probably even invoke Martial Law when the Left goes bonkers in the streets with demonstrations. The 'End of Days' are near if he's as unbalanced as I think on top of the global instability already in place. The DPRK and Iran are already postulated to go nuclear and start WWIII, not including what he'll provoke with China and Russia. Our Father which art in heaven will be sooner than later.

I don't see that happening.
It's in no one's interest to use nuclear weapons, it's just in their interest to have them.
China is only a nominal supporter of NK, if they go too far, China would help put a boot on the neck.

 

[Media_Truth]

Yes, Trump quoted from a Bigotbart news story, and as usual, there is no truth to it.

 

[grip]

I don't see that happening.
It's in no one's interest to use nuclear weapons, it's just in their interest to have them.
China is only a nominal supporter of NK, if they go too far, China would help put a boot on the neck.

China supported his brother as alternative and caused Kim Un to freak out and assassinate him, making him more dangerous. China is quickly loosing influence over Lil Kim and he's becoming more unstable. Tell me Trump wouldn't nuke NK if he bombed SK and Japan? That would draw China in and cause who knows what.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

China supported his brother as alternative and caused Kim Un to freak out and assassinate him, making him more dangerous. China is quickly loosing influence over Lil Kim and he's becoming more unstable. Tell me Trump wouldn't nuke NK if he bombed SK and Japan? That would draw China in and cause who knows what.

Kim knows if he does anything that stupid, he'll be dead in short order and NK will cease to exist.
China wouldn't stand for that either.

 

[grip]

Kim knows if he does anything that stupid, he'll be dead in short order and NK will cease to exist.
China wouldn't stand for that either.

Of course he knows that's a death sentence but he feels that's coming anyway with China supporting other leadership and the US installing THAAD in SK. The more we keep pressuring him the more unstable he's becoming.

 

[Harry Guerrilla]

Of course he knows that's a death sentence but he feels that's coming anyway with China supporting other leadership and the US installing THAAD in SK. The more we keep pressuring him the more unstable he's becoming.

I just don't see it.
Maybe I'm blind, I think it highly unlikely that he's going to devolve into a crazy authoritarian war hawk.

 

[grip]

I just don't see it.
Maybe I'm blind, I think it highly unlikely that he's going to devolve into a crazy authoritarian war hawk.

He probably won't IF we lay off and let him run his country. I doubt he wants to die but if he sees it as preeminent, I promise he'll take as many as possible with him. Everything in this world is contingent upon others actions and the US is becoming awful pro-deterrent, which can lead to definite retaliatory actions.