Re: When is Enough ,Enough?
 

It is actually concerning not just a “card” to play. That is what Fox would lead you to believe. They just hate Trump. No.

Re: When is Enough ,Enough?
 

There are multiple cohorts of his in jail. There are multiple Russians indicted. Trump constantly disputes anything that points towards Russian interference. Every time one of his guys gets caught he claims he hardly knew them. Every single thing he does and says smells guilty yet you believe it is all a hoax because dems just dont like him. Lol. He has the senate and the AG working for him. So of course he is “innocent “. I know you guys are smarter than this.

Re: When is Enough ,Enough?
 

[QUOTE=punch it in;1245171]He hired a loyalist with no credentials whatsoever to be the head up National Security. He did this on the heels of the IA’s report that Russia was interfering again. He did it because he knew Grenell would do whatever it takes to cast shade on the facts. For his own ego and fear of people considering his election illegitimate. Hiring a yes man to head up national security to protect your ego in itself is dangerous. It isn’t exactly on par with a walmart greeter.
He stood on the world stage next to putin and said he believed him over his own ia’s. Not a hoax. Not fake news. It fuckin happened and its strange as fuck. Fishy as fuck.[/QUOTE]I am with Bernie, what is fishy as fuck is the Washington Post pushing the Bernie story the day before the Nevada caucuses

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Re: When is Enough ,Enough?
 

[quote=punch it in;1245173]There are multiple cohorts of his in jail. There are multiple Russians indicted. Trump constantly disputes anything that points towards Russian interference. Every time one of his guys gets caught he claims he hardly knew them. Every single thing he does and says smells guilty yet you believe it is all a hoax because dems just dont like him. Lol. He has the senate and the AG working for him. So of course he is “innocent “. I know you guys are smarter than this.[/quote]

Nah, I'm pretty stupid. Living my best sheep life.

Re: When is Enough ,Enough?
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;1245175]I am with Bernie, what is fishy as fuck is the Washington Post pushing the Bernie story the day before the Nevada caucuses

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk[/quote]

The Democratic party is a machine. You stand in the way, you get ran over. Bernie is example A. They will not let him win. But we should take all their words on every thing else. Hard pass for me. All the more rich that they are going to feign morale outrage for 8 years on republicans "cheating" elections. They literally cheat their own party. So no way they'd sell a bill of goods against Trump or any other Republican. Pass.

Re: When is Enough ,Enough?
 

Gone With the Wind, an iconic American movie, now a racist dog whistle.

[url]https://twitchy.com/dougp-3137/2020/02/21/there-it-is-l-a-times-film-critic-hears-racist-dog-whistle-in-trumps-appreciation-for-gone-with-the-wind/[/url]

This is my mom's favorites movie. She might actually be the sweetest woman in the world, turns out she's a racist devil. I'll let her know tomorrow.

When is Enough ,Enough?
 

[QUOTE=sdskinsfan2001;1245177]The Democratic party is a machine. You stand in the way, you get ran over. Bernie is example A. They will not let him win. But we should take all their words on every thing else. Hard pass for me. All the more rich that they are going to feign morale outrage for 8 years on republicans "cheating" elections. They literally cheat their own party. So no way they'd sell a bill of goods against Trump or any other Republican. Pass.[/QUOTE]



The moral outrage with Trump goes soooo much deeper than his denial about Russian interference. I mean where to even begin.
He has got you all hook line n sinker. Dems deepstate. Witch-hunt. Blah blah blah. Who really gives a fuck if the post wrote an article misconstruing bernies words? Coincidence? Because it was the day before Nevada caucus? Seems like prime time to voice your opinion on Bernie. Right or wrong. How is that remotely even comparable to Trump taking sides with Putin over his own intel agencies? Lol. Nobody hated trump before 2016. Well maybe people he conned but certainly not the media or dems or general public. He has sold you all on the witch-hunt. Lolol.
And honestly a Trump supporter outraged by being run over if you stand in someone’s way? Hahaha. One example. Bernie. Ill give you 500 people Trump ran over because they stood in his way. Fired, bullied, ran over, etc etc. Forget standing in his way. They didn’t suck him off hard enough! You even waver in your loyalty to him and you get thrown to the lions den which is his base. Purple heart recipients escorted off the wh grounds like common criminals and their brother just because they r his brother!

Re: When is Enough ,Enough?
 

[quote=punch it in;1245179]The moral outrage with Trump goes soooo much deeper than his denial about Russian interference. I mean where to even begin.
He has got you all hook line n sinker. Dems deepstate. Witch-hunt. Blah blah blah. Who really gives a fuck if the post wrote an article misconstruing bernies words? Coincidence? Because it was the day before Nevada caucus? Seems like prime time to voice your opinion on Bernie. Right or wrong. How is that remotely even comparable to Trump taking sides with Putin over his own intel agencies? Lol. Nobody hated trump before 2016. Well maybe people he conned but certainly not the media or dems or general public. He has sold you all on the witch-hunt. Lolol.
And honestly a Trump supporter outraged by being run over if you stand in someone’s way? Hahaha. One example. Bernie. Ill give you 500 people Trump ran over because they stood in his way. Fired, bullied, ran over, etc etc. Forget standing in his way. They didn’t suck him off hard enough! You even waver in your loyalty to him and you get thrown to the lions den which is his base. Purple heart recipients escorted off the wh grounds like common criminals and their brother just because they r his brother![/quote]

Your response was very long (I've had some brewskies). Not a bad thing. I just realized as I was responding to the main points I thought you made, that no matter what I said you weren't going to accept them anyways, so I gave up. HTTR!

Note - I wouldn't expect you to accept them because I probably wouldn't (definitely wouldn't) either. We will always disagree on politics. Redskins football = Twinsies. Politics = non ending arguments. You always support my drunk gameday posts the most. Here's to winning the offseason.

Re: When is Enough ,Enough?
 

[quote=punch it in;1245179]The moral outrage with Trump goes soooo much deeper than his denial about Russian interference. I mean where to even begin.
He has got you all hook line n sinker. Dems deepstate. Witch-hunt. Blah blah blah. Who really gives a fuck if the post wrote an article misconstruing bernies words? Coincidence? Because it was the day before Nevada caucus? Seems like prime time to voice your opinion on Bernie. Right or wrong. How is that remotely even comparable to Trump taking sides with Putin over his own intel agencies? Lol. Nobody hated trump before 2016. Well maybe people he conned but certainly not the media or dems or general public. He has sold you all on the witch-hunt. Lolol.
And honestly a Trump supporter outraged by being run over if you stand in someone’s way? Hahaha. One example. Bernie. Ill give you 500 people Trump ran over because they stood in his way. Fired, bullied, ran over, etc etc. Forget standing in his way. They didn’t suck him off hard enough! You even waver in your loyalty to him and you get thrown to the lions den which is his base. Purple heart recipients escorted off the wh grounds like common criminals and their brother just because they r his brother![/quote]



Well said!

Re: When is Enough ,Enough?
 

[QUOTE=sdskinsfan2001;1245180]Your response was very long (I've had some brewskies). Not a bad thing. I just realized as I was responding to the main points I thought you made, that no matter what I said you weren't going to accept them anyways, so I gave up. HTTR!



Note - I wouldn't expect you to accept them because I probably wouldn't (definitely wouldn't) either. We will always disagree on politics. Redskins football = Twinsies. Politics = non ending arguments. You always support my drunk gameday posts the most. Here's to winning the offseason.[/QUOTE]



[emoji23] [emoji23] [emoji23]

Re: When is Enough ,Enough?
 

[url]https://www.yahoo.com/news/very-afraid-admiral-oversaw-bin-144621630.html[/url]


'We should be very afraid': Admiral who oversaw Bin Laden raid hits out at Trump over sacking of intelligence chief


In a searing op-ed, the former head of US Special Operations Command, who supervised the 2011 Navy SEAL raid in Pakistan that killed Osama bin Laden, has slammed Donald Trump’s reckless attitude towards the intelligence community saying that Americans should be afraid of the president's actions.

Retired Navy admiral William McRaven, writing in The Washington Post about the dismissal of director of national intelligence Joe Maguire, decries the fact that Mr Maguire was apparently ousted simply for doing his job — the dissemination of intelligence to elected officials





He writes: “As Americans, we should be frightened — deeply afraid for the future of the nation. When good men and women can’t speak the truth, when facts are inconvenient, when integrity and character no longer matter, when presidential ego and self-preservation are more important than national security — then there is nothing left to stop the triumph of evil.”

Admiral McRaven opens with the famous quote from Irish statesman and philosopher Edmund Burke: “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”

He lists the good men and women that have come and gone in the Trump administration: Jim Mattis, John Kelly, HR McMaster, Sue Gordon, Dan Coats, and now Joe Maguire, and later mournfully says that “in this administration, good men and women don’t last long".

Mr Maguire’s extensive career, including 36 years as a Navy SEAL, is described in detail by Admiral McRaven who paints a picture of a patriot and a man of integrity.

When caught up in the Ukraine whistleblower case, Mr Maguire told the White House he would testify if asked and would tell the truth — and he did, says Admiral McRaven.

Re: When is Enough ,Enough?
 

This writer describes my thoughts. I know it is not going to change anyone's mind but it is my opinion written well from someone else.

[url]https://m.theepochtimes.com/democrats-and-the-media-continue-to-be-russias-best-allies_3246614.html[/url]

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

When is Enough ,Enough?
 

[QUOTE=CRedskinsRule;1245191]This writer describes my thoughts. I know it is not going to change anyone's mind but it is my opinion written well from someone else.

[url]https://m.theepochtimes.com/democrats-and-the-media-continue-to-be-russias-best-allies_3246614.html[/url]

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk[/QUOTE]



Problem is it lacks actual substance or evidence other than bernie honeymooned in Russia.
CRed the IA’s are briefing congress about Russian interference and the Dems are the only ones taking it to heart. Im completely confused about your take that somehow ignoring it is the best course of action.
And you or the writer cannot with a straight face say the sowing of discord amongst the right and left in this country is a result of the dems right? U obviously see Trump has divided this nation on a daily basis from his bully pulpit? Right? Or maybe we are living in different worlds? Like SD said redskins football makes us besties. Lol. But politically speaking I am pulling my hair out about you twisting the narrative here and saying the dems and Bernie are Putins puppets. I mean if a reaction is all he is looking for than ok sure, but it isn’t. He is looking for a true puppet. One that will publicly excuse and not admonish him. One that will give him a foothold in the middle east. One that will make the ukraine look like the bad guys. I mean how in the hell do u ignore all that and post an article about bernie honeymooning in russia? Lol

Re: When is Enough ,Enough?
 

I echo sdskins note on football vs politics, and I know that this will fall on deaf ears, or even be called a cult or trumpettes or whatever makes you guys feel better but at some point enough IS effin enough.

I am kind of sick and tired of listening to all the clap trap about Putin and Trump. IF we look at the FACTS, not innuendo, not the wheelbarrows full of c**pola that the media casts about to see what will stick. You mention Ukraine looking like the bad guys (which everyone agrees the previous Ukraine administration WAS corrupt as hell), or giving Russia a foothold in the Middle East (I think you mean Syria, which is and has been a Russian proxy since before any of us were born). Nothing you want Trump admonished for is any different than where we stood under Bush 1, Bush 2, Clinton or Obama.

And in fact we stand better in the following areas.
[B]ISIS [/B]- in 2015 - 2017 their caliphate area in Iraq/Syria had up to 282000 sq kilometers. In 2016 the State Department labelled ISIS [URL="https://www.cnn.com/2016/06/02/politics/state-department-report-terrorism/index.html"]"The greatest threat globally"[/URL] by 2019 they were down to 200 sq kilometers.

[B]Syria[/B] - when Trump took office, with ISIS spread throughout and multiple factions vying for land. agree or not Trump made the strategic decision not to get enmeshed in a russian proxy country's civil war, and limited military engagements to ISIS targets. The result was massively less casualties in the Syrian population

Time Period/Pro-government forces/Anti-government forces/Civilians/Grand Total (inc. unidentified)
201517,668 killed23,601 killed13,021 killed54,574 killed
201614,771 killed23,431 killed14,100 killed52,589 killed
201710,771 killed14,064 killed13,369 killed34,700 killed
20184,522 killed8,663 killed6,776 killed20,130 killed
20192,968 killed4,727 killed3,488 killed11,244 killed

[B]Iran and Terrorism[/B] - In 2016, same article, Iran was listed as the top state sponsor of terrorism, Kerry acknowledged the some of the money that Iran got back was funneled to that terrorism. From the 2019 Global Terrorism Index
[QUOTE]Deaths from terrorism fell for the fourth consecutive year,
after peaking in 2014. The decline in deaths corresponds with
the military successes against ISIL and Boko Haram, with
the total number of deaths falling by 15.2 per cent between
2017 and 2018 to 15,952. The largest fall occurred in Iraq,
which recorded 3,217 fewer deaths from terrorism in 2018,
a 75 per cent decrease from the prior year. For the first time
since 2003, Iraq is no longer the country most impacted by
terrorism.
ISIL’s decline continued for the second successive year.
Deaths attributed to the group declined 69 per cent, with
attacks declining 63 per cent in 2018. ISIL now has an
estimated 18,000 fighters left in Iraq and Syria, down from
over 70,000 in 2014.[/QUOTE]

[B]Ukraine[/B] - AFTER the previous administration allowing/not intervening to stop Russia's takeover Crimea and refusing to send lethal aid to Ukraine's government. The Trump administration pushed lethal aid through. Ukraine's army has stood the initial invasions, and Russia and Ukraine are in talks to resolve the war. We let Ukraine down when Russia invaded them under the Obama administration. Trump has helped get more German and French aid in addition to US aid. [URL="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-oil-europe/trumps-revenge-u-s-oil-floods-europe-hurting-opec-and-russia-idUSKBN1HU1QK"]Trump has increased oil exports to northern Europe[/URL] - a direct threat to a Russian national interest, their oil exports to Europe
[QUOTE]As OPEC’s efforts to balance the oil market bear fruit, U.S. producers are reaping the benefits - and flooding Europe with a record amount of crude.
...
Now, the relatively high prices brought about by that pact, coupled with surging U.S. output, are making it harder to sell Russian, Nigerian and other oil grades in Europe, traders said.

“U.S. oil is on offer everywhere,” said a trader with a Mediterranean refiner, who regularly buys Russian and Caspian Sea crude and has recently started purchasing U.S. oil. “It puts local grades under a lot of pressure.”

U.S. oil output is expected to hit 10.7 million bpd this year, rivaling that of top producers Russia and Saudi Arabia.[/QUOTE]

[B]NATO[/B] - in [URL="https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/pdf_2019_11/20191129_pr-2019-123-en.pdf"]2014 only 3 countries paid the 2%[/URL], the US, Greece and the UK. In 2019 9 countries made the 2% mark, and all but 2 countries increased their contributions substantially. Further, from 2016 to 2019 NATO defense expenditures increased by 3-5% per year while US expenditures as a percentage of our GDP actually decreased. In addition the US built two ABM complexes in Romania and Poland that specifically outraged Russia/Putin.

[B]Bottomline[/B]
you guys whine and cry about Trump somehow making this country less safe - worse off, but ignore the reality and listen/parrot back innuendos, lies, and scare tactics.
Terrorism is down
ISIS is out of play
The US is now an Oil Exporting country
NATO is spending more on its own behalf and has strengthened allies closest to Russia.
Russia has no more land or holdings then the day Trump took office, and is held in check in the Donbass region of Ukraine by Ukrainian forces trained and armed by the US.
The US economy has continued the growth started under Obama and extended record unemployment numbers across the spectrum of the US


Thus endeth my rant.

When is Enough ,Enough?
 

Obama is the one who lifted the ban on crude exports in 2015. So alot like the economy Trump is there for all the hip hip hoorays. Lol. Im too tired to fact check the rest of this now. See you tomorrow lol
As for the first paragraph trust me when i say it wasn’t the left that started the damn name calling. Suddenly we all became snowflakes because we weren’t Trump supporters.
Ok one more....

[url]http://www.internationalaffairs.org.au/australianoutlook/russia-seeks-to-fortify-itself-in-the-middle-east-in-the-absence-of-the-us/[/url]
Isis is not out of play

[url]https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-10-07/trump-says-of-syria-it-s-time-u-s-gets-out-of-endless-wars[/url]

Re: When is Enough ,Enough?
 

It's an Opinion piece but it 's right on the money.



[url]https://www.yahoo.com/news/trumps-dangerous-justice-coup-punishing-100014486.html[/url]

Trump justice: He's using his office to reward friends, punish enemies and tarnish America


I was concerned when the punchline “Donald Trump” came to be preceded by the title “president.” But my beloved DOJ was filled with career prosecutors whose dedication and integrity would keep the ship on course — even if the storm lasted four years.

I was confident that the traditions that made the Justice Department the most respected law enforcement organization in the world would surely allow it to weather any attorney general Trump could install.

But Trump has commandeered the department and sent a clear message: “Investigate me or people close to me and I will undercut years of your hard work, trash your reputation on Twitter, and create a Hobson’s choice between your integrity and your ability to earn a living. And if you pick the former, I will issue a pardon and undo all you worked for anyway

Since Republican senators refused to remove Trump from office, there’s nothing in his path. Trump is certainly getting no push back from Attorney General William Barr, who has revealed himself to be the second coming of Roy Cohn — Trump’s former personal attorney who was disbarred due to his sleazy legal tactics.

Destructive Trump-Barr alliance

Barr’s first order of business was to release a misleading summary of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report — effectively urinating on what should have been a bonfire that burned Trump’s presidency to the ground. Then, Barr stonewalled congressional efforts to do what an honest reading of Mueller’s report should have done.

Things have only gotten worse since Trump survived his Senate impeachment trial. For a start, Barr has said he must personally approve any investigation into corruption by a presidential candidate or campaign. That’s the DOJ equivalent of a GPS warning: "Red light camera ahead."



But it was mission accomplished for Trump and Barr. On Thursday, Stone was sentenced to 40 months in prison, substantially less than the seven to nine years requested by the Stone prosecutors.

A similar sequence occurred after Trump expressed unhappiness with the prosecution of his former national security adviser, Michael Flynn. Prosecutors who had recommended up to six months in prison later said probation would be appropriate. And Barr has now ordered a “re-investigation” of Flynn’s case, presumably to undermine Flynn’s guilty plea.

Failing institutions: Stone prison term: Will courts hold Trump accountable after Congress, Mueller fall short?

Pardoning the swamp, not draining it
Trump does not always need Barr. When he can manipulate justice alone, he does, as he showed last week when he issued 11 pardons and commutations. Former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich, convicted of trying to sell Barack Obama’s Senate seat, was immediately released from prison. Trump also pardoned one of Rudy Giuliani’s former business partners, whose family happened to donate $85,000 to a Trump Victory fund and $150,000 to the Republican National Committee.

Every person reading this should be angry that they would still be sitting in prison if they committed the same crimes as the people Trump pardoned. That’s because Trump has created a separate system of justice for his friends, political allies, and wealthy donors. Trump didn’t drain the swamp, he pardoned it.

Re: When is Enough ,Enough?
 

i will agree:

Trump has not solved the middle east and there are still potential fires there. Again no other president since 1948 has ever either.

Obama did things, such as start a period of growth, or lift the crude oil ban, which Trump's policies have continued and built upon.

The term snowflake is equivalent to trumpette and namecalling is childish. And Trump uses that childishness aggressively

As for the russian footprint in the middle east, the world will never allow a vacuum. Most of the US, and I think most liberal activists, wanted the US to not get embroiled in any more mideast wars over oil, so there is this mixed goal of getting out of the never ending war cycle and maintaining influence. I will concede that Trump hasn't found the perfect balance of maintaining influence vs extractating US from embroilment, anymore than any other president since 1948.


My point was, and is, that the claim that Trump is destroying the US is overreactive and fueled mostly by innuendo. I did not say we now live in a bubble wrapped world where only unicorns and rainbows exist. We all know that is not the case



Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Re: When is Enough ,Enough?
 

Give this a read

[url]https://outline.com/8Vr37R[/url]

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Re: When is Enough ,Enough?
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;1245275]Give this a read

[url]https://outline.com/8Vr37R[/url]

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk[/quote]

Well written and yes, I agree worst case scenarios have not come to fruition. I guess the Dems (and many republicans) apology would be "Thanks for not killing us Donald Trump ... yet". Thats the tone I got.

Iran -- I dont think their response is over ... at all. Iran will almost always be an asymetrical proxy war. I did think things would have escalated more overtly than they did so far. As the writer did acknowledge .. "The calamitous war they envisioned, however, has not come to pass. They were right, though, that there would be devastating consequences. Iran retaliated by firing missiles at a U.S. base in Iraq, leaving at least 109 American troops with traumatic brain injuries. The Iranians mistakenly downed a civilian airliner, killing its 176 passengers, and hostilities between Iran and the U.S. remain dangerously high."

N Korea - we are no closer to a real resolution today then the day Trump took office. And the same could be said for every president ever. Republicans will say at least Trump tried to open up dialogue and it didnt work. Dems will say Trump got played for a photo shoot that benefits Kim greatly for propaganda and they didnt have to give up a single thing.

-------------------

Article asks - should the dems admit that Trump's foreign policy actions have not led to worst case scenarios? I dont know, seems odd. Everyone was thinking and saying the killing of Sol was a dangerous escalation and COULD lead to war w Iran. Because it was a dangerous escalation that could led to war. That it increased the chances a "mistake" could be made. And a mistake was made, Iran shot down a civilian airplane bc they thought it was US.

Should I thank my dog for not getting into the trash or shitting in my house?

Trumps unpredictability I do think has benefits after decades of foreign diplomacy defined as appeasement and de-escalation. But I dont think Trump has accomplished anything with N Korea and if Obama tried that, hannity would have been incensed an American president is giving respectability/acknowldgement to a dictator etc ..

Trump is negotiating with the freaking Taliban and was set to have them come to Camp David? wtf was that? taliban just killed like 8 us troops this month, taliban is killing US troops regularly and we are now negotiating with them. Could you imagine Hannity if Obama was secretly going to have the freaking Taliban come onto US soil at camp david for tea and negotiations?

---------------------

Trumps biggest foreign policy win where his detractors (graham, repubs and dems) may apologize ... is just getting out of the civil war in Syria. I wish we could have helped more but we had to get out of there imo. Let russia, turkey, iran, syria fight it out.

Also China, I do not mind taking on China. Actually, I like it. There was bipartisan support to challenge china for IP stealing, cyber theft and forcing companies who do biz in china to share intelligence. The only diffirence of opinion was how strong or weak to address it. Anything less than strong would not work imo and trump went strong. And Trump didnt have to. he could have avoided dealing w China, not taking a hit to his economy, not having farmers need subsidies .. basically taking on china was bad for his re-election but good for the US.

Phase 1 of the deal does not address any of that (in earnest from what I read, it duplicates what is already on paper in terms of stealing).

trump second term - probably the only thing he would do that I would be happy about is doubling down on china. I think China was slow playing this to see if he wins 2020. If he wins 2020, China may need to make some real concessions .. but any deal with china is just writing on paper, its the enforcement and confirmation that is the hard part to ensure.

----

I think Trump's abrupt foreign policy has been helpful in some ways in some situations ... i think the writer could have found 2 better examples honestly. Irans response has just begun and NK is a dud.

Syria and China are the better examples but one deals w leaving an allie for dead and the other made our economy take a hit so there is lots of room for a reasonable counter argument i suppose.

/ranting

Re: When is Enough ,Enough?
 

[QUOTE=CRedskinsRule;1245214]i will agree:

Trump has not solved the middle east and there are still potential fires there. Again no other president since 1948 has ever either.

Obama did things, such as start a period of growth, or lift the crude oil ban, which Trump's policies have continued and built upon.

The term snowflake is equivalent to trumpette and namecalling is childish. And Trump uses that childishness aggressively

As for the russian footprint in the middle east, the world will never allow a vacuum. Most of the US, and I think most liberal activists, wanted the US to not get embroiled in any more mideast wars over oil, so there is this mixed goal of getting out of the never ending war cycle and maintaining influence. I will concede that Trump hasn't found the perfect balance of maintaining influence vs extractating US from embroilment, anymore than any other president since 1948.


My point was, and is, that the claim that Trump is destroying the US is overreactive and fueled mostly by innuendo. I did not say we now live in a bubble wrapped world where only unicorns and rainbows exist. We all know that is not the case



Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk[/QUOTE]



When the POTUS doubts the IA’s information and does so publicly it destroys the faith they, and their contacts have in us. When someone doubts, even slightly, our word (trump represents our country) that can be devastating. I think you are underestimating the power of tweets/words of the POTUS can have on our standing in the world.

Re: When is Enough ,Enough?
 

[quote=punch it in;1245632]When the POTUS doubts the IA’s information and does so publicly it destroys the faith they, and their contacts have in us. When someone doubts, even slightly, our word (trump represents our country) that can be devastating. I think you are underestimating the power of tweets/words of the POTUS can have on our standing in the world.[/quote]

It would have been good if someone had questioned our findings of WMD's in Iraq.

It would have been good if someone had questioned our IA's structure of sharing information before 9-11

It would have been good if someone had questioned the running of the FISA court before abuses became a political weapon.

It's hypocritical in fact to claim that you can't doubt our IA's conclusions even slightly, but support a NSA officer who testified against the head of our executive branch about a private conversation, even though he acknowledged it was primarily a policy disagreement.

It's hypocritical and laughable to go woe is us over that the president tweets and their affect at the same time the democrats and media cohorts attack his standing every day and every action.

Our IA aren't James Bond superspies, some may be, mostly they are bureaucrats with a love of country, and all the same passions and fires you and I bring to these discussions. And in this hyper partisan time, brought on since Bush II and exacerbated by Obama, then Trump, by Republicans and Democrats, some in those agencies have let beliefs like those that G1 and you have expressed give them cause to create insurance policies and rigged FISA warrants to tear this president down. You don't think that has an effect on how our adversaries view us?

Re: When is Enough ,Enough?
 

The fed’s manipulation of the interest rate is horseshit. Let’s be completely honest, the stock market drop is because of the coronavirus is the definition of a black swan event. Fear induce selling based on the sickness has taken place. So as it takes place, indirect supply chain impact will now blunt the economy as a result..that’s just how it’s gonna happen because of where it is hittin the most, middle, industrial China. Nothing we can do about that. Other industries will be hit like travel. But overall we have to let it play out...but the fed sweeping in is a bad call. Don’t prop the market, it was running too hot anyway.

Re: When is Enough ,Enough?
 

So what was everyone's take on Schumer's speech

[QUOTE]"I want to tell you, Gorsuch. I want to tell you, Kavanaugh. You have released the whirlwind and you will pay the price!" Schumer warned. "You won’t know what hit you if you go forward with these awful decisions."[/QUOTE]

Re: When is Enough ,Enough?
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;1245951]So what was everyone's take on Schumer's speech[/quote]

Media and libs just look the other way per the usual

Re: When is Enough ,Enough?
 

[quote=Chico23231;1245953]Media and libs just look the other way per the usual[/quote]

LOL, or the ignorant right wing nuts want blood ,.......like always.

Re: When is Enough ,Enough?
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;1245951]So what was everyone's take on Schumer's speech[/quote]

Good , what's wrong with it?If you're going to fill the SC with political appointees then this is what you're going to get.

Re: When is Enough ,Enough?
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;1245633].................

Our IA aren't James Bond superspies, some may be, mostly they are bureaucrats with a love of country, and all the same passions and fires you and I bring to these discussions. And in this hyper partisan time, brought on since Bush II and exacerbated by Obama, then Trump, by Republicans and Democrats, some in those agencies have let beliefs like those that G1 and you have expressed give them cause to create insurance policies and rigged FISA warrants to tear this president down. You don't think that has an effect on how our adversaries view us?[/quote]




Seriously some of the biggest bullshit you or chico have ever posted. Trump has affected how our "adversaries view us" .......as sheep the will lie down . Trump sides with Russia , North korea and now the fucking taliban. Our friends and our Adversaries all view us the same way .........as a country lost with a fucking clown as president,......basicly a country without a leader.

Re: When is Enough ,Enough?
 

[quote=Giantone;1245955][B]Good , what's wrong with it?[/B]If you're going to fill the SC with political appointees then this is what you're going to get.[/quote]

Just wow. :doh:

Just to recap, if you are a political appointee threats suddenly come with the job. This is the left folks

Re: When is Enough ,Enough?
 

[quote=Chico23231;1245959]Just wow. :doh:

Just to recap, if you are a political appointee threats suddenly come with the job. This is the left folks[/quote]

Where was your outrage when Moscow mitch held up the SC nominees of Obama??? You're a hypocrite chico.

Re: When is Enough ,Enough?
 

[quote=Giantone;1245961]Where was your outrage when Moscow mitch held up the SC nominees of Obama??? You're a hypocrite chico.[/quote]

holding up a nomination (not with a gun) is not the same as verbal threats against specific Justices.

Hard to know where lines are drawn nowadays (on both sides)

Re: When is Enough ,Enough?
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;1245965]holding up a nomination (not with a gun) is not the same as verbal threats against specific Justices.

Hard to know where lines are drawn nowadays (on both sides)[/quote]

Republicans "politicized the SC" and there were no "threats " against anyone just a confirmation that there are consequences for there political views of the court instead of processing justice.




P.S. Roberts stayed quiet when trump went after RBG and Sotomayor but no that's ok,like I said hypocrite.


[url]https://www.washingtonpost.com/[/url]

[url]https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/25/us/politics/trump-supreme-court.html[/url]



But you guys will defend trump ...............you always do ,nothing new.

Re: When is Enough ,Enough?
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;1245965]holding up a nomination (not with a gun) is not the same as verbal threats against specific Justices.

Hard to know where lines are drawn nowadays (on both sides)[/quote]

My beef is with the Chief Justice calling out Schumer (as is his right when he feels the court is being attacked unfairly).

Where's the beef when Trump insults RBG, Sotomayer, the judge on the Stone/etc. trials, or literally any other judiciary exec Trump has attacked over the years? How about the mexican judge Trump thinks is biased due to his nationality?

Partisanship has invaded the judiciary, this is the world we live in now. Either you have a problem with all of it or you are a part of the problem as well.

Re: When is Enough ,Enough?
 

[QUOTE=mooby;1245972]My beef is with the Chief Justice calling out Schumer (as is his right when he feels the court is being attacked unfairly).



Where's the beef when Trump insults RBG, Sotomayer, the judge on the Stone/etc. trials, or literally any other judiciary exec Trump has attacked over the years? How about the mexican judge Trump thinks is biased due to his nationality?



Partisanship has invaded the judiciary, this is the world we live in now. Either you have a problem with all of it or you are a part of the problem as well.[/QUOTE]Roberts did rebuke Trump in 2018 when Trump spoke of the Obama judges.
[Quote]Back in November 2018, Roberts defended the federal judiciary in a rare rebuke of comments from Trump, saying there are no “Obama judges” as the president claimed.
“We do not have Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges or Clinton judges,” Roberts said in a statement distributed by the Supreme Court. “What we have is an extraordinary group of dedicated judges doing their level best to do equal right to those appearing before them."
[/Quote]
I cannot speak to why he didn't in the Sotomayor incident.

Schumer's language, to me, was on a far different level though. He cited the two judges saying they will pay, to come back and say it was about elections makes no sense since judges are not subject to election. If he had said your republican cohorts will pay, then thats the elections. Politicians know the meanings of words, and he was very specific in his threat.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Re: When is Enough ,Enough?
 

For the record I disagree with Schumer's choice of words. But I don't see what he said as anything worse than the constant barrage of attacks on judges from Trump.

Re: When is Enough ,Enough?
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;1245951]So what was everyone's take on Schumer's speech[/quote]

imo Schumer was wrong to single out any SCOTUS justice.

Justice Roberts, from what ive seen, I like him. Clarence Thomas imo shouldnt be on the bench, he will twist facts ro interpretation of law to fit whatever predetermined super conservative view he wants. He would vote to over turn Roe v Wade and throw precedent out the window just so his version of America is the only version of America. I think Sotomayor may be his polar equivalent. And equally not qualified imo but she doesnt have a track record yet to judge.

This isnt the first time he has had to respond another branch. I remember he made a public statement in response to trump saying there are Obama justices and Trump justices and Roberts said the SCOTUS is neutral and party bias and there are no trump or Obama judges.

If we are going to discuss Schumer's comments ... I think its fair to ask if you discussed or questioned trump and republican comments re the SCOTUS as well. if you didnt then ... can you honestly do it now and claim objectiveness?

--------------------

McConnell has driven Congress off the cliff and civility and fair play will never come back. For him to hold up the vetting of Garland was .. the last fatal blow.

In a speech that August in Kentucky, McConnell would say: "One of my proudest moments was when I looked Barack Obama in the eye and I said, 'Mr. President, you will not fill the Supreme Court vacancy.' "

McConnell was not alone. The 11 Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee signed a letter saying they had no intention of consenting to any nominee from Obama. No proceedings of any kind were held on Garland's appointment.
[url]https://www.npr.org/2018/06/29/624467256/what-happened-with-merrick-garland-in-2016-and-why-it-matters-now[/url]

Now any party can just move the goal post farther back ... if a Republican president nominates a justice for the SCOTUS 2 years before elections ... but Dems hold the Senate, why should they act on it vs just sitting on it.

We were probably already heading down the road of severe partinship but McConnell fast tracked it.

And dont give me the "but the biden rule" crap. Thats a complete strawman and any competent and semi objective person cant argue that with a straight face.

Blue slips - McConnell also killed that. he weaponized the Senate to be the working agent for the Executive branch.

I really dont want to hear any Republicans scream about how the AG or DOJ are supposed to be neutral or how Congress is supposed to be an independent branch and not work exclusively under the direction of the President.

20 years from now .. Texas will be blue, florida will be blue, arizona etc plus the Senate and POTUS will be a Dem ... and you can thank McConnell for single handily removing the checks and balances that existed for over 200 years.

Enjoy it now ... just remember that you were okay with all of this while it was trump and republicans doing it .... but im sure many republicans will be screaming bloody murder 20 years from now.

edit --- and a super extreme left view equally scares me the same as a super right view

Re: When is Enough ,Enough?
 

[quote=mooby;1245972]My beef is with the Chief Justice calling out Schumer (as is his right when he feels the court is being attacked unfairly).

Where's the beef when Trump insults RBG, Sotomayer, the judge on the Stone/etc. trials, or literally any other judiciary exec Trump has attacked over the years? How about the mexican judge Trump thinks is biased due to his nationality?

Partisanship has invaded the judiciary, this is the world we live in now. Either you have a problem with all of it or you are a part of the problem as well.[/quote]

Your calling this an attack on them. That's a stretch.

“It’s very obvious,” Trump said at a news conference in India, where he was wrapping up a 36-hour trip. “Justice Ginsburg should [recuse herself] because she went wild during the campaign when I was running."

"Perhaps she was for Hillary Clinton,” Trump said.

“I just don’t know how they cannot recuse themselves from anything having to do with Trump or Trump-related,” the president said. He said Sotomayor – who was appointed by President Barack Obama – is “trying to shame people with perhaps a different view.”

When is Enough ,Enough?
 

[QUOTE=CRedskinsRule;1245951]So what was everyone's take on Schumer's speech[/QUOTE]



Funny how suddenly words actually can be more than just words.....
I believe this is where I am supposed to say get over it snowflakes or something like that. Oh the freaking hypocrisy of you and Chico to overlook all the threatening language Trump has used for years now about folks in the media, muslims, democrats, i mean you can just read his Twitter feed because the list goes on and on and on, and than get rattled by Schumer. Absolutely unreal.

Re: When is Enough ,Enough?
 

For starters,


Donald J. Trump
[emoji818]
@realDonaldTrump
Shifty Adam Schiff is a CORRUPT POLITICIAN, and probably a very sick man. He has not paid the price, yet, for what he has done to our Country!

146K
8:20 AM - Jan 26, 2020

I know, I know. This is different because Obama made him do it or some stupid shit. [emoji23]

Re: When is Enough ,Enough?
 

This is going to be fun......


Trump had just demanded to know who provided a whistleblower with information about his call with the Ukrainian president, describing that person as “close to a spy” and adding: “You know what we used to do in the old days when we were smart? Right? With spies and treason, right? We used to handle them a little differently than we do now.”

Remember that one?

Re: When is Enough ,Enough?
 

[quote=punch it in;1246037]Funny how suddenly words actually can be more than just words.....
I believe this is where I am supposed to say get over it snowflakes or something like that. Oh the freaking hypocrisy of you and Chico to overlook all the threatening language Trump has used for years now about folks in the media, muslims, democrats, i mean you can just read his Twitter feed because the list goes on and on and on, and than get rattled by Schumer. Absolutely unreal.[/quote]

I thought threatening unelected Justices would be something we all agreed was wrong.

and to respond to the tweet in the next one, saying a politician has a price to pay, that makes sense to be a political election. Saying a justice, that has no political election in their future, has a price to pay, is much more ominous.

Finally, I have criticized ad nauseaum Trump's tweets, maybe not here but I don't defend him for being a whiny crybaby, and yes it affects the dialog in this country, but this was a specific over the line statement by Schumer, who has his own litany of crybaby moments. And Yes I thought naively, that everyone here would say his statements were outright wrong.