The ole man
Member
Holy fuck you got it bad!
Doc, I think you need to see a dr!
Anyway, carry on.
Doc, I think you need to see a dr!
Anyway, carry on.
MESO-Rx
Anabolic Steroids
Trump Timeline ... Trumpocalypse
- Thread starter CdnGuy
- Start date
President Trump on Tuesday ratcheted up a remarkable public spat with the husband of one of his top advisers, attacking Kellyanne Conway’s husband as a “total loser” on Twitter in response to the lawyer’s persistent questions about his mental health and competency.
“A total loser!” Trump wrote in the tweet targeting Conway’s husband, a prominent conservative attorney. The president’s tweet also included a dubious assertion from Trump’s 2020 campaign manager, Brad Parscale, that the president “doesn’t even know” his senior adviser’s husband.
But George Conway said in an interview Tuesday that he has had a number of notable interactions with Trump over the past decade, including legal representation and sensitive legal matters since Trump became president. He described the president as “mendacious” and “incompetent” and predicted he would not win reelection.
...
Conway’s tweets on Monday included images from the American Psychiatric Association’s “Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders,” including pages with diagnostic criteria for “narcissistic personality disorder” and “antisocial personality disorder.”
Although Conway had previously posted similar concerns on Twitter, “it stuck this time because of the utter bizarreness this weekend, his own conduct. It was so illustrative,” he said, referring to a two-day span in which Trump sent out 52 tweets with a broad range of attacks.
THE CONWAY MOOD KILLER
https://claytoonz.com/2019/03/19/the-conway-mood-killer/
It’s kind of unusual in the new normal that George Conway is a Republican who is still a Republican and not a member of the Trump cult, as the guy is a fierce critic of Donald Trump. What’s even more unusual is that he’s married to Kellyanne Conway, an adviser to Trump on his payroll.
George has gone after Trump several times in the past, most recently this weekend after Trump conducted a Festivus celebration on Twitter and aired his grievances. George accused Trump of being mentally unbalanced and published symptoms of narcissism disorder, with each one fitting Trump. Kellyanne said she didn’t agree with her husband.
Today, Trump said that George is a loser. Now, Kellyanne has a test of loyalty. While disagreeing with her husband about Trump’s mental state, is she going to disagree with her boss that her husband is a loser?
https://claytoonz.com/2019/03/19/the-conway-mood-killer/
It’s kind of unusual in the new normal that George Conway is a Republican who is still a Republican and not a member of the Trump cult, as the guy is a fierce critic of Donald Trump. What’s even more unusual is that he’s married to Kellyanne Conway, an adviser to Trump on his payroll.
George has gone after Trump several times in the past, most recently this weekend after Trump conducted a Festivus celebration on Twitter and aired his grievances. George accused Trump of being mentally unbalanced and published symptoms of narcissism disorder, with each one fitting Trump. Kellyanne said she didn’t agree with her husband.
Today, Trump said that George is a loser. Now, Kellyanne has a test of loyalty. While disagreeing with her husband about Trump’s mental state, is she going to disagree with her boss that her husband is a loser?
Americans should not be fooled by the Stalinist tactics being used by the White House to try to discredit the findings of mainstream climate science.
The Trump administration has already purged information about climate change from government websites, gagged federal experts and attempted to end funding for climate change programmes.
Now a group of hardcore climate change deniers and contrarians linked to the administration is https://cei.org/content/cei-leads-coalition-letter-commission-climate-security in support of a new panel being set up by the National Security Council to promote an alternative official explanation for climate change.
The panel will consist of scientists who do not accept the overwhelming scientific evidence that rising levels of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere are behind climate change and its impacts.
...
The creation of the new panel of climate change deniers, and the recruitment of supporters to provide it with a veneer of legitimacy, echoes the campaign by Joseph Stalin’s regime to discredit the work of geneticists who disagreed with the disastrous pseudo-scientific theories of Trofim Lysenko.
Lysenko wrongly believed that acquired traits could be passed on by parents to their offspring. Stalin embraced lysenkoism as the basis for Soviet agricultural policy, while also denouncing and persecuting Lysenko’s scientific critics.
The Trump administration’s “climate lysenkoism” is being led by William Happer, a retired professor from Princeton University who was hired by the National Security Council in September 2018 as deputy assistant to the president and senior director for emerging technologies.
...
Americans should not be conned by the Trump administration’s climate lysenkoism and should instead place their trust in the http://www.nationalacademies.org/includes/G8+5energy-climate09.pdf who place the public interest ahead of political ideology.
Last summer, the Trump administration started a campaign to convince its European allies to bar China's Huawei from their telecom networks. Bolstered by the success of similar efforts in Australia and New Zealand, the White House sent envoys to European capitals with warnings that Huawei's gear would open a backdoor for Chinese spies. The U.S. even threatened to cut off intelligence sharing if Europe ignored its advice. So far, not a single European country has banned Huawei.
Europe, caught in the middle of the U.S.-China trade war, has sought to balance concerns about growing Chinese influence with a desire to increase business with the region's second-biggest trading partner. With no ban in the works, Huawei is in the running for contracts to build 5G phone networks, the ultra-fast wireless technology Europe's leaders hope will fuel the growth of a data-based economy.
The U.K.'s spy chief has indicated that a ban on Huawei is unlikely, citing a lack of viable alternatives to upgrade British telecom networks. Italy's government has dismissed the U.S. warnings as it seeks to boost trade with China. In Germany, authorities have proposed tighter security rules for data networks rather than outlawing Huawei. France is doing the same after initially flirting with the idea of restrictions on Huawei.
Governments listened to phone companies such as Vodafone Group Plc, Deutsche Telekom AG, and Orange SA, who warned that sidelining Huawei would delay the implementation of 5G by years and add billions of euros in cost. While carriers can also buy equipment from the likes of Ericsson AB, Nokia Oyj, and Samsung Electronics Co., industry consultants say Huawei's quality is high, and the company last year filed 5,405 global patents, more than double the filings by Ericsson and Nokia combined. And some European lawmakers have been wary of Cisco Systems Inc., Huawei's American rival, since Edward Snowden leaked documents revealing the National Security Agency's use of U.S.-made telecom equipment for spying.
Various politicians, activists, and thinkers, some of them here at Niskanen, are already making plans for what a post-Trump center-right will be. Both those who are actively “Never Trump” and those in the furrowed-brow caucus expressing occasional concern at intemperate tweets recognize the possibility that sooner or later there will be a need to shape a very different Republican Party. That means there will be opportunities for those with ideas about how to distance themselves from the disgrace of the current era.
One sign of seriousness for such people would be a commitment to building a Republican Party that can win free and fair elections, a Republican Party whose strategy rests on appealing to pluralities or majorities and that can embrace more voters rather than fewer. A serious post-Trump agenda requires a Republican commitment to democracy.
The indictment of Republicans on this count is familiar but no less accurate for that. (My colleague Will Wilkinson has written about it often.) At the federal level, Republicans have won a plurality of the popular votes cast in a presidential election only once in the last thirty years. They’ve managed majorities of the electorate for the U.S. House twice [correction: three times] over the same time span. The Senate isn’t elected all at once and so comparisons with the electorate are harder, but the discrepancy between total votes cast and Senate outcomes has grown to historic highs, and to the advantage of Republicans.
http://www.people-press.org/2018/03/20/party-identification-trends-1992-2017/ (At no point in the last 25 years have self-identified Republicans outnumbered self-identified Democrats among the electorate.)But this Republican minority has controlled the presidency, the House, and the Senate disproportionately often over those years, winning the presidency twice on the basis of Electoral College-popular vote mismatches, and building up what has been calculated as roughly a 7 percent bonus in the House such that if Democrats had won the national popular vote by 6 percent instead of 8.6 percent last November, they probably would not have recaptured control. ...
From a QAnon conspiracy theorist to actor James Woods to comedian Larry the Cable Guy to the leader of the free world. Thus travels information in the age of Twitter and President Trump, who took a late-night swing at a familiar punching bag — the Transportation Security Administration — via a nearly two-year-old video spread by a character on the far fringes of the Internet.
“Not a good situation!” Trump tweeted on Tuesday just before midnight about the clip of a young man subjected to a very thorough pat-down by a TSA agent.
DEVIN HAS A COW
https://claytoonz.com/2019/03/20/devin-has-a-cow/
In 1983, Hustler Magazine published a parody mimicking a Campari advertising campaign that conducted interviews with celebrities about “their first time,” a double-entendre about their first time drinking the alcohol. In the parody, the subject was the famous televangelist Jerry Falwell who misunderstood the “first-time” question and said his first time was with his mother in an outhouse. At the bottom of the ad was fine print which said, “ad parody—not to be taken seriously,” which was for readers who took Hustler seriously. Jerry Falwell took it seriously.
Falwell sued the owner of Hustler, Larry Flynt. Falwell won in a U.S. district court in Virginia, and then he won an appeal by Flynt. On the claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress, the jury ruled in favor of Falwell and awarded him $150,000 in damages. Flynt didn’t take it lying down and took it all the way to the Supreme Court where he won a unanimous decision by all eight judges (there was a vacancy at the time), even the freaky conservative ones like William Rehnquist and Antonin Scalia.
They ruled that the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution prohibit public figures from recovering damages from emotional distress caused by a caricature, parody, or satire. Larry Flynt, a porn publisher, spent millions protecting our freedom of speech. Every editorial cartoonist in this nation owes Flynt a big thank you, which I gave in person several years ago.
So, if Flynt can get away with saying Jerry Falwell had drunken outhouse sex with his mom then a parody Twitter account can impersonate Congressman Devin Nunes’ mom and his cow. Right? Yes, they can, but Nunes doesn’t think so and has filed a $250 million lawsuit against Twitter, his fake mom, and the imaginary cow. Seriously.
Maybe Nunes believes he has a case if the cow’s followers believe it’s an actual tweeting cow. Only if they’re Republicans. Does the cow need a disclaimer that it’s not actual Devin Nunes’ cow?
Nunes, like Donald Trump, has very thin skin. These guys who consider themselves “Constitutionalists” want to destroy First Amendment protections. Trump wants the FCC to regulate humor so it’s not one-sided and Nunes wants laws preventing people from making fun of him. Trump and Nunes are also arguing that social media platforms, like Twitter and Facebook are restricting conservatives’ accounts on their platforms. They’re really worried it’ll hamper Russian trolls in 2020.
To argue about these platforms that don’t allow diversity of viewpoints, he went on Fox News and talked to Sean Hannity. Seriously.
The person you need to help sell that saying untrue stuff should be illegal is…Sean Hannity? Seriously?
In the lawsuit, Nunes argues that being called a “presidential fluffer” and “swamp rat” (seriously) interfere with his important investigation of “corruption by the Clinton campaign and alleged Russian involvement in the 2016 Presidential Election.” He also argues that people on Twitter making fun of him were trying to influence the outcome of the 2018 Congressional election. Seriously.
I’m going to make a public statement now and I want to be clear. The cartoon above was drawn with malice with the intention of defaming and injuring Devin Nunes’ name and reputation. I would say “good name,” but Nunes doesn’t have one…like his face. I really want Nunes to feel bad about this.
Here’s the thing, Devin (may I call you “Devin” or do you prefer “Mr. Fluffer?”)…I’m not afraid of Donald Trump. I’m not afraid of his supporters. After three years of them threatening and trying to intimidate me on SOCIAL MEDIA LIKE TWITTER, I’m still not afraid of them. Granted, none of them has started a cow Twitter account against me, but if they had, I think I could handle it. My point is if I’m not afraid of the president of the United States, who has hired fixers in the past to bully people and has the largest bully pulpit in the world in which to bully, then I’m not ever going to be afraid of a whiny, little, thin-skinned, presidential fluffer, treasonous pissant like you or any lawyers stupid enough to help you sue without understanding how the First Amendment works.
I don’t know your mom, and I’m sure she’s a nice person, but she should be more ashamed of you than of the account parodying her. And if you did actually own a cow, it would have jumped a fence by now to avoid being associated with you. The only cow dumb enough to be seen with you in public is orange with a bad combover.
Save yourself the trouble of suing me, Congressman and I’ll just go ahead and write you a check for a pair of big boy pants. Try not to shit in them next time someone calls you “fluffer.”
https://claytoonz.com/2019/03/20/devin-has-a-cow/
In 1983, Hustler Magazine published a parody mimicking a Campari advertising campaign that conducted interviews with celebrities about “their first time,” a double-entendre about their first time drinking the alcohol. In the parody, the subject was the famous televangelist Jerry Falwell who misunderstood the “first-time” question and said his first time was with his mother in an outhouse. At the bottom of the ad was fine print which said, “ad parody—not to be taken seriously,” which was for readers who took Hustler seriously. Jerry Falwell took it seriously.
Falwell sued the owner of Hustler, Larry Flynt. Falwell won in a U.S. district court in Virginia, and then he won an appeal by Flynt. On the claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress, the jury ruled in favor of Falwell and awarded him $150,000 in damages. Flynt didn’t take it lying down and took it all the way to the Supreme Court where he won a unanimous decision by all eight judges (there was a vacancy at the time), even the freaky conservative ones like William Rehnquist and Antonin Scalia.
They ruled that the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution prohibit public figures from recovering damages from emotional distress caused by a caricature, parody, or satire. Larry Flynt, a porn publisher, spent millions protecting our freedom of speech. Every editorial cartoonist in this nation owes Flynt a big thank you, which I gave in person several years ago.
So, if Flynt can get away with saying Jerry Falwell had drunken outhouse sex with his mom then a parody Twitter account can impersonate Congressman Devin Nunes’ mom and his cow. Right? Yes, they can, but Nunes doesn’t think so and has filed a $250 million lawsuit against Twitter, his fake mom, and the imaginary cow. Seriously.
Maybe Nunes believes he has a case if the cow’s followers believe it’s an actual tweeting cow. Only if they’re Republicans. Does the cow need a disclaimer that it’s not actual Devin Nunes’ cow?
Nunes, like Donald Trump, has very thin skin. These guys who consider themselves “Constitutionalists” want to destroy First Amendment protections. Trump wants the FCC to regulate humor so it’s not one-sided and Nunes wants laws preventing people from making fun of him. Trump and Nunes are also arguing that social media platforms, like Twitter and Facebook are restricting conservatives’ accounts on their platforms. They’re really worried it’ll hamper Russian trolls in 2020.
To argue about these platforms that don’t allow diversity of viewpoints, he went on Fox News and talked to Sean Hannity. Seriously.
The person you need to help sell that saying untrue stuff should be illegal is…Sean Hannity? Seriously?
In the lawsuit, Nunes argues that being called a “presidential fluffer” and “swamp rat” (seriously) interfere with his important investigation of “corruption by the Clinton campaign and alleged Russian involvement in the 2016 Presidential Election.” He also argues that people on Twitter making fun of him were trying to influence the outcome of the 2018 Congressional election. Seriously.
I’m going to make a public statement now and I want to be clear. The cartoon above was drawn with malice with the intention of defaming and injuring Devin Nunes’ name and reputation. I would say “good name,” but Nunes doesn’t have one…like his face. I really want Nunes to feel bad about this.
Here’s the thing, Devin (may I call you “Devin” or do you prefer “Mr. Fluffer?”)…I’m not afraid of Donald Trump. I’m not afraid of his supporters. After three years of them threatening and trying to intimidate me on SOCIAL MEDIA LIKE TWITTER, I’m still not afraid of them. Granted, none of them has started a cow Twitter account against me, but if they had, I think I could handle it. My point is if I’m not afraid of the president of the United States, who has hired fixers in the past to bully people and has the largest bully pulpit in the world in which to bully, then I’m not ever going to be afraid of a whiny, little, thin-skinned, presidential fluffer, treasonous pissant like you or any lawyers stupid enough to help you sue without understanding how the First Amendment works.
I don’t know your mom, and I’m sure she’s a nice person, but she should be more ashamed of you than of the account parodying her. And if you did actually own a cow, it would have jumped a fence by now to avoid being associated with you. The only cow dumb enough to be seen with you in public is orange with a bad combover.
Save yourself the trouble of suing me, Congressman and I’ll just go ahead and write you a check for a pair of big boy pants. Try not to shit in them next time someone calls you “fluffer.”
Last edited:
