The Trump Presidency - how I stopped worrying and learned to love the Hair

Can’t decide if this is a brilliantly placed reference or a very lucky coincidence. :ROFLMAO:

It's a reference. I find it brilliant and full of humour. The more it is true, the more it is irresistible. Interestingly enough, it didn't come to me straight from its real origin in WWI Austria, but mediated through at least two different italian intellectuals of the post WWII era.
 
Last edited:
GAO finds that Trump broke the law in freezing Ukraine aid.

https://www.npr.org/2020/01/16/7968...ezing-ukraine-funds-watchdog-report-concludes

And in a move of incredible irony, Ukraine opens an investigation into Trump's spying on Yovanovitch. ?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...ch-spy-investigation-ambassador-a9286326.html
461-4613992_uno-unoreversecard-reverse-card-unocard-uno-reverse-card.png
 
Apparently, Ken Starr is part of Trump's defense team.

 
Along with Epstien's lawyer.
 
 
National Archives admits it altered photographs of the Women's March following Trump's inauguration, editing out signs critical of Trump or referencing him.

https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-brie...es-says-it-altered-womens-march-photo-to-blur

Rewriting history.


“As a non-partisan, non-political federal agency, we blurred references to the President’s name on some posters, so as not to engage in current political controversy,” Archives spokeswoman Miriam Kleiman said in a statement to The Washington Post.

“Our mission is to safeguard and provide access to the nation’s most important federal records, and our exhibits are one way in which we connect the American people to those records. Modifying the image was an attempt on our part to keep the focus on the records.”


Doesn't this make it more controversial?
 
"Hey, got any photos of civil rights marches, women's sufferage marches, or Vietnam war protests? It's cool, I'll wait."

"I have modified the record to preserve it's accuracy" is some next-level double-speak.
 

So what they want to say is:

 
National Archives admits it altered photographs of the Women's March following Trump's inauguration, editing out signs critical of Trump or referencing him.

https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-brie...es-says-it-altered-womens-march-photo-to-blur

Rewriting history.
I am completely speechless about this. I mean, we are used to politicians and especially Trump lying all the time, but the National Archives? I suppose the people working there are, like, historians or something similar? And they alter images of public events?

And what kind of journalist does not immediately jump on this when it's said in a fucking interview?
 
Was watching the Senate Trial sporadically, and to no surprise to anyone, the republicans have not broken ranks yet. So this will be a farce.
 
It's already a farce; they've limited access to the proceedings, even C-SPAN doesn't have access. The GOP isn't allowing new evidence or any of the witnesses who didn't testify to the House. McConnel and other GOP Senators have openly stated they are collaborating with the White House defense and have no interest in an honest process.
 
It's already a farce; they've limited access to the proceedings, even C-SPAN doesn't have access. The GOP isn't allowing new evidence or any of the witnesses who didn't testify to the House. McConnel and other GOP Senators have openly stated they are collaborating with the White House defense and have no interest in an honest process.

Yes, of course, but there was some hope of the republicans showing that they have a conscious. Well, some of them.

It really amazes me how Trump has really taken over the party, and how even his detractors have fallen in line.

One thing you have to give to the republicans, they know how to circle the wagons.
 
Top