Sickening, this Narcissist is.

[larsenb]

Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my "wires tapped" in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!
@realDonaldTrump 5:35 AM - 4 Mar 2017

How low has President Obama gone to tapp my phones during the very sacred election process. This is Nixon/Watergate. Bad (or sick) guy!
6:02 AM - 4 Mar 2017

I'd bet a good lawyer could make a great case out of the fact that President Obama was tapping my phones in October, just prior to Election!
5:52 AM - 4 Mar 2017

Is it legal for a sitting President to be "wire tapping" a race for president prior to an election? Turned down by court earlier. A NEW LOW!
5:49 AM - 4 Mar 2017

Arnold Schwarzenegger isn't voluntarily leaving the Apprentice, he was fired by his bad (pathetic) ratings, not by me. Sad end to great show
7:19 AM - 4 Mar 2017

There is ample evidence that Obama set up illegal electronic surveillance before and after Trump's election. Also, the NYT revealed these activities, claiming they had seen the results, which in itself is a felony. None of this pursued by Comey, et al. Nor is the fact that the targets were unmasked to the general public, which is also illegal.

'Wire tap' is same-same electronic surveillance, because actual 'wire-taping' is obsolete in today's world.

If you weren't so keyed in to your anti-Trump sources, you might learn about some of these things.

This thread is about Marmalade's narcissism, not Obama.

The underlying purpose of this thread is for you to exhibit your unceasing venom for Trump. How narcissistic is that?? Once again, your use of derogation underscores the emotional basis for your dislike, IMHO. I.e., nigh unto being irrational.

[Silver]

Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my "wires tapped" in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!
@realDonaldTrump 5:35 AM - 4 Mar 2017

How low has President Obama gone to tapp my phones during the very sacred election process. This is Nixon/Watergate. Bad (or sick) guy!
6:02 AM - 4 Mar 2017

I'd bet a good lawyer could make a great case out of the fact that President Obama was tapping my phones in October, just prior to Election!
5:52 AM - 4 Mar 2017

Is it legal for a sitting President to be "wire tapping" a race for president prior to an election? Turned down by court earlier. A NEW LOW!
5:49 AM - 4 Mar 2017

Arnold Schwarzenegger isn't voluntarily leaving the Apprentice, he was fired by his bad (pathetic) ratings, not by me. Sad end to great show
7:19 AM - 4 Mar 2017

There is ample evidence that Obama set up illegal electronic surveillance before and after Trump's election. Also, the NYT revealed these activities, claiming they had seen the results, which in itself is a felony. None of this pursued by Comey, et al. Nor is the fact that the targets were unmasked to the general public, which is also illegal.

'Wire tap' is same-same electronic surveillance, because actual 'wire-taping' is obsolete in today's world.

If you weren't so keyed in to your anti-Trump sources, you might learn about some of these things.

This thread is about Marmalade's narcissism, not Obama.

The underlying purpose of this thread is for you to exhibit your unceasing venom for Trump. How narcissistic is that?? Once again, your use of derogation underscores the emotional basis for your dislike, IMHO. I.e., nigh unto being irrational.

Let me offer my sincere appreciation for your assistance in keeping this thread near the top.

[eddie]

I think Silver is Log, he was completely obsessive

[Silver]

I think Silver is Log, he was completely obsessive

Thanks to you, too, eddie.

[eddie]

Get the net!

[Silver]

Get the net!

Thanks again.

[eddie]

Get the net!

Thanks again.

Anytime good buddy.

[Silver]

What a blessing the Book of Mormon is in our lives. For LDSFF members it is particularly helpful with regard to the dangers of secret combinations.

The article below mentions another narcissist, Barry Soetero. Unfortunately, the article lacks the clarity provided by Ether 8. Sure, Barry did bad stuff as president. Of course he loves his mirror, just like Trump. However, both of them are just golfers. Other people are in charge.

http://www.newstarget.com/2017-05-18-la ... nixon.html

Late Justice Antonin Scalia believed Obama was spying on SCOTUS; 44th prez 100 times worse than Nixon
By: JD HeyesDate: May 18, 2017

In an appearance on Fox Business News on Monday, network legal analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano dropped a bombshell while discussing allegations by Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., that he and another senator were spied on by the Obama administration.

As reported by The Gateway Pundit, Napolitano said the late U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia told him once he believed that the Obama White House was actually spying on the high court.

“Justice Scalia told me that he often thought the court was being surveilled. And he told me that probably four or five years ago,” said Napolitano. “If they had to unmask Senator Paul’s name to reveal a conversation he was having with a foreign agent and the foreign agent was hostile to the United States they can do that. That’s not what he’s talking about. They’re talking about unmasking him when he’s having a conversation with his campaign manager when he’s running in the Republican primary.”

During the same discussion, Napolitano said the Justice Department could take the highly unusual step of calling on Obama to testify in any legal query involving said unmasking if he viewed the intelligence. (RELATED: Memo to McCain: Of course Trump Tower was under surveillance; what did Obama know and when did he know it should be your question)

But the combination of Napolitano’s bombshell, along with Paul’s belief that he was under electronic surveillance by the Obama administration, are two remarkable pieces of information taken in the greater context of allegations surrounding the former president’s politicization of the U.S. intelligence community and federal law enforcement during his tenure.

Paul – who dropped out of the presidential contest fairly early and eventually endorsed Donald J. Trump – was nevertheless a legitimate presidential candidate. If his allegations are true, then his campaign would be the second GOP presidential effort Team Obama had under surveillance, under the phony guise of gathering intelligence on foreign entities.

Coupled with Napolitano’s claim and taken in sum, these allegations – if all proven true – mean that the 44th president of the United States engaged in far more criminal surveillance than President Richard M. Nixon, whose political chicanery led to his resignation from office, thereby saving him from certain impeachment.

That is substantial because Nixon’s politicization of the FBI – largely to keep watch over the raging anti-Vietnam War movement of the day – led to major new legislation at the time regulating the Executive Branch’s authority to order such surveillance.

The illegality of the Nixon White House’s surveillance activities – which were widespread and also included White House aides and reporters – coupled with illegal CIA activities led the Church Committee to recommend legislative changes to the way the Executive Branch interacted with the intelligence community. The resulting law was the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, which has been revised a number of times since.

But the point is, the process of collecting intelligence had been completely politicized, and while the FISA law, along with House and Senate intelligence oversight, worked to curb the kind of politicization seen during the Nixon administration and subsequent administration of President Gerald R. Ford, it is now painfully obvious that politicization of the intelligence processes were brought back 100-fold by Obama.

Unmasking of Trump campaign officials including former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, former campaign official Paul Manafort and others is clear indication that the process was being controlled by the Executive Branch, like it was during the Nixon administration. Nixon was aided by H. R. Haldeman, and two other aides, Frederick LaRue and John Sears, primarily; Obama’s chief flunky was National Security Advisor Susan Rice, according to various reports. (RELATED: Rand Paul filibusters Patriot Act renewal and domestic spying)

Earlier this month, Paul asked the Senate Intelligence Committee to inform him if the panel has any information indicating that he, along with Team Trump, was under surveillance by the Obama regime.

“I reiterate my previous requests that your committee promptly investigate whether my name or the names of other members of Congress, or individuals from our staffs or campaigns, were included in queries or searches of databases of the intelligence community, or if their identities were unmasked in any intelligence reports or products,” he wrote, as The Hill reported.

Napolitano says Scalia told him Obama spied on SCOTUS. We know that he spied on the Trump campaign. If he also spied on Paul’s campaign, it is wholly appropriate to ask Congress to divulge all of the campaigns that were spied upon.

Best guess is that they would all be GOP candidates.

[Silver]

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/ ... 101243584/

Donald Trump's malignant narcissism is toxic: Psychologist
John Gartner Published 3:16 a.m. ET May 4, 2017 | Updated 8:54 a.m. ET May 4, 2017
Mental health professionals have a 'duty to warn' about a leader who may be unfit to serve.

If you take President Trump’s words literally, you have no choice but to conclude that he is psychotic. A delusion is “a fixed false belief that is resistant to reason or confrontation with actual fact.” Despite all evidence to the contrary, Trump asserts that his New York office was bugged by President Obama, and that his inauguration had the biggest crowd size in history. Before the election, Right Wing Watch published a list of 58 conspiracies proclaimed by Trump.

Is it all for effect, to rile up his base, deflect blame and distract from his shortcomings, or does Trump really believe the insane things he says? It’s often hard to know, because as Harvard psychoanalyst Lance Dodes put it, Trump tells two kinds of lies: the ones he tells others to scam them, and those he tells himself. “He lies because of his sociopathic tendencies," Dodes said. "There's also the kind of lying he has that is in a way more serious, that he has a loose grip on reality." Is he crazy like a fox or just plain crazy? Not a question we want to be asking about our president.

Much has been written about Trump having narcissistic personality disorder. As critics have pointed out, merely saying a leader is narcissistic is hardly disqualifying. But malignant narcissism is like a malignant tumor: toxic.

Psychoanalyst and Holocaust survivor Erich Fromm, who invented the diagnosis of malignant narcissism, argues that it “lies on the borderline between sanity and insanity.” Otto Kernberg, a psychoanalyst specializing in borderline personalities, defined malignant narcissism as having four components: narcissism, paranoia, antisocial personality and sadism. Trump exhibits all four.

His narcissism is evident in his “grandiose sense of self-importance … without commensurate achievements.” From viewing cable news, he knows "more about ISIS than the generals” and believes that among all human beings on the planet, “I alone can fix it.” His "repeated lying," “disregard for and violation of the rights of others” (Trump University fraud and multiple sexual assault allegations) and “lack of remorse” meet the clinical criteria for anti-social personality. His bizarre conspiracy theories, false sense of victimization, and demonization of the press, minorities and anyone who opposes him are textbook paranoia. Like most sadists, Trump has been a bully since childhood, and his thousands of vicious tweets make him perhaps the most prolific cyber bully in history.

A year ago, I warned that “the idea that Trump is going to settle down and become presidential when he achieves power is wishful thinking.” Trump, like many successful people, shows biological signs of hypomania — a mild and more functional expression of bipolar genes that manifest in energy, confidence, creativity, little need for sleep, as well as arrogance, impulsivity, irritability and diminished judgment. As is often typical, when Trump has achieved great success, his hypomania has increased with disastrous consequences.

In Michael Kruse's article “1988: the Year Donald Lost his Mind,” he wrote, “His response to his surging celebrity” after the publication of The Art of The Deal “was a series of manic, ill-advised ventures” that led to bankruptcy and divorce.

Last year, after Trump became the Republican presidential nominee, New York Times columnist David Brooks noted a similar deterioration: “With each passing week, he displays the classic symptoms of medium-grade mania in more disturbing forms: inflated self-esteem, sleeplessness, impulsivity, aggression and a compulsion to offer advice on subjects he knows nothing about.” Much has been said about Trump's disjointed Associated Press interview last month. As Brooks wrote, “Manics display something called ‘flight of ideas.’ It's a formal thought disorder in which ideas tumble forth through a disordered chain of associations. One word sparks another, which sparks another …”

One symptom of hypomania is impulsivity. Seventy-two hours after Trump saw upsetting pictures of gassed Syrian children, he launched 59 Tomahawk missiles at the Assad regime. Whether Trump guessed right or wrong, sudden lethal moves that reverse his longstanding policy are disturbing. “Acting on instinct, Trump upends his own Syria policy” was the headline in The Times. Its analysis said the president’s advisers “were clearly uncomfortable with the suggestion that Mr. Trump was acting impulsively." As Ezra Klein put it, “A foreign policy based on Trump’s gut reactions to the images flashing before him on cable news” is “dangerous.”

Now Trump is ratcheting up tensions to create a crisis with North Korea.

Some say it is unethical to dare to diagnose the president, but hundreds of mental health professionals have come together to found Duty To Warn. We believe that just as we are ethically and legally obligated to break confidentiality to warn a potential victim of violence, our duty to warn the public trumps all other considerations.

More than 53,000 people have signed our petition, aimed at mental health professionals, stating Trump should be removed under the 25th Amendment because he is too mentally ill to competently serve. At a conference on the Duty To Warn last month at Yale medical school, psychiatrist Robert Jay Lifton warned against creeping “malignant normality.” Under a malignantly narcissistic leader, alternate facts, conspiracy theories, racism, science denial and delegitimization of the press become not only acceptable but also the new normal. If we do not confront this evil, it will consume us.

Duty to Warn is planning a multicity March for Sanity on Oct. 7 to “make America sane again.” Hope to see you there, assuming we’re all still here.

Psychologist John Gartner, the founder of Duty To Warn, taught in the Department of Psychiatry at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine for 28 years. He is the author of In Search of Bill Clinton: A Psychological Biography.

[Silver]

What follows is a small part of a long and detailed appraisal of the poor shell of a man Trump has become.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/ar ... mp/480771/

III. HIS MOTIVATIONS
For psychologists, it is almost impossible to talk about Donald Trump without using the word narcissism. Asked to sum up Trump’s personality for an article in Vanity Fair, Howard Gardner, a psychologist at Harvard, responded, “Remarkably narcissistic.” George Simon, a clinical psychologist who conducts seminars on manipulative behavior, says Trump is “so classic that I’m archiving video clips of him to use in workshops because there’s no better example” of narcissism. “Otherwise I would have had to hire actors and write vignettes. He’s like a dream come true.”

When I walk north on Michigan Avenue in Chicago, where I live, I often stop to admire the sleek tower that Trump built on the Chicago River. But why did he have to stencil his name in 20‑foot letters across the front? As nearly everybody knows, Trump has attached his name to pretty much everything he has ever touched—from casinos to steaks to a so-called university that promised to teach students how to become rich. Self-references pervade Trump’s speeches and conversations, too. When, in the summer of 1999, he stood up to offer remarks at his father’s funeral, Trump spoke mainly about himself. It was the toughest day of his own life, Trump began. He went on to talk about Fred Trump’s greatest achievement: raising a brilliant and renowned son. As Gwenda Blair writes in her three-generation biography of the Trump family, The Trumps, “the first-person singular pronouns, the I and me and my, eclipsed the he and his. Where others spoke of their memories of Fred Trump, [Donald] spoke of Fred Trump’s endorsement.”

In the ancient Greek legend, the beautiful boy Narcissus falls so completely in love with the reflection of himself in a pool that he plunges into the water and drowns. The story provides the mythical source for the modern concept of narcissism, which is conceived as excessive self-love and the attendant qualities of grandiosity and a sense of entitlement. Highly narcissistic people are always trying to draw attention to themselves. Repeated and inordinate self-reference is a distinguishing feature of their personality.

[Silver]

necktie.jpeg (31.44 KiB) Viewed 1305 times

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/phi ... d91807c1/0

[brlenox]

I think Silver is Log, he was completely obsessive

No really? This can't be Log...I haven't heard from him in eons....Log is that you in there?...Hello...

[Silver]

I think Silver is Log, he was completely obsessive

No really? This can't be Log...I haven't heard from him in eons....Log is that you in there?...Hello...

Definitely not.

[Silver]

All you have to say is: I repent of all my support for Trump. That one simple sentence, strictly followed, will make you feel so much better.

Your "last several Presidents" argument is a bit fallacious. What does it matter what I have said about the previous puppets? I have mentioned them, but it is hardly germane to this discussion. Trump is committing evil now and I'm calling him out on it. Your deception is internal in that you're rationalizing away the Marmalade in Chief's murders.

As I said, you show no understanding of my position, so there really isn't much use carrying on any conversation with you on the subject. You have shown no willingness to try to understand where I and others are coming from w/regard Trump, even though I've described this starting point multiple times to you.

It is clear, however, you seem to harbor a very powerful emotional reaction to the man. This was evident long before he was elected President and is underscored by your apparent need to call him derogatory names.

You obviously are stewing in your anti-Trump juices. I simply won't be able to do anything to help you escape that condition. Sorry.

Since larsenb is yielding the field of battle, I'll direct my comments to any other Trump supporters who stumble upon this thread about the Orange Narcissist.

What larsenb is really saying is, "Why can't I convince Silver that he's wrong?" The answer is easy: It's because I have decided that in the case of this recent presidential election I would not vote for the lesser of two evils. Then when Trump was elected, I watched for the typical Administration staffing operations. Sure enough, he went back to the same old well all the previous presidents draw water from. Einstein's definition of insanity applies here if you're expecting America to be great again with the cast of villains with which Trump has surrounded himself.

The field of battle is in your mind. Take me at my word that I don't really care if you're wrong or right. You are simply obsessed with Trump, and I'm not going to change your obsession. Again, look at the dozens of anti-Trump threads you've started, and many of these well before he was elected.

I think it is worth while to point out this obsession to other readers. Obsessions come with intense biases. Yours are quite evident.

Would you care to rescind or at least explain what you mean by the sentence highlighted in red?

[Silver]

http://www.mediaite.com/online/art-of-t ... to-resign/

Art of the Deal Ghostwriter: Trump Has to ‘Figure Out a Way to Resign’
by Colin Kalmbacher | 11:38 pm, May 17th, 2017

Hours after the announcement of Robert Mueller‘s appointment as special counsel probing Russian interference in the election, CNN’s Anderson Cooper spoke with Tony Schwartz, the ghostwriter of President Donald Trump‘s perennial best-seller, “The Art of the Deal.”

When asked by the CNN host how he thought Trump was handling the steady stream of scandals that have engulfed his nascent administration, Schwartz delved deep into the president’s psyche:

There is no right and wrong for Trump. There’s winning and losing. And that’s very different from right and wrong. And right now he’s in pure terror that he is going to lose.

And by the way he is going to lose.

I surely believe that at some point over the next period of time he’s going to have to figure out a way to resign and the reason he’s going to do that as opposed to go through what could be an impeachment process, or a continuing humiliation, is that he wants to figure out a way — as he’s done all his career — to turn a loss into a victory.

And so he will declare victory when he leaves.

[Silver]

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/ ... -tells-all

THE POLITICAL SCENE JULY 25, 2016 ISSUE
DONALD TRUMP’S GHOSTWRITER TELLS ALL
“The Art of the Deal” made America see Trump as a charmer with an unfailing knack for business. Tony Schwartz helped create that myth—and regrets it.
By Jane Mayer

Last June, as dusk fell outside Tony Schwartz’s sprawling house, on a leafy back road in Riverdale, New York, he pulled out his laptop and caught up with the day’s big news: Donald J. Trump had declared his candidacy for President. As Schwartz watched a video of the speech, he began to feel personally implicated.

Trump, facing a crowd that had gathered in the lobby of Trump Tower, on Fifth Avenue, laid out his qualifications, saying, “We need a leader that wrote ‘The Art of the Deal.’ ” If that was so, Schwartz thought, then he, not Trump, should be running. Schwartz dashed off a tweet: “Many thanks Donald Trump for suggesting I run for President, based on the fact that I wrote ‘The Art of the Deal.’ ”

Schwartz had ghostwritten Trump’s 1987 breakthrough memoir, earning a joint byline on the cover, half of the book’s five-hundred-thousand-dollar advance, and half of the royalties. The book was a phenomenal success, spending forty-eight weeks on the Times best-seller list, thirteen of them at No. 1. More than a million copies have been bought, generating several million dollars in royalties. The book expanded Trump’s renown far beyond New York City, making him an emblem of the successful tycoon. Edward Kosner, the former editor and publisher of New York, where Schwartz worked as a writer at the time, says, “Tony created Trump. He’s Dr. Frankenstein.”

Starting in late 1985, Schwartz spent eighteen months with Trump—camping out in his office, joining him on his helicopter, tagging along at meetings, and spending weekends with him at his Manhattan apartment and his Florida estate. During that period, Schwartz felt, he had got to know him better than almost anyone else outside the Trump family. Until Schwartz posted the tweet, though, he had not spoken publicly about Trump for decades. It had never been his ambition to be a ghostwriter, and he had been glad to move on. But, as he watched a replay of the new candidate holding forth for forty-five minutes, he noticed something strange: over the decades, Trump appeared to have convinced himself that he had written the book. Schwartz recalls thinking, “If he could lie about that on Day One—when it was so easily refuted—he is likely to lie about anything.”

It seemed improbable that Trump’s campaign would succeed, so Schwartz told himself that he needn’t worry much. But, as Trump denounced Mexican immigrants as “rapists,” near the end of the speech, Schwartz felt anxious. He had spent hundreds of hours observing Trump firsthand, and felt that he had an unusually deep understanding of what he regarded as Trump’s beguiling strengths and disqualifying weaknesses. Many Americans, however, saw Trump as a charmingly brash entrepreneur with an unfailing knack for business—a mythical image that Schwartz had helped create. “It pays to trust your instincts,” Trump says in the book, adding that he was set to make hundreds of millions of dollars after buying a hotel that he hadn’t even walked through.

In the subsequent months, as Trump defied predictions by establishing himself as the front-runner for the Republican nomination, Schwartz’s desire to set the record straight grew. He had long since left journalism to launch the Energy Project, a consulting firm that promises to improve employees’ productivity by helping them boost their “physical, emotional, mental, and spiritual” morale. It was a successful company, with clients such as Facebook, and Schwartz’s colleagues urged him to avoid the political fray. But the prospect of President Trump terrified him. It wasn’t because of Trump’s ideology—Schwartz doubted that he had one. The problem was Trump’s personality, which he considered pathologically impulsive and self-centered.

Schwartz thought about publishing an article describing his reservations about Trump, but he hesitated, knowing that, since he’d cashed in on the flattering “Art of the Deal,” his credibility and his motives would be seen as suspect. Yet watching the campaign was excruciating. Schwartz decided that if he kept mum and Trump was elected he’d never forgive himself. In June, he agreed to break his silence and give his first candid interview about the Trump he got to know while acting as his Boswell.

“I put lipstick on a pig,” he said. “I feel a deep sense of remorse that I contributed to presenting Trump in a way that brought him wider attention and made him more appealing than he is.” He went on, “I genuinely believe that if Trump wins and gets the nuclear codes there is an excellent possibility it will lead to the end of civilization.”

If he were writing “The Art of the Deal” today, Schwartz said, it would be a very different book with a very different title. Asked what he would call it, he answered, “The Sociopath.”

[Fiannan]

I have generally found that the left is far more judgemental than the right.

[Silver]

5 minutes and 57 seconds of pure love, but the first 2 minutes tells you everything you need to know about the narcissist and his administration. Evil does not do good.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2D7AiufhXms

[Silver]

Should the title be, Very Atlantic City?

http://twitchy.com/gregp-3534/2017/05/1 ... tusabroad/

‘Very Vegas’! Trump greeted in Saudi Arabia with a gigantic portrait of himself in lights #POTUSAbroad
Posted at 7:52 pm on May 19, 2017 by Greg P.

Fake Trump.jpg (89.4 KiB) Viewed 1248 times

Fake Patriotism.jpg (238.76 KiB) Viewed 1248 times

The Hair went to pay obeisance to the House of Saud even sooner in his presidency than Barack Obama did back in 2009. Obama visited Saudi Arabia four times. Let's see how many times the Marmalade In Chief goes prior to his resignation...or prior to NOT getting the Mexicans to pay for The Wall.

Saudi Arabia Saudi Arabia Riyadh Province June 3–4 [2009] President Obama met with King Abdullah and discussed various issues, including the Arab–Israeli conflict and Iran's nuclear program.[43][44][45]

This is a list of international presidential trips made by Barack Obama, the 44th president of the United States. Barack Obama made 52 international trips to 58 different countries (in addition to visiting the West Bank) during his presidency, which began on January 20, 2009 and ended on January 20, 2017.
The number of visits per country where he traveled are:
One visit to Argentina, Brazil, Cambodia, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Egypt, El Salvador, Estonia, Ethiopia, Ghana, Greece, Iraq, Ireland, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Laos, Netherlands, Norway, Panama, Peru, Portugal, Senegal, Singapore, Spain, Sweden, Tanzania, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, Vietnam and the West Bank
Two visits to Australia, Belgium, Czech Republic, Denmark, India, Indonesia, Israel, Italy, Malaysia, Myanmar (Burma), Philippines, Russia, South Africa, Turkey and Vatican City
Three visits to Canada, China and Poland
Four visits to Afghanistan, Japan, Saudi Arabia and South Korea
Five visits to Mexico and the United Kingdom
Six visits to France and Germany

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_i ... rack_Obama

[kittycat51]

At LEAST Trump did not bow to the Saudi King....(unlike someone else did)

[Silver]

At LEAST Trump did not bow to the Saudi King....(unlike someone else did)

That rationalization won't mean much to the innocent Yemenis and Syrians who dies at the hands of the Saudis. The US/MIC is profiting from murder.

the-power-to-conscript-and-the-power-to-tax-300x300.png (149.27 KiB) Viewed 1222 times

[Silver]

The Human Rights Council is an inter-governmental body within the United Nations system made up of 47 States responsible for the promotion and protection of all human rights around the globe.

UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL
Current Membership of the Human Rights Council, 1 January - 31 December 2017
Saudi Arabia

http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/HRC/Pa ... mbers.aspx

[larsenb]

As I said, you show no understanding of my position, so there really isn't much use carrying on any conversation with you on the subject. You have shown no willingness to try to understand where I and others are coming from w/regard Trump, even though I've described this starting point multiple times to you.

It is clear, however, you seem to harbor a very powerful emotional reaction to the man. This was evident long before he was elected President and is underscored by your apparent need to call him derogatory names.

You obviously are stewing in your anti-Trump juices. I simply won't be able to do anything to help you escape that condition. Sorry.

Since larsenb is yielding the field of battle, I'll direct my comments to any other Trump supporters who stumble upon this thread about the Orange Narcissist.

What larsenb is really saying is, "Why can't I convince Silver that he's wrong?" The answer is easy: It's because I have decided that in the case of this recent presidential election I would not vote for the lesser of two evils. Then when Trump was elected, I watched for the typical Administration staffing operations. Sure enough, he went back to the same old well all the previous presidents draw water from. Einstein's definition of insanity applies here if you're expecting America to be great again with the cast of villains with which Trump has surrounded himself.

The field of battle is in your mind. Take me at my word that I don't really care if you're wrong or right. You are simply obsessed with Trump, and I'm not going to change your obsession. Again, look at the dozens of anti-Trump threads you've started, and many of these well before he was elected.

I think it is worth while to point out this obsession to other readers. Obsessions come with intense biases. Yours are quite evident.

Would you care to rescind or at least explain what you mean by the sentence highlighted in red?

I wrote that in response to your assertion that: "What larsenb is really saying is, "Why can't I convince Silver that he's wrong?"" I'm not trying to convince you of anything having realized your negative obsession with Trump is so powerful, it would be a waste of time. If I rebut you, it would be mainly for the broader audience. In that sense, I no longer care whether you have any valid points about Trump. I.e., you are a tainted conduit for Trump information, in my view because of your obsession; and thus, It's a waste of my time to take you serious.

And I see your obsessive negativity w/regards Trump as very analogous to msfreeh's obsession w/the evils of the FBI, whose posts I seldom read, because of his intense and almost monomaniacal biases toward the FBI.

Just look at the blizzard of anti-Trump posts you've come up with after receiving just a bit of opposition. There doesn't seem to be any end to your reaction.

[Silver]

Since larsenb is yielding the field of battle, I'll direct my comments to any other Trump supporters who stumble upon this thread about the Orange Narcissist.

What larsenb is really saying is, "Why can't I convince Silver that he's wrong?" The answer is easy: It's because I have decided that in the case of this recent presidential election I would not vote for the lesser of two evils. Then when Trump was elected, I watched for the typical Administration staffing operations. Sure enough, he went back to the same old well all the previous presidents draw water from. Einstein's definition of insanity applies here if you're expecting America to be great again with the cast of villains with which Trump has surrounded himself.

The field of battle is in your mind. Take me at my word that I don't really care if you're wrong or right. You are simply obsessed with Trump, and I'm not going to change your obsession. Again, look at the dozens of anti-Trump threads you've started, and many of these well before he was elected.

I think it is worth while to point out this obsession to other readers. Obsessions come with intense biases. Yours are quite evident.

Would you care to rescind or at least explain what you mean by the sentence highlighted in red?

I wrote that in response to your assertion that: "What larsenb is really saying is, "Why can't I convince Silver that he's wrong?"" I'm not trying to convince you of anything having realized your negative obsession with Trump is so powerful, it would be a waste of time. If I rebut you, it would be mainly for the broader audience. In that sense, I no longer care whether you have any valid points about Trump. I.e., you are a tainted conduit for Trump information, in my view because of your obsession; and thus, It's a waste of my time to take you serious.

And I see your obsessive negativity w/regards Trump as very analogous to msfreeh's obsession w/the evils of the FBI, whose posts I seldom read, because of his intense and almost monomaniacal biases toward the FBI.

Just look at the blizzard of anti-Trump posts you've come up with after receiving just a bit of opposition. There doesn't seem to be any end to your reaction.

It just seems nonsensical for you to say you don't care if I'm right or wrong. If I'm right, the country is in trouble, whether I'm being annoying by posting a lot of material about Trump or not. Shooting the messenger hardly seems like a logical solution. You don't like my messages. I get that. That won't make me stop though.

Your example of msfreeh's postings about the FBI is useless on me because my own family was the target of their abuse when I was nine years old. They even threatened my poor grandmother. Do you think the unrighteous dominion has gotten better or worse since 1968?

Really though, look at what you've written. If you respond to me, it's only because you want to send a message to some "broader audience" whereas all of my messages are due to what you have claimed is an obsession. I could easily reverse that claim on you. I write for the political benefit of all on LDSFF and you are so obsessed you have to respond to every one of my posts about Trump. So I pray that you'll be happy in all your endeavors while I'm having a great time finding the truth about Trump and sharing it.

He killed innocent people, you know. He's helping the Saudis to kill even more. And he's a narcissist.

[larsenb]

The field of battle is in your mind. Take me at my word that I don't really care if you're wrong or right. You are simply obsessed with Trump, and I'm not going to change your obsession. Again, look at the dozens of anti-Trump threads you've started, and many of these well before he was elected.

I think it is worth while to point out this obsession to other readers. Obsessions come with intense biases. Yours are quite evident.

Would you care to rescind or at least explain what you mean by the sentence highlighted in red?

I wrote that in response to your assertion that: "What larsenb is really saying is, "Why can't I convince Silver that he's wrong?"" I'm not trying to convince you of anything having realized your negative obsession with Trump is so powerful, it would be a waste of time. If I rebut you, it would be mainly for the broader audience. In that sense, I no longer care whether you have any valid points about Trump. I.e., you are a tainted conduit for Trump information, in my view because of your obsession; and thus, It's a waste of my time to take you serious.

And I see your obsessive negativity w/regards Trump as very analogous to msfreeh's obsession w/the evils of the FBI, whose posts I seldom read, because of his intense and almost monomaniacal biases toward the FBI.

Just look at the blizzard of anti-Trump posts you've come up with after receiving just a bit of opposition. There doesn't seem to be any end to your reaction.

It just seems nonsensical for you to say you don't care if I'm right or wrong. If I'm right, the country is in trouble, whether I'm being annoying by posting a lot of material about Trump or not. Shooting the messenger hardly seems like a logical solution. You don't like my messages. I get that. That won't make me stop though.

Your example of msfreeh's postings about the FBI is useless on me because my own family was the target of their abuse when I was nine years old. They even threatened my poor grandmother. Do you think the unrighteous dominion has gotten better or worse since 1968?

Really though, look at what you've written. If you respond to me, it's only because you want to send a message to some "broader audience" whereas all of my messages are due to what you have claimed is an obsession. I could easily reverse that claim on you. I write for the political benefit of all on LDSFF and you are so obsessed you have to respond to every one of my posts about Trump. So I pray that you'll be happy in all your endeavors while I'm having a great time finding the truth about Trump and sharing it.

He killed innocent people, you know. He's helping the Saudis to kill even more.

It's not shooting the messenger. Your messages become annoying when you ignore anything positive about Trump, his goals and what he is doing. Not any more complicated than that. And much of what you post can easily be disputed. I'm not saying all, there is another side of the story for a lot of it. And you've opened myriad threads to feed your obsession. At least msfreeh keeps his postings mostly on a few threads.

Now I don't much like the FBI, either, reinforced by how they treated witnesses to the Vince Foster death scene, etc., including the role they played in getting Lavoy Finicum murdered.

No, I have not and will not respond to everyone of your posts. There isn't time enough in the day to do so. You're too obsessed, and don't cover any of the positive things Trump has done and is doing. Of course, you would undoubtedly deny that he has done anything worthy of attention.