₦airaland Forum

Trump's hand picked acting head of the Manhattan US Attorney's office just resigned after Mayor Adams case was ordered dropped.
It was too corrupt even for her.

Harvard, Yale, clerked for Scalia, member of the Federalist Society
Will be impossible for anyone to say that she is a Liberal and dropping Adam's case wasn't anything more than corruption

Here is her scathing letter.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/02/13/us/letter-to-bondi.html

raumdeuter:
Trump is not smart enough coming from a total loser like you?

Trump just won the election and the biggest comeback in American history but a complete morron is asking if he was smart enough

I was able to predict what the move is but because you are a foool with no idea of how negotiations work, you couldnt.
Now we are seeing reports of Egypt doing what I predicted the Arab nations will do

That shows you are a neophyte with no intelligence at all. You are too stupidd

Because he used propaganda and nativist feelings to win an election do you also think he should be performing brain surgery?

This is not how foreign negotiations work.
If Trump wanted to threaten these countries he would have had a side meeting with them and threatened that he would take over GAZA privately. The conversation would leak and he would do a denial/non-denial. The message would be sent but without the Global blowback. I'm sure the lights at the CIA are blinking red because of his words.

He just opened his mouth and said the US does not care about Genocide, forced displacement of native populations and believes foreign powers have the right to take over other people's land.
China is licking it's lips.
He fux up everything he touches.

Very smart and wise chap.

You always seem to check your brain at the door when you write your posts.

The Wall Street Journal seems to be really concerned about what Trump is doing.
It means that businesses are probably concerned as well.

Trumponomics and Rising Inflation
The President calls for easier money even though consumer prices keep rising. Does he want even higher prices?

Does President Trump understand money ? Not money as in cash, but the supply of money, the price of money as measured by interest rates, and their impact on inflation? The answer would appear to be no after Mr. Trump called for lower interest rates on Wednesday—the same day the Labor Department reported an increase in inflation for the third straight month.

“Interest Rates should be lowered, something which would go hand in hand with upcoming Tariffs!!!” Mr. Trump posted on his social-media site. The layers of intellectual confusion here are hard to parse, especially since higher tariffs will mean higher prices on the affected goods. But perhaps the President wants the public to look elsewhere when assigning blame for rising prices.

https://www.wsj.com/opinion/donald-trump-inflation-interest-rates-prices-tariffs-federal-reserve-jerome-powell-af0c4d66?mod=editorials_article_pos1

Android17:
Of course. Right-wing propaganda.

But Trump asked people to take bleach? That is not left-wing propaganda? Then show us the videos of him saying so.

Rest you mind.
It seems already broken.
You don't want to get to where Basilico is.

bemeruca:
where in this statement was trump asking anyone to inject bleach? do you even understand English?

Did you of all people ask someone else if they understood English? 😂😂😂
I can't.

Android17:
Did you see Internews in my post? Cool. Then get to using your best friend named Google.

I did a quick search and all the links seemed like places Basilico would post.
I'm good.

You seem like you are spiraling and descending into the deep abyss of right wing propaganda and nuttiness.
You should probably log off before you meet Basilico there.

cococandy:
We agree. That’s why he could do us all a favor and shut his mouth when it comes to topics he doesn’t understand. Even an elementary schooler knows you don’t inject bleach. You people really have no shame. You’re embarrassing the slightly less than stupid ones in your group.


IjeBos see them.

I never cared what this TDS phrase stands for but obviously it’s a slang they share in their incel WhatsApp group. This new character (werey dey disguise) is using it too that’s how you know they don’t have any original thought amongst them. A single community brain cell is doing the whole job of holding them up.

Anyway I googled it and get this; it means TRUMP DERANGEMENT SYNDROME. I had to stop, sit down and laugh for 30 straight seconds.

We must have removed irony from figures of speech because how does a clearly deranged magat who will defend absolutely anything vile his master does, turn around say another person has Trump derangement syndrome?

In our community if a man says he would’ve been dating his child if not that he’s her dad, we would strip him and remove his titles. But these imbeciles are cheering it on. Is there another definition of derangement that we’re not aware of?

They keep saying “promises made promises kept” and in the same breath they’re saying “oh he doesn’t really mean it. You have to buy his book to understand how he thinks”. Show me a more deranged person than a trump supporter who thinks Trump is a man of his words whose words we shouldn’t take at face value.

The crazy is high with them.

The term TDS is insane.
Unbeknownst to them they are describing themselves.
I've never seen such a self delusion and an inability to be self reflective.

Android17:
Biden's own words? Don't use them. Words Trump did not use? Use them against him.

Sunlight was in the slide as well. Was Trump suggesting people could drink Sunlight?

I have more rope to help you tie yourself into more torturous knots. Believe that 💯

Your posting is tortured.
And you're straining yourself to support your position.

Yes sunlight was on the slide as well.
No he didn't suggest people drink it, but he did suggest that somehow 'we hit the body with a very powerful light'.

I don't think that worked out the way you wanted.

Android17:
Sodium Hypochlorite is a disinfectant used to clean or decontaminate surgery centers/operating rooms.

Yet, it can be ingested, drank by diluting with water. With no harmful effects whatsoever.

Yet, same chemical could be fatal if one is exposed to it in high amounts. It is a bleach, disinfectant and an antiviral drug all in one. Educate yourself.

This is what being a Trump supporter is:
Continually gaslighting, changing goal posts until you can find something to stand on.

The news conference was on disinfectant surface cleaners.
The slide said bleach/isopropyl alcohol
That's why people said he suggested drinking bleach.
Noone recommends ingesting/injecting disinfectant surface cleaners or in fact any disinfectant to stop covid.
Stop being a nutter.

Android17:
I hope you're not quoting news sources that were receiving USAID money to defame and scandalize him. This is 2025. We know what Internews and whatnot were doing behind to tarnish his image.

They are all paying up for their lies now. That's the problem with lies and liars. Truth will always eventually catch up.

Next.

So, give me your source that there were "news sources that were receiving USAID money to defame and scandalize him".
This sounds particularly insane.

It always seems the deeper you dig with Trump supporters, the more you see the mental instability hiding under the surface.

Android17:
Trump is not a scientist. Do we agree?

He did not Google a solution himself. He has intel - people who do the research and give him the bottomline.

The slide only lists common disinfectants. There are many more than that. If anyone is stupid enough to drink bleach or IPA, that's not on Trump.

TDS makes people blame Trump for things unrelated to him.

He is not, so he should shut his mouth.
There are people with multiple PHD's who have spent their lives working on this.
Why is his dumbass giving them advice.

TDS makes people blame the president of the United States for giving a press conference and saying stupid things?
I'm sorry if I believed people gave press conferences so people could listen to them.

But this is who and what you celebrate.
A stupid person too stupid to shut his mouth, giving unsolicited advice about topics he has no idea about which can hurt people who listen to him.
And it did hurt people.

That is your view of what a Good President is.

Android17:
Every chemicals's level of toxicity differs that's why we have recommendations/guidelines for using them.

Some can be used on open wounds but will damage vital organs within the stomach. Know the difference.

No one recommends injecting disinfectants.
This reply sounds like what Basilico does when he gets caught lying.
Just spin and talk around the topic.

Android17:
By the way, Trump did not make the slide.

They are just giving examples of common disinfectants. I do not encourage anyone to drink Isopropyl Alcohol. But other types of alcohol can be used to facilitate interactions and minglings.

I definitely encourage that.

Trump is basically looking at the slide that was up during his press conference.
The slide was the basis of his comments.
It was prepared for his press conference.
Have you ever given a presentation with slides?

You want to Gaslight more a 3rd time?

Android17:
Tequila is a chemical too. And I encourage women to try it. Hehe

This is the slide he was referring to.
Keep bending over backwards to defend nuttery.

Android17:
Did you understand the post you quoted? LOL

Yes, you are a supposed science person who understands what chemicals can do to the human body defending someone who said people should ingest Disinfectants, where the first disinfectant listed in the slide he was referring to was Bleach.

Do you understand the nuttery that is coming out of your mouth?

Android17:
They're ignoring this. By the way, I'm a chemical engineer 😎. I can list 3 disinfectants that can be ingested, absorbed, swallowed, drank etc. That can be used for viral infections.

All bleach = disinfectant
NOT all disinfectants = bleach.

Trump said 'disinfectant'. He is not a scientist so obviously he got that from his intel sources at the time. And he was not wrong.

And for the record.
This was the slide that was shown to the public and Trump was responding there.
You see the first disinfectant listed there?

Android17:
They're ignoring this. By the way, I'm a chemical engineer 😎. I can list 3 disinfectants that can be ingested, absorbed, swallowed, drank etc. That can be used for viral infections.

All bleach = disinfectant
NOT all disinfectants = bleach.

Trump said 'disinfectant'. He is not a scientist so obviously he got that from his intel sources at the time. And he was not wrong.

He was not wrong that Scientists should test injecting disinfectants inside the body?
That you say you are a "Chemical Engineer" defending this is insane.
Where did you get this degree?

Our minds have a tremendous ability to forget trauma.
I think people forget how batshit crazy this press conference was.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zicGxU5MfwE

Android17:
Post it and highlight it like you did with the Impoundment Act from Abby Philip on CNN 😉.

I want this thread to juxtapose my analysis of the SCOTUS' ruling vs yours. Simple sturveZz.

Yes, you noticed that I posted a discussion on that.
And you were wrong about Trump's constitutional ability to impound or stop Congressional allocated money just like you are wrong about this.

But you've seen my discussions in this thread as you've said.
Has there been a time I've argued something and haven't brought receipts to back it up or been substantially wrong? No.

That said, that is no different than this convo.
I would have normally posted it, but
1.) You should have already read it or been sufficiently familiar with it before you started arguing.
2.) You don't seem to have a basic enough understanding of how the US government works or the Constitution for me to be spending time arguing/differentiating the ruling with you vis a vis what Biden ultimately did. The fact you are wasting your time repeatedly asking me to post it instead of googling it, posting it yourself and explaining your understanding is in fact a tell.
I've done it with Bemeruca, Basilico and Raumdeuter and it's a lesson in frustration for me and gaslighting/lying on their part.

Android17:
Post the ruling. Nothing else matters. I didn't read past "off-tangent. . ."

Of course you didn't.

We are living in the dumbest timeline filled with the dumbest people who try to pretend they aren't.
https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=supreme+court+biden+student+loan+ruling+pdf

raumdeuter:
Arab states rally round support to fund the reconstruction of Gaza. No US money, No US troops
You sound very dumb. Looks like this is a permanent feature in you

You really think Trump is smart enough to be playing 4D chess?
You have really drank the cool aid.
If that was his idea he would have spoken to the stake holders privately and threatened them that way.
Publicly announcing the plan does great geopolitical damage to US interests and also gives countries like China more authority to take over other countries.
But not sure your mind can process stuff like that anynmore.

This plan was hatched by Jared Kushner who spoke about it last year.
He is the one who prepared the remarks for Trump.

Former White House senior adviser Jared Kushner was reportedly behind his father-in-law US President Donald Trump’s plan, announced yesterday, for the US to take over Gaza and clear it of Palestinians.

Kushner was involved in crafting Trump’s prepared remarks that he made alongside Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House, Puck news reports, citing an anonymous source familiar with the matter.

Netanyahu had not requested that Trump pursue such a plan ahead of time, Puck adds.

Kushner appeared to hint at the entire idea in a speech he gave last year.

“Gaza’s waterfront property — it could be very valuable, if people would focus on building up livelihoods,” Kushner said during an event at Harvard.

“It’s a little bit of an unfortunate situation there, but I think from Israel’s perspective, I would do my best to move the people out and then clean it up,” Kushner added. “But I don’t think that Israel has stated that they don’t want the people to move back there afterward.”

https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/report-jared-kushner-behind-trumps-plan-to-take-over-gaza/


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nneWrllngAU

The last thing Israel/Netanyahu wants is a successful Gaza.
Israel wants the land and a successful Gaza prevents them from that.

raumdeuter:
When we told you to sit back and watch Trumps plan unfold, you ran into the market with your TDS to be screaming

Was this not the same plan I told you about last week that WSJ is reporting today?

Article: Arab States realize Trump means what he says on GAZA
Raumdeuter: I told you Trump really didn't mean what he said about GAZA. He was just negotiating.

Cognitive Dissonance with a dab of Intellectual Dishonesty.

.

raumdeuter:
The constant need to mention me when someone else is schooling you

I know you dont have a daddy but I have no desire to be your daddy, You are over 50, get over the absence of a father figure in your life and stop looking for a father online

I just find it remarkable your argument styles are quite similar.
Gaslighting, Intellectual Dishonesty, Lying and Repetition.
The arguments of someone who knows they are wrong.

And of course his posts are what you would consider schooling as well.
I would say you should sit in a class of a quality school and see what quality arguments are.
Oh yeah.. you did go to Harvard.. Harvard Extension School that is. Bwwahahahahah

Android17:
I'm not reading past this. Post the ruling here so we'll compare what I said vs what you are claiming. Should be that simple to an honest person.

I told you people: I don't engage in off-tangent and mindless drivel. If you're interested in having an honest conversation, simply post the ruling.

Period.

Off tangent and mindless drivel has been most of your posts.
You should teach a course called "Gaslighting, Mindless Repetitive posts, and Intellectual Dishonesty: How not to Argue".
I think Raumdeuter took it at the "Harvard Extension School".

You are asking me to 'post the thing you should have read' before you started this argument so you can compare the argument you've been making based on 'the thing you should have read' with what I am claiming is in 'the thing you should have read' but still haven't.
Does that make sense even to you?

And the time it took you to write this post is the same time it would have taken you to google the ruling aka 'the thing you should have read'.
I mean it didn't take you long to find Biden's twitter remarks, right?
But of course, the right wing media would post those but not the actual text of the ruling. As facts tend to destroy most of their propaganda.
But ey, better to pretend than actually do, innit?

But you remind me of another chap who used to post here. He would always write "I'm not reading this post", but then either quote the post or somehow know exactly the post says.
What does it gain you to waste time saying something like that?
Just more intellectual dishonesty I guess.

Android17:
Post the SCOTUS' ruling here.

What kind of nonsense is this?
You can google the ruling.

Android17:
The emboldened is rich coming from you. Did I not see you pining over Trump's Canada comment? Don't change the rules of the game in-between.

Stop the gaslighting. It seems to be the depth of your arguments here.
You can say something is rich coming from me regarding this when I spend 5+ days arguing something based on some muddied language in a tweet that is inconsistent with any other language and the record.
So show me where I based any argument on a single tweet. Don't worry you won't be able to. I don't do the intellectual dishonesty dance you and Raumdeuter are fond of.
You have literally based your whole argument here on Biden's Loan Forgiveness on a vague tweet. Nothing else to back up anything you have said.
But Trump has made the same consistent comment about wanting Canada to be the 51st state repeatedly.
We don't need a tweet, you can play his own words on multiple occasions.
Or do you want to spend 5 more posts arguing against the definition of ANNEX so you can say making Canada the 51st state wouldn't be annexing it like Raumdeuter did?

This is the problem with getting your information from right wing Media. You're constantly lied to and have to consistently lie and gaslight to make your argument once and when inevitably that information is shown to you to be a lie.

Android17:
I'm sorry but for someone who kept poking me on the constitution, this is rather abject and reductive.

In your analogy, building with toothpicks was a MODIFICATION of an existing law (which required people to build only with bricks).

Biden claimed, emergencies gave him rights to waive or modify student loans plans. SCOTUS negated his argument by pointing out that the waiver or modification, had to be minor or modest, not a dramatic change to the existing plan or basically creating a new one.

If Biden went back to the drawing board, and re-implemented the subsisting student loans plan in a better, more efficient manner such that somehow he could forgive more loans, will he make this comment below?

Again, it says:

- SCOTUS tried to BLOCK him [from relieving student debt] instead of saying they told him to FOLLOW the law without changing it in the guise of modifying it.
- SCOTUS did not STOP him [which means he went on to do what he wanted to do].

I don't know how to respond to hypocrites who in one breath want to pretend words matter for Trump, but when I put Biden's words back at them, I start reading all sorts of brainless excuses.

If you say, it was fair for Biden to be told he cannot make those modifications but he went on to do it. You should better be ready to accept it, if Trump does same.

If it is good for a Goose. It should be good for Uganda🇺🇬 .

Imma start calling you the sesquipedalian MAGA.

You're getting close but your question still belies a lack of understanding as to what the Supreme Court said.
They Supreme Court was arguing with Biden's mechanism for the Student Loan relief, not student loan relief.
He then chose another mechanism that didn't allow him to target as many people, but offered some relief to some people, that was legal.

And Biden decided he wanted to be seen "fighting" the Supreme Court. At that point they had lurched to the right with some of their decisions (Roe, etc), creating law instead of interpreting it. The posts were worded that way to show that he was fighting the Supreme Court. Do I agree with his choice to word it that way. Not sure. Does the wording mean he was disobeying the Supreme Court ruling, absolutely not. It was a well lawyered tweet.

But you seem to be solely focussed on a 160 character(think that's the size) tweet that reads as purposefully vague, that is discounted by everything else on the record, rather than taking the time to understand what really happened.
It seems a wholly intellectually dishonest way to argue anything. innit?

Android17:
If you were wondering, I've been an American since 199■. Make of that what you will.

This is what's called a non-sequitur.
You could have been a US citizen for 50 years and still not have read the constitution.
You're posts here are indicative you haven't.
You often seem confused on basic things, like the separation of power.[/quote]

Android17:
When you're ready, you'd go back to the questions I asked you. Until you respond to those, meaningfully, I won't be wasting my precious time on you.

Fyi, I see that same nonsense repetitive posts from Raumdeuter all the time.
The way you both respond when you get caught Gaslighting or pretending you know something is similar.
Repeat and Gaslight.
Rinse Repeat.

Good primer on the Impoundment Control Act
Android17, you should read it.

FAQs on Impoundment: Presidential Actions Are Constrained by Long-Standing Constitutional Restrictions

The incoming Trump Administration is reportedly exploring whether it can impound — that is, not spend — funds that Congress has provided in legislation.[1] Supporters of this position argue that the Impoundment Control Act of 1974 (ICA) restricts the President’s ability to impound funds, and they recommend that it be repealed.

This notion that the ICA is what restricts presidential authority to impound funds enacted by law is contrary to legal precedent — and to the Constitution. The Constitution gave Congress the power of the purse, and that power precludes the President from unilaterally deciding not to spend money that Congress has provided. Courts — including the Supreme Court — protected this congressional power and repeatedly rejected presidential attempts to spend less than Congress had provided, overturning President Nixon’s impoundments, all of which predated the ICA.
...
Was impoundment legal before the Impoundment Control Act? No. “The president doesn’t have any constitutional authority to withhold, doesn’t have any inherent authority to withhold,”[4] explained the general counsel of the GAO, the office given authority to enforce the ICA. Despite its name, the Impoundment Control Act did not make impoundment illegal; it already was.

Attempted impoundments were rare until President Nixon took office. Unlike his predecessors, he ordered funding withheld in many different programs, by large amounts, and claimed a right to do so. The intended recipients of the funding — often state or local governments — regularly sued for release of the withheld funds.

And they regularly won. The cases seldom made it past lower courts, which invariably concluded that the specific authorization and appropriations law in question had not provided any such authority to the President.[5] (Some courts did not rule on the merits, finding the cases before them non-justiciable, that is, not capable of being decided by a court.) In general, the Nixon Administration released the impounded funds after losing, but it appealed one case to the Supreme Court. The Court ruled 9-0 against President Nixon.[6]

In some of the lower court cases, all of which occurred before enactment of the ICA, the judges also made clear that the President does not have any inherent impoundment authority. For instance, one judge stated that it is “not within the discretion of the Executive to refuse to execute laws passed by Congress but with which the Executive presently disagrees.”[7] Similarly, another judge stated that “Money has been appropriated by the Congress to achieve the purposes of both programs [that Nixon had impounded] and the Executive has no residual power to refuse to spend those appropriations.”[8]

Also, the Supreme Court’s 1998 decision overturning the Line-Item Veto Act reinforced the conclusion that presidents have no inherent constitutional authority to impound funds. See Question 6, below.

https://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-budget/faqs-on-impoundment-presidential-actions-are-constrained-by-long-standing

Android17:
They know it's flimsy but they needed a narrative for "constitutional crisis" that bozos just repeat like coached parrots on here.

Serious question, have you ever read the US Constitution?
Honestly, most of your posts sound like you really don't understand the US system of government.

bemeruca:
If you play with fire you get burned:
BREAKING: U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi just dropped the hammer.

The DOJ has filed charges against NY, Gov. Kathy Hochul, AG Letitia James, and DMV Commissioner Mark Schroeder.

“New York chose illegal aliens over American citizens. It stops—it stops TODAY."

The Biden-era free pass is OFFICIALLY OVER.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOWFE1rqHNA

Well done, the press conference seemed to have served its purpose... Fool the Rubes.
This is a civil lawsuit not a criminal action.
There are no charges.

But she knows that. She also knows that idiot Trump supporters won't know the difference.
You should ask yourself why you support people who not only deliberately fool you but do so because they think you're stupid.
Well, she was right in this instance.

cococandy:
Except for Raum who has whatever his reasons may be for continuing to support Trump, none of these other Trump minions on here even have a personal experience with the inflation he’s causing right now.

Right!
Forgot for a sec, but puts in perspective their arguments.

When you're buying eggs this week, just a reminder.