Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

The Trump Presidency...

Last edited:
That Day Trump signed over his family business empire in 2016 prior to working in elected government.



Gave very single quarterly pay to national institutions.

Vs

That day Biden started his family business empire using a position in elected government in 1972.



Sold out America to enrich his family while taking taxpayer paycheques and subsidies.
You actually believe that, don't you?

Bless.








 
Prove me wrong princess
aaaand another:


BTW, have you heard of a place called Mar el Largo?

Nearly three years into Trump’s tenure, the nonprofit Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics (CREW) has documented more than 2,000 instances that it considers conflicts of interest between his business interests and his duty to the country as president. The conflicts come, in part, because Trump has retained ownership of his international business operation, the Trump Organization, despite calls demanding he divest to avoid conflicts of interest.

“Americans should never be put in that position where there is any question of whether these politicians are acting in the interest of the American people who they are serving,” said Robert Maguire, research director at CREW, which is currently party to a number of lawsuits against the Trump administration, including two involving potential conflicts of interest.

The White House did not respond to multiple requests for comment from the PBS NewsHour regarding Trump’s financial interests in Turkey and elsewhere.
 
Last edited:
aaaand another:


BTW, have you heard of a place called Mar el Largo?

Nearly three years into Trump’s tenure, the nonprofit Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics (CREW) has documented more than 2,000 instances that it considers conflicts of interest between his business interests and his duty to the country as president. The conflicts come, in part, because Trump has retained ownership of his international business operation, the Trump Organization, despite calls demanding he divest to avoid conflicts of interest.

“Americans should never be put in that position where there is any question of whether these politicians are acting in the interest of the American people who they are serving,” said Robert Maguire, research director at CREW, which is currently party to a number of lawsuits against the Trump administration, including two involving potential conflicts of interest.

The White House did not respond to multiple requests for comment from the PBS NewsHour regarding Trump’s financial interests in Turkey and elsewhere.

err... Updated on Oct 17, 2019 2:50 PM EDT — Published on Oct 9, 2019 5:32 PM EDT

Aaaaaaaand another:



errr.. Updated 1338 GMT (2138 HKT) November 3, 2019

What was the outcome princess?
Thats right, nothing.

Clutching at wibble you are doing.


Nice try though, I suppose it's easier than accepting Trump's oppo's are guilty of extreme projection.
 
Quitd remarkable claims:


but but but Voting by mail is safe PMSL.

You rekon damning evidence would be sent by post?
The evidence is digital if it involves the hard drives and the phones (Tony B), seems there are quite a few copies about of the disks.

Unless this is more evidence outside the #laptopfromhell clusterfuck.
 
No shit eh!

The anonymous senior Trump administration official who authored the infamous New York Times op-ed in 2018 declaring to be part of the "resistance" revealed himself on Wednesday to be former Department of Homeland Security chief of staff Miles Taylor.

Taylor, who previously came forward as a critic of President Trump and a supporter of Joe Biden in August, explained that he wrote his 2019 book "A Warning" as Anonymous as a "caution to voters that it wasn't as bad as it looked inside the Trump administration – it was worse."

"While I claim sole authorship of the work, the sentiments expressed within it were widely held among officials at the highest levels of the federal government," Taylor wrote in a statement published on Medium. "In other words, Trump's own lieutenants were alarmed by his instability."

Taylor was hired by CNN as a contributor in September. However, it is now known that he lied to the network by denying authorship of the op-ed during an Aug. 21 interview with his now-colleague Anderson Cooper.

"There was an op-ed, there was a book by someone calling themselves 'Anonymous.' Are you aware of who that is?" Cooper asked.

"I'm not," Taylor responded. "Look, that was a parlor game that happened in Washington D.C. of a lot of folks trying to think of who that might be. I've got my own thoughts about who that might be, but-"

"You're not Anonymous," Cooper interjected.

"I wear a mask for two things, Anderson: Halloweens and pandemics. So, no," Taylor answered.

Taylor similarly lied to Vice News political correspondent Elizabeth Landers about being the anonymous writer.

According to CNN anchor Jake Tapper, who broke the news on his network on Wednesday afternoon, "We did not know this until today."

CNN did not immediately respond to Fox News' request for comment, though a spokesperson told Washington Post's Erik Wemple that Taylor will remain as a contributor despite his lie to Anderson Cooper.

White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany released a statement knocking Taylor as a "low-level, disgruntled former staffer," as well as "a liar and a coward who chose anonymity over action and leaking over leading.

"He was ineffective and incompetent during his time as DHS Chief of Staff which is why he was promptly fired after only serving in this role for a matter of weeks," McEnany added. "It is appalling a low-ranking official would be granted anonymity and it is clear the New York Times is doing the bidding of Never-Trumpers and Democrats."

White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows also piled on the former Trump official.

You have got to be kidding me. Miles Taylor? That’s who the New York Times granted an anonymous editorial article? I’ve seen more exciting reveals in Scooby-Doo episodes. What a monumental embarrassment," Meadows tweeted.

When the op-ed by a "senior Trump administration official" was published in September 2018, there was plenty of speculation that the identity was actually someone of high status. Names that were floated at the time included then-White House Chief of Staff John Kelly, then-Counselor to the President Kellyanne Conway, then-DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen, and then-U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley.

The big reveal turned out to be a big letdown on social media.

"It’s an embarrassment," Axios reporter Jonathan Swan reacted. "I also didn’t realize the definition of 'senior administration official' could be *this* expansive. Wasn’t even an agency chief of staff at the time the op-ed ran."

"I can’t stop laughing. What a bust. Everyone is like 'who?'" former acting DNI Ric Grenell tweeted.

"The revelation of the identity of 'Anonymous' calls into question whether the NYT had ample grounds to allow him to write without identifying him. I figured it had to be someone at cabinet level, at least," Washington Post columnist Karen Tumulty similarly expressed.

"Is an advisor to a cabinet secretary really a 'senior administration official'? The widespread impression at the time of the NYT op-ed was that 'Anonymous' was someone who actually advised the president," ABC News Chief White House correspondent Jonathan Karl posted.

A spokesperson for the Times told Fox News, "We take seriously our obligations to protect sources. Many important stories in sensitive areas like politics, national security and business could never be reported if our journalists violated that trust. In this case, however, the writer has personally waived our agreement to keep his identity confidential. We can confirm that he is the author of the Anonymous op-ed. We don’t plan to comment further."




How many people bought that one!
I eagerly await the "anonymous source" that Shifty Schiff used to push the whole Ukraine Impeachment Hoax.
Amazing, I wonder if they are getting twitchy sphincters at the thought of a 2nd term coming after them with new staff.
 
Polling; Most semi-sensible people on both sides of the US election divide, would accept that Trump has had some sort of swing, since the start of the month, as evident in the swing states... Some people argue that polling isn't crooked and yet the last 12 general polls:-

5 polls - have Trump on less than 42 % points, which is highly dubious.
3 polls - have Trump on exactly 42 % points.
2 polls - have Trump on 46 % points.
1 poll - has Trump on 48 points.

Conclusion:-
The argument; is the polling got it wrong in the lead up to 2016 and by election day, the spread was closer and most polls fell close to the margin of error(partly true).. Lessons learned and in 2020 it will be better...

The evidence to me, is unlike 2020, the polling has split into two clearly definable groups and that is evidence of bias in one side, as the other group is going to be spectacularly wrong.
 
No shit eh!

The anonymous senior Trump administration official who authored the infamous New York Times op-ed in 2018 declaring to be part of the "resistance" revealed himself on Wednesday to be former Department of Homeland Security chief of staff Miles Taylor.

Taylor, who previously came forward as a critic of President Trump and a supporter of Joe Biden in August, explained that he wrote his 2019 book "A Warning" as Anonymous as a "caution to voters that it wasn't as bad as it looked inside the Trump administration – it was worse."

"While I claim sole authorship of the work, the sentiments expressed within it were widely held among officials at the highest levels of the federal government," Taylor wrote in a statement published on Medium. "In other words, Trump's own lieutenants were alarmed by his instability."

Taylor was hired by CNN as a contributor in September. However, it is now known that he lied to the network by denying authorship of the op-ed during an Aug. 21 interview with his now-colleague Anderson Cooper.

"There was an op-ed, there was a book by someone calling themselves 'Anonymous.' Are you aware of who that is?" Cooper asked.

"I'm not," Taylor responded. "Look, that was a parlor game that happened in Washington D.C. of a lot of folks trying to think of who that might be. I've got my own thoughts about who that might be, but-"

"You're not Anonymous," Cooper interjected.

"I wear a mask for two things, Anderson: Halloweens and pandemics. So, no," Taylor answered.

Taylor similarly lied to Vice News political correspondent Elizabeth Landers about being the anonymous writer.

According to CNN anchor Jake Tapper, who broke the news on his network on Wednesday afternoon, "We did not know this until today."

CNN did not immediately respond to Fox News' request for comment, though a spokesperson told Washington Post's Erik Wemple that Taylor will remain as a contributor despite his lie to Anderson Cooper.

White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany released a statement knocking Taylor as a "low-level, disgruntled former staffer," as well as "a liar and a coward who chose anonymity over action and leaking over leading.

"He was ineffective and incompetent during his time as DHS Chief of Staff which is why he was promptly fired after only serving in this role for a matter of weeks," McEnany added. "It is appalling a low-ranking official would be granted anonymity and it is clear the New York Times is doing the bidding of Never-Trumpers and Democrats."

White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows also piled on the former Trump official.

You have got to be kidding me. Miles Taylor? That’s who the New York Times granted an anonymous editorial article? I’ve seen more exciting reveals in Scooby-Doo episodes. What a monumental embarrassment," Meadows tweeted.

When the op-ed by a "senior Trump administration official" was published in September 2018, there was plenty of speculation that the identity was actually someone of high status. Names that were floated at the time included then-White House Chief of Staff John Kelly, then-Counselor to the President Kellyanne Conway, then-DHS Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen, and then-U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley.

The big reveal turned out to be a big letdown on social media.

"It’s an embarrassment," Axios reporter Jonathan Swan reacted. "I also didn’t realize the definition of 'senior administration official' could be *this* expansive. Wasn’t even an agency chief of staff at the time the op-ed ran."

"I can’t stop laughing. What a bust. Everyone is like 'who?'" former acting DNI Ric Grenell tweeted.

"The revelation of the identity of 'Anonymous' calls into question whether the NYT had ample grounds to allow him to write without identifying him. I figured it had to be someone at cabinet level, at least," Washington Post columnist Karen Tumulty similarly expressed.

"Is an advisor to a cabinet secretary really a 'senior administration official'? The widespread impression at the time of the NYT op-ed was that 'Anonymous' was someone who actually advised the president," ABC News Chief White House correspondent Jonathan Karl posted.

A spokesperson for the Times told Fox News, "We take seriously our obligations to protect sources. Many important stories in sensitive areas like politics, national security and business could never be reported if our journalists violated that trust. In this case, however, the writer has personally waived our agreement to keep his identity confidential. We can confirm that he is the author of the Anonymous op-ed. We don’t plan to comment further."




How many people bought that one!
I eagerly await the "anonymous source" that Shifty Schiff used to push the whole Ukraine Impeachment Hoax.
Amazing, I wonder if they are getting twitchy sphincters at the thought of a 2nd term coming after them with new staff.
And?

Look out for splinters.
 
Polling; Most semi-sensible people on both sides of the US election divide, would accept that Trump has had some sort of swing, since the start of the month, as evident in the swing states... Some people argue that polling isn't crooked and yet the last 12 general polls:-

5 polls - have Trump on less than 42 % points, which is highly dubious.
3 polls - have Trump on exactly 42 % points.
2 polls - have Trump on 46 % points.
1 poll - has Trump on 48 points.

Conclusion:-
The argument; is the polling got it wrong in the lead up to 2016 and by election day, the spread was closer and most polls fell close to the margin of error(partly true).. Lessons learned and in 2020 it will be better...

The evidence to me, is unlike 2020, the polling has split into two clearly definable groups and that is evidence of bias in one side, as the other group is going to be spectacularly wrong.
0001287.jpg
 
Top