| Trump 18:06 - Feb 28 with 21977 views | backwaywhen |
Is one disgusting human being , unbelievable the way they have spoke to Zelenskyy today ….beggere belief.
This post has been edited by an administrator |  | | |  |
| Trump on 16:42 - Mar 2 with 974 views | LeoMuff |
| Trump on 21:45 - Mar 1 by pointofblue |
An interesting additional article from The Guardian.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/mar/01/trump-officials-zelenskyy
"Trump saw the minerals deal as the first phase of a broader economic partnership and told aides it showed the US was effectively making a commitment on security guarantees, because the agreement deal would mean the US had a vested interest in Ukraine’s economic prosperity.
The officials believed that had all been communicated to Ukraine, as was the advice that senators gave Zelenskyy on Friday morning to praise Trump and not litigate the issue of wanting stronger security guarantees to his face.
To Trump’s aides, Zelenskyy did not heed that advice when he expressed skepticism at JD Vance’s view of making peace with Russia and, in their view, lectured the US vice-president on the history of Russia’s aggression towards Ukraine that started in 2014 with the annexation of Crimea." |
They are clearly in a huff as he won’t sign the deal without the security guarantees and rightly so, why would he sign away hundreds of billions in assets for nothing ? Trump has already said security would be minimal from the USA in any deal, so what’s in it for Zelenskyy?
Hopefully Europe get their sh1t together and decide the USA isn’t going to contribute apart from getting minerals for previous contributions and use the £300bn frozen Russian assets to fight on and increase their spending and physical input dramatically.
The EU then make the mineral deal. |  |
| |
| Trump on 17:26 - Mar 2 with 907 views | Swansea_Blue |
I found this interesting little commentary from an American Prof on what’s happening through the lens of John Locke’s ideas on separation of power (which formed the basis of their Constitution).
Posting without comment really, but I thought the history buffs might find it interesting.
https://jneem.substack.com/p/donald-trump-is-no-longer-the-president |  |
| |
| Trump on 22:59 - Mar 2 with 741 views | Churchman |
Swansea, that’s a very interesting article. As an amateur, poor, history buff it’s a riveting read. I recommend anyone interested in the dynamics of what is happening in the US read it. |  | | |
| Trump on 10:53 - Mar 3 with 610 views | itfcjoe |
| Trump on 23:35 - Mar 1 by Churchman |
Trump saw a minerals deal as the only phase. There was never any economic partnership. The idea was take the assets that he’d already agreed to split with his mate Putin (what else did they talk about) and let Ukraine think that the presence of the odd American there with a clipboard to ensure the Ukrainians were digging hard would deter Putin. That’s no guarantee of any kind. It’s extortion.
In terms of agreement with people like this, Hitler agreed in 1938 that upon annexing the Sudetenland, Germany would hold no further territorial claims upon Czechoslovakia and would enter into a collective agreement to guarantee the borders of Germany and Czechoslovakia. Putin did the same when Ukraine gave up nuclear weapons. Words. They just want the dollars. Billions of them far in excess of what they have gifted or loaned.
According to a republican the way Trump operates is that he plays President smiles touchy-feely while Vance actually expresses what Trump and he truly feel. They loathe Zelenski and view Ukraine and its people as nothing. Not entitled to a country or anything else. Putin’s views.
With regard to Starmer he is detested too, especially by Vance and the old hatreds to the U.K. are there beneath the flattery guff. He was deliberately rude to Starmer who didn’t take the bait. Vance will be doing any trade negotiations with the U.K. He wants punitive tariffs imposed and any ‘deal’ will be extortion. Your path is clear Starmer. Break as soon as is feasible with the US.
State visit? For the press bit I’d have a person there to ask if it isn’t a bit rude to be wearing make up in Number 10. I’d also put a saucer of milk down for the toupee and ask Trump for an apology and refund for all the money, secrets, intel and assets they stole from this country from 1940 onwards.
Then I’d kick him out.
Edit: not sure a career in politics would have suited me. [Post edited 2 Mar 0:05]
|
I don't think that Trump does one thing and Vance says what he really thinks.
Trump is just Trump, he is a transactional, thin skinned, businessman. He likes what he likes - Putin and other strong men, the Royal Family and the UK, and dislikes people he feels stronger than or have slighted him in the past and bullies his way to what he wants in an inconsistent mess.
Vance doesn't have the personality of Trump, or the wealth of Musk so he has to find his own niche - and that is an idealogue who can be intellecutally consistent behind the scenes but ultimately has to out-MAGA the MAGA lot if he wants to be POTUS next time round.
He is the snake, the slime ball, who is trying to edge Trump where he wants him whilst not upsetting the apple cart and offending him. He's smart, and he's very dangerous - as can be seen by the way he took over that meeting on Friday for his own ends and his consistent international position |  |
| |
| Trump on 11:03 - Mar 3 with 566 views | Ryorry |
Excellent, thank you.
"Donald Trump Is No Longer the President of the United States
According to Locke, when a ruler demonstrates their disregard for the constitutional order, they lose legitimacy; we can treat them as we would a "thief and a robber." Even in the state of nature, before governments are established, we have the right to protect our lives, liberties, and estates. Once government is established, we rely on the rule of law to protect us. But when “whosoever in authority exceeds the power given him by the law and makes use of the force he has under his command, to compass that upon the subject, which the law allows not, ceases in that to be a magistrate; and, acting without authority, may be opposed, as any other man, who by force invades the right of another.” |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
