Trump Jr. is Advising His Father to Stand Against Gun Control

[Swordsmyth]

Count Donald Trump Jr. as someone who’s skeptical of passing gun control after recent shootings in Dayton, Ohio and El Paso, Texas.
Rebecca Ballhaus, Andrew Restuccia, and Natalie Andrews wrote (https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-advisers-are-wary-as-president-considers-gun-proposals-11565783932?shareToken=ste38100efe158426a83b08c583 1d20c74) at The Wall Street Journal about Trump Jr.’s concerns with certain gun control proposals such as red flag gun confiscation orders and expanded background checks.
They wrote:

Donald Trump Jr., the president’s son who often speaks with his father about his views on gun laws, has raised concerns about both red-flag legislation (https://www.wsj.com/articles/states-consider-laws-allowing-courts-to-take-guns-from-dangerous-people-1519986600?mod=article_inline) and about tightening background checks, according to people familiar with the matter.




BLP reported (https://bigleaguepolitics.com/message-to-president-trump-listen-to-your-son-hands-off-firearm-suppressors/) on how Trump Jr. has been a strong advocate for accessory deregulation, especially in the case of firearms suppressors. His influence was rather strong from 2017 to 2018, when Republicans had control of all branches of government and were poised to pass one of the most comprehensive firearms accessory deregulation reforms in American history.
However, this attempt was ultimately capsized after the Las Vegas shooting of 2017. Nonetheless, Trump Jr. has indirectly held a strong pro-gun presence throughout the Trump administration.
Even his father recognizes this. President Trump told supporters at a fundraiser last Friday in N.Y that “Don Jr. is my gun expert. He knows more about guns than anyone I know.”

More at: https://bigleaguepolitics.com/hope-trump-jr-is-advising-his-father-to-stand-against-gun-control/

[enhanced_deficit]

Jr is really a big deal and has been showing lot of leadership potential, could be on GOP-Adelson's 2024 ticket.
Not sure why MAGA is not exposing him more in politics and cabinet meetings (instead of Ivanka who had done fund raiser of liberal progresssive Dem Cory Booker and allegedly advised MAGA to bomb Syria).


Related


Donald Trump Jr.‏ Verified account @DonaldJTrumpJr
This is a really big deal and with @Richardgrenell at the helm it will get done!!! Trump administration launches global effort to end criminalization of homosexuality
https://twitter.com/DonaldJTrumpJr/status/1097941928128204801

(https://twitter.com/DonaldJTrumpJr/status/1097941928128204801)Donald Trump carried out Syria missile strike ‘after being convinced by daughter Ivanka’ (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?509520-Donald-Trump-carried-out-Syria-missile-strike-‘after-being-convinced-by-daughter-Ivanka’&)

[Swordsmyth]

What if all of this was a setup to make Don Jr. the hero to get him ready for 2024?

[Anti Globalist]

Trump Sr better listen to his son on this. Otherwise hes going to regret it.

[Occam's Banana]

What if all of this was a setup to make Don Jr. the hero to get him ready for 2024?

Then it's a fantastically foolish, dangerously cavalier and just plain goddam stupid way to go about it.

But I'm not seeing any (non-fantasy) reason to think that Junior gives a damn about guns - except insofar as he may be afraid that Daddy is in the process of shooting his re-election chances in the foot ...

EDIT: And sure enough, the OP article only seems to confirm my take:

Iowa radio host Steave Deace also chimed in saying, “When you’re president because of a grand total of less than 78,000 votes spread out over three states, you don’t have to alienate too much of your base on an issue they care about to lose.”

[Occam's Banana]

And another thing ...


[Junior's] influence was rather strong from 2017 to 2018, when Republicans had control of all branches of government and were poised to pass one of the most comprehensive firearms accessory deregulation reforms in American history.

So riddle me this: if the Republicans "had control of all branches of government," then how and why was the "strong influence" of the Republican President's son useful (or even needed, for that matter)? Unless ...

[Superfluous Man]

How does that blogger make the leap from a couple of journalists claiming that Jr. raised concerns about red flag laws to saying that he's advising his father to stand against gun control?

And for Sr. to say that Jr., who has no background at all in this issue, is his gun expert, and he doesn't even know anybody who knows more about guns than Jr. does, well that sure doesn't engender confidence in Sr. having very much access to decent pro-gun-rights advisers.

The TDS is just out of control here.

[Brian4Liberty]

What if all of this was a setup to make Don Jr. the hero to get him ready for 2024?

All of what was a setup?

I do find some humor in the prospect of a Don Jr. vs. Gavin Newsom contest. Kimberly Guilfoyle could moderate. :D

[nikcers]

Then it's a fantastically foolish, dangerously cavalier and just plain goddam stupid way to go about it.

But I'm not seeing any (non-fantasy) reason to think that Junior gives a damn about guns - except insofar as he may be afraid that Daddy is in the process of shooting his re-election chances in the foot ...

EDIT: And sure enough, the OP article only seems to confirm my take:

Because cash rules everything not partisanship. Thats why. The politcal parties never have control over all three branches. Most the time the majority party doesnt have that many votes over the minority party so they dont even have to buy that many politicians.

[shakey1]

If DT folds on this issue, it’ll be checkmate alright.

[tfurrh]

What if all of this was a setup to make Don Jr. the hero to get him ready for 2024?

Damn Swordy, it was a chess game after all!

[Superfluous Man]

If DT folds on this issue, it’ll be checkmate alright.

Would folding be giving in to the pro-2nd Amendment crowd that's pressuring to abandon his long-held anti-2nd Amendment principles?

Or would folding be standing by his long-held anti-2nd Amendment principles?

[TheCount]

What a bunch of absolute bullshit.

You know the Trumpkins are desperate when the fan fiction comes out.

[nikcers]

Would folding be giving in to the pro-2nd Amendment crowd that's pressuring to abandon his long-held anti-2nd Amendment principles?

Or would folding be standing by his long-held anti-2nd Amendment principles?

I choose to believe what I want to, don't you? Its not like you know the truth, unless you really are Trump or part of his brain trust.

[Superfluous Man]

I choose to believe what I want to

That has long been obvious.

[nikcers]

That has long been obvious.

Don't you? Or are you psychic or have the white house brain trust bugged or really are Trump himself?

[Superfluous Man]

Don't you?

No. I consider evidence.

[nikcers]

Ofcourse its just as likely that they are telling the truth but you want to believe you own narrative. Unless you have an inside source or are Trump himself. plzbetrumphimself.

[nikcers]

No. I consider evidence.

You consider evidence while making up your own narrative when you have no evidence to show. lol nice.

[nikcers]

SPIN ME A TAIL SUPERFLUOUSMAN I AM NOT ENTERTAINED.

[Superfluous Man]

Ofcourse its just as likely that they are telling the truth but you want to believe you own narrative. Unless you have an inside source or are Trump himself. plzbetrumphimself.

Trump has not been shy about this. Why doesn't he himself count as an inside source?

[nikcers]

Trump has not been shy about this. Why doesn't he himself count as an inside source?

So you are Trump himself? Holy shit! Can you tell me the meaning of life?

[Zippyjuan]

Then it's a fantastically foolish, dangerously cavalier and just plain goddam stupid way to go about it.

But I'm not seeing any (non-fantasy) reason to think that Junior gives a damn about guns - except insofar as he may be afraid that Daddy is in the process of shooting his re-election chances in the foot ...

EDIT: And sure enough, the OP article only seems to confirm my take:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CxgHwLPUcAE8XiE.jpg:large

https://inhabitat.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/2012/03/donald-trump-jr.jpg

https://redditupvoted.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/trump-elephant-creativecrete.jpg

OK- that last one may be fantasy.

[nikcers]

Not one reason LOL I can't stop laughing I wish I could rep you twice.

[Occam's Banana]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CxgHwLPUcAE8XiE.jpg:large

https://inhabitat.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/2012/03/donald-trump-jr.jpg

https://redditupvoted.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/trump-elephant-creativecrete.jpg

OK- that last one may be fantasy.

Yeah, he's a big game hunter. So? :confused:

By itself, that does not indicate anything more than an NRA-style support for milquetoast "sporting" rights, at best.

But I am not a Great American like @TheTexan (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/member.php?u=33245) (maybe someday ...), so that is not what I meant when I said, "gives a damn about guns."

Is he a GOA member? Or does he at least support their purpose and agenda? Prior to his father's presidency, has he (1) clearly demonstrated support for gun rights on the basis of something other than "sportsmanship", or (2) expressed adamant opposition to so-called "assault weapon" bans, or (3) expressed adamant opposition to preemptive confiscation schemes like "red flag" laws, or (4) opposed firearms accessory regulations for reasons other than things like "hearing-loss prevention," or (5) anything else beyond the aforementioned NRA-style milquetoastery ... ?



ETA: If the answer to any of those questions is "yes," then I will be delighted to hear it. But in any case, the notion that Trump's gun-control shenanigans are some kind of ploy to set Junior up as a "hero" for dynastic purposes is grotesquely absurd. Even if such a fantasy were true, it would be, as I described it earlier, such an irresponsibly foolish, cavalier and stupid way of going about it that it would make Trump far more dangerous to gun rights than the most ardent and openly-avowed gun-grabbers. At least the "honest" gun-grabbers can be clearly and easily identified and fought against, and they stand little chance of duping otherwise sensible gun-rights supporters into supporting a supposedly "fake" gun-grabber today (i.e., Trump) just for the sake of perhaps being able to support a supposedly "real" gun-supporter 5 years from now (i.e., Junior) ...

[Swordsmyth]

All of what was a setup?

I do find some humor in the prospect of a Don Jr. vs. Gavin Newsom contest. Kimberly Guilfoyle could moderate. :D
Trump AND Rand voicing support for Red Flag laws etc.

O's B is right that it would be stupid and dangerous, I have already said that about any 3D chess explanation but this could be part of 3D chess.

[nikcers]

Yeah, he's a big game hunter. So? :confused:

By itself, that does not indicate anything more than an NRA-style support for milquetoast "sporting" rights, at best.

But I am not a Great American like @TheTexan (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/member.php?u=33245) (maybe someday ...), so that is not what I meant when I said, "gives a damn about guns."

Is he a GOA member? Or does he at least support their purpose and agenda? Prior to his father's presidency, has he (1) clearly demonstrated support for gun rights on the basis of something other than "sportsmanship", or (2) expressed adamant opposition to so-called "assault weapon" bans, or (3) expressed adamant opposition to preemptive confiscation schemes like "red flag" laws, or (4) opposed firearms accessory regulations for reasons other than things like "hearing-loss prevention," or (5) anything else beyond the aforementioned NRA-style milquetoastery ... ?

I dunno if we are going off rhetoric has Don Jr ever voiced support for gun control or banning guns?

[Swordsmyth]

President Trump (https://thehill.com/people/donald-trump) on Thursday told supporters in New Hampshire that he would "always uphold the Second Amendment" and suggested that the construction of new mental health facilities would help curb gun violence.
The president lamented the lack of mental health institutions as he spoke about the need to keep guns away from people with mental illnesses. The comments come as the White House and Congress examine new gun laws (https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/457471-white-house-eyes-september-action-plan-for-gun-proposals) after recent mass shootings in Dayton, Ohio, and El Paso, Texas.
"It's not the gun that pulls the trigger. It's the person that pulls the trigger," Trump said, earning a roar of approval from the crowd in Manchester.

TRUMP on guns: "It's not the gun that pulls the trigger, it's the person holding the guy."

He then says "we are going to have serious consideration to building" new mental institutions, adding, "we will be taking mentally deranged and dangerous people off of the streets." pic.twitter.com/w7cZg2wKQ7 (https://t.co/w7cZg2wKQ7)
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) August 16, 2019 (https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1162162244630786049?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw)He suggested that the closure of mental institutions led to an influx of sick individuals on the streets. Trump proposed building new facilities to get those individuals help, and implied that the move would assist in the fight against gun violence.


But the president, wary of upsetting his base supporters, assured the crowd that he would not allow new laws to infringe on their access to guns.
"We can’t make it harder for good, solid, law-abiding citizens to protect themselves," he said. "We will always uphold the right to self-defense, and we will always uphold the Second Amendment."

More at: https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/457655-trump-vows-to-always-uphold-the-second-amendment-amid-ongoing-talks

[susano]

Count Donald Trump Jr. as someone who’s skeptical of passing gun control after recent shootings in Dayton, Ohio and El Paso, Texas.
Rebecca Ballhaus, Andrew Restuccia, and Natalie Andrews wrote (https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-advisers-are-wary-as-president-considers-gun-proposals-11565783932?shareToken=ste38100efe158426a83b08c583 1d20c74) at The Wall Street Journal about Trump Jr.’s concerns with certain gun control proposals such as red flag gun confiscation orders and expanded background checks.
They wrote:

Donald Trump Jr., the president’s son who often speaks with his father about his views on gun laws, has raised concerns about both red-flag legislation (https://www.wsj.com/articles/states-consider-laws-allowing-courts-to-take-guns-from-dangerous-people-1519986600?mod=article_inline) and about tightening background checks, according to people familiar with the matter.




BLP reported (https://bigleaguepolitics.com/message-to-president-trump-listen-to-your-son-hands-off-firearm-suppressors/) on how Trump Jr. has been a strong advocate for accessory deregulation, especially in the case of firearms suppressors. His influence was rather strong from 2017 to 2018, when Republicans had control of all branches of government and were poised to pass one of the most comprehensive firearms accessory deregulation reforms in American history.
However, this attempt was ultimately capsized after the Las Vegas shooting of 2017. Nonetheless, Trump Jr. has indirectly held a strong pro-gun presence throughout the Trump administration.
Even his father recognizes this. President Trump told supporters at a fundraiser last Friday in N.Y that “Don Jr. is my gun expert. He knows more about guns than anyone I know.”

More at: https://bigleaguepolitics.com/hope-trump-jr-is-advising-his-father-to-stand-against-gun-control/

Thank God, because someone has to counter that idiot, Ivanka.

[susano]

Yeah, he's a big game hunter. So? :confused:

By itself, that does not indicate anything more than an NRA-style support for milquetoast "sporting" rights, at best.

But I am not a Great American like @TheTexan (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/member.php?u=33245) (maybe someday ...), so that is not what I meant when I said, "gives a damn about guns."

Is he a GOA member? Or does he at least support their purpose and agenda? Prior to his father's presidency, has he (1) clearly demonstrated support for gun rights on the basis of something other than "sportsmanship", or (2) expressed adamant opposition to so-called "assault weapon" bans, or (3) expressed adamant opposition to preemptive confiscation schemes like "red flag" laws, or (4) opposed firearms accessory regulations for reasons other than things like "hearing-loss prevention," or (5) anything else beyond the aforementioned NRA-style milquetoastery ... ?



ETA: If the answer to any of those questions is "yes," then I will be delighted to hear it. But in any case, the notion that Trump's gun-control shenanigans are some kind of ploy to set Junior up as a "hero" for dynastic purposes is grotesquely absurd. Even if such a fantasy were true, it would be, as I described it earlier, such an irresponsibly foolish, cavalier and stupid way of going about it that it would make Trump far more dangerous to gun rights than the most ardent and openly-avowed gun-grabbers. At least the "honest" gun-grabbers can be clearly and easily identified and fought against, and they stand little chance of duping otherwise sensible gun-rights supporters into supporting a supposedly "fake" gun-grabber today (i.e., Trump) just for the sake of perhaps being able to support a supposedly "real" gun-supporter 5 years from now (i.e., Junior) ...

I would guess that other than an NRA membership, Jr never the occasion to delve into the issue. Now that his father is president and the commies and their anti 2nd agenda is such a huge issue, in his father's life, Jr can't help but pay attention. Nothing wrong with that. Sometimes people aren't spending lot of time on things that aren't right in front of them. I loather hunting (and elephants :( :( :( ) but I'll take what I can get with moron daughter pulling daddy in the other direction. Eric is a hunter, too, so I'm sure he's backing Jr on this.

[Occam's Banana]

I would guess that other than an NRA membership, Jr never the occasion to delve into the issue. Now that his father is president and the commies and their anti 2nd agenda is such a huge issue, in his father's life, Jr can't help but pay attention. Nothing wrong with that.

No, there isn't anything wrong with it. Well, except for the fact that the NRA is and always has been a "Judas goat" to the cause of gun rights - but that isn't the fault of Junior (assuming he's a member) or of the vast bulk of the membership, who have been duped, domesticated and pacified (not to mention bilked and milked) by the NRA leadership.

But it certainly isn't any basis for thinking that Junior is (or can be made out to be) some kind of "hero to the cause," either.

And if Daddy wasn't such a waffling, "half-assed" gun-grabber himself, then we wouldn't even need Junior's "strong influence" in the first place ...

[PAF]

It is always easier to ask for forgiveness than permission. Now that the damage has already been done. And elections are coming up.

[dannno]

Yeah, he's a big game hunter. So? :confused:

By itself, that does not indicate anything more than an NRA-style support for milquetoast "sporting" rights, at best.

But I am not a Great American like @TheTexan (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/member.php?u=33245) (maybe someday ...), so that is not what I meant when I said, "gives a damn about guns."

Is he a GOA member? Or does he at least support their purpose and agenda? Prior to his father's presidency, has he (1) clearly demonstrated support for gun rights on the basis of something other than "sportsmanship", or (2) expressed adamant opposition to so-called "assault weapon" bans, or (3) expressed adamant opposition to preemptive confiscation schemes like "red flag" laws, or (4) opposed firearms accessory regulations for reasons other than things like "hearing-loss prevention," or (5) anything else beyond the aforementioned NRA-style milquetoastery ... ?



ETA: If the answer to any of those questions is "yes," then I will be delighted to hear it. But in any case, the notion that Trump's gun-control shenanigans are some kind of ploy to set Junior up as a "hero" for dynastic purposes is grotesquely absurd. Even if such a fantasy were true, it would be, as I described it earlier, such an irresponsibly foolish, cavalier and stupid way of going about it that it would make Trump far more dangerous to gun rights than the most ardent and openly-avowed gun-grabbers. At least the "honest" gun-grabbers can be clearly and easily identified and fought against, and they stand little chance of duping otherwise sensible gun-rights supporters into supporting a supposedly "fake" gun-grabber today (i.e., Trump) just for the sake of perhaps being able to support a supposedly "real" gun-supporter 5 years from now (i.e., Junior) ...


I would guess that other than an NRA membership, Jr never the occasion to delve into the issue. Now that his father is president and the commies and their anti 2nd agenda is such a huge issue, in his father's life, Jr can't help but pay attention. Nothing wrong with that. Sometimes people aren't spending lot of time on things that aren't right in front of them. I loather hunting (and elephants :( :( :( ) but I'll take what I can get with moron daughter pulling daddy in the other direction. Eric is a hunter, too, so I'm sure he's backing Jr on this.



The right to bear arms is sacred, and endowed by God to every citizen from birth.

Most Americans recognize that it’s not dependent on some old-fashioned notion about arming citizen militias. It’s a fundamental right that enables the people to maintain a check against the near-limitless power of government, which is granted by the people in the first place.

-Donald Trump Jr.
April 30, 2019

https://humanevents.com/2019/04/30/exclusive-donald-trump-jr-dont-risk-the-2nd-amendment-by-voting-democrat/?utm_referrer=https://www.google.com/

[Todd]

What if all of this was a setup to make Don Jr. the hero to get him ready for 2024?

Well then screw all those people that think having another elitist political dynasty family in the WH is what "Makes America Great Again (™) " .

[enhanced_deficit]

What if all of this was a setup to make Don Jr. the hero to get him ready for 2024?

Are you just repeating what I said in one post above?

I'm changing my mind now, Jr keeps losing to more talented Ivanka everytime , real influencer and winner Ivanka Trump should be on 2024 ticket. GOP extremist conservative Roy Moore's defeat in AL, Syria bombing against Assad's chemical weapons, abortion, DACA, LGBTQ equality, Prison Refoms/Felon voting rights, rapper Rocky A$AP relaese in Sweden, latest Red Flag laws.. to name a few of her recent wins. Can you cite a single example where Jr beat her in influencing MAGA?



Ivanka Trump involved in congressional outreach on gun reform
August 13, 2019 / 10:04 AM / CBS News

President Trump's daughter and senior aide Ivanka Trump is involved in the White House's outreach to members of Congress, a White House official told CBS News. Her outreach, the official said, is a part of the White House office of legislative affairs' efforts to engage members of Congress in talks about gun policy.
Ivanka Trump "has trusted relationships on both sides of the aisle and she is working in concert with the White House policy and legislative teams," a White House official said. Axios first reported Ivanka Trump's involvement.
The president's elder daughter was the first in the Trump family to declare the shootings in El Paso, Texas, and Dayton, Ohio, acts of "terror." And she has voiced support for "red flag" laws (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/what-are-red-flag-laws-and-which-states-have-implemented-them/), which would allow law enforcement to take weapons from Americans deemed to be a risk to themselves or others.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ivanka-trump-involved-in-congressional-outreach-on-gun-reform/


Donald Trump carried out Syria missile strike ‘after being convinced by daughter Ivanka’ (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?509520-Donald-Trump-carried-out-Syria-missile-strike-‘after-being-convinced-by-daughter-Ivanka’&)

Trump says Ivanka would be hard to beat for president (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?533460-Trump-says-Ivanka-would-be-hard-to-beat-for-president&)

[nikcers]

Well then screw all those people that think having another elitist political dynasty family in the WH is what "Makes America Great Again (™) " .

How dare Rand Paul run for senate and president because his dad did so he shouldnt be able to.

[dannno]

Well then screw all those people that think having another elitist political dynasty family in the WH is what "Makes America Great Again (™) " .

No, nobody thinks that is what makes america great again, it's incidental.

[dannno]

I'm changing my mind now, Jr keeps losing to more talented Ivanka everytime , real influencer and winner Ivanka Trump should be on 2024 ticket.

The Democrat ticket maybe?

[Occam's Banana]

Is he a GOA member? Or does he at least support their purpose and agenda? Prior to his father's presidency, has he (1) clearly demonstrated support for gun rights on the basis of something other than "sportsmanship", or (2) expressed adamant opposition to so-called "assault weapon" bans, or (3) expressed adamant opposition to preemptive confiscation schemes like "red flag" laws, or (4) opposed firearms accessory regulations for reasons other than things like "hearing-loss prevention," or (5) anything else beyond the aforementioned NRA-style milquetoastery ... ?

If the answer to any of those questions is "yes," then I will be delighted to hear it. [...]


-Donald Trump Jr.
April 30, 2019

https://humanevents.com/2019/04/30/exclusive-donald-trump-jr-dont-risk-the-2nd-amendment-by-voting-democrat [cleaned URL - OB]

Good for him. This almost qualifies under part #1 (and perhaps part #5) from my question above - "almost" because it is not, as I stipulated, "prior to his father's presidency." But I can be magnanimous:. +rep for Junior, anyway. (He should drop the "sportsmanship" rhetoric, though - and if he really means it, he should quit the NRA and join GOA.)

So with that out of the way, I repeat the question I asked in post #6:

And another thing ...


[Junior's] influence was rather strong from 2017 to 2018, when Republicans had control of all branches of government and were poised to pass one of the most comprehensive firearms accessory deregulation reforms in American history.

So riddle me this: if the Republicans "had control of all branches of government," then how and why was the "strong influence" of the Republican President's son useful (or even needed, for that matter)? Unless ...

Of course, the answer is obvious:

[If] Daddy wasn't such a waffling, "half-assed" gun-grabber himself, then we wouldn't even need Junior's "strong influence" in the first place ...

[enhanced_deficit]

The Democrat ticket maybe?

MAGA is a hardcore conservative, he would never appoount Democrats as Senior White House advisors.
He even sacrificed Steve Bannon for those advisors.

Are you implying MAGA is deep down a democrat leaning liberal progressive socialist?

[dannno]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CxgHwLPUcAE8XiE.jpg:large

https://inhabitat.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/2012/03/donald-trump-jr.jpg

https://redditupvoted.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/trump-elephant-creativecrete.jpg

OK- that last one may be fantasy.

..

We have the utmost respect for nature and have always hunted in accordance with local laws and regulations. In addition, all meat was donated to local villagers who were incredibly grateful. We love traveling and being in the woods - at the end of the day, we are outdoorsmen at heart.

[dannno]

MAGA is a hardcore conservative, he would never appoount Democrats as Senior White House advisors.
He even sacrificed Steve Bannon for those advisors.

Are you implying MAGA is deep down a democrat leaning liberal progressive socialist?

Ivanka is a lot more liberal than Trump Jr.

It would be interesting to see Ivanka vs. Trump Jr. in 2024.

Can you imagine the debates??


Do you remember that time when you were 11 years old and you tried to take one of dad's cars out for a joyride? How can the American people trust you after knowing that??

[TheCount]

We love traveling and being in the woods - at the end of the day, we are outdoorsmen at heart.

You would have to be a complete and utter moron to believe that.

[Zippyjuan]

..

So they were just killing for the pleasure of it.

[nikcers]

The Democrat ticket maybe?

No- more likely he just always says the best thing possible that he can say about his daughter and that was the context. It probably has nothing to do with the two party system because Trump isn't really a political party person. His kids didn't even register to vote for his dad so they are probably the same. He is a populist independent who hijacked the republican party and they did everything they could to kick him out of the debates and delegitmize his candidacy because of that. He said he would run 3rd party multiple times before saying that he was a democrat while he was on a tv show that they would of kicked him off of if he didn't say that. He does seem to like Israel but that's because Israel is the biggest lobbying group in washington, they would of destoyed his campaign otherwise and he would of lost. They even tried to impeach him with a phoney Russia investigation about foreign influence even though the democrats were working with the Chinese to win the election. The biggest story out of all of that Russia investigation is we got to see how involved the Chinese were with the democrat party.

[dannno]

So they were just killing for the pleasure of it.

..


We have the utmost respect for nature and have always hunted in accordance with local laws and regulations. In addition, all meat was donated to local villagers who were incredibly grateful. We love traveling and being in the woods - at the end of the day, we are outdoorsmen at heart.

The money they spend on the licenses helps protect animals in the wild, so there ends up being more of them than there would have been otherwise. And they donated the meat to poor villagers.

Only leftists can turn that into a negative.

[dannno]

You would have to be a complete and utter moron to believe that.


I think you would have to be a complete and utter moron NOT to believe that. Why else would they go out into the wild African jungle to hunt? They have plenty of money, they can do anything they want. They could go to a resort anywhere in the world, or cruise the oceans in a yacht, and yet they chose to go out into the jungle in Africa to hunt.

[Swordsmyth]

Well then screw all those people that think having another elitist political dynasty family in the WH is what "Makes America Great Again (™) " .
I don't care whether he is Don Sr.'s son or not, all I care about is his positions, if he is the best available option in 2024 that isn't only a lesser of two evils I will support him.

I have already made my opposition to the use of the 2ndA in 3D Chess clear.

My point is that Trump may not actually sign anything.

[nikcers]

Meant to post this here.


We don't have a gun problem in the United States we have a mass shooting problem that is instigated by media, mostly the mainsteam media. Violence is glorified in every part of our culture and the fake news uses it to sell their propaghanda because violence sells just as much as sex does. Our mental health problems here definitely need to be fixed, especially since the fake news glorifies mass shootings and instigates hatred against other people in order to advance their political agenda. The mainstream media has been coopted by foreign entities that want to disarm the country and cause our country to kill ourselves. We need to be honest on where the mainstream media gets its funds, it gets its funds mostly by foreign governments who don't have our best interests in mind, who want to divide the country and sell it off wholesale for pennies on the dollar. This is divide and conquer and the enemy is already here, and they want to kill us, and they are our mainstream media and our social media.

[Todd]

How dare Rand Paul run for senate and president because his dad did so he shouldnt be able to.

Right...cause the Paul's are a political "dynasty". lol..

[Swordsmyth]

Right...cause the Paul's are a political "dynasty". lol..

But the Trumps are?

What's the difference?

[nikcers]

But the Trumps are?

What's the difference?

Yeah the Trumps have been president for decades now. We can't even have one presidential election in which the Trumps aren't involved. They are part of the revolving door in politics, Trump has never held a job outside of politics.

[nikcers]

Businesses that provide the mass shooters with a platform should be held responsible for the damages caused by demagogues.

[Todd]

Right...cause the Paul's are a political "dynasty". lol..

Oh and by the way. In addition to it being laughable that the Pauls could ever be considered an "establishment elitiist dynasty"........ Anyone who compares Ron and Rand Paul and their grounded philosophical foundations to Donald Trump jr. might also believe that someone akin to Spaulding Smails (https://gfycat.com/detailedtightamericankestrel) should hold political office.

https://gfycat.com/detailedtightamericankestrel

[Occam's Banana]

Right...cause the Paul's are a political "dynasty". lol..


But the Trumps are?

Not yet.


What's the difference?

The difference is that Ron Paul was never President.

So if Rand becomes POTUS, it wouldn't be a "dynastic" thing.

But if any other member of the Trump clan becomes POTUS, it would be.

[TheCount]

I think you would have to be a complete and utter moron NOT to believe that. Why else would they go out into the wild African jungle to hunt? They have plenty of money, they can do anything they want. They could go to a resort anywhere in the world, or cruise the oceans in a yacht, and yet they chose to go out into the jungle in Africa to hunt.

A single trip to a hunting resort where actual hunters lead you directly to an animal so that you can shoot it does not an outdoorsman make.

[Swordsmyth]

Not yet.



The difference is that Ron Paul was never President. If Rand became POTUS, it wouldn't be a "dynastic" thing.

If some other member of the Trump clan became POTUS, it would be.
Ron was in the House and Rand is in the Senate, both ran for POTUS.

Even if Don Jr. ran and won the Trump's wouldn't necessarily be a "Political Dynasty", if other members of the family continued to dedicate their lives to politics like all the Bushes running around then they would be.

And there isn't anything particularly damning about political dynasties anyway, if one family had 10 Presidents to its name but had all the right positions would you vote for an upstart with the wrong positions?

[Todd]

Ron was in the House and Rand is in the Senate, both ran for POTUS.

Even if Don Jr. ran and won the Trump's wouldn't necessarily be a "Political Dynasty", if other members of the family continued to dedicate their lives to politics like all the Bushes running around then they would be.

And there isn't anything particularly damning about political dynasties anyway, if one family had 10 Presidents to its name but had all the right positions would you vote for an upstart with the wrong positions?

Your logic is the mirror image of the idiots that think Hillary Clinton, then Chelsea Clinton or Michelle Obama should be POTUS.

Anybody trying to sell the narrative that Don Jr should be a legitimate consideration anytime in the future has lost their friggin minds about what this place was established for.

[dannno]

A single trip to a hunting resort where actual hunters lead you directly to an animal so that you can shoot it does not an outdoorsman make.

He didn't say he was a proficient outdoorsman or even an avid outdoorsman. He said he was an outdoorsman at heart. People usually say that when the life they lead from day to day is different than what some of their true inner passions entail.

According to the Bible, only God can judge what is in a man's heart. I don't know if that's true, I don't know if God even exists. But there is no way IN HELL I think you have any clue about what is in Donald Trump Jr's heart.

[dannno]

Your logic is the mirror image of the idiots that think Hillary Clinton, then Chelsea Clinton or Michelle Obama should be POTUS.

Anybody trying to sell the narrative that Don Jr should be a legitimate consideration anytime in the future has lost their friggin minds about what this place was established for.

If Ron Paul ended up being President, would you not want Rand Paul to be President at some point in the future if he was the best option?

Political dynasties are often bad, but they don't have to be bad every time.

Trump Jr.'s political beliefs fall more in line with this site's mission statement than Trump Sr. from what I can tell. There is nothing in the mission statement that says you can only support people who are 100% pure. The idea is to strive for more liberty. If people can make the case than Trump Sr. and Jr. are pushing us in that direction and they are the best shot we have, I'm not sure what the issue is.

[Swordsmyth]

Your logic is the mirror image of the idiots that think Hillary Clinton, then Chelsea Clinton or Michelle Obama should be POTUS.

Anybody trying to sell the narrative that Don Jr should be a legitimate consideration anytime in the future has lost their friggin minds about what this place was established for.
I never said he should be POTUS.

I would need to see his platform and who else was running to decide.

But just because his father is POTUS doesn't mean he shouldn't be.

[dannno]

Not yet.



The difference is that Ron Paul was never President.

So if Rand becomes POTUS, it wouldn't be a "dynastic" thing.

But if any other member of the Trump clan becomes POTUS, it would be.

That is incorrect, technically the Pauls are already a dynasty by definition.


A political family (also referred to as political dynasty) is a family in which several members are involved in politics and businesses, particularly electoral politics. Members may be related by blood or marriage; often several generations or multiple siblings may be involved.

[nikcers]

If Ron Paul ended up being President, would you not want Rand Paul to be President at some point in the future if he was the best option?

Political dynasties are often bad, but they don't have to be bad every time.

People just don't normally want to serve the country unless they have ulterior motives. Anyone who is eligable to run for president should be up for debate with criticism for their ideas and merits. You shouldn't say someone shouldn't be able to run because of their name.

[Todd]

If Ron Paul ended up being President, would you not want Rand Paul to be President at some point in the future if he was the best option?

Political dynasties are often bad, but they don't have to be bad every time.

You do know the difference between two people who have a philosophically solid foundations on Liberty and two douche bag billionaires who philosophical foundations are grounded in which type yachts have the most square party footage and at what point you ditch your older wife for a younger one right?

[nikcers]

You do know the difference between two people who have a philosophically solid foundations on Liberty and two douche bag billionaires who philosophical foundations are grounded in which type yachts have the most square party footage and at what point you ditch your older wife for a younger one.

Lots of people get divorced over becoming incompatible. People change over time. You are just as much the product of your experience as you are your genetics.

[Swordsmyth]

You do know the difference between two people who have a philosophically solid foundations on Liberty and two douche bag billionaires who philosophical foundations are grounded in which type yachts have the most square party footage and at what point you ditch your older wife for a younger one.
Tell us, great mind reader, about all the other candidates and their families.

[dannno]

You do know the difference between two people who have a philosophically solid foundations on Liberty and two douche bag billionaires who philosophical foundations are grounded in which type yachts have the most square party footage and at what point you ditch your older wife for a younger one right?

They have different tactics for obtaining more liberty?

[nikcers]

They have different tactics for obtaining more liberty?

Billionaires who make their money in the private sector aren't qualified because they use marketing and sales tactics in order to win the election instead of politicians who use marketing and sales tactics in order to win elections.

[Occam's Banana]

That is incorrect, technically the Pauls are already a dynasty by definition.

It is not incorrect. The context of my remarks, and of all the discussion leading up to them, was that of POTUS "dynasties."

That a family with two or more members in diverse and distinct political offices may also be referred to as a "dynasty" is not relevant to what I said.

[Swordsmyth]

It is not incorrect. The context of my remarks, and of all the discussion leading up to them, was that of POTUS "dynasties."

That a family with two or more members in diverse and distinct political offices may also be referred to as a "dynasty" is not relevant to what I said.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Todd http://www.ronpaulforums.com/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?p=6845902#post6845902)

Right...cause the Paul's are a political "dynasty". lol..


The context was "political" dynasties.

[Stratovarious]

Trumps 'Platform' blew me away , that's why I supported him 2+ years,
his actions, not so much.

He stood against PC and the Fake Science of Global Warming,
that was big, but only about 2 out of 20.

Not to mention Trump's bootlicking Israel, and chipping away at due process
and the 2nd Amendment.


I'm not all that impressed with platforms today.

[Swordsmyth]

Trumps 'Platform' blew me away , that's why I supported him 2+ years,
his actions, not so much.

He stood against PC and the Fake Science of Global Warming,
that was big, but only about 2 out of 20.

Not to mention Trump's bootlicking Israel, and chipping away at due process
and the 2nd Amendment.


I'm not all that impressed with platforms today.
He's still the best president we have had in generations. (so far)

[nikcers]

He's still the best president we have had in generations. (so far)

Definitely the most entertaining president we have had in generations.

[Occam's Banana]

Ron was in the House and Rand is in the Senate, both ran for POTUS.

And neither won. Hence, no POTUS "dynasty"


Even if Don Jr. ran and won the Trump's wouldn't necessarily be a "Political Dynasty", if other members of the family continued to dedicate their lives to politics like all the Bushes running around then they would be.

The term would still apply.


And there isn't anything particularly damning about political dynasties anyway [...]

I haven't said that there is. I simply pointed out the difference you asked for.

I have no particular objection to "dynasties" in and of themselves.

The problem is that the relatively recent growth of both "real" and "speculative" "dynasties (such as Bush Sr. -> Dubya, Bill -> Hillary, Obama -> Michelle, etc. - and now Trump -> Junior) betokens the increasing irrelevance of ideals and principles in politics (not that those were too much present to begin with - but now even less so ...)

The emergence of such "dynastic" dynamics in American politics is a yet another symptom of the disease of late-stage democracy.

[Stratovarious]

You do know the difference between two people who have a philosophically solid foundations on Liberty and two douche bag billionaires who philosophical foundations are grounded in which type yachts have the most square party footage and at what point you ditch your older wife for a younger one right?


Who are these two 'solid' people you speak of ?

I don't hate Trump for his yachts, I judge is performance by
his actions.

[Stratovarious]

He's still the best president we have had in generations. (so far)

I said that up till about jan of this year, from then on, I'm not impressed, extremely underwhelmed.

[nikcers]

Who are these two 'solid' people you speak of ?

I don't hate Trump for his yachts, I judge is performance by
his actions.

I think he has way too many yachts to be president. That's how I pick the person who I support.

[Occam's Banana]

The context was "political" dynasties.

Fair enough. I stand corrected.

[Swordsmyth]

And neither won. Hence, no POTUS "dynasty"
The subject was "political" dynasties not "POTUS" dynasties:


http://www.ronpaulforums.com/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Todd http://www.ronpaulforums.com/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?p=6845902#post6845902)

Right...cause the Paul's are a political "dynasty". lol..




The term would still apply.
I disagree with any definition that requires only a second member of the family to be in politics.
It's only a coincidence until you have at least a third.




I haven't said that there is. I simply pointed out the difference you asked for.

I have no particular objection to "dynasties" in and of themselves.

The problem is that the relatively recent growth of both "real" and "speculative" "dynasties (such as Bush Sr. -> Dubya, Bill -> Hillary, Obama -> Michelle, etc. - and now Trump -> Junior) betokens the increasing irrelevance of ideals and principles in politics (not that those were too much present to begin with - but now even less so ...)

The emergence of such "dynastic" dynamics in American politics is a yet another symptom of the disease of late-stage democracy.
Dynasties are only a problem if they are divorced from principles, some are and others are not, if the dynasty is tied to principles then it helps you be able to trust that a given politician will actually uphold the family tradition and stick to his principles, Rand automatically gets some credibility because of Rand as an example. (I know that by my definition the Pauls aren't a dynasty yet but they illustrate the point)

[Occam's Banana]

The subject was "political" dynasties not "POTUS" dynasties:

Yes, I have already acknowledged this. But all my remarks have been made in the context of POTUS dynasties.


I disagree with any definition that requires only a second member of the family to be in politics.
It's only a coincidence until you have at least a third.

*shrug* As you will. I don't play dueling dictionaries. Definitional fiat is the prerogative of every discussant.

But regardless of whatever definition you yourself wish to insist upon, a Junior (or other Trump clan) presidency will be called a "Trump dynasty" by pretty much everyone else.


Dynasties are only a problem if they are divorced from principles, some are and others are not, if the dynasty is tied to principles then it helps you be able to trust that a given politician will actually uphold the family tradition and stick to his principles, Rand automatically gets some credibility because of Rand as an example. (I know that by my definition the Pauls aren't a dynasty yet but they illustrate the point)

As I said before, I do not regard "dynasties" as problematic in themselves. The problem is in what their dynamics betoken and illustrate about mass democracy.

(And in any case, as far as I can tell Trump has no particular principles, so I am not seeing what traditional "familial principles" Junior et al. might be "tied to" ...)

[Stratovarious]

I think he has way too many yachts to be president. That's how I pick the person who I support.

:frog:

[Swordsmyth]

Trump's public mention of background checks is vanishing (https://www.news4jax.com/news/politics/trump-s-public-mention-of-background-checks-is-vanishing)

[Zippyjuan]

Trump's public mention of background checks is vanishing (https://www.news4jax.com/news/politics/trump-s-public-mention-of-background-checks-is-vanishing)

The Flip Flopper in Chief is at it again. Backing off previous promises/ statements.

[Swordsmyth]

The Flip Flopper in Chief is at it again. Backing off previous promises/ statements.
And you are so disappointed that it is turning out to be 3D chess and you aren't getting more gun control.

[Zippyjuan]

And you are so disappointed that it is turning out to be 3D chess and you aren't getting more gun control.

https://thumbs.dreamstime.com/z/kid-playing-checkers-28595322.jpg

[Swordsmyth]

https://thumbs.dreamstime.com/z/kid-playing-checkers-28595322.jpg
Nice selfie.

[Swordsmyth]

President Donald Trump (https://www.cnn.com/specials/politics/president-donald-trump-45) on Sunday emphasized a need for the country to focus on "a very big mental health problem" in the wake of two mass shootings (https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/el-paso-dayton-shootings-august-2019/index.html) in one weekend that left 32 people dead earlier this month as he appeared to defend current US gun control measures, stating "we do have a lot of background checks right now.""It's the people that pull the trigger, not the gun that pulls the trigger so we have a very, very big mental health problem and Congress is working on various things and I will be looking at it," Trump told reporters on the tarmac before heading back to Washington after a vacation at his golf club in Bedminster, New Jersey.
The White House, Trump said, is "very much involved" in the discussions Congress is having to address gun violence (https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/14/politics/white-house-gun-talks-congress-background-checks/index.html) and while "a lot of things are happening on the gun level" he said "the concept of mental institutions" must be addressed.

"These are people that have to be in institutions for help, I'm not talking about as a form of a prison, I'm saying for help and I think it's something we have to really look at, the whole concept of mental institutions," he said. "I remember growing up we had mental institutions, then they were closed -- in New York, I'm talking about -- they were, many of them closed. A lot of them were closed and all of those people were put out on the street."
"So I think the concept of mental institutions has to be looked at," he said.

Trump's comments Sunday mark an increased focus from the President on mental health measures over gun control legislation to address gun violence as lawmakers remain skeptical gun control legislation could pass a divided Congress. (https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/14/politics/white-house-gun-talks-congress-background-checks/index.html)

More at: https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/18/politics/trump-background-checks-gun-control/index.html

[Swordsmyth]

President Trump (https://thehill.com/people/donald-trump) called National Rifle Association (NRA) CEO Wayne LaPierre on Tuesday to tell him that universal background checks for gun purchases are off the table, The Atlantic reported (https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/08/trump-background-checks-nra/596413/).

“He was cementing his stance that we already have background checks and that he’s not waffling on this anymore,” a source told The Atlantic with regard to Trump's phone call with LaPierre on Tuesday. “He doesn’t want to pursue it.”
Trump told LaPierre that he instead wanted to focus on “increasing funding” for mental health care and directing attorneys general across the country to start prosecuting “gun crime” through federal firearms charges from the Justice Department, according to The Atlantic.
LaPierre confirmed Tuesday evening that he had spoken to Trump, though he did not provide details.
"I spoke to the president today. We discussed the best ways to prevent these types of tragedies," LaPierre wrote on the NRA's Twitter account. "@realDonaldTrump is a strong #2A President and supports our Right to Keep and Bear Arms!"

More at: https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/458169-trump-called-nra-chief-to-tell-him-universal-background-checks-are

[Swordsmyth]

President Trump (https://thehill.com/people/donald-trump) said Tuesday that the United States already has “very strong background checks” for gun purchasers and that officials need to be wary of the prospect of a “slippery slope” where “everything gets taken away.”
Trump’s comments to reporters in the Oval Office provided more evidence that he is backtracking after initially expressing support for enhanced background checks following a pair of mass shootings that killed 31 people earlier this month.

More at: https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/458133-trump-warns-of-slippery-slope-on-gun-control-says-background-checks