Trump - hoće li biti impeachment ili 8 godina drugačijeg predsednikovanja?

[laser lotus]

vaistinu bogotac

[Weenie Pooh]

Taj Tramparin stil je najočigledniji pokazatelj teške bolesti mozga koju donosi sedam decenija poltronskog okruženja. Many people don't know there's oil in Iraq, no one had realized that health care reform was complicated... stvarno Donalde, mi pojma nismo imali Donalde, hvala ti Donalde, kako su ti velike šake Donalde...

 

Kad god mu nešto dođe iz dupeta u glavu, čovek automatski pretpostavi da ostatku sveta još nije došlo jer on je Prometej moderne misli, a nipošto samoljubiva budaletina.

[ObiW]

Hteli ste zabavu, imate je. 

 

Samo nemoj sad da se iznenadjujete (kao Dagmar, recimo) sto ne sedi na dupetu miran i masta kako da oplodi Ivanku nego baca bombe naokolo ko pijani mornari stolice po baru. 

[Takeshi]

pozadinska masinerija radi, bio ispred mirotvorac obama ili estradni tramp. to sto se klanovi izmedju sebe otimaju ko ce dohvatiti svoj deo, ne znaci da nema generalnog kursa supersile.

[ObiW]

I ti si ukapirao da su svi isti i da nam ne gine Treci svetski rat? 

[Eraserhead]

pozadinska masinerija radi, bio ispred mirotvorac obama ili estradni tramp. to sto se klanovi izmedju sebe otimaju ko ce dohvatiti svoj deo, ne znaci da nema generalnog kursa supersile.

Dobro znaci lekcija nije naucena. Nema veze ima jos bar 3 god i 9 meseci.

[Takeshi]

tramp je republikanac po meri 21. veka, kao sto je berni isto za demokrate. nista novo u rotaciji, samo su kontrasti u drustvima (ne samo u americi) sve jaci. 

supersile ne mogu da ratuju izmedju sebe vec pedesetak godina.

[ObiW]

tramp je republikanac po meri 21. veka, kao sto je berni isto za demokrate. nista novo u rotaciji, samo su kontrasti u drustvima (ne samo u americi) sve jaci. 

supersile ne mogu da ratuju izmedju sebe vec pedesetak godina.

Hoces da kazes da supersile ne bi zaratile ni da je Hilari pobedila?

Edited April 14, 2017 by ObiW

[Takeshi]

Hoces da kazes da supersile ne bi zaratile ni da je Hilari pobedila?

 

supersile sigurno ne, ali daljinski ratovi moraju bas zbog toga.

a i sa severnom korejom cemo ubrzo videti da li teorija o nuklearnom oruzju i dalje ima smsla.

[ObiW]

supersile sigurno ne, ali daljinski ratovi moraju bas zbog toga.

E pa necemo tako...

 

 

 

 

 

 

elektori su stoka, narod je hteo prvu zenu predsednicu   :(

sad opet moramo da cekamo novu priliku za treci svetski rat.

 

 

http://www.parapsihopatologija.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=20330&p=3737140

Edited April 14, 2017 by ObiW

[ObiW]

Ovaj clanak je must read za drama efendiju, slowa i sve ostale koji veruju da se pre 10 dana dogodio mekani vojni puch, pa su zli generali naterali dobrog Tramparu da bombarduje Siriju i Avganistan, a uskoro ce i Severnu Koreju:

 

 

 

But now, in full view of the country and the world, we are watching what happens when a president is elected on the basis of an incoherent and crowd-sourced agenda, one that pandered to white nationalists and stoked economic anxiety. When that same president is someone who has never managed a large bureaucracy and brings almost no close associates who have. And when some of the aides he haphazardly acquired a few months before taking office care more about their own ambitions than his own—whatever they are.

 

 

 

When Donald Trump moved into the Oval Office, he redecorated decisively, replacing his predecessor’s maroon drapes with heavy gold ones. He also brought with him a collection of advisers who, according to another senior administration official, not only have “breathtaking personal agendas” and are willing to “malign the people around him” but are also prepared to say, “We are going to do it our way and push through what we want whether it is right for him or not.” The two former presidents Trump is most often compared to are Reagan (for the unserious image that Reagan had as a B-list movie actor) and Richard Nixon (for his authoritarian tendencies, his paranoia, and his antipathy toward the press). But those presidents, this senior administration official explained, had “a real ideology and a real set of issues, and that doesn’t exist here.”

 

 

 

Trump’s staff is as unbridled as the president himself. His advisers came together almost by accident and by default. They exhibit loyalty to their boss in front of the camera, only to whisper about him (and about their rivals, often in vicious terms) when the camera is gone. Before they joined the campaign, many of the current staffers had shown no allegiance to Trump... Senior administration officials told me that both Bannon and Priebus partisans have spent hours on the phone with reporters, planting stories about each other and their colleagues. While Bannon and Kushner got along well during the campaign, Bannon seems to have felt betrayed by Kushner and has retaliated by planting negative stories about him. Kushner sees Bannon as an ideologue whose approach has stymied the president’s effectiveness.

 

 

 

Who will be next to fall from grace is a daily parlor game of the Washington press corps. What seems clear is that each member of the staff operates with the knowledge that there will always be someone who seems about to fall next, and that that person may well be him or her. This uncertainty is frozen in place by a peculiar trait of the boss: as one West Wing official told me, “For a person who has made a very successful TV career off ‘You’re fired,’ he’s not someone who likes to fire people.”

 

I poenta celog clanka:

 

 

 

In every White House, there are competing loyalties and rivalries. That dynamic is normal. What is unusual about this presidency is that Trump himself is not a stable center of gravity and may be incapable of becoming one. He knows little, believes in little, and shows signs of regretting what has happened to him. Governing requires saying no to one’s strongest supporters and yes to one’s fiercest opponents. To have that presence of mind requires a clear and unified vision from the president. “Without an ideology or a world view, all you have is a scramble for self-preservation and self-aggrandizement,” a former West Wing aide told me. And it is a scramble without boundaries. What has been seen in the West Wing is now playing out in every Cabinet department and government agency: the competing agendas of a jockeying staff are being transplanted to the upper reaches throughout the executive branch as now Bannon, now Kushner, now Priebus, now Pence push their acolytes and protégés into hundreds of senior positions. The White House mess may soon be everywhere.

 

http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/04/jared-kushner-steve-bannon-white-house-civil-war

[ObiW]

Jos malo o raskidu Trampa i Banona, i kako Tramparu bole kuratz za ideologiju na cijem je talasu dosao u Belu Kucu:
 

He[s.B]  wasn’t vigilant enough about patrolling the way his allies inside and outside the administration deified him in their own murmurings to the media, which included the nugget that colleagues awed by his knowledge called him “the encyclopedia.” He didn’t grasp that you can’t be “the encyclopedia” if your president is barely a pamphlet, and didn’t see the traps that would have been obvious to a Washington insider.

.

.
He [s.B.] didn’t grapple with who Trump really is. Trump’s allegiances are fickle. His attention flits. His compass is popularity, not any fixed philosophy, certainly not the divisive brand of populism and nationalism that Bannon was trying to enforce. Bannon insisted on an ideology when Trump cares more about applause, and what generates it at a campaign rally isn’t what sustains it when you’re actually governing.

.

 

 

Bannon stupidly picked a fight with Jared Kushner that he was all but certain to lose, and not only because Kushner is kin. Consider Trump’s obsession with appearances, then tell me who has the advantage: the guy who looks like a flea market made flesh or the one who seems poised to pose for G.Q.?

 

Today’s Steve appreciates where yesterday’s went wrong. He understands that if you want to be the Svengali, you have to play the sycophant. That was a performance beyond Bannon’s ken. He never had a chance.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/15/opinion/sunday/steve-bannon-was-doomed.html

Edited April 17, 2017 by ObiW

[Eraserhead]

A kid asks Trump to sign his hat at the White House Easter Egg Roll. The president signs ... and then tosses the hat into the crowd.

 

 

[Lord Protector]

War Cries Drown Out ‘America First’

 

 

By Patrick J. Buchanan

 

“Why would I call China a currency manipulator when they are working with us on the North Korean problem?” tweeted President Donald Trump on Easter Sunday.

Earlier, after discovering “great chemistry” with Chinese President Xi Jinping over “the most beautiful piece of chocolate cake” at Mar-a-Lago, Trump had confided, “I explained … that a trade deal with the U.S. will be far better for them if they solve the North Korean problem!”

“America First” thus takes a back seat to big-power diplomacy with Beijing. One wonders: How much will Xi end up bilking us for his squeezing of Kim Jong Un?

Trump once seemed to understand how America had been taken to the cleaners during and after the Cold War. While allies supported us diplomatically, they piled up huge trade surpluses at our expense and became virtual free-riders off the U.S. defense effort.

No nations were more successful at this than South Korea and Japan. Now Xi is playing the game — and perhaps playing Trump.

What is the “North Korean problem” Beijing will help solve in return for more indulgent consideration on future U.S.-China trade deals?

North Korea’s nuclear arsenal. As 80 percent of Pyongyang’s trade comes through China, Trump believes that Beijing can force Kim to stop testing missiles and atomic bombs before he produces an intercontinental ballistic missile that could hit the U.S.

But what is to prevent Xi from pocketing Trump’s concessions and continuing on the strategic course China has long pursued?

For in many ways, Pyongyang’s goals parallel China’s.

Neither could want an all-out war on the Korean Peninsula. For Kim, this would devastate his country, bring down his regime, and cost him his life. For China, war could mean millions of Koreans crossing the Yalu into Manchuria and a disruption of Beijing’s march to Asian hegemony.

A continuing crisis on the peninsula, however, with Trump and the U.S. relying on Beijing’s help, could leave Xi in the catbird seat.

And now that North Korea has declared its goal to be building missiles with nuclear warheads that could hit all U.S. bases in Asia — and even California — the clock is running for the White House.

“It won’t happen,” Trump has said of North Korea’s developing an ICBM that could hit the United States. “If China is not going to solve North Korea, we will.”

“The threat is upon us,” says outgoing deputy national security adviser K.T. McFarland. “This is something President Trump is going to deal with in the first year.”

Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Vice President Mike Pence have declared that our policy of “strategic patience” with Pyonyang is at an end.

National security adviser H.R. McMaster said Sunday the U.S. has “to take action, short of armed conflict, so we can avoid the worst” in dealing with “this unpredictable regime.”

 

With a stunning parade of missiles in Pyongyang on Saturday, the North’s failed firing of a solid-fueled missile that same day, and the promise of new missile tests weekly, Kim is forcing our hand.

Either he backs away from building atomic bombs and long-range missiles or Trump and his generals must make good on their warnings.

Have something to say about this column?

 

How did we get to this point?

Why, 64 years after the Korean War, a quarter-century after the Cold War, are we still obliged to go to war to defend South Korea from a North with one-half the South’s population and 3 percent of its gross domestic product?

Why are we, on the far side of the Pacific, still responsible for containing North Korea when two of its neighbors — Russia and China — are nuclear powers and South Korea and Japan could field nuclear and conventional forces far superior to Kim’s?

How long into the future will containing militarist dictators in Pyongyang with nuclear missiles be America’s primary responsibility?

Another issue arises. Before the U.S. launches any pre-emptive strike on North Korea, Congress should be called back into session to authorize any act of war against the North.

Perhaps this time, Congress would follow the Constitution.

Though Korea is the crisis of the moment, it is not the only one.

Not since 9/11 have the Afghan Taliban been stronger or controlled more territory. The United States’ commanding general there is calling for thousands more U.S. troops. Russia and Iran are reportedly negotiating with the Taliban. Pakistan is said to be aiding them.

To counter Vladimir Putin’s Russia, we have moved U.S. and NATO troops into Poland, the Baltic States, Romania and Bulgaria. We have fired missiles into Syria. We are reportedly preparing to back the Saudis in the latest escalation of their war on the Houthi rebels in Yemen.

Twenty-four years after “Black Hawk Down,” the weekend brought reports of U.S. troops returning to Somalia.

The promise of a Trump presidency — that we would start looking out for our own country and own national interests first and let the rest of the world solve, or fail to solve, its own problems — appears, not 100 days in, to have been a mirage.

Will more wars make America great again?

 

Edited April 18, 2017 by slow

[ObiW]

Alt-right pao u depresiju a ni slowu nije lako.