White House whistleblower: Trump's condition quickly deteriorating

[Jill 31,812]

Just now, GagaSine said:

I would argue they are more similar than different, and while I would never ‘prefer’ Trump I understand where that user is coming from

Well I don't. It sounds deeply unempathetic to me.

[GagaSine 7,464]

3 minutes ago, Lionel Hutz said:

Well I don't. It sounds deeply unempathetic to me.

 okay, I guess victims of the democrats tyranny are not worthy of empathy in your eyes. Do you think the families of people who died from drone bombing care if it was a republican or a Democrat who called for the bombing? Are they supposed to feel ‘well i’m glad the Americans have a Democrat in charge that is killing us’

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Lionel Hutz said:

Great. Latin Americans aren't as worthy as you, so congrats if that happens I guess

I was clearly giving my prediction of what could happen to agree with you saying all presidents have to do wars. I did not say its good it will be directed on latin America and not me.

Latin Americans are as worthy as me, my country, and my people so stop misrepresenting what im saying.
 

[Jill 31,812]

1 minute ago, Faysalaaa said:

I was clearly giving my prediction of what could happen to agree with you saying all presidents have to do wars. I did not say its good it will be directed on latin America and not me.

Latin Americans are as worthy as me, my country, and my people so stop misrepresenting what im saying.
 

But there's no way of stopping the US without some kind of international movement so I don't know what you're getting at. There will be wars in the Middle East with or without Trump. Plus, this discussion is worthless since Pelosi would only assume the presidency if Trump is dead, so it wouldn't be much of a choice would it

[MJHolland 12,725]

1 hour ago, KNJ said:

It has happened before.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_line_of_succession

It'll still be Pelosi. But what's scary is she's the only Dem in the whole line of succession. After her it's all of his generals: Grassley, then Pompeo, Mnuchin, Esper, Barr.... Chr*st  She needs to be protected. 

Oh.

But wanna know what's also happened? In 1919, we had a president who suffered a stroke and hid his health from his vice president, his cabinet, and the public so he could hold onto power, despite not totally being up for the job and endangering our national security. 

Spoiler

In October 1919, Woodrow Wilson suffered a debilitating stroke. Nearly blind and partially paralyzed, he spent the final 17 months of his presidency sequestered in the White House.[28] Vice President Thomas Marshall, the cabinet, and the nation were kept in the dark over the severity of the president's illness for several months. Marshall was pointedly afraid to ask about Wilson's health, or to preside over cabinet meetings, fearful that he would be accused of "longing for his place". Though members of both parties in Congress pledged to support him if he asserted his claim to the presidency, Marshall declined to act, or to do anything that might seem ambitious or disloyal to Wilson.[29] - Wikipedia you linked

 

[Jill 31,812]

3 minutes ago, GagaSine said:

 okay, I guess victims of the democrats tyranny are not worthy of empathy in your eyes. 

Democrats tyranny? Did you forget about the Bush family or Trump's numerous war crimes? Doing these kind of things are necessary in order to be the president of the world's most powerful country. It's not good, it's not fair, but electing a fascist as President wouldn't help much I think

[lavenderblondee 3,695]

My boyfriend is good with politics/in the know and he's still torn on how bad it would be if Trump actually die. 

Do I think he'll die? No. But I do think if he stays as sick as he supposedly is... this may drastically change the election and it may just be in Bidens favor? I need more information on what can actually happen if Trump is incapacitated the next month.

[GagaSine 7,464]

Just now, Lionel Hutz said:

Democrats tyranny? Did you forget about the Bush family or Trump's numerous war crimes? Doing these kind of things are necessary in order to be the president of the world's most powerful country. It's not good, it's not fair, but electing a fascist as President wouldn't help much I think

They’re all fascists hunny, some of them are just more open about it

[Jill 31,812]

Just now, GagaSine said:

They’re all fascists hunny, some of them are just more open about it

(X) doubt

I don't think you know what fascism is then

[GagaSine 7,464]

Just now, Lionel Hutz said:

Democrats tyranny? Did you forget about the Bush family or Trump's numerous war crimes? Doing these kind of things are necessary in order to be the president of the world's most powerful country. It's not good, it's not fair, but electing a fascist as President wouldn't help much I think

Like literally just because I can recognize the democrats do horrible things doesn’t mean I excuse the republicans. Enough with this binary thinking

[GagaSine 7,464]

Just now, Lionel Hutz said:

(X) doubt

I don't think you know what fascism is then

Actually I think you don’t 

[Jill 31,812]

Just now, GagaSine said:

Like literally just because I can recognize the democrats do horrible things doesn’t mean I excuse the republicans. Enough with this binary thinking

You're referring to this concept of democrat tyranny as if it was the only thing stopping the US from being a full-fledged utopian democracy when it's not. I brought the Republicans in because what you said implies Trump wouldn't be capable of doing something like that, and he already did.

[Jill 31,812]

1 minute ago, GagaSine said:

Actually I think you don’t 

Well, let's see. For starters, Democrats never had intentions of not leaving the f*cking office after losing an election. That seems pretty fascist to me. And so you know, authoritarian is not the same as fascist, and just because the US doesn't have free elections doesn't mean all the presidents are non-democratic.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Lionel Hutz said:

But there's no way of stopping the US without some kind of international movement so I don't know what you're getting at. There will be wars in the Middle East with or without Trump.

Yes both parties serve the military industrial complex and there is no anti war party. But depending on whos president, their strategy could benefit me or make things worse for me. I never claimed wars will stop under Trump or Pelosi, I simply talked about their strategy and how it could possibly effect me.

2 minutes ago, Lionel Hutz said:

Plus, this discussion is worthless since Pelosi would only assume the presidency if Trump is dead, so it wouldn't be much of a choice would it

Yes which is why my comment was a joke, but some people here took it seriously and wanted to argue with me. Which is fine I enjoy arguing about this stuff specially with respectful people here.

[MJHolland 12,725]

48 minutes ago, NFRockwell said:

I’m not saying you shouldn’t be pissed. But arguing with people on their morals and **** for hours isn’t going to solve our problems.

People should be concerned about the future of this country, I am. But they should also make sure to remember their limit of control in these situations. You’re not gonna start a revolt and get all the information from the government you want in a Gaga Daily thread.