Donald Trump is at it AGAIN…Open Thread for August 11, 2017…

This time it’s the North Korea’s…

If ya haven’t noticed by now?

This is TYPICAL Trump….

Image result for trump

With the Media breathlessly reporting EVERY utterance…..(which scares most people, but gets eaten up by his base)

Donald Trump is on center stage throwing haymakers at SOMEBODY….

During the campaign last year it was his adopted parties other candidates…and few judges…

Then it was Hillary Clinton…

Then it was the FBI Director which he fired….

Recently it ‘s been his own Republicans…

Briefed that the North Korea’s won’t actually fire anything AT America and now say they’ll think about Guam?

Trump has the green light to beat his chest and be that guy that gets in your face knowing that he’s got his posse standing behind him and there isn’t gonna be a fight….


Turns out that the US and North Korea HAVE BEEN talking for months…

Beyond the bluster, the Trump administration has been quietly engaged in back channel diplomacy with North Korea for several months, addressing Americans imprisoned in the communist country and deteriorating relations between the long-time foes, The Associated Press has learned.

It had been known the two sides had discussions to secure the June release of an American university student. But it wasn’t known until now that the contacts have continued, or that they have broached matters other than U.S. detainees.

People familiar with the contacts say the interactions have done nothing thus far to quell tensions over North Korea’s nuclear weapons and missile advances, which are now fueling fears of military confrontation. But they say the behind-the-scenes discussions could still be a foundation for more serious negotiation…


In addition?

The US and Allies will hold annual military drills with the South Korea military that the North Korea’s have always been uncomfortable with….


Share on Facebook

142 thoughts on “Donald Trump is at it AGAIN…Open Thread for August 11, 2017…”

  1. The claim that Keith “still votes for Republicans” is right up there with Trump claiming that he always gets all the facts before making statements.

  2. Of course I have voted for, and will most likely in the future vote for worthy Republicans. Both my husband and I always split our tickets. For the most part because we aren’t so narrow that we don’t believe a Republican can be a competent public servant.

    In Illinois I supported lots of Republicans, but they were moderate Republicans like Percy, Thompson and George Ryan (the best “Democratic” Governor that Illinois ever had, before he went to jail of course). And I have voted for tons of Republicans for Cook County office, although like California most lost. In DC there wasn’t much choice but I did vote for the lone Republican City Councilman David Cantania (who I supported financially when he ran for Mayor). But by then David had left the GOP because they were racist and homophobic.

    The jungle primary in California makes it easier to support worthy Republicans and help them make the November runoff. Once again, my votes didn’t help those Republicans, but they were worthwhile candidates to support.

    Not sure why these actions are met with skepticism? As my stalker knows, I was the Executive Director of an political organization in Illinois devoted to ticket splitting, one that supported reform candidates.

    Besides I only know one poster here who proudly proclaims they have never voted for a Democrat.

  3. I’m not your stalker, but I do know the organization you speak of and they almost always support Democrats. That was before your foray into Machine politics in Chicago and all the racial and illegal activities you got in trouble with there, so I have been curious how the transformation came about. Maybe it was indeed just about the money and you regretted it at the time, just like you might regret so much of the stuff you say online, but I may be overly optimistic.

    (Would you have possibly qualified as my stalker though, since you knew my last name for years before I knew yours and you would very often look up my campaign contributions and talk about them online as well as revealing your interpretation of what the job was I had at that time.)

    While you almost certainly have not voted for a Republican at the statewide or Congressional level since years before I was eligible to vote, I do thank you for listing David Catania. I suppose that does qualify as an answer to something I had tried to ask several times.

  4. Shall we stop this silly Kabuki dance?

    Anyone who posted the volume of information that you have about me qualifies as a stalker. The fact that you are trying to defend your actions is silly, and your deflections sophomoric.

    Here is the difference between you and me. I personally know and have actually worked with the Republicans I have supported. And here is another Republican I have both supported financially and might even vote for if he ran for President – Charlie Baker. But I know Charlie and know he isn’t the run of the mill right wing Republican. In fact, he might be the last moderate Republican left standing in a few years.

    Putting aside your very strange obsession with me and my voting habits, it is obvious to all that visit here that we don’t need to ask about your voting history, you only vote for one party.

    But, here’s an offer, I will reveal my entire voting history to you, as much as I can remember that is, but in-person. I will be in Chicago later next month and will gladly take you to lunch. But, only if I get to ask you questions. Lots of questions.

    So, lunch?

  5. No, I don’t need to meet with you. Sounds stalkerish, but thanks, I guess. We could always have civil conversations here if that is something you think you could be capable of. You can ask me anything you want here about my political activity/voting history. I have nothing to hide. I’ve never worked in the public sector and have never remotely been in trouble with the law.

    I would also vote for Charlie Baker against Trump. Maybe you can ask him to run as an Independent if nobody else does it. And I have also certainly known and worked for/volunteered for a lot of the Republican candidates I have supported. I’ve also voted for a bunch of people locally who are Democrats, but the races were non-partisan. In Cook County, many of “Republicans” I voted for were actually Democrats, for various reasons. I am considering voting in the D primary in March to vote against Toni Preckwinkle, but her job approval is now down to 21 percent, which is a lot worse than Trump, so they may not even need my vote against her in a primary. Otherwise, thus far, I have only voted for Republicans, except that whole last Presidential election and all.

    As for the information I have posted about you, it’s all public record of course, easily accessible via Google (and I never even paid anything to find the newspaper archives behind paywalls) and as I mentioned, I knew of you before I knew it was actually you because so much of what you did in the 80s. qualifies as notorious. Nonetheless, I have gone to lengths to not have your last name put on here, because I assume, for good reason, you would not want it to be.

    You went out of your way though (while certainly legal) to look me up on campaign donation databases and then tried to reveal information about my job at the time, which I did not talk about, and you did that while a six figure federal employee, so I think that was a bit sketchy.

    Also back in those P1 days, someone found an online profile of someone who had the same name as me, but was most certainly not me, and that poor person got a whole bunch of harassing emails from the crowd there. I cannot remember if you were directly involved in that, but I certainly remember all the fake handles and stuff posted as “Corey” with the porn links, etc, that you did. That was not very mature, but I assume you thought you had permanent anonymity.

  6. You two need to move into the NOW….

    Your old scores are NOT what we need here….

    And this post is WTF over the numbers….

    We’re SUPPOSTED to be having GOOD time coming here for goodness sakes….

  7. Actually agreeing to meet someone in person in public is far less stalkerish than going back 30 years and posting stuff anonymously.
    Just my opinion.

  8. Whatever I posted was under my own name/handle here and was only done as a counter to extreme judgments against others and outright hypocrisy on issues, but yeah, if someone actually had a notion they had a “stalker”, asking them to meet would be pretty unwise for anyone.

  9. So, no lunch then!?? But, you have all these questions? Not sure why you don’t want to join me, you have spent so much time researching me, going back 30 years. I would think you would want to meet your research project in-person.

    And, I am willing to answer all your questions, just over a lunch table, not electronically so they might then clog my clients mailboxes. Not sure why you have this obsession with me, but I must agree with James, it has gotten out of control and you do appear so very defensive (not sure why).

    So, you won’t accept a friendly invitation to lunch. I must admit I am a little surprised that you wouldn’t be willing to meet with a person you have wasted so much time and energy on — and I would pay. Maybe it’s because you already know the answers to those “questions” you have for me, or maybe you’re just afraid.

    In any event, the invitation stands.

Comments are closed.