MESO-Rx
Anabolic Steroids
Trump Timeline ... Trumpocalypse
- Thread starter CdnGuy
- Start date
WASHINGTON — At first, he vowed to “take the mantle” for closing part of the federal government. Then he blamed Democrats, saying they “now own the shutdown.” By Friday, President Trump was back to owning it again. “I’m very proud of doing what I’m doing,” he declared.
Two weeks into the showdown over a border wall, Mr. Trump is now crafting his own narrative of the confrontation that has come to consume his presidency. Rather than a failure of negotiation, the shutdown has become a test of political virility, one in which he insists he is receiving surreptitious support from unlikely quarters.
Not only are national security hawks cheering him on to defend a porous southern border, but so too are former presidents who he says have secretly confessed to him that they should have done what he is doing. Not only do federal employees accept being furloughed or forced to work without wages, they have assured him that they would give up paychecks so that he can stand strong.
Never mind how implausible such assertions might seem. The details do not matter to Mr. Trump as much as dominating the debate. After an oddly quiescent holiday season in which he complained via Twitter about being left at home alone — “poor me” — he has taken the public stage this week clearly intent on framing the conflict on his own terms.
People close to the president described him as emboldened since members of Congress returned to Washington after the break, giving him not only a clear target to swing at but helping him focus on a fight that he is convinced is a political winner. One aide said Mr. Trump believes he has gained the upper hand in the public battle.
Last edited:
I keep seeing representatives of the right (and sometimes of the far left) defending Trump and I wonder, have they no decency? How many incidents of racism, misogyny, lying, corruption, service to foreign enemies, or incompetence does it take for them to stand down?
Yet they do not. They defend the wall although it is not needed, the crisis is fabricated, it is founded in racism and vanity, it is linked to concentration camps and children in cages and unnecessary deaths on the southern border. They defend Trump's claims of no collusion...
...even though evidence of collusion includes the president himself asking for the assistance of the Russians, embracing Russian law-breaking to support his own campaign, defenses of the Russians, giving national secrets to the Russians, obsequious service to Vladimir Putin,...
and obstruction of justice on behalf of the Russians. They defend him in the face of his embrace of white supremacists and of his serial abuse of women. They defend him the face of his campaign finance crimes and his proven efforts to defraud the American voter.
They defend him as seeks to profit illegally from the presidency. They defend him as his foundation is shutdown for abuses. They defend him as he defends murderers and despots overseas and alienates our most important allies. They defend him as he lies 10 times a day.
They defend him as his cabinet and appointees are revealed to be profoundly corrupt. They defend him as he despoils the environment. They defend him as he dismantles the international order that has been the foundation of American security for three-quarters of a century.
They defend him although his tax cuts helped only the rich, hurt the majority and did not help the U.S. economy. They defend him as he daily proves his unfitness for office. They defend him as he promotes unheard of nepotism in the U.S. government.
They defend him as he attacks the Department of Justice, the FBI, the Intelligence Community, distinguished generals, heroes, families who have lost their children to sacrifice for the nation.They defend him as he daily reveals himself to be the most corrupt president in history.
They defend him as he daily reveals himself to be the worst of us. And we must wonder, at what point should such defenses require questioning by those who give a platform to these talking heads and enabling columnists and toadying pols.
At what point do producers and editors have to ask, "Has this person lost any shred of credibility they may once have had? Can anyone who defends the indefensible for so long be seen as anything but complicit in the crimes they are defending."
There is no journalistic principle that requires that liars be defended because the truth is the only victim, no ethical guideline that says that racists or criminals have advocates because that only compounds the wrongs that already have taken place.
You know their names. You see them daily. You hear their lame defenses of this most indefensible American and the gang of thugs around him and his sponsors among our enemies and corrupted leaders overseas.
And you must recognize that only when audiences turn away from them, only when audiences protest their appearances, only when audiences demand advertisers no longer support them, only when audiences demand the truth and a modicum of decency, will they be silence.
They do not "deserve" our attention. They are not practicing politics as usual. Their views have been so deeply discredited they no longer have credibility or merit. There is no form of fairness that requires they be allowed to speak.
Indeed, quite the contrary, they have abused the privilege of having our attention. As the dark truths about this dangerous president and those who enable him are further revealed and justice is done, part of that justice will be consigning...
...these unprincipled tools of Trump and Putin and their ilk to the ignominy and obscurity they have earned. They have helped bring us to where we are. If we are to return to the kind of country we can be (and once were) their role must be understood and they must be cast aside.
There would have been no Trump Administration without them. These crimes are theirs. These wrongs, this corruption of our society, are theirs as well as Trump's. Mark them as you would mark him. They are not voices in our public discourse. They are its enemies.
Thread by @djrothkopf: "I keep seeing representatives of the right (and sometimes of the far left) defending Trump and I wonder, have they no decency? How many inci […]"
Yet they do not. They defend the wall although it is not needed, the crisis is fabricated, it is founded in racism and vanity, it is linked to concentration camps and children in cages and unnecessary deaths on the southern border. They defend Trump's claims of no collusion...
...even though evidence of collusion includes the president himself asking for the assistance of the Russians, embracing Russian law-breaking to support his own campaign, defenses of the Russians, giving national secrets to the Russians, obsequious service to Vladimir Putin,...
and obstruction of justice on behalf of the Russians. They defend him in the face of his embrace of white supremacists and of his serial abuse of women. They defend him the face of his campaign finance crimes and his proven efforts to defraud the American voter.
They defend him as seeks to profit illegally from the presidency. They defend him as his foundation is shutdown for abuses. They defend him as he defends murderers and despots overseas and alienates our most important allies. They defend him as he lies 10 times a day.
They defend him as his cabinet and appointees are revealed to be profoundly corrupt. They defend him as he despoils the environment. They defend him as he dismantles the international order that has been the foundation of American security for three-quarters of a century.
They defend him although his tax cuts helped only the rich, hurt the majority and did not help the U.S. economy. They defend him as he daily proves his unfitness for office. They defend him as he promotes unheard of nepotism in the U.S. government.
They defend him as he attacks the Department of Justice, the FBI, the Intelligence Community, distinguished generals, heroes, families who have lost their children to sacrifice for the nation.They defend him as he daily reveals himself to be the most corrupt president in history.
They defend him as he daily reveals himself to be the worst of us. And we must wonder, at what point should such defenses require questioning by those who give a platform to these talking heads and enabling columnists and toadying pols.
At what point do producers and editors have to ask, "Has this person lost any shred of credibility they may once have had? Can anyone who defends the indefensible for so long be seen as anything but complicit in the crimes they are defending."
There is no journalistic principle that requires that liars be defended because the truth is the only victim, no ethical guideline that says that racists or criminals have advocates because that only compounds the wrongs that already have taken place.
You know their names. You see them daily. You hear their lame defenses of this most indefensible American and the gang of thugs around him and his sponsors among our enemies and corrupted leaders overseas.
And you must recognize that only when audiences turn away from them, only when audiences protest their appearances, only when audiences demand advertisers no longer support them, only when audiences demand the truth and a modicum of decency, will they be silence.
They do not "deserve" our attention. They are not practicing politics as usual. Their views have been so deeply discredited they no longer have credibility or merit. There is no form of fairness that requires they be allowed to speak.
Indeed, quite the contrary, they have abused the privilege of having our attention. As the dark truths about this dangerous president and those who enable him are further revealed and justice is done, part of that justice will be consigning...
...these unprincipled tools of Trump and Putin and their ilk to the ignominy and obscurity they have earned. They have helped bring us to where we are. If we are to return to the kind of country we can be (and once were) their role must be understood and they must be cast aside.
There would have been no Trump Administration without them. These crimes are theirs. These wrongs, this corruption of our society, are theirs as well as Trump's. Mark them as you would mark him. They are not voices in our public discourse. They are its enemies.
Thread by @djrothkopf: "I keep seeing representatives of the right (and sometimes of the far left) defending Trump and I wonder, have they no decency? How many inci […]"
At his White House cabinet meeting this week, Donald Trump went into quite a bit of detail while https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-cabinet-meeting-12/ with the head of a “very rich” foreign country. As the American president described his discussion, the foreign leader – a “very great gentleman” – has been charging the United States when we fly planes over his country, even though the United States is preventing that country from being “overrun” by terrorists.
According to https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-cabinet-meeting-12/, Trump has convinced his unnamed foreign counterpart to stop doing this, which will mean a savings of “millions and millions of dollars” to American taxpayers.
It all sounded quite nice, although the conversation almost certainly didn’t happen in reality. The Washington Post tried to find a country that met Trump’s description. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/01/04/fact-checking-trumps-free-wheeling-cabinet-session/ (No such country exists).
Today, the Republican told reporters about conversations he’s had with his American predecessors. ...
The presidential oath of office contains 35 words and one core promise: to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” Since virtually the moment Donald J. Trump took that oath two years ago, he has been violating it.
He has repeatedly put his own interests above those of the country. He has used the presidency to promote his businesses. He has accepted financial gifts from foreign countries. He has lied to the American people about his relationship with a hostile foreign government. He has tolerated cabinet officials who use their position to enrich themselves.
To shield himself from accountability for all of this — and for his unscrupulous presidential campaign — he has set out to undermine the American system of https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2017/06/02/trumps-war-against-the-checks-on-his-power-keeps-expanding/?utm_term=.af27320503d7 (checks and balances). He has called for the prosecution of his political enemies and the protection of his allies. He has attempted to obstruct justice. He has tried to shake the public’s confidence in one democratic institution after another, including the press, federal law enforcement and the federal judiciary.
The unrelenting chaos that Trump creates can sometimes obscure the big picture. But the big picture is simple: The United States has never had a president as demonstrably unfit for the office as Trump. And it’s becoming clear that 2019 is likely to be dominated by a single question: What are we going to do about it?
The easy answer is to wait — to allow the various investigations of Trump to run their course and ask voters to deliver a verdict in 2020. That answer has one great advantage. It would avoid the national trauma of overturning an election result. Ultimately, however, waiting is too dangerous. The cost of removing a president from office is smaller than the cost of allowing this president to remain.
He has already shown, repeatedly, that he will hurt the country in order to help himself. He will damage American interests around the world and damage vital parts of our constitutional system at home. The risks that he will cause much more harm are growing.
The biggest risk may be that an external emergency — a war, a terrorist attack, a financial crisis, an immense natural disaster — will arise. By then, it will be too late to pretend that he is anything other than manifestly unfit to lead.
For the country’s sake, there is only one acceptable outcome, just as there was after Americans realized in 1974 that a criminal was occupying the Oval Office. The president must go.
President Trump this week revealed yet another subject matter in which he claims to have expertise: drones and drone technology.
"I know more about drones than anybody. I know about every form of safety that you can have."
The big picture: President Trump says he's an expert on a lot of things, including ISIS, taxes, technology, nuclear arms and even Sen. Cory Booker.
- Campaign finance: "I think nobody knows more about campaign finance than I do, because I'm the biggest contributor." (1999.)
- TV ratings: "I know more about people who get ratings than anyone." (October 2012.)
- ISIS: "I know more about ISIS than the generals do." (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/11/13/donald-trump-begs-iowans-not-to-believe-ben-carson-dont-be-fools-okay/?postshare=2221447428349529&utm_term=.323350663576 (November 2015.))
- Social media: "I understand social media. I understand the power of Twitter. I understand the power of Facebook maybe better than almost anybody, based on my results, right?" (November 2015.)
- Courts: "I know more about courts than any human being on Earth." (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/01/02/foremost-experts-various-topics-according-trump-most-whom-are-trump/?utm_term=.e6ee20d65376 (November 2015.))
- Lawsuits: "[W]ho knows more about lawsuits than I do? I'm the king." (January 2016.)
- Politicians: "I understand politicians better than anybody."
- The visa system: "[N]obody knows the system better than me. I know the H1B. I know the H2B. ... Nobody else on this dais knows how to change it like I do, believe me." (March 2016.)
- Trade: "Nobody knows more about trade than me." (March 2016.)
- The U.S. government system: "[N]obody knows the system better than I do." (April 2016.)
- Renewable energy: "I know more about renewables than any human being on Earth." (April 2016.)
- Taxes: "I think nobody knows more about taxes than I do, maybe in the history of the world." (May 2016.)
- Debt: "I’m the king of debt. I’m great with debt. Nobody knows debt better than me." (June 2016.)
- Money: "I understand money better than anybody." (June 2016.)
- Infrastructure: "[L]ook, as a builder, nobody in the history of this country has ever known so much about infrastructure as Donald Trump." (July 2016.)
- Sen. Cory Booker: "I know more about Cory than he knows about himself." (July 2016.)
- Borders: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/01/02/foremost-experts-various-topics-according-trump-most-whom-are-trump/?utm_term=.a5e14089111c (Trump said in 2016)that Sheriff Joe Arpaio said he was endorsing him for president because "you know more about this stuff than anybody."
- Democrats: "I think I know more about the other side than almost anybody." (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/01/02/foremost-experts-various-topics-according-trump-most-whom-are-trump/?utm_term=.e6ee20d65376 (November 2016.))
- Construction: "[N]obody knows more about construction than I do." (May 2018.)
- The economy: "I think I know about it better than [the Federal Reserve]." (October 2018.)
- Technology: "Technology — nobody knows more about technology than me." (December 2018.)
- Drones: "I know more about drones than anybody. I know about every form of safety that you can have." (January 2019.)
- Drone technology: "Having a drone fly overhead — and I think nobody knows much more about technology, this type of technology certainly, than I do." (January 2019.)
Diagnostic criteria for 301.81 Narcissistic Personality Disorder
https://behavenet.com/diagnostic-criteria-30181-narcissistic-personality-disorde
DSM Version
DSM IV
DSM Criteria
A pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by five (or more) of the following:
(1) has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements)
(2) is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love
(3) believes that he or she is "special" and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)
(4) requires excessive admiration
(5) has a sense of entitlement, i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations
(6) is interpersonally exploitative, i.e., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends
(7) lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others
(8) is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him or her
(9) shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes
