Yup, The National Review's Had It With Trump

They very effectively call him an empty suit.

I am sure the Trumpanzees will reject it out of hand and call both the author and the publication"rinos". That is how they usually try to hand wave away reality.

This is a fantastic article: you can almost feel the butt-hurt.

Face reality.

r/Donald Trump is where you go to find reality, huh? No wonder you are so mixed up.

I notice you don't refute a single point. Hmm...

It went from 1 which is actually true to 2 which is partially true to 3 which is the complete opposite of true (not a single dollar has been diverted from sanctuary cities and in fact there are more sanctuary cities today than there were when Trump was elected).

Considering how quickly that devolved it's not worth my time to keep reading.

Maybe you could make your own list and provide the links to back them?

This is my favorite thing on that list.
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/whi...s-first-salary-national-parks-service-n742206

Which part of it did you like? The bit where Trump cut Park funding by 12% then gave them a drop in the bucket back by this "charity"?

This is a common practice of corrupt, faux-populist dictators*, make a public show of not taking a salary, or take a very small salary while your companies and those around you rake in the money.



*not saying Trump is a dictator, he's not that competent.

Right wingers are always bad at math.

Considering I don't know whether or not the Park Service needed this money or not, I can't say whether this cut was justified or not.Trump doesn't need a salary, so I'm glad he recognizes that and does what he promised. As for the charity, well, would you rather him burn it?

Would you rather him take a salary?

Do you know for sure that the park service needed that money or should we just maintain a certain amount indefinitely?

No they haven't been defunded, there was a cut and nobody, so far, can answer whether or not they needed that money or not.

I'd rather folks not be stupid enough to think declining a salary (IF in fact he follows through, in his private life he was notorious for making pledges that cost him nothing) means anything when he repeatedly creates more income for himself than an entire year's salary simply by dragging the presidential enterouge off to one of his properties and charging all manner of fees. Indeed, the taxpayer paid more money to the Trump Org. renting space in Trump Tower during the campaign than his total salary over 8 years (god forbid) would amount to.

Only FF would be so dumb.

Yes. I would rather he take it. I don't like the making a show of it by donating it the way he is doing.

Of course then Anc and the rest of the nutty left would be crying over how the "rich" Trump gets a salary.

The Bush's are more wealthy than Trump. Please find one instance when I complained about GWB's salary.

You didn't.

But you would for Trump. Because every leftist would be doing it.

Bullshit. You're just making shit up. I have been pretty outspoken in my stance that public officials should be paid more.

And if 'leftists' didn't do it for Bush, why would they for Trump?

Not when he's funneling money to himself via Presidential trips to Mar-A-Lago and Trump-branded golf courses.

Well, he may not be a dictator but I think we can all agree that he's a dick.

http://www.npr.org/2017/08/01/54078...s-and-trump-supporter-created-fake-news-story

Remember the conspiracy theory Fox was selling claiming that Hillary and the DNC had assassinated their own staffer to... Well know one really knew what this mythical conspiracy theory was supposed to accomplish but Fox ran it full tilt during the election.

Not only was it all false and made up complete with fake quotes but it turns out Do nie Small Hands tmordered Fox to run it because he was upset that the headlines were all about how he criminally comluded with the Russian FSB (which he did).

So Trump is the one who actually creates fake news and Fox literally is nothing more than the lying propaganda arm of the Republican Party. Every intelligent person already knew this but it is nice to see it once again confirmed.

http://www.golf.com/tour-news/2017/...-trump-relationship-golf-more-complicated-now

Trump tells golf associates the White House is a real dump. Imagine how the right would have reacted if Obama said that.

But it is the orangutan so crickets.

Imagine how the left would have reacted if Obama joked about wanting fried chicken and watermelon, versus how they reacted when Fuzzy Zoeller suggested Tiger Woods might want it (or whatever the foods mentioned were).

It absolutely matters who says a thing, regardless of which side of the aisle you're on.