A 'Rogue Account' Is Tweeting Insider Information On Trump From The White House

[bilby]

So what is earth shattering about this more than Trumps speeches and statements? The election is over so campaigning is now futile.

You can't answer?

I did; there isn't.

The question was.

Of course the Washington Rag says that so it must be right. I don't think its a bad idea to comment on how Obama agreed to take on migrants from Australia this when the us can't drive in any more he gets them from others.

The Earth's not shaking.

What's wrong with the Washington Post reporting? Specifics?

You should only let one WP post at a time.

Specific meaningless posts. If reporting a series of discussions mid way you could just selectively post parts where there are conflicts. It seems there is now no conflict with the Australians.

It seems that, as of an hour ago, nobody had told the New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/02/world/australia/donald-trump-malcolm-turnbull-refugees.html

Or as of 34 minutes ago, News Ltd. http://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/donald-trump-still-undecided-about-deal-made-with-malcolm-turnbull-to-take-in-refugees/news-story/fbdac6ae86d62ff0f03bd8d51637a47a

Perhaps you should give them a call?

 

[whichphilosophy]

So what is earth shattering about this more than Trumps speeches and statements? The election is over so campaigning is now futile.

You can't answer?

I did; there isn't.

The question was.

Of course the Washington Rag says that so it must be right. I don't think its a bad idea to comment on how Obama agreed to take on migrants from Australia this when the us can't drive in any more he gets them from others.

The Earth's not shaking.

What's wrong with the Washington Post reporting? Specifics?

You should only let one WP post at a time.

Specific meaningless posts. If reporting a series of discussions mid way you could just selectively post parts where there are conflicts. It seems there is now no conflict with the Australians.

It seems that, as of an hour ago, nobody had told the New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/02/world/australia/donald-trump-malcolm-turnbull-refugees.html

Or as of 34 minutes ago, News Ltd. http://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/donald-trump-still-undecided-about-deal-made-with-malcolm-turnbull-to-take-in-refugees/news-story/fbdac6ae86d62ff0f03bd8d51637a47a

Perhaps you should give them a call?

I did better:

.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...-a7558526.html
Mexico has denied Donald Trump threatened to send American soldiers into the country during a telephone conversation with his counterpart, President Enrique Peña Nieto.

Such a threat “did not happen during that call,” the Mexican government said in a statement, released on Twitter on Wednesday night.

Australia
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nati...1d1e12992b0b28
Turnbull also made clear that the deal made with Barack Obama was “not an acceptance to take in everyone.”

“Can I just make this clear, the suggestion in some parts of the media . that this involves taking refugees sight unseen is wrong, it has always been based on the premise that the US homeland security officials would take into consideration their vetting measures.

“It is possible that they will take a smaller or larger number.”

“Trump didn’t hang up on me”

 

[bilby]

So what is earth shattering about this more than Trumps speeches and statements? The election is over so campaigning is now futile.

You can't answer?

I did; there isn't.

The question was.

Of course the Washington Rag says that so it must be right. I don't think its a bad idea to comment on how Obama agreed to take on migrants from Australia this when the us can't drive in any more he gets them from others.

The Earth's not shaking.

What's wrong with the Washington Post reporting? Specifics?

You should only let one WP post at a time.

Specific meaningless posts. If reporting a series of discussions mid way you could just selectively post parts where there are conflicts. It seems there is now no conflict with the Australians.

It seems that, as of an hour ago, nobody had told the New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/02/world/australia/donald-trump-malcolm-turnbull-refugees.html

Or as of 34 minutes ago, News Ltd. http://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/donald-trump-still-undecided-about-deal-made-with-malcolm-turnbull-to-take-in-refugees/news-story/fbdac6ae86d62ff0f03bd8d51637a47a

Perhaps you should give them a call?

He accepted the 1,200 odd from Australia so what's the fuss. If you ever attended negotiations in business arguments are common.
Has the US broken diplomatic relations with Australia? Of course not.

Its definitely a media drama over nothing as in grasping straws to try to get breaking news.

The fuss is that Trump has smashed a diplomatic relationship that took decades to build. There are lots of people on both sides trying frantically to put it back together, but Trump isn't even prepared to accept that he has fucked up.

If this is how he behaves towards trusted long-standing allies, what hope is there for diplomatic solutions when inevitable problems arise with less friendly nations? Diplomacy is a matter of life and death for billions of people, and the guy with the world's largest military has just decided he isn't going to bother with it. If you think that's a drama over nothing, then you are fucking nuts.

 

[whichphilosophy]

So what is earth shattering about this more than Trumps speeches and statements? The election is over so campaigning is now futile.

You can't answer?

I did; there isn't.

The question was.

Of course the Washington Rag says that so it must be right. I don't think its a bad idea to comment on how Obama agreed to take on migrants from Australia this when the us can't drive in any more he gets them from others.

The Earth's not shaking.

What's wrong with the Washington Post reporting? Specifics?

You should only let one WP post at a time.

Specific meaningless posts. If reporting a series of discussions mid way you could just selectively post parts where there are conflicts. It seems there is now no conflict with the Australians.

It seems that, as of an hour ago, nobody had told the New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/02/world/australia/donald-trump-malcolm-turnbull-refugees.html

Or as of 34 minutes ago, News Ltd. http://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/donald-trump-still-undecided-about-deal-made-with-malcolm-turnbull-to-take-in-refugees/news-story/fbdac6ae86d62ff0f03bd8d51637a47a

Perhaps you should give them a call?

He accepted the 1,200 odd from Australia so what's the fuss. If you ever attended negotiations in business arguments are common.
Has the US broken diplomatic relations with Australia? Of course not.

Its definitely a media drama over nothing as in grasping straws to try to get breaking news.

The fuss is that Trump has smashed a diplomatic relationship that took decades to build. There are lots of people on both sides trying frantically to put it back together, but Trump isn't even prepared to accept that he has fucked up.

If this is how he behaves towards trusted long-standing allies, what hope is there for diplomatic solutions when inevitable problems arise with less friendly nations? Diplomacy is a matter of life and death for billions of people, and the guy with the world's largest military has just decided he isn't going to bother with it. If you think that's a drama over nothing, then you are fucking nuts.

I don't see any negative impact so far. Negotiations need to be getting more hard nosed as these are firing shots in negotiations. In politics its called posturing, dick wagging or sabre rattling

 

[bilby]

So what is earth shattering about this more than Trumps speeches and statements? The election is over so campaigning is now futile.

You can't answer?

I did; there isn't.

The question was.

Of course the Washington Rag says that so it must be right. I don't think its a bad idea to comment on how Obama agreed to take on migrants from Australia this when the us can't drive in any more he gets them from others.

The Earth's not shaking.

What's wrong with the Washington Post reporting? Specifics?

You should only let one WP post at a time.

Specific meaningless posts. If reporting a series of discussions mid way you could just selectively post parts where there are conflicts. It seems there is now no conflict with the Australians.

It seems that, as of an hour ago, nobody had told the New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/02/world/australia/donald-trump-malcolm-turnbull-refugees.html

Or as of 34 minutes ago, News Ltd. http://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/donald-trump-still-undecided-about-deal-made-with-malcolm-turnbull-to-take-in-refugees/news-story/fbdac6ae86d62ff0f03bd8d51637a47a

Perhaps you should give them a call?

He accepted the 1,200 odd from Australia so what's the fuss. If you ever attended negotiations in business arguments are common.
Has the US broken diplomatic relations with Australia? Of course not.

Its definitely a media drama over nothing as in grasping straws to try to get breaking news.

The fuss is that Trump has smashed a diplomatic relationship that took decades to build. There are lots of people on both sides trying frantically to put it back together, but Trump isn't even prepared to accept that he has fucked up.

If this is how he behaves towards trusted long-standing allies, what hope is there for diplomatic solutions when inevitable problems arise with less friendly nations? Diplomacy is a matter of life and death for billions of people, and the guy with the world's largest military has just decided he isn't going to bother with it. If you think that's a drama over nothing, then you are fucking nuts.

I don't see any negative impact so far. Negotiations need to be getting more hard nosed as these are firing shots in negotiations. In politics its called posturing, dick wagging or sabre rattling

And it's not something to be admired, not something it is reasonable to do after negotiations are concluded (as in this case), and certainly not something to be indulged in with allies.

You really can't be this clueless, surely?

 

[whichphilosophy]

So what is earth shattering about this more than Trumps speeches and statements? The election is over so campaigning is now futile.

You can't answer?

I did; there isn't.

The question was.

Of course the Washington Rag says that so it must be right. I don't think its a bad idea to comment on how Obama agreed to take on migrants from Australia this when the us can't drive in any more he gets them from others.

The Earth's not shaking.

What's wrong with the Washington Post reporting? Specifics?

You should only let one WP post at a time.

Specific meaningless posts. If reporting a series of discussions mid way you could just selectively post parts where there are conflicts. It seems there is now no conflict with the Australians.

It seems that, as of an hour ago, nobody had told the New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/02/world/australia/donald-trump-malcolm-turnbull-refugees.html

Or as of 34 minutes ago, News Ltd. http://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/donald-trump-still-undecided-about-deal-made-with-malcolm-turnbull-to-take-in-refugees/news-story/fbdac6ae86d62ff0f03bd8d51637a47a

Perhaps you should give them a call?

He accepted the 1,200 odd from Australia so what's the fuss. If you ever attended negotiations in business arguments are common.
Has the US broken diplomatic relations with Australia? Of course not.

Its definitely a media drama over nothing as in grasping straws to try to get breaking news.

The fuss is that Trump has smashed a diplomatic relationship that took decades to build. There are lots of people on both sides trying frantically to put it back together, but Trump isn't even prepared to accept that he has fucked up.

If this is how he behaves towards trusted long-standing allies, what hope is there for diplomatic solutions when inevitable problems arise with less friendly nations? Diplomacy is a matter of life and death for billions of people, and the guy with the world's largest military has just decided he isn't going to bother with it. If you think that's a drama over nothing, then you are fucking nuts.

I don't see any negative impact so far. Negotiations need to be getting more hard nosed as these are firing shots in negotiations. In politics its called posturing, dick wagging or sabre rattling

And it's not something to be admired, not something it is reasonable to do after negotiations are concluded (as in this case), and certainly not something to be indulged in with allies.

You really can't be this clueless, surely?

He took on a deal which someone else agreed; Obama. However this isn't going to have a long term affect with Australia even if it had one in the first place

 

[bilby]

So what is earth shattering about this more than Trumps speeches and statements? The election is over so campaigning is now futile.

You can't answer?

I did; there isn't.

The question was.

Of course the Washington Rag says that so it must be right. I don't think its a bad idea to comment on how Obama agreed to take on migrants from Australia this when the us can't drive in any more he gets them from others.

The Earth's not shaking.

What's wrong with the Washington Post reporting? Specifics?

You should only let one WP post at a time.

Specific meaningless posts. If reporting a series of discussions mid way you could just selectively post parts where there are conflicts. It seems there is now no conflict with the Australians.

It seems that, as of an hour ago, nobody had told the New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/02/world/australia/donald-trump-malcolm-turnbull-refugees.html

Or as of 34 minutes ago, News Ltd. http://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/donald-trump-still-undecided-about-deal-made-with-malcolm-turnbull-to-take-in-refugees/news-story/fbdac6ae86d62ff0f03bd8d51637a47a

Perhaps you should give them a call?

He accepted the 1,200 odd from Australia so what's the fuss. If you ever attended negotiations in business arguments are common.
Has the US broken diplomatic relations with Australia? Of course not.

Its definitely a media drama over nothing as in grasping straws to try to get breaking news.

The fuss is that Trump has smashed a diplomatic relationship that took decades to build. There are lots of people on both sides trying frantically to put it back together, but Trump isn't even prepared to accept that he has fucked up.

If this is how he behaves towards trusted long-standing allies, what hope is there for diplomatic solutions when inevitable problems arise with less friendly nations? Diplomacy is a matter of life and death for billions of people, and the guy with the world's largest military has just decided he isn't going to bother with it. If you think that's a drama over nothing, then you are fucking nuts.

I don't see any negative impact so far. Negotiations need to be getting more hard nosed as these are firing shots in negotiations. In politics its called posturing, dick wagging or sabre rattling

And it's not something to be admired, not something it is reasonable to do after negotiations are concluded (as in this case), and certainly not something to be indulged in with allies.

You really can't be this clueless, surely?

He took on a deal which someone else agreed; Obama. However this isn't going to have a long term affect with Australia even if it had one in the first place

Nation states are required to honour the agreements they have made, regardless of subsequent changes of leadership in those states. Hell, Russia remained bound by a number of treaties signed by the leaders of the USSR throughout the 1990s - despite the fact that not only the leadership, but the entire system of government had changed. For example, START I, signed by Gorbachev on behalf of the USSR on 31 July 1991 was nevertheless binding on Russia (and on the other members of the CIS) from the dissolution of the USSR on December 8 1991, until its expiry in December 2009 - 18 years after the nation that signed the treaty had ceased to exist.

The mere suggestion that a country's new ruler might dishonour existing obligations to a close ally is deeply disturbing.

You appear to be as poorly informed about the conventions and rules of international diplomacy as Lord Dampnut himself.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The fuss is that Trump has smashed a diplomatic relationship that took decades to build. There are lots of people on both sides trying frantically to put it back together, but Trump isn't even prepared to accept that he has fucked up.

If this is how he behaves towards trusted long-standing allies, what hope is there for diplomatic solutions when inevitable problems arise with less friendly nations? Diplomacy is a matter of life and death for billions of people, and the guy with the world's largest military has just decided he isn't going to bother with it. If you think that's a drama over nothing, then you are fucking nuts.

Hopefully our allies will understand down the road when the next president comes along and tries to rebuild things and explain that he's not His Flatulence.

 

[bilby]

The fuss is that Trump has smashed a diplomatic relationship that took decades to build. There are lots of people on both sides trying frantically to put it back together, but Trump isn't even prepared to accept that he has fucked up.

If this is how he behaves towards trusted long-standing allies, what hope is there for diplomatic solutions when inevitable problems arise with less friendly nations? Diplomacy is a matter of life and death for billions of people, and the guy with the world's largest military has just decided he isn't going to bother with it. If you think that's a drama over nothing, then you are fucking nuts.

Hopefully our allies will understand down the road when the next president comes along and tries to rebuild things and explain that he's not His Flatulence.

Sure, if you have any allies left by then

The Royal Australian Navy has, until now, been keen to assist the US Navy in her efforts to demonstrate that the disputed areas of the South China Sea remain international waters. I expect that our policy in this area will not change in any fundamental way, and Operation Gateway will continue; But I wouldn't be surprised if we were less keen to modify our operational dispositions to suit US interests, if and when assistance is requested in the near future. Particularly if it looks like Lord Dampnut might drag us into a more direct conflict with China, who remain one of our largest trading partners.

Similarly with our boots on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan - A coalition of the willing requires that the junior coalition partners remain willing. Both sides have a lot to lose from a less friendly relationship between our nations. But if Dampnut doesn't care, then there's no reason for us to continue to do so either.

 

[LordKiran]

So what is earth shattering about this more than Trumps speeches and statements? The election is over so campaigning is now futile.

You can't answer?

I did; there isn't.

The question was.

Of course the Washington Rag says that so it must be right. I don't think its a bad idea to comment on how Obama agreed to take on migrants from Australia this when the us can't drive in any more he gets them from others.

The Earth's not shaking.

What's wrong with the Washington Post reporting? Specifics?

You should only let one WP post at a time.

Specific meaningless posts. If reporting a series of discussions mid way you could just selectively post parts where there are conflicts. It seems there is now no conflict with the Australians.

It seems that, as of an hour ago, nobody had told the New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/02/world/australia/donald-trump-malcolm-turnbull-refugees.html

Or as of 34 minutes ago, News Ltd. http://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/donald-trump-still-undecided-about-deal-made-with-malcolm-turnbull-to-take-in-refugees/news-story/fbdac6ae86d62ff0f03bd8d51637a47a

Perhaps you should give them a call?

He accepted the 1,200 odd from Australia so what's the fuss. If you ever attended negotiations in business arguments are common.
Has the US broken diplomatic relations with Australia? Of course not.

Its definitely a media drama over nothing as in grasping straws to try to get breaking news.

The fuss is that Trump has smashed a diplomatic relationship that took decades to build. There are lots of people on both sides trying frantically to put it back together, but Trump isn't even prepared to accept that he has fucked up.

If this is how he behaves towards trusted long-standing allies, what hope is there for diplomatic solutions when inevitable problems arise with less friendly nations? Diplomacy is a matter of life and death for billions of people, and the guy with the world's largest military has just decided he isn't going to bother with it. If you think that's a drama over nothing, then you are fucking nuts.

I don't see any negative impact so far. Negotiations need to be getting more hard nosed as these are firing shots in negotiations. In politics its called posturing, dick wagging or sabre rattling

"Hey Billy, why do you have so many reservations about this whole "Isreal thing"? You keep talking all this doom and gloom but I don't see any negative impact so far, so quit your worrying!"

-A presumed quote from a 1950s Whichphilosophy .

But really, the fact that WP doesn't seem to have any concept of the words "Long-Term consequences" is indicative of breath-taking foolishness and staggering stupidity.

 

[ZiprHead]

C'mon, people. Edit!

 

[blastula]

So what is earth shattering about this more than Trumps speeches and statements? The election is over so campaigning is now futile.

You can't answer?

I did; there isn't.

The question was.

Of course the Washington Rag says that so it must be right. I don't think its a bad idea to comment on how Obama agreed to take on migrants from Australia this when the us can't drive in any more he gets them from others.

The Earth's not shaking.

What's wrong with the Washington Post reporting? Specifics?

You should only let one WP post at a time.

Specific meaningless posts. If reporting a series of discussions mid way you could just selectively post parts where there are conflicts. It seems there is now no conflict with the Australians.

Another WP reply with unrelated gibberish. Please go find the lucid WP, if there is one in there somewhere.

 

[Elixir]

Another WP reply with unrelated gibberish. Please go find the lucid WP, if there is one in there somewhere.

That's pretty harsh. I have seen some sentence fragments...

 

[Warpoet]

Account just went private.

 

[Rhea]

Account just went private.

The rogue twitter account went private? Which one of them?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Account just went private.

The rogue twitter account went private? Which one of them?

Rogue POTUS staff. They really hadn't released much of anything confirmable since saying the anti-LGBQ Executive Order thing was out there. That they weren't private doesn't do much to help their image of being legit.