slug.com slug.com
10 0

Many have their frustrations with Trump. What are yours?

What is the worst part of the Trump Presidency?

  • 3 votes
  • 4 votes
  • 5 votes
  • 13 votes
  • 9 votes
  • 7 votes
HatedDixieFan 5 June 18
Share
You must be a member of this group before commenting. Join Group

Be part of the movement!

Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.

Create your free account

10 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

1

He's a Jew-owned goyim wrangler. His actions don't back up his empty words. Trump is useless.

0

The left fantasizes Trump as an omnipotent demigod. The US President is the weakest office of the western democracies. He effectively faces two parliaments and a judiciary who can over rule him for any reason any time. Trump has constraints and imperatives, he cannot do whatever he wants.

0

If you have a dislike for President Trump you are going to mortified by President Biden!

Luek Level 3 June 20, 2020
0

His caution. we hired him to smash shit. I appreciate the legal concerns, but this fucking nonsense about judges saying he can't do a thing he can do, so he doesn't, is absolute bullshit.

solopro Level 6 June 19, 2020
1

He needs to call out BLM for what it is. His response to the riots/looting has been completely toothless so far. I wonder if half the reason is that he's letting Kushner whisper into his ear that he'll lose the black vote if he takes action. Everyone in politics knows that blacks have always voted majority democrat (>80%) every election ever since we've been keeping track. He's going to lose the black vote no matter what he does, and the media is going to call him racist no matter what he does, so why doesn't he take proper action and stomp these people out? He needs to designate both BLM and Antifa as domestic terrorist organizations involved in a communist takeover already. He has nothing to lose.

gadsden Level 4 June 19, 2020
1

The fact that he didn't understand the historical moment.

America is dead, but he desperately thinks it can be made great again.

2

The constant Trump bashing and the relentless attacks by the globalist corporate media!

2peros Level 8 June 18, 2020
2

TRUMP is TRUMP. His election was a answer to the former dolt in the white house, who was the only president in history to be AGAINST the U.S. We did not want another shoe shine your ass politician as you got the royal screw. The man loves the country and it's people, it's military and most of all the flag and history.

I think for most people here, we see that he may love America- but that America he grew up in was not the America that foundational Americans like myself support. His America is big banker, big stock market, and unquestioning loyalty to the child-trafficking, child raping, terrorist state of Israel.

Trump loves Trump and nothing else. He once saw a man fall and hit his head and bleed, and rather than try and help, he turned away and complained about his blood ruining the "beautiful marble floor". If you think he loves the people of the US, I have a bridge to sell you. If he discovered a way to benefit himself by selling out the country, he'd do it in a heartbeat.

1

Trump is a Nationalist. That means that a Nation State (a despotic one of course) Trumps a Global State Government Power.

That is an example of the lesser of two evils false choice.

A better choice is the non-evil choice.

An actual Federation (voluntary mutual defense association) of Independent (free) States Trumps both Nation Level Despotic State Governments and Global Level Despotic State Governments.

When the word State is a Legal Fiction Corporate Oligarchy, which is a Profitable Monopoly of Power, which is a Dominant Criminal Organization hiding behind a Legal Fiction Treasonous Fraud, then there will be fraud, extortion, terror, torture, murder, and mass murder employed in order to maintain them.

When there is only ONE (Globalist) such Criminal Organization or State, then people begin to see the wisdom of defending against the ONE thing. Us (victims) versus them (victimizers).

That is why those in power must maintain constant war (Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace), failing to do so tends to Unite the Victims into one cohesive group of defenders. The result of failing to keep the victims divided (so as to be conquered) is exemplified in the American Revolution between 1774 and 1789.

If it turns out that Trump is not a Nationalist, and instead Trump is Revolutionizing the American government, returning the American government back to an actual Federation (voluntary mutual defense association) of Independent (free) States, then I'll be surprised, and delighted.

Reclaiming the American Revolution: The Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions and Their Legacy
by William Watkins

"Second, federalism permits the states to operate as laboratories of democracy-to experiment with various policies and Programs. For example, if Tennessee wanted to provide a state-run health system for its citizens, the other 49 states could observe the effects of this venture on Tennessee's economy, the quality of care provided, and the overall cost of health care. If the plan proved to be efficacious other states might choose to emulate it, or adopt a plan taking into account any problems surfacing in Tennessee. If the plan proved to be a disastrous intervention, the other 49 could decide to leave the provision of medical care to the private sector. With national plans and programs, the national officials simply roll the dice for all 284 million people of the United States and hope they get things right.

"Experimentation in policymaking also encourages a healthy competition among units of government and allows the people to vote with their feet should they find a law of policy detrimental to their interests. Using again the state-run health system as an example, if a citizen of Tennessee was unhappy with Tennessee's meddling with the provisions of health care, the citizen could move to a neighboring state. Reallocation to a state like North Carolina, with a similar culture and climate, would not be a dramatic shift and would be a viable option. Moreover, if enough citizens exercised this option, Tennessee would be pressured to abandon its foray into socialized medicine, or else lose much of its tax base. To escape a national health system, a citizen would have to emigrate to a foreign country, an option far less appealing and less likely to be exercised than moving to a neighboring state. Without competition from other units of government, the national government would have much less incentive than Tennessee would to modify the objectionable policy. Clearly, the absence of experimentation and competition hampers the creation of effective programs and makes the modification of failed national programs less likely."

No. 3 - New Constitution Creates A National Government; Will Not Abate Foreign Influence; Dangers Of Civil War And Despotism


Like the nome de plume "Publius" used by pro Constitution writers in the Federalist Papers, several Anti-Federalists signed their writings "A FARMER. " While the occupation of the writers may not have coincided with the name given, the arguments against consolidating power in the hands of a central government were widely read. The following was published in the Maryland Gazette and Baltimore Advertiser, March 7, 1788. The true identity of the author is unknown.


"There are but two modes by which men are connected in society, the one which operates on individuals, this always has been, and ought still to be called, national government; the other which binds States and governments together (not corporations, for there is no considerable nation on earth, despotic, monarchical, or republican, that does not contain many subordinate corporations with various constitutions) this last has heretofore been denominated a league or confederacy. The term federalists is therefore improperly applied to themselves, by the friends and supporters of the proposed constitution. This abuse of language does not help the cause; every degree of imposition serves only to irritate, but can never convince. They are national men, and their opponents, or at least a great majority of them, are federal, in the only true and strict sense of the word.

"Whether any form of national government is preferable for the Americans, to a league or confederacy, is a previous question we must first make up our minds upon. . . .

"That a national government will add to the dignity and increase the splendor of the United States abroad, can admit of no doubt: it is essentially requisite for both. That it will render government, and officers of government, more dignified at home is equally certain. That these objects are more suited to the manners, if not [the] genius and disposition of our people is, I fear, also true. That it is requisite in order to keep us at peace among ourselves, is doubtful. That it is necessary, to prevent foreigners from dividing us, or interfering in our government, I deny positively; and, after all, I have strong doubts whether all its advantages are not more specious than solid. We are vain, like other nations. We wish to make a noise in the world; and feel hurt that Europeans are not so attentive to America in peace, as they were to America in war. We are also, no doubt, desirous of cutting a figure in history. Should we not reflect, that quiet is happiness? That content and pomp are incompatible? I have either read or heard this truth, which the Americans should never forget: That the silence of historians is the surest record of the happiness of a people. The Swiss have been four hundred years the envy of mankind, and there is yet scarcely an history of their nation. What is history, but a disgusting and painful detail of the butcheries of conquerors, and the woeful calamities of the conquered? Many of us are proud, and are frequently disappointed that office confers neither respect nor difference. No man of merit can ever be disgraced by office. A rogue in office may be feared in some governments - he will be respected in none. After all, what we call respect and difference only arise from contrast of situation, as most of our ideas come by comparison and relation. Where the people are free there can be no great contrast or distinction among honest citizens in or out of office. In proportion as the people lose their freedom, every gradation of distinction, between the Governors and governed obtains, until the former become masters, and the latter become slaves. In all governments virtue will command reverence. The divine Cato knew every Roman citizen by name, and never assumed any preeminence; yet Cato found, and his memory will find, respect and reverence in the bosoms of mankind, until this world returns into that nothing, from whence Omnipotence called it.

"That the people are not at present disposed for, and are actually incapable of, governments of simplicity and equal rights, I can no longer doubt. But whose fault is it? We make them bad, by bad governments, and then abuse and despise them for being so. Our people are capable of being made anything that human nature was or is capable of, if we would only have a little patience and give them good and wholesome institutions; but I see none such and very little prospect of such. Alas! I see nothing in my fellow-citizens, that will permit my still fostering the delusion, that they are now capable of sustaining the weight of SELF-GOVERNMENT: a burden to which Greek and Roman shoulders proved unequal. The honor of supporting the dignity of the human character, seems reserved to the hardy Helvetians alone.

"If the body of the people will not govern themselves, and govern themselves well too, the consequence is unavoidable - a FEW will, and must govern them. Then it is that government becomes truly a government by force only, where men relinquish part of their natural rights to secure the rest, instead of an union of will and force, to protect all their natural rights, which ought to be the foundation of every rightful social compact.

"Whether national government will be productive of internal peace, is too uncertain to admit of decided opinion. I only hazard a conjecture when I say, that our state disputes, in a confederacy, would be disputes of levity and passion, which would subside before injury. The people being free, government having no right to them, but they to government, they would separate and divide as interest or inclination prompted - as they do at this day, and always have done, in Switzerland. In a national government, unless cautiously and fortunately administered, the disputes will be the deep-rooted differences of interest, where part of the empire must be injured by the operation of general law; and then should the sword of government be once drawn (which Heaven avert) I fear it will not be sheathed, until we have waded through that series of desolation, which France, Spain, and the other great kingdoms of the world have suffered, in order to bring so many separate States into uniformity, of government and law; in which event the legislative power can only be entrusted to one man (as it is with them) who can have no local attachments, partial interests, or private views to gratify.

"That a national government will prevent the influence or danger of foreign intrigue, or secure us from invasion, is in my judgment directly the reverse of the truth. The only foreign, or at least evil foreign influence, must be obtained through corruption. Where the government is lodged in the body of the people, as in Switzerland, they can never be corrupted; for no prince, or people, can have resources enough to corrupt the majority of a nation; and if they could, the play is not worth the candle. The facility of corruption is increased in proportion as power tends by representation or delegation, to a concentration in the hands of a few. . . .

"As to any nation attacking a number of confederated independent republics . . . it is not to be expected, more especially as the wealth of the empire is there universally diffused, and will not be collected into any one overgrown, luxurious and effeminate capital to become a lure to the enterprizing ambitious.

"That extensive empire is a misfortune to be deprecated, will not now be disputed. The balance of power has long engaged the attention of all the European world, in order to avoid the horrid evils of a general government. The same government pervading a vast extent of territory, terrifies the minds of individuals into meanness and submission. All human authority, however organized, must have confined limits, or insolence and oppression will prove the offspring of its grandeur, and the difficulty or rather impossibility of escape prevents resistance. Gibbon relates that some Roman Knights who had offended government in Rome were taken up in Asia, in a very few days after. It was the extensive territory of the Roman republic that produced a Sylla, a Marius, a Caligula, a Nero, and an Elagabalus. In small independent States contiguous to each other, the people run away and leave despotism to reek its vengeance on itself; and thus it is that moderation becomes with them, the law of self-preservation. These and such reasons founded on the eternal and immutable nature of things have long caused and will continue to cause much difference of sentiment throughout our wide extensive territories. From our divided and dispersed situation, and from the natural moderation of the American character, it has hitherto proved a warfare of argument and reason."
A FARMER

Returning to Rule of Law (common law with private prosecutors, independent grand juries, and independent common law trial juries in Courts of Law) would be an obvious step in the right direction. Then the people can drain the swamp, and leave a "president" free to defend all the States Federated.

Yes, I haven't all of this yet, but honestly I agree with the first bit for sure. Once people remove the slavery narrative surrounding the War of Northern Aggression it becomes clear- the US has gotten too large and diverse for anything that can even resemble self-government. Confederation, or returning to a true republic that is, is a far better option than any kind of continuance in Lincolnianism.

@HatedDixieFan

Slavery was never good for anyone but the slave consumers (kidnappers, traders, sellers, buyers, abusers), and unfortunately the criminal slave abusers in the south made a deal with the criminal slave carriers in the north to annihilate the Federal government in 1787.

A reasonable live-and-let-live type person could see this in the data:

"We ask your attention to the injuries inflicted upon you and your children, by an institution which lives by your sufferance, and will die at your mandate. Slavery is maintained by you whom it impoverishes and degrades, not by those upon whom it confers wealth and influence. These assertions will be received by you and others with surprise and incredulity. Before you condemn them, ponder the following considerations and statistics."
[archive.org]

It was evil to all but those who invested in it, for their own benefit, at the expense of everyone else.

June 17, 1788
George Mason:
"Mr. Chairman, this is a fatal section, which has created more dangers than any other. The first clause allows the importation of slaves for twenty years. Under the royal government, this evil was looked upon as a great oppression, and many attempts were made to prevent it; but the interest of the African merchants prevented its prohibition. No sooner did the revolution take place, than it was thought of. It was one of the great causes of our separation from Great Britain. Its exclusion has been a principal object of this state, and most of the states in the Union. The augmentation of slaves weakens the states; and such a trade is diabolical in itself, and disgraceful to mankind; yet, by this Constitution, it is continued for twenty years. As much as I value a union of all the states, I would not admit the Southern States into the Union unless they agree to the discontinuance of this disgraceful trade, because it would bring weakness, and not strength, to the Union."

George Mason was a southerner.

Thomas Jefferson was a southerner:

Thomas Jefferson, A Summary View of the Rights of British America, August 1745
"For the most trifling reasons, and sometimes for no conceivable reason at all, his majesty has rejected laws of the most salutary tendency. The abolition of domestic slavery is the great object of desire in those colonies, where it was unhappily introduced in their infant state. But previous to the enfranchisement of the slaves we have, it is necessary to exclude all further importations from Africa; yet our repeated attempts to effect this by prohibitions, and by imposing duties which might amount to a prohibition, have been hitherto defeated by his majesty’s negative: Thus preferring the immediate advantages of a few African corsairs to the lasting interests of the American states, and to the rights of human nature, deeply wounded by this infamous practice. Nay, the single interposition of an interested individual against a law was scarcely ever known to fail of success, though in the opposite scale were placed the interests of a whole country. That this is so shameful an abuse of a power trusted with his majesty for other purposes, as if not reformed, would call for some legal restrictions. . . "

Note the date 1745 above, and evil, as any criminal power, corrupts everyone who invests in it.

During the revolutionary war:

On the 20th day of October 1774
"This agreement contained a clause to discontinue the slave trade, and a provision not to import East India tea from any part of the world. In the article respecting non-exportations, the sending of rice to Europe was excepted."

On the 1st of April, 1775
"On this occasion, the importation of slaves was expressly prohibited."

The following is quoted from the Original Draft of the Declaration of Independence, again Thomas Jefferson (southerner):

"he has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating it's most sacred rights of life & liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him, captivating & carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere, or to incur miserable death in their transportation thither. this piratical warfare, the opprobrium of infidel powers, is the warfare of the CHRISTIAN king of Great Britain. determined to keep open a market where MEN should be bought & sold, he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or to restrain this execrable commerce: and that this assemblage of horrors might want no fact of distinguished die, he is now exciting those very people to rise in arms among us, and to purchase that liberty of which he has deprived them, & murdering the people upon whom he also obtruded them; thus paying off former crimes committed against the liberties of one people, with crimes which he urges them to commit against the lives of another."

English Despotic Government Imposed Slavery on America, and the revolutionary idea was to reject Subsidized Slavery (Despotism, where the people are made to work to keep them enslaved: to send the product of their labor to their slave masters).

Here is another southerner, Richard Henry Lee, who was the 6th President of the United States of America while it was a Federation of Independent States, before 1789:

"Extreme shyness prevented his taking any part in the debates for some time in House of Burgess. His first speech was on a motion: "to lay so heavy a duty on the importation of slaves as effectually to put an end to that iniquitous and disgraceful traffic within the colony of Virginia." On this occasion, his hatred of slavery overcame his timidity and he made a powerful speech supplying the proofs of principal points of view used by the northern Abolitionists through the 1860s."

The link above (Address to the Non-Slaveholders of the South, on the Social and Political Evils of Slavery) may have been aided by the work of Richard Henry Lee.

And then there is this:

"The abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison thought the U.S. Constitution was the result of a terrible bargain between freedom and slavery. Calling the Constitution a "covenant with death" and "an agreement with Hell," he refused to participate in American electoral politics because to do so meant supporting "the pro-slavery, war sanctioning Constitution of the United States." Instead, under the slogan "No Union with Slaveholders," the Garrisonians repeatedly argued for a dissolution of the Union.

"Part of Garrison's opposition to continuing the Union stemmed from a desire to avoid the corruption that came from participating in a government created by the proslavery Constitution. But this position was also at least theoretically pragmatic. The Garrisonians were convinced that the legal protection of slavery in the Constitution made political activity futile, while support for the Constitution merely strengthened the stranglehold slavery had on America. In 1845 Wendell Phillips pointed out that in the years since the adoption of the Constitution, Americans had witnessed "the slaves trebling in numbers—slaveholders monopolizing the offices and dictating the policy of the Government-prostituting the strength and influence of the Nation to the support of slavery here and elsewhere—trampling on the rights of the free States, and making the courts of the country their tools." Phillips argued that this experience proved "that it is impossible for free and slave States to unite on any terms, without all becoming partners in the guilt and responsible for the sin of slavery."
Garrison's Constitution
The Covenant with Death and How It Was Made
By Paul Finkelman, 2000

And this:

"To emancipate all slaves born after passing the act. The bill reported by the revisors does not itself contain this proposition; but an amendment containing it was prepared, to be offered to the legislature whenever the bill should be taken up, and further directing, that they should continue with their parents to a certain age, then be brought up, at the public expence, to tillage, arts or sciences, according to their geniusses, till the females should be eighteen, and the males twenty-one years of age, when they should be colonized to such place as the circumstances of the time should render most proper, sending them out with arms, implements of houshold and of the handicraft arts, feeds, pairs of the useful domestic animals, &c. to declare them a free and independant people, and extend to them our alliance and protection, till they shall have acquired strength; and to send vessels at the same time to other parts of the world for an equal number of white inhabitants; to induce whom to migrate hither, proper encouragements were to be proposed. It will probably be asked, Why not retain and incorporate the blacks into the state, and thus save the expence of supplying, by importation of white settlers, the vacancies they will leave? Deep rooted prejudices entertained by the whites; ten thousand recollections, by the blacks, of the injuries they have sustained; new provocations; the real distinctions which nature has made; and many other circumstances, will divide us into parties, and produce convulsions which will probably never end but in the extermination of the one or the other race."
Notes on the State of Virginia
by Thomas Jefferson, 1781

I also found this:

"Freeman’s case, however, was different. She didn’t seek her freedom through a loophole but instead called into account the existence of slavery, which affected an estimated 2.2 percent of Massachusetts’ population."
[history.com]

Note the date: 1780.

Now, returning to Thomas Jefferson concerning why the Declaration of Independence was censored for the indictment on the crime known as slavery:

In the Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. I. p. 10
"The clause, too, reprobating the enslaving the inhabitants of Africa, was struck out in complaisance to South Carolina and Georgia, who had never attempted to restrain the importation of slaves, and who, on the contrary, still wished to continue it. Our northern brethren also, I believe felt a little tender under those censures; for, though their people had very few slaves themselves, yet they had been pretty considerable carriers of them to others."

So...Slavery was on the way out in America, because America was returning to Rule of Law (common law, trial by jury), but instead of America returning to Rule of Law a deal was done in 1787 to anihilate the existing Federation of States, to replace that Volunary Mutual Defense Association with a despotic Subdidized Slavery of everyone, doing so with Paper Money (another story).

"War of Northern Aggression"

@JacksonNought All things aside, there would have been no war had the North allowed secession to proceed, as was a recognized right of the states until 1861.

Write a book next, time...don't have time to read it....

2

I said other due to his slow response to big tech censorship

Definitely a huge knock on him, but what is worse is his executive orders about BDS on college campuses that receive federal aid. Trump isn't for ending censorship- he is for making sure any voice criticizing Israel is shut down swiftly.

Write Comment

Recent Visitors 81

Photos 516 More

Posted by CourseofEmpireA little weird. All of them ina nation that is overwhelmingly Eastern Orthodox? Shouldn’t there be more of them in there instead?

Posted by InspirationHow do you explain this.

Posted by CourseofEmpireIf the international banking cartel says that you aren't allowed to have a bank account, it means you are a threat.

Posted by CourseofEmpireThis should be our objective

Posted by CourseofEmpireProposed measures to reduce fertility in the US, 1967. "Too Many Americans."

Posted by CourseofEmpireA little pita bread, tsaziki, souvlaki, mmmm, quite tasty; not sure about the social media platform though. ;)

Posted by CourseofEmpireI mean, is he really wrong?

Posted by CourseofEmpireThere are reports many larger cities are starting to see an outward drift. Maybe the early stages of this? ;)

Posted by CourseofEmpireWhy can’t C-19 vaccine mandates be taken seriously?

Posted by CourseofEmpireWarren is one of the inventors of mRNA and he believes 1 to 2 billion will die from this vaxx. [twitter.com]

Posted by CourseofEmpireThe vast majority are vaxxed. This can’t be the unvaxxed who are mostly dying. Remember, they are a few months ahead of the Northern hemisphere.

Posted by CourseofEmpireAwesome 😂

Posted by CourseofEmpireWeimar (yes, THAT Weimar) will no longer report numbers of vaxxed people being hospitalized for COVID because the truth might be used for "misinformation." -Lovecraft's Cat

Posted by CourseofEmpireAny cause. This is an amazing vaccination, you are almost invincible if you get it, everyone (except a few little side effects and such)! 😂

Posted by CourseofEmpireHow long before a politician is physically attacked and even killed for mandating vaccines? [news.com.au]

Posted by CourseofEmpireNotice how much things increased with this one vaccine?

  • Top tags#video #world #media #government #hope #biden #money #Police #youtube #reason #truth #death #god #culture #rights #whites #democrats #society #China #politics #USA #freedom #vote #evidence #Canada #children #videos #TheTruth #liberal #racist #nation #evil #fear #kids #racism #chinese #friends #hell #conservative #community #crime #propaganda #justice #Christian #book #population #religion #FreeSpeech #antifa #violence ...

    Members 1,889Top

    Moderator