Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 hour ago, Kelly101 said:

Now that the left got this omnibus bill passed the trump russia thing will go away quietly.

hopefully the 2020 gop candidate doesn't turn out to be a fraud too.

Trump is done, going down as the softest president ever, punked by the likes

of schumer and pelosi.

Strategically, it makes sense for Trump and the Democrats.  Trump can run on getting a supermajority to build the wall and he vowed never to sign this kind of bill again.  Democrats can run on DACA and preserving medicaid/medicare/social security.

Posted

.@RandPaul on omnibus bill: "This is why people are so upset with politics, because when the Republicans are out of power, when they're in the minority, they are the conservative party. But then when they get in the majority, there is no conservative party."

 

 

 

 
Quote

 

kUuht00m_bigger.jpgDonald J. TrumpVerified account @realDonaldTrump
FollowFollow @realDonaldTrump
 

As a matter of National Security I've signed the Omnibus Spending Bill. I say to Congress: I will NEVER sign another bill like this again. To prevent this omnibus situation from ever happening again, I'm calling on Congress to give me a line-item veto for all govt spending bills!

 

 

Posted
2 minutes ago, B-Man said:

.@RandPaul on omnibus bill: "This is why people are so upset with politics, because when the Republicans are out of power, when they're in the minority, they are the conservative party. But then when they get in the majority, there is no conservative party."

 

His twitter feed is entertaining as he has a point with all the waste.  He's unique though among Republicahs in that he's libertarianish and is generally opposed to any increase in military spending.

Posted
3 hours ago, reddogblitz said:

 

At least they didn't have an election where the person that got the most votes lost.

 

What election would that be? I know you can't mean the 2016 US Presidential election, considering that Trump won that 306-232.

 

You know, 306 votes being more than 232 votes.

Posted
15 minutes ago, Koko78 said:

 

What election would that be? I know you can't mean the 2016 US Presidential election, considering that Trump won that 306-232.

 

You know, 306 votes being more than 232 votes.

 

8C9CB6BA-E956-4853-AC2D-2D97FAB6D523.jpeg

Posted
11 hours ago, reddogblitz said:

 

Thanks. I understand the argument.  A couple of questions though.  Are we the only 200 level democracy?  Are there any others where the person with the most votes can still lose?  

Certainly there are. Every Parliamentarian government is prone to that scenario. The largest vote getter is never assured of being able to form a new government unless they can cobble together an alliance with whatever strange bedfellows they can cajole into a majority of seats. England and Israel come to mind, as do France, Germany, and Italy. 

Posted
11 hours ago, DC Tom said:

 

No, most are 300-level democracies, that parlimentarian and don't elect heads of state. 

Don't forget the level 350 democracies run by the Loch Ness Monster

9 hours ago, Koko78 said:

 

What election would that be? I know you can't mean the 2016 US Presidential election, considering that Trump won that 306-232.

 

You know, 306 votes being more than 232 votes.

Yeah but only because the Russians hacked the election so Trump could get two scoops of ice cream.

10 hours ago, B-Man said:

.@RandPaul on omnibus bill: "This is why people are so upset with politics, because when the Republicans are out of power, when they're in the minority, they are the conservative party. But then when they get in the majority, there is no conservative party."

 

 

 

 

 

 

10 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

His twitter feed is entertaining as he has a point with all the waste.  He's unique though among Republicahs in that he's libertarianish and is generally opposed to any increase in military spending.

 

#istandwithrand

 

 

Posted
15 minutes ago, /dev/null said:

Don't forget the level 350 democracies run by the Loch Ness Monster

Yeah but only because the Russians hacked the election so Trump could get two scoops of ice cream.

 

 

#istandwithrand

 

 

 

I stood with Ron but won’t with rand.

Posted

 

 

https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/23/politics/government-funding-russia-punishment/index.html

 

Washington (CNN)Deep inside the 2,232 pages of text that make up the newly passed $1.3 trillion bill to keep the federal government open is a direct message to President Donald Trump: Russia needs to be punished.

The so-called omnibus spending bill, which the Senate passed just after midnight early Friday morning, includes measures that bar a host of federal agencies from engaging with Russia and sanctions the country for a vast series of grievances.
The bill is the latest attempt by Congress to take a harder stance on Russia than what the White House has been willing, so far, to take. Trump reluctantly signed a bill sanctioning Russia in August after both houses of Congress overwhelmingly passed the measure. The Trump administration blew through two key deadlines in the bill, though, and just this month announced new sanctions against Russia that were meant to be rolled out in January.
Rep. Eliot Engel, the ranking Democrat on the House Foreign Relations Committee, said "with the appropriations bill, bipartisan majorities are once again sending the President tough new measures to push back on Russia and shore up our election system against future interference."
Posted
1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said:

Worth the time:

https://libertyunyielding.com/2018/03/23/collusion-took-whole-obama-administration-put-team-trump-surveillance/

 

...would be curous to hear Tom, Dev and others' thoughts who work in this field...

 

The writer of that article

 

is unrealistically optimistic about

 

how well things work in government.  

 

(I spaced it out like that so you can read between the lines.)

  • Haha (+1) 2
Posted

Russians deny it? So Trump's reaction will be to 

a) ignore this 

b) Say Putin is right 

c) fire our general 

 

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-afghanistan-russia/russia-denies-aiding-afghan-taliban-in-wake-of-u-s-generals-comments-idUSKBN1H1064

 

 

KABUL (Reuters) - Russia has rejected comments by NATO’s top commander in Afghanistan that it has been supporting and even supplying weapons to the Taliban, in a clash of words that underlines growing tension over Moscow’s involvement in the conflict.

Posted
6 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Trump growing a pair.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/world/wp/2018/03/26/trump-orders-expulsion-of-60-russian-officers-and-closure-of-consulate-in-seattle-e-u-actions-also-expected-today/?utm_term=.f49905dfff64

 

To the argument that is obviously going to be coming forth that this proves he isn't compromised: Yawn 

 

I'm sure he is just acting on orders from his KGB FSB masters to throw their agents out of the country.

Posted
1 minute ago, Koko78 said:

 

I'm sure he is just acting on orders from his KGB FSB masters to throw their agents out of the country.

Caught between a rock and a hard place

Posted
4 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Caught between a rock and a hard place

 

Not really. He'll just await further orders.

Posted
34 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

To the argument that is obviously going to be coming forth that this proves he isn't compromised: Yawn 

 

He's cutting the Russian foreign services budget so Putin has more money to spend on manipulating US elections.  Collusion!

  • Haha (+1) 1
×
×
  • Create New...