I confess to back pedaling into Trump territory when I wanted to leave discussions about him in the garbage can. My thread on the read-only break room site has 9,600 replies so I thought I'd bring up a new one.
He's not going away.
Haberman's book is out based on interviews. I won't read it, but the excerpts are interesting. Especially what he says about McConnell, a description that's against the Terms of Service here, but I actually don't disagree with. LOL
Quote
“At one point, Trump made a candid admission that was as jarring as it was ultimately unsurprising. ‘The question I get asked more than any other question: “If you had it to do again, would you have done it?”’Trump said of running for president. ‘The answer is, yeah, I think so. Because here’s the way I look at it. I have so many rich friends and nobody knows who they are.’ … Reflecting on the meaning of having been president of the United States, his first impulse was not to mention public service, or what he felt he’d accomplished, only that it appeared to be a vehicle for fame, and that many experiences were only worth having if someone else envied them.”
Specializes in Peds/outpatient FP,derm,allergy/private duty.
toomuchbaloney said:
I don't understand what sparked the tirade. The portrait was hung in 2019. What triggered the mad but vain king's tirade? Is he up at night looking at all of the images of himself in Google?
That's what I didn't understand either. I assumed that for some reason, as he said "many people have called and written to complain. In fact, they are actually angry about it!" Meaning he only saw the portrait after people complained.
By the way, I don't agree that Obama's portrait looked wonderful. Here's the one she painted of George W. Bush. He looks OK. I think the artist makes the cheeks look too puffed out, seems quite noticeable on Trump's portrait. I just don't think it was deliberate.
That's funny. It's OK if you don't agree with the way I characterized how the sychphant physician described Trump. I don't care if it looks like him then or now.
Fair enough you don't care. But it appears they physician didn't say what you claimed and you cant back it up.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
Tweety said:
Fair enough you don't care. But it appears they physician didn't say what you claimed and you cant back it up.
It was my characterization of doctor Ronny lying about Trump's weight and other details of his physical. It's OK if you believe that Jackson was honest about Trump's weight at the time. I clearly don't but it's not important enough to argue over the details. Trump is a liar surrounded by liars. You believe any of them about anything at your own risk.
It was my characterization of doctor Ronny lying about Trump's weight and other details of his physical. It's OK if you believe that Jackson was honest about Trump's weight at the time. I clearly don't but it's not important enough to argue over the details. Trump is a liar surrounded by liars. You believe any of them about anything at your own risk.
You could make this discussion smoother by actually referencing the lie told by Jackson concerning Trump's weight and other details of his physical.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
Beerman said:
You could make this discussion smoother by actually referencing the lie told by Jackson concerning Trump's weight and other details of his physical.
Nah. We talked about it at the time. It's old news that Trump specifically chooses people to work for and around him because they will support and tell his lies.
I'd rather talk about how Trump doesn't know what his top cabinet members are doing while he's spending his time fretting about an unflattering portrait in Colorado. Is rather talk about the VP, and Director of DOD using personal phones and Signal to talk about a real time military mission. It sounds kind of like Trump's team uses this method of official communication in the regular, doesn't it? Those chats aren't retained as official communication.
Yeah. Let's talk about current events and current lies.
Nah. We talked about it at the time. It's old news that Trump specifically chooses people to work for and around him because they will support and tell his lies.
I'd rather talk about how Trump doesn't know what his top cabinet members are doing while he's spending his time fretting about an unflattering portrait in Colorado. Is rather talk about the VP, and Director of DOD using personal phones and Signal to talk about a real time military mission. It sounds kind of like Trump's team uses this method of official communication in the regular, doesn't it? Those chats aren't retained as official communication.
Yeah. Let's talk about current events and current lies.
I read that Project 2025 called for exactly this approach in order to circumvent subpoenas for official communications. Am skimming the document to find the specific statement. It's taking a while.
Meanwhile, we could always discuss Trump's ongoing threats to annex Greenland. Like Afghanistan and Ukraine, Greenland happens to have substantial deposits of rare earth minerals. Funny how that works, eh?
We could talk about how Trump and team have diminished our standing in the world.
Quote
Trump himself, of course, has denied any knowledge of the whole farrago. He is never in the room at the time when any of this stuff happens. His initial remarks were simply an iteration of the usual White House response to any embarrassment: he knew nothing about it but suggested that the Atlantic is "not much of a magazine". What is that supposed to mean? And if Mr Goldberg and his publication are so low in esteem, what was he doing on Mike Waltz's contacts list?
I read that Project 2025 called for exactly this approach in order to circumvent subpoenas for official communications. Am skimming the document to find the specific statement. It's taking a while.
The Department of Health and Human Services has abruptly canceled more than $12 billion in federal grants to states that were being used for tracking infectious diseases, mental health services, addiction treatment and other urgent health issues.
The cuts are likely to further hamstring state health departments, which are already underfunded and struggling with competing demands from chronic diseases, resurgent infections like syphilis and emerging threats like bird flu.
State health departments began receiving notices on Monday evening that the funds, which were allocated during the Covid-19 pandemic, were being terminated, effective immediately.
"No additional activities can be conducted, and no additional costs may be incurred, as it relates to these funds,” the notices said.
For some, the effect was immediate.
In Lubbock, Texas, public health officials have received orders to stop work supported by three grants that helped fund the response to the widening measles outbreak there, according to Katherine Wells, the city's director of public health.
On Tuesday, some state health departments were preparing to lay off dozens of epidemiologists and data scientists. Others, including Texas, Maine and Rhode Island, were still scrambling to understand the impact of the cuts before taking any action.
In interviews, state health officials predicted that thousands of health department employees and contract workers could lose their jobs nationwide. Some predicted the loss of as much as 90 percent of staff from some infectious disease teams.
The best way to find money for a tax break for the wealthy is to make cuts to public health during a measles outbreak. Just ask Elon.
The best way to find money for a tax break for the wealthy is to make cuts to public health during a measles outbreak. Just ask Elon.
Your logic is faulty for many reasons. The most obvious is that That a "tax break for the wealthy" anytime they want if that was the goal. It's not necessary to "find money" for it.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
Who expected Trump to call the Signal scandal a hoax? Who is surprised that the hoax angle is the direction that Fox News felt they needed to take their audience?
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
Beerman said:
Your logic is faulty for many reasons. The most obvious is that That a "tax break for the wealthy" anytime they want if that was the goal. It's not necessary to "find money" for it.
LOL
Your statement seems self evident. The corrupt and deeply dishonest members of the republican congressional caucus could most certainly pass whatever they can build consensus around. Building consensus is a problem for Republicans. This is part of the reason that republicans are reforming the federal government to centralize power in the executive office.
My guess is that they are still trying to maintain some narrative with their base that the tax cuts are some how offset by this or that savings. That is something that they've required for other legislation, right? Maybe it's OK for them to just abandon that ruse now, like they abandoned family values, law and order, or accountability, eh?
nursel56
7,122 Posts
That's what I didn't understand either. I assumed that for some reason, as he said "many people have called and written to complain. In fact, they are actually angry about it!" Meaning he only saw the portrait after people complained.
By the way, I don't agree that Obama's portrait looked wonderful. Here's the one she painted of George W. Bush. He looks OK. I think the artist makes the cheeks look too puffed out, seems quite noticeable on Trump's portrait. I just don't think it was deliberate.