Who brought up Hillary? You guys really need to stop with the "but she did that" argument. We're not talking about Hillary, she's not a candidate and she's not the president of the united states. What we're talking about is the possibility of a collusion between Trump and Russia. The FBI and CIA have confirmed that Russia hacked into servers during the voting and it's also confirmed that they spread missinformation in favor of Trump. That's the subject at hand. Not Hillary Clinton. I seriously don't understand how you don't see this. I guess facts have no meaning when you're getting all your "news" from the orange in office.

In the email chain that Trump jr. Released it clearly says that the information they said they had I'm Hillary was a sign of Russia's support for Trump. It's not just a narrative. There's already proof that Russia was involved. Stop denying straight up facts.

Now his face is just another symbol for fake news

Not really ironic, Trump is already spreading lies and fake news

You sure sweet cheeks?

Well just bend over and we'll fix that

They react faster and can look in every direction at the same time. If every car was self driving that would mean they could all interact with each other and remove any chance of a mistake or an accident.

I'll give you Lord Gwyn's soul for a T-Rex

I never said that letting in too many refugees was good. Once again strawman argument. C'mon man, you need to listen to what I'm saying if you don't want to sound stupid. Too many refugees is bad, but banning traveling. Normal people just because they come from a country? That's overkill. But Trump wants America to be like North Korea so I guess this is just the first step. And still, he wasn't just making business. He was using (abusing) his power as president for personal gain. That's exactly what that article refers to. He should not be using his power as president to have personal gain. You can't squirm out of this, your beloved constitution has it clearly written. Also if you're gonna pump out those numbers and statements, please cite a source. It's already hard enough to believe anything a Trump supporter says. Im not saying you're wring, but I need sources. Especially the 1400%.

"Just running his business" no, he s abusing his power as president for personal gain. It even quotes the constitution that says that it's illegal. Stop making up bad excuses. And I didn't write that article, I would exclude the Russia part, but it is confirmed that they tried to interfere. What effect it ha d and if Trump colluded is still unknown. The news part is not only banning CNN, you just if tired the part about how he calls the media the "enemy of the public"? For the travel ban I don't really know that much, but he's essentially banning Muslims and has talked down to other races and religions before.

http://robertreich.org/post/159255024465

Wow, you're really bad at interpreting stiff, aren't you? I mean Trump has already done so many dumb and borderline illegal shit. The congress can throw him out any moment on several grounds. Problem is they don't want to.

Yeah, it's really disgusting to see how low politicians have gone. What's disturbing is to see how Trump does the same. It really makes you wonder how either of them ever became candidates.

Maybe someone who knows how to act like a proper president. Replace him with another republican with the same ideals, I don't care, as long as he behaves.

I don't defend CNN's lies, stop making a strawman argument. All American media is more or less bad, biased or propaganda. I just think that if you're gonna hold a standard to the media then you should also hold a standard to your idiot president.

I agree that CNN are shit, but if they're gonna be put to these standards then so should Trump. He's lying on almost a daily basis and yet Trumptards defend him to their last breath.

There's a difference between reporting faulty information without their knowledge and actively spreading misinformation and slandering. I agree that a press that is slandering should be punished, but I hardly doubt CNN has actually done any severe slandering. And no, reporting on the Trump Russia collusion is not slandering. It's still being investigated and if the republicans are so mad at CNN for updating they are probably hiding something. If not they should shut the fuck up because it doesn't affect them in that case. If you are saying that CNN should be sentenced for slandering then so should almost every American news outlet too. Mistakes are made, propaganda is still quite common. Deal with it. Freedom of the press.

He has several fascist tendencies, the stronger the better and the "we vs them". Also I don't really have any problem with the press making up stories because those stories will be debuncted and they will suffer the consequences. The question is: don't you have any concerns with the president constantly lying and spreading misstruths?
.
Besides the press is free and restraining it in any way is going to hurt democracy. Even though CNN is the worst media outlet in the USA besides satire "news" doesn't give the president the right to deny them to do their job.
.
You also said yourself that the house is public, that means he does not have the right or at least shouldn't deny one news source .

No one said they weren't fascist. Just that Rump is also shoving fascist tendencies.

*Europe laughs in the distance*

These problems are why we need to invest in the technology. Hydro, solar and wind power are not nearly as powerful or effective as they could be. That doesn't mean we should neglect them, on the contrary we need to focus more on them. A solution for the droughts is also focusing in fusion energy. Clean and basically an endless supply. Just because fossil fuels are more powerful today doesn't mean we should keep relying on them just because the alternative isn't as developed. The Paris treaty was supposed to help this development. It was a crude and maybe not the best treaty, but it was a start. Leaving it is like a sportsman that stops training because he can't see immediate results.
.
It doesn't look better to completely leave it rather than changing the goals. Trump could have dodged a bullet if he just stopped paying or decreased it by 1/2 or 1/3.

If I interpreted that data right the 2.2 percent drop is only counting within the fossil fuel jobs. Not the new jobs that will be created within green energy. The job market is always changing and sooner or later fossil fuels will be out of date. It would have been smarter of Trump to change the goals and pay a smaller sum while remaining in the deal (since it wasn't binding in any way).
.
I know that there are countries that have more or are tied with us when it comes to per capita. The difference is that they don't have as much money as the US does. Therefore it's smarter for them to focus within the country rather than spending enormous sums on other countries. Of course I'm all for the US paying less in the treaty. The goals were set by the countries themselves, not anyone else. The money is going to help developing countries with developing green energy instead of relying on coal.

Just because someone served in the German army back then doesn't mean they were a Nazi or sympathized with what their country was doing. Quite the contrary. The majority of the German troops had no idea about the atrocities Hitler ordered.