12-20-19 New Trump bashing for cliff-e
67 responses | 0 likes
Started by metmike - Dec. 20, 2019, 2:45 p.m.

cliff-e continues to take advantage of  threads dedicated to his trolling and Trump bashing. 

Since I let this last one go longer than usual, we set an all time record.......congratulations cliff!

                11-5-2019 New Trump bashing Thread for cliff-e(others)             

                            73 responses |                


            Started by metmike - Nov. 5, 2019, 11:16 p.m.            


Here are some previous ones below:

The previous one got close to a record.

                10-5-2019 New Trump bashing Thread for cliff-e(others)         

   62 responses

                 Started by metmike - Oct. 5, 2019, 7:36 p.m.            



                New Trump Criticizing/bashing Thread for cliff-e(and others)            

                            65 responses |    

                                            Started by metmike - Aug. 22, 2019, 1:16 p.m.            



Here is the previous one:

                Trump bashing thread for cliff-e            

                            53 responses |             

                              Started by metmike - Aug. 5, 2019, 1:35 a.m.            



By metmike - Dec. 20, 2019, 2:52 p.m.
Like Reply

So that cliff does not lose the impact of his active trolling the last couple of days, here are his posts from the last Trump bashing thread.

Please use this current thread to continue!

                Re: 11-5-2019 New Trump bashing Thread for cliff-e(others)            


                By cliff-e - Dec. 17, 2019, 11:14 a.m.            


Winning less support.





                Re: 11-5-2019 New Trump bashing Thread for cliff-e(others)            


                By cliff-e - Dec. 18, 2019, 9:50 p.m.            


No photo description available.





                             Re: 11-5-2019 New Trump bashing Thread for cliff-e(others)            

                            By cliff-e - Dec. 19, 2019, 8:22 a.m.            


45 classless and cruel as always.




                Re: Re: 11-5-2019 New Trump bashing Thread for cliff-e(others)            



Thanks for passing along the breaking news cliff. 

Who would have guessed that this was coming (-:



                Re: 11-5-2019 New Trump bashing Thread for cliff-e(others)            


                By cliff-e - Dec. 19, 2019, 5:47 p.m.            


More winning news...45 is the 1st in the 1st term.

Image may contain: 2 people, text




                Re: Re: 11-5-2019 New Trump bashing Thread for cliff-e(others)            


                           By TimNew - Dec. 20, 2019, 3:40 a.m.            


I think this says more about the current dem party than it does about Trump. Will history agree?  Guess it depends on who writes it.



                                     Re: 11-5-2019 New Trump bashing Thread for cliff-e(others)            

                By cliff-e - Dec. 20, 2019, 7:44 a.m.            


Image may contain: 1 person, text




                Re: 11-5-2019 New Trump bashing Thread for cliff-e(others)            


                By cliff-e - Dec. 20, 2019, 2:24 p.m.            


More support from another family mocked with 45's cruel and venomous blather.




                Re: Re: 11-5-2019 New Trump bashing Thread for cliff-e(others)            

                                   By metmike - Dec. 20, 2019, 2:34 p.m.            


We were  getting worried about you for awhile there cliff, with the Trump bashing drought for several weeks.

One can see that the impeachment has given you new life and Trump bashing, post generating enthusiasm.

This thread is almost 2 months long though and we will need to start a new one because the length requires excessive scrolling to get to the last post.

By cliff-e - Dec. 21, 2019, 8:17 a.m.
Like Reply
By mcfarm - Dec. 21, 2019, 10:16 a.m.
Like Reply

this actually tracks the general feel about Trump nationwide. He is being impeached for something he said meanwhile Hil, biden, comey, brennan, clapper, stryuck, page, and all the rest are free while committing actual crimes. Trump has doe great work for America and the swamp tries to maintain their power.

By metmike - Dec. 21, 2019, 1:40 p.m.
Like Reply

From your source:

"But if, as expected, Trump is acquitted by the Senate, more voters say it would help his chances of winning reelection (43 percent) than say it would hurt (16 percent) or wouldn’t have an impact (26 percent). Roughly 3-in-10 Democrats, 29 percent, say a Senate acquittal would be a boon to Trump’s reelection prospects, compared with 58 percent of Republicans and 38 percent of independents."

So everybody knows this and Pelosi isn't going to give that as her reason for not doing her Constitutional duty to send this to the senate(instead, blaming the republicans for planning an unfair trial in the senate is her reason).

Mitch McConnell at least is honest in stating that he is biased. Stating otherwise would be a disingenuous lie. This partisan effort goes exactly down party lines and he is a republican.............dugh!

Who would say and believe otherwise? Oh, wait we actually have somebody(s) that have the audacity to pretend they are not being entirely political here. 

Schiff: I would be leading calls for impeachment if Trump were a Democrat


So just in comparing their honesty about this dynamic(or lack of it) one can see the difference in integrity between those mentioned above. Even those outside of congress for impeaching Trump have to admit this. The impeachers pretend to be something they are not.

And they constantly bust themselves with their actions and words that come out of the other side of their mouth:

Pelosi warns: 'Civilization as we know it today is at stake' in 2020 election


Of course this is about stopping Trump from being elected again in 2020. Even cliff knows it...and is for it.

Pelosi: "The word hate is a terrible word ... so for him to say that was really disgusting to me."The California Democrat added, "I'd rather like to think that America is a country that is full of love, whatever we think about what somebody else might believe that might be different from us, that that isn't a reason to dislike somebody. It's a reason to disagree with somebody."

1. Actions speak much louder than words especially when words come from a lady that speaks with a fork tongue.

2. Jesus said that we should pray for those that persecute us. Pelosi must be confused and got it backwards.........she is persecuting the man that she claims to pray for.

By cliff-e - Dec. 21, 2019, 5:21 p.m.
Like Reply
By metmike - Dec. 21, 2019, 6:14 p.m.
Like Reply


This is the exact same poll that you cut and pasted a link to for us earlier today, just 3 posts above this one in this thread. 

I appreciate greatly that you never make personal attacks here and that you are having to represent the views and methods of expressing them of one side all by yourself (as a cut and paste troll) vs there being several here that disagree with you and use their own words to express their opinions but please don't start getting carried away again.

Keep the following description at this link below in mind. If this bothers you, then please stop being a copy/paste troll. Otherwise, you are allowed to continue to act like one here but try to not get carried away or I am obligated to address the situation........this is not a warning.

Copy/Paste Troll


We actually need you here so others can see how your side thinks and communicates. It would be great for you to invite all of your friends but please don't cut and paste links to the same thing on the same day in the same thread....................no matter how excited you are when you find things that show bad news for Trump.



By cliff-e - Dec. 22, 2019, 7:35 a.m.
Like Reply
By metmike - Dec. 22, 2019, 11:32 a.m.
Like Reply

Thanks again cliff for cut and pasting somebody else's opinion here for us.

Again, we know that the investigation that Trump wanted into the real Ukraine corruption was motivated politically because Joe Biden was in the middle of it and Joe Biden is a democrat. We know that if it had been Mike Pence, he would not have asked for Ukraine to do a legit investigation............and all the evidence indicates that he asked for a legit investigation into obvious corruption..........not a manufacturing of facts that did not happen(like has been done to him dozens of times by his political opponents).

It's usually the responsibility of other US agencies to investigate corruption like this. However, as the FISA report proved earlier this month(and Barr's report will further prove, along with criminality)  those agencies were completely stacked.........100% against Trump, to the point of violating his rights and trying to take him down, while protecting the democrat, Hillary Clinton. This has now been proven.

The biggest irony about all of this is that the swamp(democrats/bureaucrats/MSM) in Washington has been relently targeting Trump as a political opponent for 3+ years, often illegally with a 35 million dollar Witch hunt for instance and its considered acceptable..............then when Trump targets somebody from the other party asking for a legit investigation into legit corruption(don't even try to defend Biden on this) the massive  hypocrites,  accuse him of doing exactly what defines all of their actions for 3 straight years and call for impeachment because of it.

This would be like me robbing numerous banks in town during a 3 year period and the corrupt cops/justice system looking the other way and letting me get away with it, then at the last robbery, you pick up a $100 bill that I dropped while fleeing the scene and try to use it as evidence against me........... and me calling for you to get the death penalty because you are in possession of a stolen $100 bill, ordering a trial with hand picked jurors to make sure I'm found guilty and for the corrupt prosecutor and justice system continuing to overlook me robbing more banks. 

By cliff-e - Dec. 22, 2019, 11:48 a.m.
Like Reply
By metmike - Dec. 22, 2019, 12:36 p.m.
Like Reply

Thanks cliff,

We already knew that the aid was held up for several weeks and why. 

Is this supposed to be another bombshell? The ordering of the aid being with held on July 25?

 If it is, it contradicts the testimony of  recent bombshells(when the aid was with held really doesn't matter though since it was released before the deadline and there was no investigation.............though clearly Trump wanted an investigation into the corruption)


Timeline: The curious release of military aid to Ukraine

JULY 3: The hold

Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, a national security official working at the White House, becomes aware that the military aid has been held up. He testified that he received a notice from the State Department. “That’s when I was concretely made aware of the fact there was a hold placed,” he said in testimony to lawmakers.

JULY 10: The meeting

A meeting at the White House with Ukrainian officials is cut short when Gordon Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union, says he has an agreement with the acting White House chief of staff that Ukraine’s president would get a meeting with Trump if Ukraine agreed to launch investigations.

JULY 18: The hold-up announcement

In a secure call with national security officials, a staff member of the White House Office of Management and Budget announces there’s a freeze on Ukraine aid until further notice, based on a presidential order to the budget office.

JULY 25: The phone call

Trump speaks with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, asking him for favors that include an inquiry into Joe Biden’s son Hunter’s dealings with Burisma, a Ukrainian gas company, and to investigate whether Ukraine interfered in the 2016 U.S. presidential elections. He later calls it a “perfect” call.

Based on the testimony, everybody already knew.........before the phone call.

So it's supposed to be a bombshell to find out that the Pentagon found out last?(if that's how it happened which is odd). But again, the aid did get released BEFORE the deadline and there was no investigation by Ukraine.........which might just have been lucky for Trump but regardless, you can't impeach a president over wanting(and not getting) an investigation of real corruption that affects(did affect) the USA because it involved his political opponent if he broke no laws.

errrrr, I mean in the land of justice you can't do that............which is no longer the USA )-:

By pj - Dec. 22, 2019, 1:11 p.m.
Like Reply

’Twas the Eve of Impeachment


By metmike - Dec. 22, 2019, 1:16 p.m.
Like Reply


When Bill Clinton was elected in 1992, did the republicans call for impeaching him from the get go? They actually waited until his 2nd term and the the trial in the senate took place in January 1999, so he was not going to run for president again  in 2000..........and it actually backfired badly and increased his approval/popularity. This impeachment was a black eye to our political system and what we thought at the time, very divisive. 

With Nixon, there didn't need to be an impeachment because he resigned but clearly it was not based on damaging his chances to be elected again because it was his 2nd term.  He committed blatantly impeachable offenses. This probably helped Carter, the democrat(my favorite president) win in 1976 but clearly, that was not part of the reason for him to leave office(there was bipartisan support) 

When Donald Trump was elected in 2016, were there democrats calling for his impeachment from the get go? Yes! and they voted on it in 2017. In 2019, when he was finally impeached in the house was it an impartial, bi partisan effort based on his impeachable crimes? 0 republicans voted for impeachment in the house. How is it possible that  every single republican, many who have criticized president Trump on several issues and some who dislike him voted against impeachment?

Here is evidence that republicans WILL disagree with Trump and will vote against him and condemn him............when they feel that it's justified.

House overwhelmingly votes bipartisan condemnation of Trump withdrawal of U.S. troops from Syria


"Despite stark divisions over Democrats' Trump impeachment inquiry, Democrats and Republicans banded together and approved a nonbinding resolution by 354-60 vote.

The resolution states Congress' opposition to the troop pullback"

metmike: So who is being partisan here? Democrats leading the impeachment process and  all voting for impeachment(except for a couple) or republicans.......... zero voting for impeachment. 

By cliff-e - Dec. 22, 2019, 8:52 p.m.
Like Reply

The actual email of my afore mentioned post.


Hour by hour and day by day the new evidence continues to mount since the vote to Impeach Impotus 45.

By metmike - Dec. 22, 2019, 11:34 p.m.
Like Reply


They have him now cliff. 

How the republicans in the senate seeing this can vote anything but for impeachment would be crazy. 

After he gets removed from office, since this is a high crime, he should be prosecuted as a private citizen and spend the rest of his life in prison(-:

By metmike - Dec. 23, 2019, 12:47 a.m.
Like Reply

Wow, I didn't notice you earlier pj.

Welcome to our Trump bashing thread. Please continue to join the party with cliff.

By cliff-e - Dec. 30, 2019, 8:36 a.m.
Like Reply
By cliff-e - Dec. 30, 2019, 9:21 p.m.
Like Reply
By metmike - Dec. 30, 2019, 10:16 p.m.
Like Reply

Thanks cliff,

"a chronology of Trump’s decision to withhold aid to a vulnerable ally under assault while he and his henchmen extorted Ukraine into carrying out his corrupt designs"

Too funny how this person's description is supposedly from an objective, professional  journalist....using editorial, condemning, judgmental language, contradicting what Ukraine and its president have stated about this. 

Leave it to the MSM sources that hate Trump to provide you with loads of great links and stories like this one to post here to provide us with glimpses into the minds of the hate Trump cult..........and how they communicate it(some as copy and paste trolls). 

By cliff-e - Dec. 31, 2019, 4:19 p.m.
Like Reply

What did people expect from a business failure in the WH?


By metmike - Dec. 31, 2019, 5:52 p.m.
Like Reply

Thanks cliff,

We especially enjoy analyzing your President Trump bashing on the economy.........his strongest point.

Sort of like bashing Babe Ruth for having more strike outs than home runs (-:

Home runs vs. strikeouts


Speaking of baseball, you're still batting 1,000..............for bashing Trump on the economy every time and not recognizing the tremendous positives one time. 


Started by TimNew - Dec. 6, 2019, 9 a.m.e: Re: Employment Situation +266k        




                By metmike - Dec. 7, 2019, 2:56 p.m.            



Almost all of cliff's posts for many months are Trump bashing posts. 

When he does make a rare post on the economy, that too is intended to bash Trump. In cliff's world, we are having a severe recession/depression right now............and it's Trumps fault. 

Here's the proof:

Last 3 months of cliff's economy related posts(negative ones first):

                Freightliner layoffs            


                Started by cliff-e - Oct. 7, 2019, 8:55 a.m.            


"Everything moves via truck whether it's bought thru the keyboard or "brick and mortar" businesses. Less freight means less demand for trucks and parts etc. So goes the national economy.


     Deere layoffs     

                Started by cliff-e - Oct. 2, 2019, 7:29 a.m.            


"So goes the rural economy."


These two maps show how the trade war with China is hurting ‘Trump country’    

                Re: china            

                           By cliff-e - Oct. 12, 2019, 9 p.m.            



  Re: china....again            

                            By cliff-e - Sept. 8, 2019, 5:30 p.


tariffs hurting, not helping the US    


                Re: Employment Situation +130k            


                By cliff-e - Sept. 6, 2019, 12:29 p.m.            



True unemployment chart comparison. U-3,U-6 and "shadow stat." of 21.6%.



cliff's positive posts on the economy:



There hasn't been one yet. 


By metmike - Dec. 31, 2019, 6:06 p.m.
Like Reply

From your link:

"According to the Tax Foundation, GDP has shrunk by 0.55% as a result of the trade war. But for now, “the coast is clear,” Rupkey said, because of the phase one trade deal.

“The major hit to the economy was going to take place if the Trump administration went all in with 30% tariffs on $540 billion of goods that America imported from China in 2018,” he said. “That tariff tax would have braked economic growth hard from a 2% forecast in 2020 to just 1.1 or 1.2%.”

metmike: So we should note that the real story today is actually that this(the major hit to the economy) did NOT happen and THIS below did:

Trump to sign phase one trade deal with China, announces planned trip to Beijing

By Brett Samuels - 12/31/19 09:36 AM EST


Which is probably why you looked for a link to use to copy/paste troll us that had a title that told the opposite message of the breaking "good"  news today. 

By metmike - Dec. 31, 2019, 6:23 p.m.
Like Reply

I have been saying all year that Trump was going to make this deal with China with high confidence.......no matter what the deal.

He wants to be re elected more than he wants anything else. Going into the debates with the democrat, there is no way that he was going to have the negatives of a continuing trade war haunting him and causing him to be attacked. 

No way as in a near 0% chance.

Instead, he will be using it to embellish about the great deals that he cut with China because of his negotiating using tariffs. There will be some gains for the US for sure but President Trump will exaggerate and tell us how they were the best deals in history between the US and China.................actually, they might be but he will still embellish/exaggerate.

And the MSM will spin all of it as negatively as possible.......and cliff will treat us to the most negative of the headlines/stories that he can find on the internet.

Regardless, the point is that there was never a minuscule chance that President Trump was going to let the US economy be severely damaged and/or allow the tariffs to continue well into 2020.

The threat by him  for ramping them up was:

1. A negotiating tactic

2. Would have been very short lived

3. Would have been counterproductive to him winning the election in 2020 if they lasted.

4. Everything that he is doing now has that in mind.........being elected to a 2nd term.

5. Most of what the democrats are doing is focused on preventing that from happening. 

By cliff-e - Jan. 1, 2020, 4:20 p.m.
Like Reply

All part of the Cult 45 mantra...just get 'em gone and/or sweep it under the rug before anyone notices.


By metmike - Jan. 1, 2020, 4:54 p.m.
Like Reply

Happy New Decade cliff!

By cliff-e - Jan. 2, 2020, 7:54 a.m.
Like Reply
By metmike - Jan. 2, 2020, 5:09 p.m.
Like Reply

Thanks cliff!

From your copy/paste source:

“Republicans are now officially the character doesn’t count party, the personal responsibility just proves you have failed to blame the other guy party, the deficit doesn’t matter party, the Russia is our ally party, and the I’m-right-and-you-are-human-scum party,"

metmike: But this is exactly what he is doing/claiming.......that he's right and his party has the moral high ground and the entire point of his article is to convince us that the republicans are the party of "human scum".

By cliff-e - Jan. 2, 2020, 8:09 p.m.
Like Reply
By cliff-e - Jan. 4, 2020, 11:35 a.m.
Like Reply

Image may contain: 4 people

By TimNew - Jan. 4, 2020, 12:10 p.m.
Like Reply

So, you don't think an attack on a US embassy warrants a response?  Well, that certainly explains Benghazi.  I hope you understand why many disagree, but I'm guessing ya don't. 

By metmike - Jan. 4, 2020, 1:41 p.m.
Like Reply

Thanks much cliff,

We  should let Iranians attack our embassy and soldiers and oil tankers in the Gulf and Saudi oil fields and other sources(just this year) that they don't like  with no consequences.

We should also let evil characters like the ISIS leader and this leader from Iran run free to kill more innocent people, including many US soldiers. 

We should also give Iran more billions of dollars to use to fund their radical terrorism regime........much of it aimed at the US.

We should definitely impeach Trump today for saying those things as a private citizen  7-9 years ago from your copy/paste trolling.


Not with regards to the comments that started with "We".

Above that, I encourage you to continue to generously express and represent your sides views on matters that relate to President Trump. 

We very much appreciate the fact that you never attack fellow posters or call names or make things personal  against those that disagree with you here which, seriously in the politically divisive and emotionally charged world today is a really good thing. 

By cliff-e - Jan. 5, 2020, 8:28 p.m.
Like Reply

Image may contain: 1 person, text

By metmike - Jan. 6, 2020, 11:32 a.m.
Like Reply

While this guy deserved to die, I have additional thoughts that will make you happy cliff.

                Re: Re: Iran retaliation            


                By metmike - Jan. 6, 2020, 11:25 a.m.            


Thanks Wayne,

Unfortunately, under the circumstances, Trumps character flaws that feature his impulsive tweets, that are now including elevated threats/warnings to Iran are exactly what we DON'T need in this situation.

As a decades long anti war/dove, this is very disturbing.

It's unknown how far that Iran will take this. They don't think like people in the Western World. They are much more powerful than Iraq. China and Russia are considered allies but I don't think those 2 countries would want WW-3.

By cliff-e - Jan. 6, 2020, 1:38 p.m.
Like Reply
By metmike - Jan. 6, 2020, 6:04 p.m.
Like Reply

I am very disturbed by President Trump threatening to bomb cultural/historical  sites in Iran. 

This is a serious war crime and though they belong to IRAN, in many ways they belong to the human race.

He will never do this of course and is thinking his threats will intimidate Iran apparently but this will only generate shock from people who can’t believe that he’s saying this. So he will lose support quickly taking this path.

I realize that most of his supporters think that Iran deserves this and it’s about time we had somebody stand up to this terrorist country but it’s the USA and other countries that are the ones in the Middle East, not Iran in the USA trying to get us to follow their rules.

Iran is an evil country but we should not lose  site of the fact that a huge part of why they hate us is because we go over there and try to force them to abide by our civilized rules in our civilized world.

They are NOT civilized by some of our standards. Some of the stuff they do is despicable but just like we cherish our freedoms here in America, they cherish their culture, customs and accept some things that we think are really wrong.

We will NEVER change that part of them but still need to hold them accountable for crimes against other counties, like the US......there is a globally accepted rule of law, regardless of what happens inside of Iran.

However, the Iranians not only greatly detest other countries trying to force their standards on them, they hate the methods being used......sanctions that have obliterated their economy for instance.

So the mindset of an Iranian is to see somebody doing this to them as a mortal enemy. Many to most of their attacks were motivat d by and justifies by us being in their backyard telling them what to do. If we were not there to begin with, most of this would not have happened. 

Again, I detest the atrocities that Iran sponsors as a county but completely understand why they detest the USA. 

You would feel the same way too if a bunch of countries in the world Decided to control us and we were powerless to do anything about it. This is why they strike out. 

This is also why I have always felt we should not be over there.  Why can’t we learn this from the past and understanding those people?

By GunterK - Jan. 7, 2020, 11:58 a.m.
Like Reply

metmike, I totally agree with your assessment.

I would like to add that, IMHO, the Iranians' hatred for the US goes back a few centuries, when Iran was a democracy. The US (and, I believe, the UK) helped Shah Pahvlavi overthrow their government and make himself "King" of Iran.

Trump threatening Iranian "cultural" sites is horrible, in my opinion. This would turn a war against Iran into a war against a religion (if religious sites are included in the term"cultural"). Either way, we were appalled, when ISIS destroyed the 2000 year old cultural sites in Syria... and now, we are threatening to act like them???

I believe, the vast majority of the People would prefer for the US to not be involved in the M.E., as you said. But then, the People have nothing to say about such things. It's "they", who make the decisions... remember "topple 7 regimes in 5 years"? Iran was one of the 7. 

In 2016, I had hoped that "they" would lose some of their power, and our troops would be brought home from foreign lands....unfortunately, it looks like Trump is following their plans. 

By metmike - Jan. 7, 2020, 10:16 p.m.
Like Reply

‘I like to obey the law’: Trump backs off threat to target Iranian cultural sites


The president's retreat came after his secretaries of Defense and State said the administration would abide by the laws of war.


"Asked on Tuesday by NBC News’ Andrea Mitchell whether he would “also push back” against the targeting of culturally significant sites, Pompeo replied indignantly."

“You’re not really wondering, Andrea. You’re not really wondering,” he said, adding that “every action we take will be consistent with the international rule of law, and the American people can rest assured that that’s the case.”


"Pompeo went on to argue that it was the government of Iran‘s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, not the U.S., that has “done damage to the Persian culture,” which he described as “rich and steeped in history and intellect.”


“They’ve denied the capacity for that culture to continue,” Pompeo said, concluding: “The real risk to Persian culture does not come from the United States of America. There is no mistake about that.”


Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) on Tuesday rejected Trump’s controversial proposal, as well. 


“I want to associate myself with the secretary of Defense and the secretary of State with regard to the appropriateness of cultural sites being targeted,” he said. “That is not appropriate.”

metmike: There was a o% chance that the US would ever target cultural sites as this was just another case of what gets Trump in the most trouble..........blustery, volatile tweets  that embellish or exaggerate and even make things up that did not or would never happen but are brutally honest about how he really feels with no off switch or tact.

Other presidents may have thought about some unacceptable things that  he tells us on a regular basis X 100. 

 This horrible character flaw is why so many hate him.  I will continue to judge him based on actions, including recognizing that he reversed his absurd position to target cultural sites in Iran. 

He wants to be elected again later this year more than he wants to punish Iran, so he will likely be making decisions that keep that in mind. 

Despite what some are claiming, his following  his advisors to assassinate what was probably the most powerful leader of terrorism in the world was a good choice. Make no mistake, unlike the phone conversation with Ukraine trying to get them to investigate Bidens corruption (real corruption not digging up dirt)  which he was solely responsible for................the idea to take out this evil guy did not come from him.

Our amazing intelligence agencies had been tracking this guy for years and knew where he was, almost every minute and must have had opportunities to take him out previously, which President Trump obviously gave the thumbs down to. 

Iran was very upset at the US for the crippling sanctions and determined to create increasing havoc, with this guy behind much of it. He has hundreds of American soldiers blood on his hands and (we are told) was planning new attacks...........and there were just too many incidents in such a short period attributed to Iran(which the president chose not to react militarily too)  in order to not finally do something. 

Again, his choices for action will fit inside of a range of choices that he is presented with and advised on. His decisions will not go outside of that based on some loose cannon thinking which people claim will cause him do something extreme.............as in bombing cultural sites which was just a dumb, no chance of happening threat. 

He may threaten extreme things but only if his advisors have recommended it, will it be one of his options. They will not create extreme options to appease President Trump. if they know those options are not viable or will cause a disaster for his administration  or this country.

The MSM will keep telling us that he has no plan and has no idea about what he's doing. Of course thats not true. He has several comprehensive plans which have been in the making for a long time from the hard work of our brilliant intelligence and military experts who know what they are doing.

Unfortunately, most military leaders/advisors are not in that position because they are doves/peace lovers that use military action as a very last resort. So President Trumps range of options will probably include some high end type attacks on many key sites that will do huge damage. Hopefully he does not choose one of those but I am not smart enough to know how that would affect Iran's frame of mind. 

My guess is that every Iranian that dies at our hands, will enrage them that much more and cause even more escalation vs them learning a lesson. 

We should note that the price of oil is now $2 off its highs, so the market is feeling better about where this might be headed.

By cliff-e - Jan. 8, 2020, 9 a.m.
Like Reply

Let's hope that 45 pays attention or things could get even uglier especially if Iran's allie's  Putin and/ or Turkey decide to "influence".


By metmike - Jan. 8, 2020, 10:52 a.m.
Like Reply

But your side has been saying that Putin/Russia and Trump are buddies for 3 years.

By cliff-e - Jan. 8, 2020, 3:50 p.m.
Like Reply

The connection between 45 and Putin/Russia financing is well documented. One of many links on the subject below.


The connection between Iran and Russia and other countries is also well documented.


So...if ya mess with Iran ya mess with the Bear Putin and it's other allies. The delicate Mideast situation requires far more finesse and due diligence than what financially strapped 45 has given it.

When it comes to Mideast policy...45 is a babe in the woods or a cat without claws. His hands are bound by what his lender Putin wants as they are financially and hopelessly joined at the hip. This latest dust up is just another diversion from his Ukraine scandal troubles. Imo.

By metmike - Jan. 8, 2020, 4:33 p.m.
Like Reply

Thanks cliff

If only Mueller had you on his team he could have saved millions and busted President Trump instead of exonerating him on collusion with Russia (-:

By cliff-e - Jan. 10, 2020, 8:19 a.m.
Like Reply
By metmike - Jan. 10, 2020, 10:26 a.m.
Like Reply

Thanks cliff!

Good thing that this is going to be resolved soon...........and it will because President Trump is mostly concerned with getting elected to a 2nd term and will have agreements in place well before that so that he can brag about them............and the democrat will not have an ongoing trade war to hurt him with in the debates. 

By cliff-e - Jan. 11, 2020, 8:37 a.m.
Like Reply

Image may contain: 1 person, smiling, possible text that says 'Garrett M. Graff @vermontgmg Reminder that as this crisis escalates, we have no Director of National Intelligence, no Dep Dir, no Homeland Security Secretary, no Dep Sec, no head of CBP or ICE, no State Dept Under Sec of Arms Control, no Asst Sec for Europe, and no Navy Sec. 5:15 PM Jan 7, 2020 Twitter for iPhone'

Apparently all in an attempt to save wages to divert to paying for the "45" golf outtings that we can't seem to find out what they are costing. :~/

By metmike - Jan. 11, 2020, 9:01 a.m.
Like Reply

Thanks cliff!

By cliff-e - Jan. 14, 2020, 8:30 a.m.
Like Reply

Nothin' says "guilty" like a crook who tries to get his own trial dismissed.


By metmike - Jan. 14, 2020, 2:46 p.m.
Like Reply

"Nothin' says "guilty" like a crook who tries to get his own trial dismissed."

Thanks cliff!

Having a Criminal Charge Dismissed


"Many cases are dismissed before a plea or trial. Learn about the common reasons why"


Maybe they should update their information based on your position. They forgot to mention that if they try to get your trial/charges dropped, the judge and jury will know that you are guilty (-:

By cliff-e - Jan. 15, 2020, 7:05 p.m.
Like Reply

More evidence.


How long can "Moscow Mitch McCoverup" turn a blind eye to mounting evidence and witnesses that will talk eventually?

By metmike - Jan. 15, 2020, 7:33 p.m.
Like Reply

Thanks cliff!

Funny how terms and language can be twisted to mislead people.

The beneficial gas, CO2,  defined as such in all fields of science has been redefined for political agenda as pollution......it is no such thing. The increase in CO2 is greening the planet and helping life to do better....not destroying the planet.

Trumps investigation into the corruption/nepotism of the Biden’s has been redefined as “digging up dirt” along with constantly repeating that “there is no evidence the Bidens did anything wrong”

Kind of hard to find evidence when you won’t do an investigation.........which is what Trump was trying to do because the Bidens have been protected by everyone else.

Funniest thing about that term “digging up dirt”. The quintessential example of it on the largest scale in government history was what we call “The Mueller investigation”

$35,000,000 and 2.5 years and they couldn’t use any of it to impeach Trump........that’s a lot of money to pay for dirt that turned out not to exist.......so they came up with the whistle blower scheme.

By metmike - Jan. 15, 2020, 8:02 p.m.
Like Reply

Anybody else happen to notice that the findings of Muellers 2.5 year intensive investigation into Donald Trump we’re not/are not being used to impeach him?

What is the reason for that cliff?

I can go back and find a dozen posts of yours with links to articles that claimed he committed wrong doing related to Russia while being investigated and even after he was cleared.

Boy that cried wolf.

Thats why most people don’t take the impeachment serious. 

Sure, half the people want him impeached because he is Donald Trump the criminal. Find a crime any crime or anything you can call a crime and use it to impeach Donald Trump the criminal.

Some of those people would have been ok with impeaching for ............fill in the blank.

But the dems and MSM shouting about dozens of bombshell impeachable offenses for 3 years and that it was the beginning of the end......every time, like that new one was different.....but it never was.

Now, this time is different. Never mind the previous 20 times or the Mueller investigation. We really didn’t mean it all those other times.

But now......

But now.......time was running out before the 2020 election and they had to find something.

Hello whistleblower scheme and Adam Schiff. 

Trump absolutely was trying to get Biden investigated because of apparent corruption. 

At least his investigation into real corruption would have cost us tax payers much less than the 35,000,000 we paid for the corrupt investigation trying to dig up dirt on Trump, where there was nothing.

Seriously, I think we have a right to know what the heck  was going on with the joe and hunter Biden nepotism/corrupt relationship with the Ukraine.

It happened. Why.

We know a couple of reasons.....money and power. We know some of the results but how the arrangements were made is what we need to find out.

Ukraine people were not mind readers. Joe Biden MUST have communicated what he wanted.......the only reason that things happened that way. Hunter got-put on a board he was unqualified for in a country he should not have been in making massive money.

This is corruption. We need to know and not have the only person trying to get the answer persecuted for his effort.

By GunterK - Jan. 16, 2020, 12:12 a.m.
Like Reply

This impeachment trial is quite amazing. It has already been made clear.... if the Senate finds Trump not guilty, then the Senate is guilty of cover-up

Has there even been a court trial where the Jury is required to find the accused guilty, or they themselves are guilty of a crime?

Furthermore, since the whole Ukraine scandal is about "alleged" wrong doings (actually, they are not alleged.. he already has admitted doing them) by Quid-pro-Joe Biden and his son, they both should be required to testify

Yet, Biden has already stated that we would refuse to appear, should this be asked of him. This would definitely be a case of "obstruction", if Trump did so.... but in his case, or in the case of Hillary "Sledgehammer" Clinton, it is no problem.

changing subject... just read that there has been a number of micro-earthquakes on the East Coast. Upon closer investigation, it was found that they happened near the graves of the Founding Fathers. Experts say, it's because the Funding Fathers were turning over in their graves, in view of all the current partisan efforts to remove a legally elected president 

By metmike - Jan. 16, 2020, 12:54 a.m.
Like Reply

Trump Bombshell Montage - Walls Are Closing In


The scandal of the last  decade or longer was the last few years of reporting on Donald Trump by the MSM.  

We often hear that the other side did the exact same thing to Obama.

OK, then find me a video similar to the one at the link above that has more than  a fraction of stuff like that aimed at Obama.  And that Trump video only captures a tiny part of it. 

How many of those numerous reporters in that video are practicing objective, professional journalism?

They are all editorializing the news reporting, using their bias and their objective to destroy president Trump, while claiming to be trustworthy and open minded. 

They are the left arm of the very partisan democratic party which cares more about destroying president Trump than it does for the USA. 

By cliff-e - Jan. 16, 2020, 8:10 a.m.
Like Reply

Lev Parnas is either singing like a canary or spinning a tale...it's hard to tell whenever we hear from a Cult 45 rat. But for all the trouble Lev is in...it'd be hard to imagine him libeling himself when he speaks. There's been lot of new developments since the vote took place to impeach 45 permanently on Dec.18 and there'll be a bunch more. It underscores the need for admission of evidence/documents and the calling of witnesses in order to have a fair trial. And testimony under oath is where the "tale spinning" would stop.


By metmike - Jan. 16, 2020, 9:47 p.m.
Like Reply

"make Watergate looks like child's play"

Fascinating how we've been told for 3 years that President's Trump crimes were "worse than Watergate"

A year ago, we were being fed a steady stream of this crapola by the MSM(actually for 3 straight years, non stop):

Worse Than Watergate

If the multiple charges against Trump prove out, he’ll easily displace Nixon at the top of the Crooked Modern Presidents list.


Congressional investigators are also looking into whether the president has made policy decisions based on campaign favors. The president’s critics are suspicious of his relationship with Vladimir Putin and wonder if his financial ties to countries in the Middle East—including Saudi Arabia—affected the administration’s positions on serious matters such as the brutal murder of the Washington Post reporter Jamal Khashoggi.

The attorneys general of Maryland and Washington, D.C., have now piled on by filing a suit against the administration for having violated the Emoluments Clause. They argue that Trump has accepted foreign money through his hotels, where countries such as the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia have been renting large blocks of rooms at considerable costs."

metmike: That was 1 year ago. Here in January 2020, how many of those "worse than Watergate crimes that he was accused of then, is he being impeached for now?

Answer: ZERO!

This is obviously because all those other crimes(many, many more than just listed here) were actually NOT worse than Watergate.  If they were, then they would have:

1. Been included with the current impeachment charges

2. Been supported by more than just Democrats and the MSM

So when we hear "worse than Watergate" or "makes Watergate look like child's play for the hundredth time" by a never Trumper, it just means what it did the previous 99 times, when, every time, it turned out to be an attempt to use sensationalizing verbiage to convince people that something even worse than the worse thing that ever happened just occurred in this realm..............when we really all know that  it  did not(some of us do-some keep believing it every single time).

That's  been the game plan to sell the fake climate emergency too. Tell everyone that we are going to destroy the planet by 2030 if we don't stop using fossil fuels.........even while we experience a climate optimum on a greening planet with the best weather/climate for life in the last 1,000 years. 

We keep hearing that it's worse than they thought..............when it continues to be, not as bad as they said it would be. And the predictions have turned more extreme because the previously extreme predictions did not get enough people to (re) act.

U.N. Predicts Disaster if Global Warming Not Checked



Whether your statements are true or not doesn't matter. The key is, whether you can make them sound convincing enough to get people to believe you.............to accomplish your political agenda. 

By cliff-e - Jan. 17, 2020, 9:14 a.m.
Like Reply
By GunterK - Jan. 17, 2020, 11:09 a.m.
Like Reply

cliff, it says here...

"...“The bombshell legal opinion from the independent [GAO] demonstrates, without a doubt, that the Trump Administration illegally withheld assistance from Ukraine,” 

and a few lines later, it says

"...“How can money that does not need to be appropriated until September 30 — and it was appropriated before September 30 — how are they saying that’s illegal?” 

this kind of debate has been going on for 3 years now.

By cliff-e - Jan. 17, 2020, 12:57 p.m.
Like Reply

Another fine member of Cult 45...

Image may contain: 8 people, people smiling

By metmike - Jan. 18, 2020, 10:53 a.m.
Like Reply

Using this guy by one side to vilify Trump, sort of reminds me how the corrupt Mueller team tried to use Roger Stone to try to make Trump look bad before they released their nothing burger report on Trump and Russia(which made Trump look good):

I had some fun with it here before the embarrassing Mueller testimony:

                Re: Mueller testimony            

                           By metmike - July 6, 2019, 12:40 p.m.            


Here's a fun line of hypothetical questions and answers:

Rep-met.mike-Market Forum: "Mr. Mueller, when your FBI arrested Roger Stone on January 25, 2019, who in your department was in contact with CNN prior to the arrest?"

Mueller:  "I am not aware of anybody connected with the FBI that was in contact with CNN prior to this arrest"

metmike: "In arrests similar to this in the past, is it considered proper protocol for the FBI to allow a major national television news network to accompany the FBI and record the event?"

Mueller: "I was not involved in those previous arrests and can't comment on them"

metmike: Mr. Mueller, can you site an instance when a major news network was allowed to accompany the FBI on a similar arrest"

Mueller: "Again, I was not involved in previous arrests and can't comment on them"

metmike: "On this arrest, how do you think that CNN knew to be there exactly 1 hour before the arrest"

Mueller: "You'll have to ask CNN that question"

metmike: Mr. Mueller, once CNN arrived at this location, video surveillance and their own footage shows that they were authorized to record the entire event from an optimal spot, in front of the Stone house, positioned with the FBI agents.  Who would have authorized them to do this"

Mueller: "I'm not sure"

metmike: In this particular arrest and under FBI protocol, with similar arrests, all pedestrians and traffic was closed off for the entire block and all neighbors on that block were told to stay in their houses, is this correct?

Mueller: "To my understanding that is correct"

metmike: With that being the case, can you explain how a CNN reporter and photographer were allowed to be there upfront, recording the event to play on national television?"

Mueller: "Because I wanted to close out my Witch Hunt with a big bang and give the anti Trump station an exclusive story to spin to make me look good and the evil Trump and his associates bad"

Mueller: "Hey! Who slipped the truth serum into my coffee!!!!"

By cliff-e - Jan. 18, 2020, 4:53 p.m.
Like Reply

Lev Parnas has pics with 45 as well as with many of Cult 45 members (including one with Pam Bondi who's on 45's impeachment legal team) but all claim to not know him. Hmmm... :~/


Stay tuned. More evidence and pics to come before and well after next Tuesday.

By metmike - Jan. 18, 2020, 9:13 p.m.
Like Reply

Thanks cliff!

We look forward to getting all the latest tabloid news type scandals and other president Trump bashing stuff that you are the master of delivering to us here. Nobody could do it better without making personal attacks on fellow posters.

By cliff-e - Jan. 20, 2020, 9:16 a.m.
Like Reply

Yet another "double standard" of the Cult 45 impeachment legal team.


By metmike - Jan. 20, 2020, 11:32 a.m.
Like Reply

Special thanks today Cliff for bringing this up!

GOP Highlights Nadler's 1998 Comments Saying A Purely Partisan Impeachment "Would Lack Legitimacy"


Pelosi calls out 'hypocrisy' during Clinton impeachment

During President Clinton's impeachment in 1998, Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) accused the Republican majority of being "paralyzed with hatred."


Remember When Adam Schiff Ran Against Impeachment?


Adam Schiff

Schiff called 'hypocrite' as past comments criticizing Clinton impeachment emerge


Joe Biden said in 1998 that Clinton impeachment could be seen as ‘partisan lynching'


Is Lindsey Graham really a hypocrite on impeachment? A look at the record      


“You don’t even have to be convicted of a crime to lose your job in this constitutional republic if this body determines that your conduct as a public official is clearly out of bounds in your role,” the politician said. “Impeachment is not about punishment. Impeachment is about cleansing the office. Impeachment is about restoring honor and integrity to the office.”

metmike: The point is that both these impeachment proceedings were purely partisan and political from both sides of the aisle, with both the dems and pubs taking the complete opposite sides ........totally based on their political affiliation. 100% of republicans in the house did not vote for the president Trump impeachment. 

Another thing that is 100%, is us knowing that we can never trust anything the fork tongued Adam Schiff says on this 100% partisan impeachment(read what he stated about the Clinton impeachment above and compare it to what he just said below):

Schiff: I would be leading calls for impeachment if Trump were a Democrat


It's no wonder that the people in Congress have an extraordinarily low approval rating........much lower than even the greatly despised(by one side and the MSM) President Trump. Ironically, its gone up recently...........with the "Never Trumpers" flipping from disapproving to approving because of the impeachment and previous attacks by dems on Trump(and vice versa defending by pubs)! So by becoming even more extremely partisan...............Congress has actually increased their approval because their electorate is taking on a similar, one sided/party view and for more and more..........that's all that matters vs accomplishing positive things that make our county better for the American people.

Congressional Job Approval


By cliff-e - Jan. 20, 2020, 5:48 p.m.
Like Reply

Image may contain: 1 person, text

By metmike - Jan. 20, 2020, 9:58 p.m.
Like Reply

Good one cliff!

I busted that one/number with facts when somebody posted it around a year ago..........as it showed the Washington Post made many more false or misleading so called "facts" to generate those exaggerated numbers than President Trump actually made but have been unable to retrieve that thread.

But President Trump does make loads of false and misleading claims for sure.

By cliff-e - Jan. 21, 2020, 6:55 a.m.
Like Reply

Yeah that new name fits... Just pass the popcorn and the NoDoze and they'll be just fine. Lol.


By metmike - Jan. 21, 2020, 3:16 p.m.
Like Reply

Here are some other very popular nicknames from sports hero's in history.

I thought this one sounds a bit like the latest one that you mentioned cliff:

25. Dick "Night Train" Lane

The 100 Best Nicknames in Sports History


By cliff-e - Jan. 21, 2020, 6:56 p.m.
Like Reply

Who cares? Certainly not 45 who's been thru bankruptcy 6 times.


By metmike - Jan. 21, 2020, 7:18 p.m.
Like Reply

It's because most people have heard about all the bad things the growing debt will cause for decades and they never happen(but they will). Politicians are most effective at getting votes by promising to give people stuff.......which costs money.  They also don't want their taxes raised to pay down the debt. Considering all the stuff the democrats are promising, it's hard to conceive of them balancing the budget if elected.


Did We Just Hear Three Democratic Candidates Talk About Reducing Deficit and Debt?

What is this, 2008?


"Most moments in Democratic presidential debates this cycle can be classified in one of three ways: 1) Let's raise all the taxes! 2) Let's spend all the money! Or 3) Let's squabble endlessly over the dreamy-time details of the tax/spending increases on Medicare for All. That, and whatever stupid slap fights the moderators want to egg on.

So color me flabbergasted that not one but two of the six candidates on stage tonight, Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D–Minn.) and South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg said—out loud, even—that they intend to reduce the deficit." 

Previous article:

The Democratic Debates So Far: Nearly 300 Questions, but None About the National Debt