Trump 47
- Thread starter PF5
- Start date
Reagan was the start of this. I don’t think he wanted it to go this way but they used him to get where we are.
Long time Conservative Reporter and Publication Buried Trump on Ukraine
Both Donald Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio were raked over the coals by a longtime columnist for the conservative National Review for nothing less than their "betrayal" of the people of Ukraine.
According to National Review's Jim Geraghty, Trump and Rubio are getting played by Russian strongman Vladimir Putin and getting nothing in return for turning their backs on Ukraine and the NATO countries that are battling Russian expansionism.
Reacting to comments from both Trump and Rubio on Tuesday, Geraghty wrote, "... so far in his second term, regarding the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Trump has offered to Vladimir Putin that Ukraine will not retake all its annexed and occupied sovereign territory, that Ukraine will not join NATO, that there will be no U.S. troops on Ukrainian soil after the war, and that the U.S. will lift sanctions on Russia." before noting, "And in exchange, Putin offered . . . well, nothing, really."
With that in mind, he singled out Rubio telling reporters he agreed with the Russian delegation to “lay the groundwork for future cooperation on matters of mutual geopolitical interest and historic economic and investment opportunities which will emerge from a successful end to the conflict in Ukraine.”
That led the conservative columnist to bluntly ask, "What 'mutual geopolitical interest' do we have with the regime that fired a missile into Kyiv’s main children’s hospital? " before adding, "Russia has killed more than 12,000 Ukrainian civilians, and more than 6 million Ukrainian citizens live under the brutal hand of occupying Russian forces, and our government is talking about 'historic economic and investment opportunities' with them?"
As he noted, Russian has little to nothing that America needs by pointing out, "Grain? Oil? Natural gas? We already have that stuff; there is more than we need, and plenty is available for export. I thought the Trump plan was to build us into an energy production superpower."
Reporting that Rubio also stated a peace settlement would be brought about in "a way that’s enduring and acceptable to all the parties engaged,” Geraghty questioned Rubio's wisdom.
"Does Rubio envision Putin recognizing Ukraine as a legitimate and independent country? He has never done that. Down to the marrow in his bones, Putin sees Ukraine as part of Russia that can never be allowed to pursue its own separate path," he wrote.
As for Trump's demands that Ukraine hold a new election as part of the settlement, Geraghty wrote that the mere thought of that being acceptable when nearly 20 percent of Ukraine is living under a Russian occupation is absurd by pointing out, "This would be akin to running an American presidential election with only 40 of the 50 states able to participate."
Noting Trump's claims that the Ukraine president is unpopular in his own country, the columnist concluded, "Trump’s absurd claim that Zelensky has a 4 percent approval rating is a hint that Trump is flailing and thrashing around, trying anything to justify his current de facto pro-Russian stance."
You can read more here.
'Flailing and thrashing around' Trump buried by conservative publication for Ukraine 'betrayal'
Both Donald Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio were raked over the coals by a longtime columnist for the conservative National Review for nothing less than their "betrayal" of the people of Ukraine.
According to National Review's Jim Geraghty, Trump and Rubio are getting played by Russian strongman Vladimir Putin and getting nothing in return for turning their backs on Ukraine and the NATO countries that are battling Russian expansionism.
Reacting to comments from both Trump and Rubio on Tuesday, Geraghty wrote, "... so far in his second term, regarding the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Trump has offered to Vladimir Putin that Ukraine will not retake all its annexed and occupied sovereign territory, that Ukraine will not join NATO, that there will be no U.S. troops on Ukrainian soil after the war, and that the U.S. will lift sanctions on Russia." before noting, "And in exchange, Putin offered . . . well, nothing, really."
With that in mind, he singled out Rubio telling reporters he agreed with the Russian delegation to “lay the groundwork for future cooperation on matters of mutual geopolitical interest and historic economic and investment opportunities which will emerge from a successful end to the conflict in Ukraine.”
That led the conservative columnist to bluntly ask, "What 'mutual geopolitical interest' do we have with the regime that fired a missile into Kyiv’s main children’s hospital? " before adding, "Russia has killed more than 12,000 Ukrainian civilians, and more than 6 million Ukrainian citizens live under the brutal hand of occupying Russian forces, and our government is talking about 'historic economic and investment opportunities' with them?"
As he noted, Russian has little to nothing that America needs by pointing out, "Grain? Oil? Natural gas? We already have that stuff; there is more than we need, and plenty is available for export. I thought the Trump plan was to build us into an energy production superpower."
Reporting that Rubio also stated a peace settlement would be brought about in "a way that’s enduring and acceptable to all the parties engaged,” Geraghty questioned Rubio's wisdom.
"Does Rubio envision Putin recognizing Ukraine as a legitimate and independent country? He has never done that. Down to the marrow in his bones, Putin sees Ukraine as part of Russia that can never be allowed to pursue its own separate path," he wrote.
As for Trump's demands that Ukraine hold a new election as part of the settlement, Geraghty wrote that the mere thought of that being acceptable when nearly 20 percent of Ukraine is living under a Russian occupation is absurd by pointing out, "This would be akin to running an American presidential election with only 40 of the 50 states able to participate."
Noting Trump's claims that the Ukraine president is unpopular in his own country, the columnist concluded, "Trump’s absurd claim that Zelensky has a 4 percent approval rating is a hint that Trump is flailing and thrashing around, trying anything to justify his current de facto pro-Russian stance."
You can read more here.
Mike Pence Calls out Trump for lying about Ukraine
Mike Pence has refused to sit quietly as Donald Trump claims Ukraine is somehow to blame for being invaded by Russia three years ago.
Trump’s former vice president, who war cordial with his former running mate at Jimmy Carter’s funeral and inauguration last month, struck a different tone in a post to X on Wednesday.
“Mr. President, Ukraine did not ‘start’ this war,” he wrote. “Russia launched an unprovoked and brutal invasion claiming hundreds of thousands of lives. The Road to Peace must be built on the Truth.”
Pence included a link to a 2022 Fox News report from day one of the Russia-Ukraine war that read, “Russia invades Ukraine in largest European attack since WWII.”
Trump has offered up his own version of history this week, suggesting from Mar-a-Lago on Tuesday that Ukraine’s president Volodymyr Zelensky shouldered the blame for the combined deaths of more than 700,000 of his countrymen and Russians.
Ohh Look Project 2025 that wasn't Real in FULL EFFECT
The order would essentially put independent agencies such as the Federal Trade Commission, the Federal Communications Commission and the Securities and Exchange Commission under the watch of Office of Management and Budget Review Director Russell Vought, a key Project 2025 author.
If it survives expected legal challenges, it would require the agencies to submit major regulations to the OMB and allow it to make changes to their budgets according to Trump’s priorities.
The order also states that no employee may “advance an interpretation of the law as the position of the United States that contravenes the President or the Attorney General’s opinion on a matter of law,” effectively forcing the agencies' attorneys to go along with Trump's and Attorney General Pam Bondi’s interpretations of laws.
For Vought, who has advocated for greater presidential control over government agencies, the executive order would realize a long-standing goal if allowed to go into effect. In a chapter in Project 2025, he wrote that the president must rein in a “sprawling federal bureaucracy” and laid out how the OMB could help consolidate power over independent agencies in the White House.
PF5
Sheriff
real question for maga´s or trump supporters: are you ok with these EOś that seem to be heading for some form of dictatorship, or monarchy, or at the very least expanded presidential control? I try to put myself in the shoes of others, and think, ¨how would I feel if Obama had done this?¨ (last president I respected) I´d like to think I would be somewhat embarrassed and thinking this is not right or good for America...
Right or Good For America?? Members of the GOP OR Voters who Register as Republicans have a serious question to ask themselves RIGHT NOW. Is what Trump is doing with our Allies, Our Adversaries, Our Institutions and making VAST power grabs , the way he is conducting Mass Deportations, in ANY WAY reflective the Principles the GOP adopted?
1. Individual Freedom
2. Limited Government
3. The Rule of Law
4. Peace Through Strength
5. Fiscal Responsibility
6. Free Markets
7. Human Dignity
If you can see that the Principles of Conservatism (FYI this list was written by Speaker Mike Johnson and a GOP Think Tank) are being trampled all over right now by Trump, then its time you understand you are a Conservative that No longer has a Party....because the Party of Trump is doing NOTHING to uphold the Principles THEY THEMSELVES tell us they should have.
Bit it actually did.
Because they have conditioned people to not take him seriously or literally. Yet, can anyone say it is not amazing to see such brazenly undemocratic messaging from an official White House communication?
Dude I hate Trump as much as anyone. This is a pure propaganda hit piece. Sadly we have to look for that in our media today.
PF5
Sheriff
Trump calls Zelensky 'dictator' as rift between two leaders deepens
The comments come as the latest salvo in a public war of words between the US and Ukrainian leaders.
www.bbc.com
"Zelensky better move fast or he is not going to have a country left," Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social.
(tRump is such a fine leader...)so effing embarrassing...
Or you could, you know,.not defend him. Can't blame someone for your choice.
Are you feeling okay these days? That isn’t close to true if you could do math. And also. Yes it did.
@Bowers3 if you don't get it you never will. I hate Trump and think his end game is empirical America. His method of achieving it is point out the insanity that has to be stopped. Sadly he's not wrong. I hope he fails and wins. Stops the insanity and doesn't change our constitution.
Well I get math and ain’t no way Trump is worth $200 billion or more.
Or….you know….just don’t.
PF5
Sheriff
The White House message about flamethrowing Elon Musk: Nothing to see here politico
It’s the Elon Musk paradox.
On X, he’s a noble gladiator with a mission direct from President Donald Trump. He brags at length about using his “Department of Government Efficiency” to dismantle federal bureaucracies, cancel taxpayer-funded programs and transform Washington’s institutions.
But in court — and increasingly in public messaging — the White House claims he’s really just a run-of-the-mill adviser. Musk is an “employee” with no direct connection to the DOGE operation and no decision-making power, a White House official swore this week in response to one of the many lawsuits challenging what Musk and DOGE are doing.
Officially downplaying Musk’s authority — even as the ultra-wealthy CEO himself amplifies it — may have both legal and political benefits. After all, Musk’s consolidation of power might not just run afoul of the Constitution; it also could undermine some of the populist rhetoric that propelled Trump to victory in 2024.
The political pitfalls are already emerging in a new poll out Wednesday that shows 55 percent of voters think Musk has accumulated too much power.
“I think it is by design,” New Jersey Attorney General Matt Platkin, a Democrat, said of the mixed messages about Musk’s role. “They don’t want to say what his real role is because they don’t want to admit that an unelected billionaire is running the federal government right now.”
...
It’s the Elon Musk paradox.
On X, he’s a noble gladiator with a mission direct from President Donald Trump. He brags at length about using his “Department of Government Efficiency” to dismantle federal bureaucracies, cancel taxpayer-funded programs and transform Washington’s institutions.
But in court — and increasingly in public messaging — the White House claims he’s really just a run-of-the-mill adviser. Musk is an “employee” with no direct connection to the DOGE operation and no decision-making power, a White House official swore this week in response to one of the many lawsuits challenging what Musk and DOGE are doing.
Officially downplaying Musk’s authority — even as the ultra-wealthy CEO himself amplifies it — may have both legal and political benefits. After all, Musk’s consolidation of power might not just run afoul of the Constitution; it also could undermine some of the populist rhetoric that propelled Trump to victory in 2024.
The political pitfalls are already emerging in a new poll out Wednesday that shows 55 percent of voters think Musk has accumulated too much power.
“I think it is by design,” New Jersey Attorney General Matt Platkin, a Democrat, said of the mixed messages about Musk’s role. “They don’t want to say what his real role is because they don’t want to admit that an unelected billionaire is running the federal government right now.”
...
Similar threads
