Trump has an interest in tearing up anything and everything he can and then putting his own name on it, regardless of actual differences in the plan. Repeal and replace ObamaCare, the Republican plan! etc etc repeat repeat
I suspect that the “national security” clause will be removed next time the Democrats have power.
No need to be a dick. . . .
I would be skeptical that Trump personally had much to do with the details of any agreements. Like you said, his motivation is mostly getting to rebrand stuff to be under his own name.
That said, some of these new agreements are going to be improved in some ways regardless, if only because they’re getting updated for the first time in decades.
Sell your Amazon stocks.
Any reason as to why?
Oops. . . .
That’s because Trump is a lying piece of shit fat fuck who got himself elected through the principles of white supremacy in the backlash and hatred of our first black president, and because the Democrats ran a terrible fucking candidate against him and anyone who supports Trump is a complicit fucking moron.
That’s… Pretty spot on.
and then you have this video clip. Surprised he hasn’t deleted this tweet given his rant
Candace Owens, Larry Elder, David Clarke, Michelle Malkin are white supremacist?
You can in fact be black and openly support white supremacists. It’s called “being disingenuous so you can make money,” and David Clarke and Candace Owens are masters at it.
I’m tempted to ask for evidence of their white supremacy but I already know the answer to that. Just gotta keep reminding myself “Facts don’t matter!”
You could ask, but you won’t read, because it’s about not having an “echo chamber.” Never mind that Clarke has pushed the very white supremacist ideal that BLM is an attack on American institutions or that he still disparages Trayvon Martin for being a “thug,” nah, he’s just trolling and pointing out the foibles of the Left. Okay.
Candace Owens literally said that Climate Change was a Left conspiracy theory, but we have to take her seriously. These aren’t serious people, they don’t belong in a conversation about ideals because they have none. They are good dogs that follow the money.
No lies detected. Still no evidence of white supremacy.
Interesting NYT article:
I liked the BBC’s recent approach:
Quote of interest:
To achieve impartiality, you do not need to include outright deniers of climate change in BBC coverage, in the same way you would not have someone denying that Manchester United won 2-0 last Saturday. The referee has spoken.
