Ripley’s Unveils Wax Figures of President-Elect Trump
Wow. They look healthier than the real Donald.
Well, they’re both giant cocks.
This is a bit too much. Better to say that one of them is and at least give yourself an out.
[/moderating]
My apologies. Won’t happen again.
I think I can say with confidence that what Joe was thinking was, “Grow the fuck up, Donald!”
Do the more sane Republicans in Congress (let’s say Ryan, McCain, Graham) have any plan to remove Trump? I mean an “in case of emergency” type plan.
I know there’s no way to know. But, I’d feel better thinking that there is some, at least partial, plan that they have to remove him.
I think THEY think he will be their puppet–their popular puppet.
I suppose there’s something he might do that would cause them to dump him, but it’s hard to imagine what that might be, given that nothing he’s done so far has caused a ripple.
They appear to be clinging fiercely to the notion that they can “bring him around”, control him, that he is going to get more “Presidential” real soon. About two weeks from now, The Miracle. And here I sit, having no option but to hope that things work out swimmingly for them.
Christ, was an imagination I’ve got.
So, Trump trashes new episodes of ‘The Celebrity Apprentice’ for low ratings. Uh, isn’t he an exec producer?
He’s pissed at Arnold, has been for some time. Some crazy shit Arnold said about Trump not being a sensible choice. Imagine!
Hey, these guys believe lots of other mythology, like supply-side economics, so why not?
Yes. In trashing Schwarzenegger, Trump was trashing his own financial interests.
This could be a measure of how many billions he expects to loot via his Presidential powers (making his Celebrity Apprentice revenues mere chicken feed).
Or, it may be a measure of how far gone he is, mentally. (His father was diagnosed with Alzheimer’s at an age older than Trump is now–but then, from the photographs, it would appear that Fred Trump lived a healthier life than does his son. So who knows.)
:smack:
That’s a REAL good use of time and money. We’ve got preschoolers running the gummint.
I wonder if their apparent faith that Trump fans won’t mind paying for the wall themselves (along with all US taxpayers) is justified?
Of course The Wall is a stupid use of time and money.* And those in Congress pushing for it have to know it’s stupid–but they fear Trump’s fans and also want the support of Trump’s fans for the privatizing and other pet projects. So they will support the line of nonsense Trump tweeted today:
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/trump-border-wall-tweet-mexico-233265
Pure cynicism.
*Border security? Yes. Important. The Wall? Not the best way to achieve border security.
R-i-i-i-i-i-ght. :dubious:
The scheduling of so many hearings on the same day is ugly and cynical. It deprives Americans of the right to learn about–and react to–the people who will, if confirmed, hold immense power over us.
Trump’s plan to add to the circus is par for his usual course. I hope that the non-Fox media outlets will ignore him. Tape his shenanigans and play them back later–but don’t cut away from the hearings.
(It’s not as if Trump is going to say anything that means anything, anyway. By now we’ve all learned that lesson.)
Sure they’ve thought about it. In fact, there is a lot of energy right now going into plans for how they will blame Obama for the upcoming shit-storm of job losses and people without insurance.
It’s all about how you spin it for the Republicans, and how you blame others.
I’m not very familiar with how the schedules this time around compare with, for example, Obama’s nominees. Do you have any particular knowledge about how this compares, or is this just liberal belly-aching?
I don’t believe that anyone, including Republicans, thinks that a full disclosure of Trump’s entanglements around the world would not reveal truly disqualifying information about his legal fitness for the Presidency.
Just as most high appointees to Cabinet or Intelligence positions must be subject to having their private lives and finances examined (not to mention entry level jobs with most govt. agencies), state law should clearly state that candidates – for the Presidency, vice Presidency, Senate and House of Representatives – in order to be placed on the ballot of that state in primaries and elections, must reveal their full criminal, civil suit and financial matters. Because politics is the humble home of legal lying per the first amendment, nothing a candidate says about their background should ever be taken as the truth. Lies, statements contrary to the record, should be cause for disqualification. Trump wouldn’t have even made it to the ballot of Wyoming.
Is there any reason that an individual state, say California, can not pass a law requiring that for a presidential candidate to be on the ballot in their state that they must release their tax returns?