• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

So Ivanka sat in for Trump at G20

It was a great trip for Trump.

He managed not to piss his pants or vomit on Angel Merkel. Therefore, Maga + Trump 2020!

As an aside, and probably more appropriate elsewhere, has anyone else here lost friends and/or family over all of this? I have.

I made early preps and walked away from the Obama haters in 2011. Family is just a word. Disagreeing is fine. Being disagreeable is not. I was out the door on the heels of decorum.
 
As an aside, and probably more appropriate elsewhere, has anyone else here lost friends and/or family over all of this? I have.
I have coworkers i've been working beside for 17 years who won't talk to me anymore.
Finally!
 
Yeah. The President was "called away". To what a five star golf resort? Once again we see the famous Trump projection. Accusing others of having "no stamina" while utterly failing to hold to schedules that other foreign dignitaries don't seem to have a problem with.

Perhaps some Russian pee?
 
How long did she stand in for Trump?

Why is she there in the first place?

Isn't she an unpaid adviser. I'm not sure how the US constitution sees that. I cant comment whether this is right or wrong but certainly the question was how long she was there and what transpired.

The Media should have reported that but their bread and butter is bottom feeding (be they pro or anti Trump).
 
Why is she there in the first place?

Isn't she an unpaid adviser. I'm not sure how the US constitution sees that. I cant comment whether this is right or wrong but certainly the question was how long she was there and what transpired.

The Media should have reported that but their bread and butter is bottom feeding (be they pro or anti Trump).

You can´t comment if it is right or wrong to have a uneducated socialite stand in for her uneducated game show host father?
 
Isn't she an unpaid adviser. I'm not sure how the US constitution sees that. I cant comment whether this is right or wrong but certainly the question was how long she was there and what transpired.

The Media should have reported that but their bread and butter is bottom feeding (be they pro or anti Trump).

You can´t comment if it is right or wrong to have a uneducated socialite stand in for her uneducated game show host father?

There isn't enough information to make an educated assessment except for the last sentence.
 
Oswald Moseley would not have done this. Way to let the standards fall, Trumpo.

You're off the team.
 
Oswald Moseley would not have done this. Way to let the standards fall, Trumpo.

You're off the team.

We don't know because he was never a leader of a country, but may have stood a chance if he remained in the Conservative Party. The Daily Mail for a time was a supporter of the British Union of Fascists.
 
Defend?

If I go to the grocery store and questioned about why I am there, my response that I was buying groceries is not a defense. There needs to be an accusation. It would be like me asking you for your alibi for yesterday afternoon for no reason whatsoever. In absence of an accusation, merely explaining where you were would not be an alibi.

Perhaps she wasn't supposed to be there, in which case one might be interested in her defense, but being interested in why she was there when she has no obligatory reason to refrain from going, that's something altogether different.

So, which is it? Does she need a defense, or are you just nosey?
I cannot imagine in what capacity she was allowed to take a seat--any seat. Why was she even present? Who cares if she's more rational than her father? She's not in any way qualified, not even compared with her father.
 
Defend?

If I go to the grocery store and questioned about why I am there, my response that I was buying groceries is not a defense. There needs to be an accusation. It would be like me asking you for your alibi for yesterday afternoon for no reason whatsoever. In absence of an accusation, merely explaining where you were would not be an alibi.

Perhaps she wasn't supposed to be there, in which case one might be interested in her defense, but being interested in why she was there when she has no obligatory reason to refrain from going, that's something altogether different.

So, which is it? Does she need a defense, or are you just nosey?
I cannot imagine in what capacity she was allowed to take a seat--any seat. Why was she even present? Who cares if she's more rational than her father? She's not in any way qualified, not even compared with her father.
Not true. I bet she has great interest in exploiting cheap African labor.
 
Defend?

If I go to the grocery store and questioned about why I am there, my response that I was buying groceries is not a defense. There needs to be an accusation. It would be like me asking you for your alibi for yesterday afternoon for no reason whatsoever. In absence of an accusation, merely explaining where you were would not be an alibi.

Perhaps she wasn't supposed to be there, in which case one might be interested in her defense, but being interested in why she was there when she has no obligatory reason to refrain from going, that's something altogether different.

So, which is it? Does she need a defense, or are you just nosey?
I cannot imagine in what capacity she was allowed to take a seat--any seat. Why was she even present? Who cares if she's more rational than her father? She's not in any way qualified, not even compared with her father.

We have a lousy government in the UK but we don't just constantly moan to the extent as disgruntled Democrats and Champagne Socialist splinter groups do in the USA. Instead Labour is preparing for the next election, (not that it will be much better).

According to the Washington Post, she did this for a few minutes and there is no indication of anything major being done. So why should anyone care when the media scrapes the barrel to sell advertising?
 
Back
Top Bottom