• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Latest: Trump’s children involved in Moscow tower talks 37 minutes ago

Of course everyone's appreciation of art is personal. I don't care for the red trees, I think the pencil wreaths are a horror. Patriotic themes are great for the 4th of July not Christmas. I imagine the artist's plan for the red trees varied significantly from the finished product, otherwise no thinking person would have gone out of their way to choose it. As a country we will survive the White House Christmas decorations of 2018, and hope for a better outcome in 2019. I did read though that there was a pretty huge price tag on this years display.

Melania has gotten a free pass on the "mocking" scale vis-a-vie other First Ladies. Someone married to the most powerful man on earth needs to rise above it and not resort to silly jackets. JMO

The negative memes also happened for the 2017 decorations. You can see those memes in the following link.

Melania Trump'''s White House Christmas Decor Become Memes | Time

Time

Title: Melania Trump's Christmas Decorations Gave the Internet the Most Wonderful Memes of the Year

By Ashley Hoffman November 28, 2017

Christmas came early for the internet thanks to the First Lady’s White House decorations.

snippets from article follows..

With the help of 150 volunteers from 29 states, Melania Trump filled her high-profile home with Balsam fir trees dripping with “icicles” and trimmed with glass ornaments emblazoned with the seal of each state and territory, unveiled Monday. For her entrance from the residence into the Grand Lobby, ballet dancers performed to The Nutcracker.

“The President, Barron, and I are very excited for our first Christmas in the White House,” the First Lady said in a statement. “As with many families across the country, holiday traditions are very important to us. I hope when visiting the People’s House this year, visitors will get a sense of being home for the holidays."

Those memes were not about red trees. Those memes were about white trees.

Melania Trump Unveils White House Christmas Decorations | Time

The link ^provides a video of those white trees which you can see at the 0:43 mark on the video. The trees are white, bright and beautiful and nothing like the dark memes and the dark comments in the first link I provided.

If, you do a search on the history of past White House Christmas decorations you will discover that Our previous First Lady's have included Patriotic Themes in their Christmas decorations.

By the way, I have no problem with people using their free speech to use dark memes or add dark words to those memes concerning Our First Lady's decorations.

I do, however reserve my free speech right to defend Our First Lady.

I also, don't have a problem when Our First Lady uses a silly jacket to address mockers.

It appears to me that Melania Trump also does not have a problem with her mockers.. as she states on her silly jacket to the mockers... I don't care that you mock me. With a follow up question to the mockers.. Do You?

My answer to her question is... Clearly the mockers care about just about everything she does or does not do according to their liking and they once again used their free speech to mock her silly jacket.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mock

mock - to treat with contempt or ridicule

https://www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/mocker

Synonyms and Antonyms of mocker

a person who causes repeated emotional pain, distress, or annoyance to another.

imho, Roseann:)
 
Nope. Your memory seems faulty because you aren't even considering the context of when Trump made it an issue; during an election in which no one was talking about it.

That wasn't my memory, that was factual history, realty.

Why didn't Trump and the Republican majority House, and republican majority Senate, pass Immigration reform then?
because he wants to make it a culture-wars issue, and not actually solve anything.

I can't believe you really fell for that B.S. now, when you can clearly look this sort of thing up.
 
The negative memes also happened for the 2017 decorations. You can see those memes in the following link.

Melania Trump'''s White House Christmas Decor Become Memes | Time

Time

Title: Melania Trump's Christmas Decorations Gave the Internet the Most Wonderful Memes of the Year

By Ashley Hoffman November 28, 2017

Christmas came early for the internet thanks to the First Lady’s White House decorations.

snippets from article follows..

With the help of 150 volunteers from 29 states, Melania Trump filled her high-profile home with Balsam fir trees dripping with “icicles” and trimmed with glass ornaments emblazoned with the seal of each state and territory, unveiled Monday. For her entrance from the residence into the Grand Lobby, ballet dancers performed to The Nutcracker.

“The President, Barron, and I are very excited for our first Christmas in the White House,” the First Lady said in a statement. “As with many families across the country, holiday traditions are very important to us. I hope when visiting the People’s House this year, visitors will get a sense of being home for the holidays."

Those memes were not about red trees. Those memes were about white trees.

Melania Trump Unveils White House Christmas Decorations | Time

The link ^provides a video of those white trees which you can see at the 0:43 mark on the video. The trees are white, bright and beautiful and nothing like the dark memes and the dark comments in the first link I provided.

If, you do a search on the history of past White House Christmas decorations you will discover that Our previous First Lady's have included Patriotic Themes in their Christmas decorations.

By the way, I have no problem with people using their free speech to use dark memes or add dark words to those memes concerning Our First Lady's decorations.

I do, however reserve my free speech right to defend Our First Lady.

I also, don't have a problem when Our First Lady uses a silly jacket to address mockers.

It appears to me that Melania Trump also does not have a problem with her mockers.. as she states on her silly jacket to the mockers... I don't care that you mock me. With a follow up question to the mockers.. Do You?

My answer to her question is... Clearly the mockers care about just about everything she does or does not do according to their liking and they once again used their free speech to mock her silly jacket.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mock

mock - to treat with contempt or ridicule

https://www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/mocker

Synonyms and Antonyms of mocker

a person who causes repeated emotional pain, distress, or annoyance to another.

imho, Roseann:)

The jacket actually stated "I don't care" Not I don't care if you mock me. Also, the timing of her donning the jacket was less than ideal. My point was Melania has suffered ridicule of her Christmas decorations, a rather petty matter compared to some actual pain and distress directed at other first ladies. Playing games with the mockers does not reflect well on her.
 
The jacket actually stated "I don't care" Not I don't care if you mock me. Also, the timing of her donning the jacket was less than ideal. My point was Melania has suffered ridicule of her Christmas decorations, a rather petty matter compared to some actual pain and distress directed at other first ladies. Playing games with the mockers does not reflect well on her.

The jacket actually stated.. "I really don't care do u?"

I added the "if you mock me" in addition to "the I don't care" portion> as my opinion/interpretation based on the fact she had been recently mocked prior to her wearing that jacket.

I also offered my opinion/interpretation concerning the last part "do u" as a question directed at her mockers. Followed up by my opinion/interpretation via my answer concerning the mockers.

My opinion is that statement would not make any sense to be actually addressing anyone who had not mocked her.

How do you know she was playing games with the mockers? Perhaps, she was simply letting the mockers know that she "really didn't care" about their mocking.

I have no way of knowing for sure that I am correct in my opinion/interpretation what those words on the back of the jacket meant.

I also, don't know for sure what message she may have been sending or whether or not she was actually trying to send a message. imho, neither do you.

Yes, the tree mocking was petty. If, I remember correctly, there were also petty personal mocks that had nothing to do with tree decorations.

If, I remember correctly there were some not so petty statements made concerning her young son, Baron. That most likely caused some pain and distress for a mother to hear about her only child.

I also, remember some rather nasty remarks directed at First Lady Barbara Bush after she passed away.

I did not/do not expect you to agree with me. I simply, provided my personal opinion, just like you provided your personal opinion.

I'm thinking, this discussion is moving in the direction where... we may eventually need to agree to disagree.

Roseann:)
 
So...Trump's kids...the same kids who worked closely in various Trump business ventures...were involved with this Moscow Tower project. The same project that didn't work.

Big deal.

Oh, the horror hang them from the nearest tree! Why does someone even start a thread as silly as this!
 
The jacket actually stated.. "I really don't care do u?"

I added the "if you mock me" in addition to "the I don't care" portion> as my opinion/interpretation based on the fact she had been recently mocked prior to her wearing that jacket.

I also offered my opinion/interpretation concerning the last part "do u" as a question directed at her mockers. Followed up by my opinion/interpretation via my answer concerning the mockers.

My opinion is that statement would not make any sense to be actually addressing anyone who had not mocked her.

How do you know she was playing games with the mockers? Perhaps, she was simply letting the mockers know that she "really didn't care" about their mocking.

I have no way of knowing for sure that I am correct in my opinion/interpretation what those words on the back of the jacket meant.

I also, don't know for sure what message she may have been sending or whether or not she was actually trying to send a message. imho, neither do you.

Yes, the tree mocking was petty. If, I remember correctly, there were also petty personal mocks that had nothing to do with tree decorations.

If, I remember correctly there were some not so petty statements made concerning her young son, Baron. That most likely caused some pain and distress for a mother to hear about her only child.

I also, remember some rather nasty remarks directed at First Lady Barbara Bush after she passed away.

I did not/do not expect you to agree with me. I simply, provided my personal opinion, just like you provided your personal opinion.

I'm thinking, this discussion is moving in the direction where... we may eventually need to agree to disagree.

Roseann:)

Absolutely. If the only other nasty remarks you recall were directed at Barbara Bush, there does not seem to be any reason to continue a dialogue. ;)
 
Oh, the horror hang them from the nearest tree! Why does someone even start a thread as silly as this!

I know right, instead they should have been like other cons and started a thread on Obama wearing a tan suit, putting his feet on the desk or Michelle Obama's shoes. Wait, cons already did that. Sorry your faux outrage called and wants its comments back from you for wasting space.
 
Absolutely. If the only other nasty remarks you recall were directed at Barbara Bush, there does not seem to be any reason to continue a dialogue. ;)

I agree, no reason to continue the dialogue. Thanks for the interesting dialogue.

Roseann:)
 
I know right, instead they should have been like other cons and started a thread on Obama wearing a tan suit, putting his feet on the desk or Michelle Obama's shoes. Wait, cons already did that. Sorry your faux outrage called and wants its comments back from you for wasting space.

Contradicting a post that made mountains out of molehills is not wasting space! Ivanka & Don Jr. were involved in most Trump business ventures
like the one in Moscow I recall there was an effort in Argentina that also never materialized. The Trump organization was involved in over 30 countries
business wise, it's an international company. Don Jr. & Ivanka graduated from Wharton Business School at U. Penn & thus well educated without incident
unlike liberal giants like Joe Biden & Ted Kennedy who were suspended from less prominent schools. and let us not forget Obama's transcripts from Occidental, supposed the most transparent president of all whose college transcripts are not available. Ivanka & Jr. became Trump's key Lieutenants tasked with the biggest projects and properly so.


This is about as silly an attempt to dislodge Trump that those with TDS ever indulged in, IMO probably
funnier than the 'Two scoops of Ice Cream' fiasco they harped on. The certainty that the Ice Cream was Vanilla
indicated Trump's racist tendencies didn't create the earthquake that was hoped for & neither will this.
 
Last edited:
You're sadly mistaken, Comey said there were over 100 emails that were classified at the time they were sent received. As a matter of fact Comey said there was a 7 email chain that was classified Top Secret SAP.

The truly sad part is, Comey's statement has been in the public record for over 2 years and people continue to lie or post/speak out of ignorance.

Link, please.
 
Link, please.

*From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the State Department, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time. .................. For example, seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level when they were sent and received.*

https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/p...-clinton2019s-use-of-a-personal-e-mail-system

This was in Comey's statement, which has been public knowledge for over 2 years.
 
*From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the State Department, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time. .................. For example, seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level when they were sent and received.*

https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/p...-clinton2019s-use-of-a-personal-e-mail-system

This was in Comey's statement, which has been public knowledge for over 2 years.


Well, I'm not going to nitpick on whether the emails were actually marked classified when she received them because it doesn't actually say that.
Yes, and you do have an argument that even if they were not, she should have known.

The bottom line is this: The FBI agrees and Concludes that there are not any acts committed by Hillary that warrant prosecution. Moreover, there is no evidence anyone was hurt by her carelessness, which doesn't excuse her, but it will, in the final analysis, the bar that has to be surpassed if anyone is going to prosecute her.

Not only does the FBI so state, on Fox news, your favorite judge Neopolitano agrees with this point, which he made today on Sirius XM Radio.

Because of this, arguing about Hillary is a complete waste of time, she is history and she is not, despite efforts by republicans ( and some dems ) over the last 25 years to nail her, she is not, nor is she ever, going to jail, you must let this go.


I'd still take her compared to the current ****tangle that parades as the president.
 
Well, I'm not going to nitpick on whether the emails were actually marked classified when she received them because it doesn't actually say that.
Yes, and you do have an argument that even if they were not, she should have known.

The bottom line is this: The FBI agrees and Concludes that there are not any acts committed by Hillary that warrant prosecution. Moreover, there is no evidence anyone was hurt by her carelessness, which doesn't excuse her, but it will, in the final analysis, the bar that has to be surpassed if anyone is going to prosecute her.

Not only does the FBI so state, on Fox news, your favorite judge Neopolitano agrees with this point, which he made today on Sirius XM Radio.

Because of this, arguing about Hillary is a complete waste of time, she is history and she is not, despite efforts by republicans ( and some dems ) over the last 25 years to nail her, she is not, nor is she ever, going to jail, you must let this go.


I'd still take her compared to the current ****tangle that parades as the president.

1) Yes, HRC was an incompetent SOS.

2) Comey said she didn't "intend" to break the law, Comey knows that's BS and no excuse. Comey covered for Lynch. HRC very much intended to skirt the law by the very fact she set up a person private email system to conduct State Dept business on.

3) I cut the cable/sat cord years ago, your Fox partisan BS is dismissed.

4) Don't bring her up.

5) Her incompetence and knowing she illegally handled classified information is one on the two main reasons I voted against her.
 
1) Yes, HRC was an incompetent SOS.

2) Comey said she didn't "intend" to break the law, Comey knows that's BS and no excuse. Comey covered for Lynch. HRC very much intended to skirt the law by the very fact she set up a person private email system to conduct State Dept business on.

3) I cut the cable/sat cord years ago, your Fox partisan BS is dismissed.

4) Don't bring her up.

5) Her incompetence and knowing she illegally handled classified information is one on the two main reasons I voted against her.

You don't know what Comey knows, and putting words into anyone's mouth is not a merit worthy argument.

Comey didn't "cover" for anyone. He is as non-partisan as they come, which is expected of a leader for the FBI. Same goes for Mueller. No one is perfect, of course, but to accuse these individuals as "partisan", is ridiculous.

A vote against her was a vote for Trump, and look where we are now:

https://youtu.be/KHCQcwnpQO8

Of course, all of this will go in one of your ears and out the other.


Hillary & Bill are very accomplished souls, despite their flaws ( compared to Trump they are saints), the Clinton foundation employees 2000 people world wide, and does a lot of good.

Compare that to Trump's paper mill which is under criminal investigation for all sorts of dubious acts most of which have one underlying theme:

Trump's greed. The Trump white house is a ****tangle of illegality

After 25 years of investigations into the clintons, what have they found that they can pin on them?

Zero.


Keep dreamin'


Nobody is "competent" on all aspects of life. Just because she is tech challenged doesn't prove she is incompetent on other aspects of her job. She should have foreseen the consequences of using a private server, and I'll accept she is not tech savvy, so I blame her political advisors on that count. We get it, you don't like Hillary. But, 67 million people voted for her, which was almost 3 million more than who voted for Trump.


Anyway, she is history, so arguing about Hillary is a waste of time.
 
You don't know what Comey knows, and putting words into anyone's mouth is not a merit worthy argument.

Comey didn't "cover" for anyone. He is as non-partisan as they come, which is expected of a leader for the FBI. Same goes for Mueller. No one is perfect, of course, but to accuse these individuals as "partisan", is ridiculous.

A vote against her was a vote for Trump, and look where we are now:

https://youtu.be/KHCQcwnpQO8

Of course, all of this will go in one of your ears and out the other.


Hillary & Bill are very accomplished souls, despite their flaws ( compared to Trump they are saints), the Clinton foundation employees 2000 people world wide, and does a lot of good.

Compare that to Trump's paper mill which is under criminal investigation for all sorts of dubious acts most of which have one underlying theme:

Trump's greed. The Trump white house is a ****tangle of illegality

After 25 years of investigations into the clintons, what have they found that they can pin on them?

Zero.


Keep dreamin'


Nobody is "competent" on all aspects of life. Just because she is tech challenged doesn't prove she is incompetent on other aspects of her job. She should have foreseen the consequences of using a private server, and I'll accept she is not tech savvy, so I blame her political advisors on that count. We get it, you don't like Hillary. But, 67 million people voted for her, which was almost 3 million more than who voted for Trump.


Anyway, she is history, so arguing about Hillary is a waste of time.

1) Seriously ?? Are you actually implying Comey doesn't know ignorance of the law is no excuse ?? especially an SOS and former Sentor that's been briefed on handling classified materials several times. :lamo

2) Sure he did. His job was investigate not proscute, that was Lynch's decision, she shirked her duty and Comey covered.

3) duh

4) The rest of your post is irrelevant.
 
I think what people are missing here is the very possible quid pro-quo angle that could very well be a major motive as to why the Trump campaign/Trump Org. continued to work towards a Trump Tower Moscow deal so late into the campaign. Think of it this way:

Initially long before running for president, Trump gets what he wanted from Moscow - a big commercial loan that makes up "a large cross-section of the company's finances". But he soon runs into problems; he can't make those interest payments on the loan. So, he strikes a couple of deals with his benefactors: 1) he sells off some of his high-end properties; 2) he provides a few of his units in Trump Tower rent-free.

On the surface, none of this looks suspicious until Trump runs for office. Then you start seeing one trend that constantly emerges: Russian connections.

* In social media
* In political platforms
* In opposition research
* In foreign policy
* In business dealings

Everywhere you look where Trump is concerned there tends to be a Russian connection of one form or another. So, the question one starts asking himself quite naturally is "how deep does the connections go?"

Right now, things appear to be rather innocent - or at least that's the image Trump is attempting to portray. For him, it's easy to blow the suspicions and allegations off as either him being a businessman doing business as usual or everything is a which hunt, it's all fake or political operatives are out to get him. But keep in mind how Trump's excuses have changed ever since the Mueller investigation began:

- I have no business dealings in Russia.
- I have no business interest in Russia.
- No one in my campaign/Administration has ever met with Russians.
- I don't know Putin...never met the guy...maybe we'll become friends.

Then there's his legal team led by Rudy Giuliani always attempting to get ahead of any legal defense involving Trump and Russia. While I can't say I blame him as that's his job, it's how he keeps going into the gutter or using a play on words to convince people there's no "there" there.

* Collusion is not a crime.
* Truth isn't truth! (Love that one...even better than "alternative facts!".)
* Perjury trap (except there isn't one if you answer the questions honestly).
* Deep state operatives

I'm still trying to take it all in with a grain of salt and wait for the Mueller investigative report to come out before passing judgement, but I honestly admit it's becoming harder each passing day to try and remain objective. Do I think there'll be a definitive "smoking gun" in his reporting? No. However, I do believe there will be enough "red flags" to cast a reasonable degree of doubt and suspicion upon him. What Congress does with that is up to them...and ultimately the voters come 2020.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom