Donald Trump Endorses Murdering Drug Users/Dealers

[fishonjazz]

I haven't discussed politics in this forum, I didn't realize a response was needed every 5 minutes. I was letting people know Im not going into hiding.

Sent from my VS425PP using JazzFanz mobile app

Nevermind.
I shouldn't have even said anything. My bad

 

[JazzyFresh]

Ok, off work. Basically all I'm asking for is for any ounce of proof that Trump has endorsed Duterte. It seems every single day something like this comes out and has no factual proof or substance beside stirring the pot. To claim Trump is ok with the killing of drug dealers and users is quite the serious claim and in order for me to take it with any truth, I need more evidence than some maniac talking out of his ***. People say "why didn't he denounce, blah blah", I could say that about Hillary's campaign and all the supposed crookedness, I could say that about those who claim Obama supports Muslims so he's a terrorist, I could say that about Bills affiliation with Podesta and the possible child porn ring, I could say that about almost any politician(well why didn't they denounce it?). It's ridiculous to me that people believe anything the media tells them with only hearsay. It's amazingly scary that people will eat it up without even second guessing all while these news organizations(CNN, Fox, MSNBC) have been caught in partisan lie after lie.

If Trump is guilty of "endorsing" a cold blooded killer, then I fully understand the concern. But to do so based off the word of another person is extremely irresponsible and straight up gullible. I'm not the one claiming guilt here, others are based off evidence that wouldn't hold any weight in a court of law.

If that makes me stupid then so be it.

 

[Gameface]

Ok, off work. Basically all I'm asking for is for any ounce of proof that Trump has endorsed Duterte. It seems every single day something like this comes out and has no factual proof or substance beside stirring the pot. To claim Trump is ok with the killing of drug dealers and users is quite the serious claim and in order for me to take it with any truth, I need more evidence than some maniac talking out of his ***. People say "why didn't he denounce, blah blah", I could say that about Hillary's campaign and all the supposed crookedness, I could say that about those who claim Obama supports Muslims so he's a terrorist, I could say that about Bills affiliation with Podesta and the possible child porn ring, I could say that about almost any politician(well why didn't they denounce it?). It's ridiculous to me that people believe anything the media tells them with only hearsay. It's amazingly scary that people will eat it up without even second guessing all while these news organizations(CNN, Fox, MSNBC) have been caught in partisan lie after lie.

If Trump is guilty of "endorsing" a cold blooded killer, then I fully understand the concern. But to do so based off the word of another person is extremely irresponsible and straight up gullible. I'm not the one claiming guilt here, others are based off evidence that wouldn't hold any weight in a court of law.

If that makes me stupid then so be it.

I get what you're saying. And I agree. We don't necessarily know if Trump said what Duterte said he said.

However, let's look at what we do know.

Trump made a phone call to Duterte. At this point that's an official head of state to head of state-elect communication. Trump seems to lack an understanding that he is not representing Trump anymore. His actions are official actions of the US head of state.

The head of state, President Duterte of the Philippines, made an official statement in regard to the nature of that phone call, with specific claims as to Trump's endorsement of how he has handled drug dealers, drug users and people who could have possibly been drug users. So the President of the Philippines talked to Trump and then made a statement about what happened. At this point the ball is in President-elect Trump's court. If the official statement from the Filipino President is false Trump MUST clarify the facts.

This is not Presidential nominee Trump anymore. This is President-elect Trump. If he wants to abandon thousands of years of protocols for heads of state he should announce that and make clear how it is he is going to handle foreign affairs. Otherwise he's actually just a clown who is in a game he doesn't know the rules for and he will be assessed as such by the leaders of every other nation on this planet.

There are, apparently, consequences to electing a person to an office they are not qualified for.

 

[JazzyFresh]

I get what you're saying. And I agree. We don't necessarily know if Trump said what Duterte said he said.

However, let's look at what we do know.

Trump made a phone call to Duterte. At this point that's an official head of state to head of state-elect communication. Trump seems to lack an understanding that he is not representing Trump anymore. His actions are official actions of the US head of state.

The head of state, President Duterte of the Philippines, made an official statement in regard to the nature of that phone call, with specific claims as to Trump's endorsement of how he has handled drug dealers, drug users and people who could have possibly been drug users. So the President of the Philippines talked to Trump and then made a statement about what happened. At this point the ball is in President-elect Trump's court. If the official statement from the Filipino President is false Trump MUST clarify the facts.

This is not Presidential nominee Trump anymore. This is President-elect Trump. If he wants to abandon thousands of years of protocols for heads of state he should announce that and make clear how it is he is going to handle foreign affairs. Otherwise he's actually just a clown who is in a game he doesn't know the rules for and he will be assessed as such by the leaders of every other nation on this planet.

There are, apparently, consequences to electing a person to an office they are not qualified for.

I can't argue with that, and admittedly I should have read through this thread more before jumping to conclusions. I've had this conversation elsewhere and maybe brought some of that conversation here.

To your point I don't feel that we need an explanation for everything and anything. It would be nice to know or for him to come out on every bit of news but it is not a necessity. Not its even close to the same level of importance, and I know this is far fetched but I compare it to the Jazz front office on injuries. Sure we want to hear them come clean and give us specifics but they don't have to tell us everything that goes on, nor do the need to inform us on every trade rumor or trade speculation. Trump isn't the first president to not come clean on something we may view as wrong and he will not be the last.



Sent from my VS425PP using JazzFanz mobile app

 

[fishonjazz]

To your point I don't feel that we need an explanation for everything and anything. It would be nice to know or for him to come out on every bit of news but it is not a necessity.

Don't want an explanation for anything and everything. Or for every bit of news.

Maybe trump should just give us an explanation when he calls another countries leader and that leader proclaims that Trump told him that Trump supports murdering drug dealers and drug users.

Trump should pick and choose when he gives his citizens an explanation for things. Don't come out publicly for every minor criticism. Don't tweet about every little thing that gets a bee in his bonnet. This seems like one the times he should probably come out and explain himself. Supporting murdering drug users is kind of a big deal but he doesn't want to explain himself on that one..... yet if someone says he has small hands he is quick to make a public statement about that. Seems like he is concerned about the wrong things. Imo being a supporter of murdering drug users is a bigger concern than the size of his hands.

 

[♪alt13]

I get what you're saying. And I agree. We don't necessarily know if Trump said what Duterte said he said.

However, let's look at what we do know.

Trump made a phone call to Duterte. At this point that's an official head of state to head of state-elect communication. Trump seems to lack an understanding that he is not representing Trump anymore. His actions are official actions of the US head of state.

The head of state, President Duterte of the Philippines, made an official statement in regard to the nature of that phone call, with specific claims as to Trump's endorsement of how he has handled drug dealers, drug users and people who could have possibly been drug users. So the President of the Philippines talked to Trump and then made a statement about what happened. At this point the ball is in President-elect Trump's court. If the official statement from the Filipino President is false Trump MUST clarify the facts.

This is not Presidential nominee Trump anymore. This is President-elect Trump. If he wants to abandon thousands of years of protocols for heads of state he should announce that and make clear how it is he is going to handle foreign affairs. Otherwise he's actually just a clown who is in a game he doesn't know the rules for and he will be assessed as such by the leaders of every other nation on this planet.

There are, apparently, consequences to electing a person to an office they are not qualified for.

I must add that a leader that has openly advocated for the mass killing of his own citizens and acted upon those words, called Obama a "son of a bitch" after Obama criticized him for it. That same man said that Trump made him feel "like a saint" after he spoke with him.

 

[reignman40]

Could be worse. Thank goodness Hitlery didn't win anyway.

 

[Gameface]

Could be worse. Thank goodness Hitlery didn't win anyway.

Hillary is a pro. She would have commanded respect from the international community.

There's a reason Putin wanted to deal with Trump instead of Clinton, and it's not because he cares about the quality and morality of the U.S. government.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

Hillary is a pro. She would have commanded respect from the international community.

There's a reason Putin wanted to deal with Trump instead of Clinton, and it's not because he cares about the quality and morality of the U.S. government.

 

[LogGrad98]

Hillary is a pro. She would have commanded respect from the international community.

There's a reason Putin wanted to deal with Trump instead of Clinton, and it's not because he cares about the quality and morality of the U.S. government.

Pro what? We have never been weaker on the international stage than we are right now. As sec of state she carries substantial blame. I'm deathly afraid of trumps foreign policy,but the anemia of the Obama/Clinton foreign policy didn't do us any favors.

 

[NAOS]

Pro what? We have never been weaker on the international stage than we are right now. As sec of state she carries substantial blame. I'm deathly afraid of trumps foreign policy,but the anemia of the Obama/Clinton foreign policy didn't do us any favors.

How would you rate W's record on foreign policy? Two endless wars and pink revolutions all across the Western Hemisphere?

I traveled in Latin America for most of Bush's presidency and Americans were hated, generally speaking. That's not the case any more. He also managed to turn a just war (IMO)(Iraq) into an on-going international diplomatic nightmare. And what did he do as far as Israel-Palestine is concerned?

Anemia is one thing. ****ty pragmatics with the hand you're dealt is another. Triage is yet another....



For the record, I'm not a fan of either Clinton. AT ALL.

 

[Gameface]

Like, that's hilarious and all, but ultimately meaningless.

Thanks for lowering the level of conversation.

 

[LogGrad98]

I've tried to find it without any luck, so what is the context of that gif? Was it just one of those moments for her or was there actually something going on? Watch anyone pretty much 24/7 and you're bound to catch them napping or picking their nose.

 

[Gameface]

Pro what? We have never been weaker on the international stage than we are right now. As sec of state she carries substantial blame. I'm deathly afraid of trumps foreign policy,but the anemia of the Obama/Clinton foreign policy didn't do us any favors.

I know you're not pro-Trump (or at least, that's how I've read you so far) and I get that you're also not a fan of Hillary Clinton. But Clinton is unquestionably a professional politician and would have handled diplomacy in a competent way.

Her judgement is certainly questionable. She does deserve some blame for actions as Secretary of State, no doubt.

But I think the differences between her and Trump would be huge. Trump has disappointed me at almost every turn during this transition phase and the only thing saving me from outright horror over him is that at this rate he will not serve 4 years. In this context I use the word "serve" very lightly, as I don't think Trump has the slightest inclination towards service to this nation.

 

[Gameface]

I've tried to find it without any luck, so what is the context of that gif? Was it just one of those moments for her or was there actually something going on? Watch anyone pretty much 24/7 and you're bound to catch them napping or picking their nose.

I don't really know either but I imagine a banner being unfurled or balloons being released, or something along those lines.

 

[LogGrad98]

I know you're not pro-Trump (or at least, that's how I've read you so far) and I get that you're also not a fan of Hillary Clinton. But Clinton is unquestionably a professional politician and would have handled diplomacy in a competent way.

Her judgement is certainly questionable. She does deserve some blame for actions as Secretary of State, no doubt.

But I think the differences between her and Trump would be huge. Trump has disappointed me at almost every turn during this transition phase and the only thing saving me from outright horror over him is that at this rate he will not serve 4 years. In this context I use the word "serve" very lightly, as I don't think Trump has the slightest inclination towards service to this nation.

I made it petty clear, I thought, that my opinion was the worst case scenario was Trump getting elected, and the next worst case was Clinton getting elected. I voted third party. The only hope I have for the Trump presidency is the fact that he is inexperienced so hopefully he has some fairly competent "handlers" to help him when the **** really starts to hit the fan. Otherwise we are in for 4 years of potential hell fueled by narcissism and incompetence. That is a truly dangerous combination. But I'm also willing to wait and see, because largely we have no other choice right now anyway and we really just don't know.

As far a foreign policy goes, imo we have never been viewed as weaker on the international stage. Here is a decent articles detailing the failures of the Obama administration. I think GWB started digging the foreign policy hole we are in but Obama and Clinton made it far worse through terrible decisions, inaction, and outright dishonesty and failure to follow through. Bush made some of our allies begin to dislike us, but still maintained a healthy respect for our capabilities and willingness to actively support just causes, Obama has made our allies and enemies believe we are no longer a force to be reckoned with and cannot be trusted to even keep our word.

https://nationalinterest.org/featur...olicy-performance-the-worst-ever-16436?page=2

 

[DutchJazzer]

why arent we talking about obamas "legacy"?

it will be gone like a FART in the wind. only thing obama legacy will leave behind, is the most debt accumulated by a president ever.


everything else seems to vanish thanks to executive orders!

 

[fishonjazz]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-tu...vate-citizens-raising-concerns-222713161.html

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

Like, that's hilarious and all, but ultimately meaningless.

Thanks for lowering the level of conversation.

You have talked about her all election season as if she's some gift from the body politic. Now you're calling her a pro. In reality, it was going to take one hell of a poor choice to lose to Trump, but she pulled it off.

 

[Joe Bagadonuts]

I've tried to find it without any luck, so what is the context of that gif? Was it just one of those moments for her or was there actually something going on? Watch anyone pretty much 24/7 and you're bound to catch them napping or picking their nose.

She was sooper-dooper excited to see the balloons released at the Democratic Convention.