Originally posted by @tom-wolsey The fact that Trump had to go around our gridlocked Congress an write and executive order, demonstrates the legality of what was happening.
Did you get a load of those poor caged children, piled up like sardines sleeping on the floor at the Nogales facility? Oh wait, that was going on in 2014. No outrage from any of you.
Trump didn't "have to" do anything other than reverse his own administration's decision to implement this evil policy, your desperate whataboutisms notwithstanding.
Originally posted by @tom-wolsey The fact that Trump had to go around our gridlocked Congress and write an executive order, demonstrates the legality of what was happening.
Did you get a load of those poor caged children, piled up like sardines sleeping on the floor at the Nogales facility? Oh wait, that was going on in 2014. No outrage from any of you.
LMAO! Is that how Fox News is spinning it? That is directly contrary to what you claimed yesterday.
Originally posted by @no1marauder How is that an "insult"? "Cave", in this sense, means "capitulate or submit under pressure" which is what Trump certainly did. The use by me and the headline is certainly accurate.
The headline doesn't say "caved." You purposely chose the word to suggest that Trump solved the problem against his will with regret and resentment.
Originally posted by @no1marauder LMAO! Is that how Fox News is spinning it? That is directly contrary to what you claimed yesterday.
No. No it's not. I said the democrat bill was too complicated. Problem now solved by circumventing the swamp with an executive order. As far as the Nogales facility, what I said was factual.
Originally posted by @tom-wolsey No. No it's not. I said the democrat bill was too complicated. Problem now solved by circumventing the swamp with an executive order. As far as the Nogales facility, what I said was factual.
The Trump administration didn't need to "circumvent" anything to reverse their own decisions.
Have to admit, it's funny to see you squirm. If you had just unequivocally condemned this policy from the start, you would have looked a bit better than a proponent of concentration camps for children.
So... you find it necessary to insult him (which the NY Times didn't), even when he takes measures to fix what you complain about. Says a lot about you. And your lack of virtue.
The sorry sack of faeces (Trump) deserves every insult slinged at him.
Originally posted by @tom-wolsey The headline doesn't say "caved." You purposely chose the word to suggest that Trump solved the problem against his will with regret and resentment.
Technically correct; the headline said "retreats" and the first sentence says "caved". But they are synonyms here; one is no more "insulting" than the other.
As of yesterday, you, other right wing drones, Trump's minions and the Donald himself said that the policy was required by law and there was nothing he could do to legally end it.
Originally posted by @tom-wolsey Well it could have been something like "Trump finally fixes problem" but instead, yes, it was worded with a negative connotation.
I've been thinking about this, one might give recognition that he didn't dig his feet in for any longer, but I'm not sure a round of applause is in order either. I'm left wondering about the timing however. The US has just withdrawn from UNHRC and apparently not because the last three letters are the same as the initials of his Democratic Party rival for the Presidency, and were criticized for the policy. Given that supporting Israel seems to be a high priority for this administration and looking tough on immigration is basically for the fans, I'd speculate that this is to fend off international criticism aimed at undermining the credibility of the UNHRC move.
Originally posted by @no1marauder Technically correct; the headline said "retreats" and the first sentence says "caved". But they are synonyms here; one is no more "insulting" than the other.
As of yesterday, you, other right wing drones, Trump's minions and the Donald himself said that the policy was required by law and there was nothing he could do to legally end it.
What changed?
No, I never said Trump could not legally end it. And again, it only goes to prove YOU wrong because if an executive order was required to end it, then it was legal and lawful beforehand.
Originally posted by @deepthought I've been thinking about this, one might give recognition that he didn't dig his feet in for any longer, but I'm not sure a round of applause is in order either. I'm left wondering about the timing however. The US has just withdrawn from UNHRC and apparently not because the last three letters are the same as the initials of his Democratic Party rival ...[text shortened]... s is to fend off international criticism aimed at undermining the credibility of the UNHRC move.
Ok ok ok... no applause is in order.
Now quit making sense. I'm doing my best with what I've got and you're defusing the situation! Not good! ðŸ˜
Originally posted by @no1marauder Technically correct; the headline said "retreats" and the first sentence says "caved". But they are synonyms here; one is no more "insulting" than the other.
As of yesterday, you, other right wing drones, Trump's minions and the Donald himself said that the policy was required by law and there was nothing he could do to legally end it.
What changed?
Wait. Maybe I *did* say Trumps "hands were tied." If so... 😛
So... you find it necessary to insult him (which the NY Times didn't), even when he takes measures to fix what you complain about. Says a lot about you. And your lack of virtue.
Yep !! That Trump !!
For a guy whose campaign mantra was
"Drain the swamp !!!" .....
He sure created a swamp here !! 😀
Trump Caves
20 Jun '18 20:30
Back to Top