Deranged Rhino Posted May 15, 2017 Posted May 15, 2017 Also, why so many Dems are rooting for Trump to be impeached is beyond me? You want a stable White House with a far right conservative like Mike Pence running the country? Also, even if there was collusion which they still have no proof, how exactly did that impact the election? I still haven't heard any good answers. And you won't hear any good answers because there are none to be given. Tribalism runs deep is the answer to your overall question. Most people, including our elected officials, care more about party than country... which, of course, is an impediment to any true change. But they're too deep into the narrative of "good guys versus bad guys" to see their partisan zeal is being taken advantage of by those who wish to keep us divided and fighting the wrong enemy - because they know if we actually did find a way to see past all the bullshite, their days would be numbered. imo of course.
mead107 Posted May 15, 2017 Posted May 15, 2017 They care more about filling their pockets. If they wanted to serve the people they would stop taking extra money for committees and cut there pension to $50,000. They give away money to o the poor so that can get elected and do not care about the middle class. Just pay more
Deranged Rhino Posted May 15, 2017 Posted May 15, 2017 NYT running the same story now... shocking. CNN is treating it as "bombshell" news, Wolf can't say that word enough in one sentence. "If all of this is true", is the qualifier everyone is using at the start of a five minute prattle about how it's the end of the world. ... But as Tom said, the president can declassify whatever he pleases whenever he pleases. So, this is a story about how he's an idiot at best/worst. In other words... water is wet.
HappyDays Posted May 15, 2017 Posted May 15, 2017 NYT running the same story now... shocking. CNN is treating it as "bombshell" news, Wolf can't say that word enough in one sentence. "If all of this is true", is the qualifier everyone is using at the start of a five minute prattle about how it's the end of the world. ... But as Tom said, the president can declassify whatever he pleases whenever he pleases. So, this is a story about how he's an idiot at best/worst. In other words... water is wet. CNN is exaggerating. It's just another dumb moment from our dumb president. Americans won't really care unless it comes out that he actually sold state secrets or personally rigged the election, something juicy like that. As far as presidential scandals go this is pretty light. I do love the NYT and CNN suddenly pretending to care about national security. Very amusing.
DC Tom Posted May 15, 2017 Posted May 15, 2017 Something one would expect from a person that was compromised No, one would expect someone that was compromised to be far more subtle and secretive about it. Divulging information in a meeting the entire public knows you're attending, in such a way that your senior staff has to play damage control, isn't a sign of being compromised. It's a sign of being a blithering idiot.
EasternOHBillsFan Posted May 15, 2017 Posted May 15, 2017 NYT running the same story now... shocking. CNN is treating it as "bombshell" news, Wolf can't say that word enough in one sentence. "If all of this is true", is the qualifier everyone is using at the start of a five minute prattle about how it's the end of the world. ... But as Tom said, the president can declassify whatever he pleases whenever he pleases. So, this is a story about how he's an idiot at best/worst. In other words... water is wet. You'd defend Stalin if he was a Republican... this is obvious! Commie lovers abound these days. "We also need the best protection of classified information...no one will be above the law".- Donald Trump
DC Tom Posted May 15, 2017 Posted May 15, 2017 You'd defend Stalin if he was a Republican... this is obvious! Commie lovers abound these days. "We also need the best protection of classified information...no one will be above the law".- Donald Trump [This is an automated response.] Created by DC Tom-bot, beta version 0.10.
Azalin Posted May 15, 2017 Posted May 15, 2017 I'm used to the word now, but when these things start, they drive me nuts, too. You never heard anybody say it in that way - and then every channel you turn out, they are saying optics! Same thing happened in 2008. Never heard the word vetting. Then all of a sudden - Sarah Palin wasn't vetted! They go from not being a word to being used by everybody overnight. As you said, we already had a word - appearances. Why do we need optics? Two words: focus groups.
Azalin Posted May 15, 2017 Posted May 15, 2017 Let's just continue to mine the various branches of physics for new, trendy terminology; the acoustics of president Trump's comments aren't sitting well within the migrant community, creating a cryogenic reaction across the domestic geophysical landscape.
Maury Ballstein Posted May 16, 2017 Posted May 16, 2017 Why were Hillary's emails so important again? So she could extort money and not be stuck working at a laundromat ?
Joe Miner Posted May 16, 2017 Posted May 16, 2017 Let's just continue to mine the various branches of physics for new, trendy terminology; the acoustics of president Trump's comments aren't sitting well within the migrant community, creating a cryogenic reaction across the domestic geophysical landscape. It's like the guy at work that feels the need to let everyone know which directors and vp's he was most recently in communication with. Nevermind who you know, or the made up phrases you copy from others, I'd be most impressed if you got off your ass today and did something constructive.
Doc Brown Posted May 16, 2017 Posted May 16, 2017 Impeachment?? For what? Declassifying information by a president is perfectly legal no matter how careless he is.
Benjamin Franklin Posted May 16, 2017 Author Posted May 16, 2017 For what? Declassifying information by a president is perfectly legal no matter how careless he is. Gross incompetence can't get you impeached, though at some point his idiocy is bound to push into criminal territory. Firing the FBI Director because he's investigating you at least skirts into obstruction of justice territory.
GoBills808 Posted May 16, 2017 Posted May 16, 2017 Gross incompetence can't get you impeached, though at some point his idiocy is bound to push into criminal territory. Firing the FBI Director because he's investigating you at least skirts into obstruction of justice territory. I think you have to replace the word 'because' with 'while', to be fair. It's a small distinction, but an important one. You need a 'high crimes and misdemeanors' definition to make anything stick.
bbb Posted May 16, 2017 Posted May 16, 2017 It was and continues to be reinforced. But regardless of that, the Washington Post has a clear agenda with ISIS and it's "sources" which are not in the best interest of the country. IMO it's far better to steer clear of their bias on that issue than to take anything they say at face value. What's this about the Washington Post and ISIS?
Deranged Rhino Posted May 16, 2017 Posted May 16, 2017 (edited) What's this about the Washington Post and ISIS? The Washington Post is (for a lack of a better description) the US version of RT. It historically has been the mouth of Langley and Foggy Bottom and is currently owned by an openly known CIA asset. The same year Bezos closed a $600m contract with CIA, he buys the Post. This is not happenstance. The Post has a history of being manipulated by the IC, specifically the CIA, to push their agendas. For the most recent reference, see the Washington Post's coverage of the lead up to the invasion of Iraq in 2003. The US (through cutouts and directly) has been arming, funding, training, and sharing intelligence with ISIS and AQ forces inside Syria since 2011 in their fight against Assad. This operation has been run largely by the CIA, and coordinated through Saudi Arabia, Israel, Jordan, Qatar, and the UAE. The sin Trump allegedly committed (and if true, it is a huge violation of the unwritten laws in intelligence work) was to out an asset inside ISIS who undoubtedly was working with the intelligence agencies of one of those countries. Meaning, the CIA - through the Washington Post - is sticking up for its assets on the ground by leaking this story. It also means they have a clear and obvious bias in this story that they do not disclose and considering their history, their work on this issue (and all ISIS related issues) should be read with that in mind. Russia, for all their faults, is actively fighting ISIS in Syria - which works against the CIA's interest and is at the root of much of the neo-McCarthyism we've seen since July of '16 (really since Mitt's campaign in 2012). Edited May 16, 2017 by Deranged Rhino
Recommended Posts