Unless it's fake news that he said it
What does @ReallyRealDonaldTrump say ?
ps does it slightly concern anyone else that official statements by the world's remaining superpower are verified only by having the "Real" in front of them?
The White House has decried as fake news reports that the Trump Administration will institute a ban on Chinese companies investing in US tech companies. "On behalf of @realDonaldTrump, the stories on investment restrictions in Bloomberg & WSJ are false, fake news," read a statement by Treasury Secretary Stephen Mnuchin posted …
Give it a year or so, and looking back this will seem like a period of calm. God knows how this administration will lash out once the reality of its trade wars becomes obvious, with American consumers paying higher prices due to imports being blocked and less competition for domestic suppliers, American jobs being moved overseas as exporters move production to the other side of the tariff wall, and sporadic shortages of goods due to transnational supply chains being disrupted. MAGA it won't be.
The funny thing is I never believed the story of "Russia" interfering with the US election - there were plenty of better reasons why Trump won including the slanting of news by US sources and the anger of some democrats at the hijacking of the convention by the super-delegates to ensure Clinton was nominated.
But it would seem that the current US administration can do things which will, in the long term, vastly benefit Russia and China out of sheer stupidity, no help needed.
"the anger of some democrats at the hijacking of the convention by the super-delegates to ensure Clinton was nominated."
Hillary Clinton: 16,914,722
Bernie Sanders: 13,206,428
Hillary Clinton: 34
Bernie Sanders: 23
Delegate (not superdelegate) count:
Hillary Clinton: 2,271
Bernie Sanders: 1,820
Clinton won without the superdelegates. Try something else.
OK, different person commenting, how about the gerrymandering that was evident throughout the DNC voting process? The Clinton faction seemed to have a great deal of control over the entire process. In fact, as much as I hate what the Republican Party has become the RNC process was far more open and seemingly legitimate than the DNC process. However, for the RNC to have elected Donald Trump shows the weakness of all the other candidates in that race. For the DNC to have elected Clinton over Sanders shows the weakness in the DNC's process and controls.
I don’t know whether I want to agree or debate this.
We saw republicans dropping from the election for now reason that seemed clear. Just one after another dropped out and yielded to Trump with no explaination to be had. Each time they dropped out and made their support for Trump clear it looked like people behaving as if they were forced to under duress.
Bernie seemed to have real support of the people because they believed in him politicaly. As though they liked his message. Hillary seemed to garner support by people who liked her making fun of Trump and also by people voting for superficial reasons. I’ve been a long believer that it’s time for a female president. I remember as a child being excited that Geraldine Ferrara was running. But Hillary simply scared me because her message didn’t seem to be anything other than “I’ll win and it’s my turn!”
Sander dropped out out of what seemed like frustration over the stubborn child stomping her feet and claiming “I’ll win, it’s my turn!”
I have had great hopes that if this election proved anything to the American people, it’s that the two parties are so corrupt that people need a choice and neither party is offering a choice to the people.
Amazon, Facebook, Twitter, Google, Microsoft, Netflix, and others can all change the platform. They can reinvent the entire two party system overnight. All it would take is to each build on their platforms a new electoral process to identify and support candidates that they would then have added to the ballot. If each company run different competitions and systems to identify and sponsor candidates, we could have a presidential election with 10 or more alternatives to choose from.
They can even allow underdogs to get a grip on the elections. For example, traditional fund raisers which reward only people willing to sell their political capital would become irrelevant. People could get elected because they were in fact popular instead of having sold their souls in exchange for enough money for some commercial time.
I think Trump and Hillary may be the best thing to ever happen to America. If two shit bags like them can end up being the only possible choices the people had, then it’s clear it’s time for a change.
@DavCrav - the statistics on the ground obviously failed to convince some Democrats to vote Clinton, and Trump's win was very narrow.
Remember what matters in people's voting is more gut feeling than dry facts. There was a perception that the machine and the superdelegates blocked Bernie. It didn't actually matter whether it was true or not.
We have the same thing in different ways with Corbyn.
I never believed the story of "Russia" interfering with the US election - there were plenty of better reasons why Trump won
The existence of those other reasons has no bearing on whether some people in Russia (or anywhere else) interfered with the US election process - either directly in the election mechanics or in attempting to shape voter sentiment.
In fact it's wildly unlikely that independent activists outside the US didn't attempt to do so, and highly unlikely that government-sponsored groups didn't attempt to, because individuals and governments have been trying to interfere with other countries' political processes since time immemorial.
Whether such interference had a significant effect on the outcome is a separate question, and one that is probably impossible to answer with any accuracy. Certainly there are plenty of domestic factors that could explain Trump's win. But thinking that any significant election, in any of the major nations, goes by without foreign meddling is naive.
MAGE - Make America Great Entertainment! Now what will this tragic opera be named?
Watched Stephen Colbert and Trevor Noah shows last night on Youtube. Both comedians were desperately trying to lampoon Trump's latest rally, which was nigh impossible, because Trump was doing it himself. Really cringeworthy to watch. Actually it wasn't fun any more, but scary.
Yes but there are exceptions. Sometimes they even claim "Fake News" for things that they did personally release in a press statement.
To be fair, this was Mnuchin decrying something Trump had said, so it wasn't "personally".
Also, in this case, not the White House but the Treasury1 waving the "fake news" flag.
Not that it makes much difference. In my estimation, Mnuchin has dropped from "pretty smart asshole" to "pretty stupid asshole" since he was appointed.2 This looks like him shooting off his Twitter-mouth before checking what his boss had said.
1The Secretary of the Treasury is a Cabinet member, but Cabinet pronouncements are not generally considered to be "from the White House". That phrase usually indicates blather from the POTUS or his spokesbeasts.
2His career was, frankly, pretty undistinguished. Yeah, he did fine as an investment banker, but there are tons of successful investment bankers. He had executive jobs at Goldman, but at an organization like that, the executives are not the cleverest employees. He ran one successful clever scam, as far as I know - the rather nasty IndyMac / OneWest foreclosure-with-FDIC-rebates business. He bankrolled some successful films, and also some flops. And so on. As SoT, he's been a complete waste of space, with no significant accomplishments and a string of petty scandals and missteps.
Doesn't matter. A sufficiently sophisticated Trumpkin will tell you, it doesn't matter that he's lying all the time, because they know what he means and what he's doing - he's confusing the enemy (a category that includes all liberals and liberal media, as well as foreigners).
You can point to him contradicting himself in the very same statement, and they'll just shrug and say "that's what he does".
Only the liberal media obsesses with this "truth" thing. Trump has transcended it, at least to the extent of making it politically irrelevant.
Pretty soon he's going to declare his trade war won. You watch. The media will all point out "but nothing's changed, at least nothing good", and his followers will laugh and say "they still don't get it, do they?"
Thanks veti, you're quite right.
I can remember George II having similar moments, with "Mission Accomplished" and "Truthiness".
I am even old enough to remember that odd Mr. Reagan telling us wealth would "Trickle Down" and we all know how well that worked.
It seems the supporters of the American far-right have no problem with being lied to.
The examples you point to (and there are equivalent ones for democrat presidents) were pretty rare though. Past presidents would lie occasionally, and while you don't want to see presidents lie at least they were big lies ('Mission Accomplished') or irrelevant lies ("I did not have sexual relations") but Trump lies multiple times in a day, even about things he specifically said before.
He doesn't care what the truth is, when he changes his mind that's his new truth as far as he's concerned. Attacking "fake news" is just another way to help maintain and expand the division between the fools who believe in him and the rest of America. He knows he's guilty of a multitude of crimes, and Mueller will already have more than enough evidence to impeach and jail anyone else, so he and his state run media outlet Fox News have been laying the groundwork for calling all the evidence against him fabricated in hopes of continuing to use the presidency to enrich himself for his full term. And maybe longer, depending on whether the democrats are smart about who they nominate and how they run their campaign.
The same winning techniques that caused an American icon, Harley Davidson, to announce it was moving a bunch of jobs to Europe to avoid the tariffs his trade war caused the EU to place upon them! The EU and China are smart about the companies they are targeting - ones that are in red states or have a lot of red state support like Harley Davidson and exports of corn, wheat and natural gas.
If only there was a way the EU could target the Koch Brothers with a 25% tariff on everything they do, they'd put the reins on Trump within a hour!
Then we can cancel the whole folly and blame the USA for its failings (or which there are far too many to list here).
If the POTUS wants to stop Johnny Foreigner from stealing their tech then why on earth did they put the engine maintennance plant in Turkey which is right in Putin's backyard.
IMHO there really is very little tech that the US has that other nations especially the Chinese don't already have.
Putin may be America's enemy, but he's Trump's friend. Trump has no issue with Putin, or Erdogan for that matter.
(Note, the Senate voted to block the sale of F-35s to Turkey entirely. Turkey responded by threatening to buy arms from the Russians instead, whereupon the US gov't quietly dropped all opposition. The Turks, of course, went on to buy the Russian missiles anyway, and quite right too.)
All aspects of trade between Turkey and Russia are on the up.
Russia is Turkey's closest large scale customer and the two countries have a long tradition of trade between them.
Maybe a new Molniya that works will be in the offing.
Erdogan's won the last democratic election in Turkey for some time. Saudi is now trying to isolate Qatar with, unbelievably, a canal. The bits of the ME that are at least independent of US policy seem to be on the up generally - Syria winning its war, Qatar getting the investment and trade. Israel and Saudi, the US clients in the region, can't be too happy. Netanyahu has to cope with the fact that Trump is even more immoral, devious and inconsistent than he is - which means that Trump will do things intended to help but that put Israel in a bad light, like move the US embassy to Jerusalem.
China and Russia between them have a vast opportunity to fill the US policy vacuum; and whatever you think of their leadership, Putin and Xi are intelligent men with plenty of self control who think long term. Trump's long term legacy could well be to repeat the pattern of the decline of the British Empire.
Trump's long term legacy could well be to repeat the pattern of the decline of the British Empire.
A good many people who want to see global change and a collapse of what there currently is are quietly quite happy about what Trump is doing.
Railing against Trump, causing him to double-down on what he's doing, booing when he does, while cheering inside, has become a refined form of performance art - Give a man a rope and watch him hang himself with it.
After years of pushing for change and getting nowhere it really does prove that if one wants to break something the best way to do that is from the inside.
In as much as I'm not a Trump fan, his policy/ies targeting trade with countries that don't have roughly equivalent levels of pay and benefits. The whole globalization and free trade with countries that don't and have not even tried to meet fair labour standards should always have been a non-starter. Greedy Corps have made sure that it was though. Whether Trump and cohort realize it, some of those policies may prove beneficial over time; although, to break this down further, Red States may have to go on a list of areas that don't meet fair labour standards and be put on a list of areas not to be traded with.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019