A day without stupid?

[Worldtraveller]

Trump is blaming tge teleprompter.

This is the same Trump that lambasted Obama for using a teleprompter?

Just checking.

Yeah, and I already saw a meme about that too.

 

[ZiprHead]

Trump’s campaign offered 10 plastic straws for $15 because ‘liberal paper straws don’t work’ — and they just sold out

There was the Jeb Bush guacamole bowl. Then, the “Grillary Clinton ” kitchen apron.

Now, there’s Trump Straws.

President Donald Trump’s reelection campaign is selling 10-packs of branded plastic straws for $15.

Why? Because “liberal paper straws don’t work,” the president’s online campaign store asserts.

“STAND WITH PRESIDENT TRUMP and buy your pack of recyclable straws today,” the website says.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Trump’s campaign offered 10 plastic straws for $15 because ‘liberal paper straws don’t work’ — and they just sold out

There was the Jeb Bush guacamole bowl. Then, the “Grillary Clinton ” kitchen apron.

Now, there’s Trump Straws.

President Donald Trump’s reelection campaign is selling 10-packs of branded plastic straws for $15.

Why? Because “liberal paper straws don’t work,” the president’s online campaign store asserts.

“STAND WITH PRESIDENT TRUMP and buy your pack of recyclable straws today,” the website says.

Our nation is heading towards an iceberg because about 25% of this nation can't handle anything but inertia.

Of course, plastic straws are very reusable... but no one ever brings their straw when they go out to eat.

 

[Angry Floof]

Trump’s campaign offered 10 plastic straws for $15 because ‘liberal paper straws don’t work’ — and they just sold out

There was the Jeb Bush guacamole bowl. Then, the “Grillary Clinton ” kitchen apron.

Now, there’s Trump Straws.

President Donald Trump’s reelection campaign is selling 10-packs of branded plastic straws for $15.

Why? Because “liberal paper straws don’t work,” the president’s online campaign store asserts.

“STAND WITH PRESIDENT TRUMP and buy your pack of recyclable straws today,” the website says.

Our nation is heading towards an iceberg because about 25% of this nation can't handle anything but inertia.

Of course, plastic straws are very reusable... but no one ever brings their straw when they go out to eat.

They will if Trump tells them to. Then we'll see them waving straws around everywhere they go, taking selfies with Trump straws, yelling "Take that, libtards!"

 

[Ford]

Trump meets Yazidi activist whose family was slaughtered. Asks dumbest question possible.

The utter lack of empathy here is stunning. His body language alone tells you that, but then at 1:28 in the video...I can't even.

 

[Elixir]

Trump’s campaign offered 10 plastic straws for $15 because ‘liberal paper straws don’t work’ — and they just sold out

There was the Jeb Bush guacamole bowl. Then, the “Grillary Clinton ” kitchen apron.

Now, there’s Trump Straws.

President Donald Trump’s reelection campaign is selling 10-packs of branded plastic straws for $15.

Why? Because “liberal paper straws don’t work,” the president’s online campaign store asserts.

“STAND WITH PRESIDENT TRUMP and buy your pack of recyclable straws today,” the website says.

They're as hollow as the rest of Cheato's promises.

 

[Treedbear]

Our nation is heading towards an iceberg because about 25% of this nation can't handle anything but inertia.

Of course, plastic straws are very reusable... but no one ever brings their straw when they go out to eat.

They will if Trump tells them to. Then we'll see them waving straws around everywhere they go, taking selfies with Trump straws, yelling "Take that, libtards!"

And with a piece of toilet paper proudly stuck to their shoe.

 

[Angry Floof]

 

[ZiprHead]

Trump aide Monica Crowley plagiarized thousands of words in Ph.D. dissertation

Conservative commentator Monica Crowley, who is slated to serve in a top national security communications role in Donald Trump's presidential administration, plagiarized thousands of words of her 2000 dissertation for her Columbia University Ph.D., a CNN KFile review has found.

On Monday, Politico reported that it found more than a dozen examples of plagiarism in Crowley's Ph.D. dissertation. CNN's KFile has found nearly 40 lengthy instances of Crowley lifting paragraphs from numerous sources, including several scholarly texts, the Associated Press, and former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger.

The revelation comes on the heels of another CNN KFile investigation, which found more than 50 instances of plagiarism in Crowley's 2012 book, "What The (Bleep) Just Happened." On Tuesday, the book's publisher, HarperCollins, announced that it would stop selling the book until "the author has the opportunity to source and revise the material."

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Trump aide Monica Crowley plagiarized thousands of words in Ph.D. dissertation

Conservative commentator Monica Crowley, who is slated to serve in a top national security communications role in Donald Trump's presidential administration, plagiarized thousands of words of her 2000 dissertation for her Columbia University Ph.D., a CNN KFile review has found.

On Monday, Politico reported that it found more than a dozen examples of plagiarism in Crowley's Ph.D. dissertation. CNN's KFile has found nearly 40 lengthy instances of Crowley lifting paragraphs from numerous sources, including several scholarly texts, the Associated Press, and former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger.

The revelation comes on the heels of another CNN KFile investigation, which found more than 50 instances of plagiarism in Crowley's 2012 book, "What The (Bleep) Just Happened." On Tuesday, the book's publisher, HarperCollins, announced that it would stop selling the book until "the author has the opportunity to source and revise the material."

This news came out during the Transition for the Trump Admin (January 2017).

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Trump and Afghanistan

We’re like policemen. We’re not fighting a war. If we wanted to fight a war in Afghanistan and win it, I could win that war in a week. I just don’t want to kill 10 million people.

I have plans on Afghanistan that if I wanted to win that war Afghanistan would be wiped off the face of the earth. It would be gone, it would be over literally in 10 days.

What in the blue hell is he going on about?!

1) We have a military plan for Afghanistan with a death toll that tops 10 million? I doubt it.
2) Why would it take 10 days to kill 10 million people? That could only be done with nukes, and that could be pretty quick.
3) How in the heck do we win in our occupation of Afghanistan if we nuke it?!

 

[ideologyhunter]

Afghanistan has about 35 million people (way more than I'd've guessed), but there's no doubt a lot of little villages squirreled away in gullies, hollers, and wadis, so my guess (purely a guess, since it aint wise to second-guess a stable genius and military strategist) is that Trump plans on having Vietnam-era helicopters with open side-hatches, so that the crew can fling nuclear hand grenades at the various villages, hamlets, sub-hamlets, and general shitholes. Ten days of nuclear hand grenades would no doubt wipe out 10 million Afghanis, and then our victorious C-in-C could hold a celebration rally at the Heifer Dome in Waco. I can't answer the bit about our occupation, but I am an unstable genius (with big hands) (and dead sexy.)

 

[bilby]

You kill ten million Afghanis, and you won't have won jack shit.

You will have earned the eternal hatred of the remaining twenty five million Afghanis; The condemnation of most of the world; and a place in history alongside the worst of genocidal lunatics.

You may also provoke the formation of a coalition of nations (many of whom are currently allies) intent on deposing you, even if that requires massive rearmament and an eventual invasion of the USA; and/or a domestic rebellion to remove you and your cronies from power.

But winning most assuredly isn't going to be one of the things that happens.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

According to Wiki, the population was 20,000,000 in 2000, so there has been a population increase of about 60% since 2000 to 32ish million. And about 70% are in rural areas.

You'd think we'd know more about a country we've occupied for 20 or so years.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

You kill ten million Afghanis, and you won't have won jack shit.

You will have earned the eternal hatred of the remaining twenty five million Afghanis; The condemnation of most of the world; and a place in history alongside the worst of genocidal lunatics.

You may also provoke the formation of a coalition of nations (many of whom are currently allies) intent on deposing you, even if that requires massive rearmament and an eventual invasion of the USA; and/or a domestic rebellion to remove you and your cronies from power.

But winning most assuredly isn't going to be one of the things that happens.

I think he was saying that it wouldn't quite be great. But I'm still not certain how it'd be even technically "winning" as the US is the occupying force.

 

[bilby]

Afghanistan has about 35 million people (way more than I'd've guessed), but there's no doubt a lot of little villages squirreled away in gullies, hollers, and wadis, so my guess (purely a guess, since it aint wise to second-guess a stable genius and military strategist) is that Trump plans on having Vietnam-era helicopters with open side-hatches, so that the crew can fling nuclear hand grenades at the various villages, hamlets, sub-hamlets, and general shitholes. Ten days of nuclear hand grenades would no doubt wipe out 10 million Afghanis, and then our victorious C-in-C could hold a celebration rally at the Heifer Dome in Waco. I can't answer the bit about our occupation, but I am an unstable genius (with big hands) (and dead sexy.)

It's very much a rural and tribal environment; About ten percent of the population are concentrated around Kabul, and another 1% or so in Kandahar, but easily 80% of Afghanis are scattered in small villages all across the country.

It's been four decades since the last census, so nobody really knows how many there are, or where they live. This would make genocide quite difficult, and renders nuclear weapons impractical - even Kandahar is too small for a nuke to be an efficient attack option, and using nuclear weapons against villages with populations in triple or even double digits is practically the definition of 'overkill'.

Sometimes you need a solution that's more subtle and sane than simply 'more dakka'.

 

[Keith&Co.]

2) Why would it take 10 days to kill 10 million people? That could only be done with nukes, and that could be pretty quick.

9 days of sharing our plans with other nuclear nations so when they see the detonations they don't assume WWIII and start slinging their own around.
1 day of war.
Declare victory, no one left alive to dispute it, go home, hand out medals.
"For gallantry in the face of 'holy shit he's really doing it!!' we award you the.... "

 

[bilby]

2) Why would it take 10 days to kill 10 million people? That could only be done with nukes, and that could be pretty quick.

9 days of sharing our plans with other nuclear nations so when they see the detonations they don't assume WWIII and start slinging their own around.
1 day of war.
Declare victory, no one left alive to dispute it, go home, hand out medals.
"For gallantry in the face of 'holy shit he's really doing it!!' we award you the.... "

I wouldn't bet that the other nuclear nations won't include at least one who, on seeing the plans, says "Nope. Do this and we will consider it an act of aggression requiring a nuclear response from us against your nation".

That is, after all, how deterrence is meant to work, surely?

Both the Indians and the Pakistanis would likely be deeply concerned about fallout on their home territory; The Russians and Chinese, and probably also the British and French, would be deeply concerned by the diplomatic and balance of power implications of US employment of nuclear weapons against a non-nuclear state; And it's even possible that one or two nuclear armed nations would take a stand against genocide on moral grounds (although I admit that such qualms rarely influence international diplomacy).

I can't see how even a competent diplomatic team could resolve these issues in just nine days. Trump's clown-car administration has no chance - not in nine years, never mind nine days.

 

[Keith&Co.]

2) Why would it take 10 days to kill 10 million people? That could only be done with nukes, and that could be pretty quick.

9 days of sharing our plans with other nuclear nations so when they see the detonations they don't assume WWIII and start slinging their own around.
1 day of war.
Declare victory, no one left alive to dispute it, go home, hand out medals.
"For gallantry in the face of 'holy shit he's really doing it!!' we award you the.... "

I wouldn't bet that the other nuclear nations won't include at least one who, on seeing the plans, says "Nope. Do this and we will consider it an act of aggression requiring a nuclear response from us against your nation".

That is, after all, how deterrence is meant to work, surely?

Well, that's certainly whast I am hoping....
That someone put a List of people to notify before oopening on the football...

 

[bilby]

I wouldn't bet that the other nuclear nations won't include at least one who, on seeing the plans, says "Nope. Do this and we will consider it an act of aggression requiring a nuclear response from us against your nation".

That is, after all, how deterrence is meant to work, surely?

Well, that's certainly whast I am hoping....
That someone put a List of people to notify before oopening on the football...

I was kinda hoping that someone in the Pentagon has had the sense to replace it with an actual football during Trump's term in office, on the basis that he won't know the difference, and that it's a good deal safer for everyone.

They might want to write "Nuculer Football" on it, to complete the illusion.