President Trump: The NEW one and only politics thread

I posted a link on the other thread, but a growing majority of consumers want brands to be involved in activism. We see it across brand categories and political beliefs. If your core consumers already believe in protecting the environment and you start being vocal that your brand does too, then you see a bump in sales.

 

A Trumpist and RT? Seems like an odd fit.

 

Every time I see a burning pair of Nikes on FB, my comment is that Levi's has come out for gun control and that if they don't want their Levis I'll take them.

I have yet to get a response to that line.

 

"Lucrative". I wonder what Tokyo Rose got paid.

 

Brett Kavanaugh will be our next Supreme Court justice for all the wrong reasons

 

I've actually been wondering about this. If the person who wrote the op-ed is taking stuff off the president's desk, or out of the Oval Office -- even with what they think are the best intentions -- wouldn't that be some form of treason and/or espionage? And haven't they just admitted to it publicly?
Pretty sure if you steal a pen on the White House tour your ass is going in the slammer, so why wouldn't taking potentially classified information fall under the same category?

 

This sounds familiar: Remember Otto in North Korea?

 

The corollary to which is "your lectures made Trump inevitable."

 

I'm no lawyer, but I would think there is a distinction between swearing an oath of allegiance to your country and to your president. If you are charged with treason for sabotaging the president, could you argue that you thought you were doing something to protect your country?

I'm asking. I don't know the answer.

 

Lectures about the supposed geographic locations of presidential birthplaces: acceptable
Lectures about being a good citizen from a former chief executive: unacceptable

 

-- House Republicans withdrew from negotiations about barring the use of hacked or stolen material on the campaign trail. The New York Times’s Nicholas Fandos reports: “Leaders of the National Republican Congressional Committee, the campaign arm of House Republicans, and their counterparts at the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee had labored for much of the summer over rules that would have governed the way the congressionally run committees and their candidates treated material like the thousands of pages of damaging Democratic documents stolen and leaked by Russian hackers in 2016. Instead, the two parties were left on Thursday exchanging shots just two months before Election Day; Republicans claimed that Democrats had negotiated in bad faith and violated an agreement not to speak about the negotiations publicly, and Democrats said that Republicans were merely searching for an excuse to pull out.”

 

Wrong. If you don't want the same rules applied, then don't set the precedent.

You don't want the other side to go low, then don't go low yourself first. You go low, then you have zero right to complain when your opponent uses your own methods against you.

Plus, it may turn out that Trump's offenses are a lot more legitimately impeachable then lying about one's sex life under oath. Is that necessarily going low?