Nov 8, 2016 - The lesser of two evils?
- Thread starter TX Redman
- Start date
- Status
I have not heard that Sessions was tapped at all.
My take is that......
If Trump's illegal wire tapping accusation is correct, it should be a big deal.
If Trump's illegal wire tapping accusation is not correct, it should be a big deal.
In the mean time, I wonder when there will be some governing? Regardless of whose fault you think it is.....we are a mess.
The Russia Connection is real.
All of Trump's bluster, likely from the beginning of the presidential campaign, has just been a smokescreen to hide the illegal takeover of the country with Russian help.
Loose facts like the level of unemployment, ignoring rights, calling to limit the free press are all just a few examples. We even have a Nazi as the MInister of Propaganda just like there was 80 years ago.
And don't try to throw bleeding hearted liberal at me. I have been a War Hawk republican for as long as I could vote, over forty years.
Wake up!
All of Trump's bluster, likely from the beginning of the presidential campaign, has just been a smokescreen to hide the illegal takeover of the country with Russian help.
Loose facts like the level of unemployment, ignoring rights, calling to limit the free press are all just a few examples. We even have a Nazi as the MInister of Propaganda just like there was 80 years ago.
And don't try to throw bleeding hearted liberal at me. I have been a War Hawk republican for as long as I could vote, over forty years.
Wake up!
Not to mention the one I am on right now. In Stellenbosch, South Africa staying for a week's retreat on a vineyard where they produce a number of red and white varieties of delicious vines for national and international markets. My liberal colleagues invited me to help them to figure out how to increase socio-economic benefits to those poorer sections of the global society particularly the rural (read more than a billion people living on a measure stick called $1.25 per day). My previous suggestion of 40 acres and a mule did not go down well last time
Perhaps between courses you can suggest that they sell Turtle Bay to the highest bidder and combine the sale price with the UN's six billion dollar budget and distribute the revenue to the poor.
Akin to a response to a question asked of the Shah of Iran by Barbara Walters whether he is planning to return to Iran some time soon after the revolution, he stated: "I may be many things but I am not stupid"
UN is an extremely white dominant Northern European xenocentric (Scandanavian and mainland Northern Europeans are its biggest financial supporters in relative sense - that is, percentage of money they give of their GDP), while USA is the biggest financier simply because it is biggest economy of the world. So .01 percent is absolutely way more money if your GDP is $13 trillion or you give .07% while your GDP is $1.3 trillion. Whereas the US is not really interested in the multilateral system, Northern Europe wants to strengthen it because it at least keeps them relevant and on the table vis a vis international [strike]law[/strike] power politics.
Now all this is irrelevant to the actual practice of helping the poor, and I would agree with you and many other actors involved the field of economic development and poverty that the biggest problem is often us ... we maintain like welfare the vicious cycle of addiction and dependency where alternatively providing people two keys things (and thats all) does way more than the programmes of keeping the poor addicted. That is Give the people land [back] (especially the poor in rural areas hence the 40 acres of assets idea) and give them a level playing field (that is they have access to money, equipment, markets of inputs and outputs no matter if they have to pay fair prices for them), and get the hell out of the way.. Most funding goes to staff (i like to believe unlike me but it doesnt really matter) who have a vested interest in keeping the poor poor, and keeping the policies the same. It is similar to the climate and environmental crises.
Mr. Beast you are right because of the wikileak emails between wasserman and podesta, mentioning Bernie's Jewish faith and it was not sounding very nice so to speak (do not have time to dig up the emails).
Now the issue you are alll talking about should be referred to the number of stumbling blocks Obama (as I guessed) would and did leave President Trump. And I am going to list my top three key ones:
1. Russian sanctions and the Russian scare
2. Allowing the UN Resolutions against Israel to pass in the Security Council. Hard to undo right away, and makrs EU dealing complex. This ploy also created a second thing Obama wanted ... to slap Netanyahu in the face for the AIPAC meeting he did in US while embarrassing Obama. Bernie did not attend the AIPAC meeting. Trump anti-semitic? nope.
3. The guise of smooth handover NOT ... wiretapping, spying ... you name it, they did it, and it creates a series of stumbling blocks.
This success of all these is easily apparent on how the issues are covered in the media, by party idealist and and the rank and file.
We already know that the administration and national security apparatus had Trump Towers under surveillance during the campaign: it was reported in the NY Times a month ago. The MSM lives in such a cocoon that they failed to realize the full implications of what they were saying. They reported it to smear Trump and to beat the drum of his alleged ties to Putin. See they said, the FBI and NSA and CIA were investigating Trump using the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, so there must be something to it - foreign and intelligence and surveillance, res ipsa loquitur - and where there's smoke there's fire. What they didn't realize were the full implications of reporting that the government in power employed the national security apparatus to investigate the political opposition during a presidential campaign. Which is Stasi territory, which is why they're all of a sudden parsing everyone's sentences so carefully. Trump said Obama wiretapped him but Obama didn't order the surveillance personally Loretta Lynch did and it wasn't a wiretap it was a computer server being monitored and the FISA warrant wasn't aimed at Trump it named his his associates. So in this case where there's smoke it's just smoke, move along, look over there a squirrel.
Thanks, that was Fun. A beautiful narrative with truth and lean taken from a singular perspective.
A FISA was first requested in July 2016 and denied. A subsequent FISA was approved in November when everyone on the planet knew the FBI was investigating Russia meddling in the election. I wouldn't be surprised if a warrant to monitor servers on the democrat side were also requested. In any event, such a warrant would only have been granted if the FBI—not the Obama administration—was able to convince a judge that it was reasonable to believe that the Trump could have had links to a foreign power.
My guess is, next, we will find out who appointed that judge (democrat or republican) and everyone will proceed in their attempts to write a narrative that suits their "side".
Me.....investigate it all. If Obama did something illegal so be it. If Trump did something illegal so be it.
Honestly, my guess is that Trump is NOT complicit in the Russian hacking. I think it is possible that he or people within his campaign knew about it.....but that's not illegal. I also guess that Trump has been involved with some shady financial deal involving Russian banks. Illegal? I have no idea. I do believe presidents should have to show their tax returns, but that is not the current law.
Lastly......Donald Trump is a clown that has dragged our country through a circus show for the past two years. Noe that he is president, I wish he would put Twitter down and start the arduous task of governing a nation.
Beast,
Big difference between protecting Israel as Jewish homeland and not confronting West Bank settlement policy. Support of Israel Defense capacity at highest level ever under Obama, possibility of peace at lowest level under Netanyahu's pandering to bizarre Israeli religious right, some of whom are sure that total control of Judea and Samaria now will prove that their Rabbi from Romania and Brooklyn was actually the messiah.
Yes, I have a perspective. And so do you. The difference between us being that I don't pretend that I'm an "independent" and therefore everything I say must be fair and true because I'm not biased. You're an independent who just happens to "hate" republicans and espouses every liberal trope that comes down the pike. What that is is just another tired variation of the usual leftist virtue signalling. I'm moral and therefore my opponents are evil; I'm independent and therefore my opponents are biased. Guess what? I'm a registered democrat. So I guess therefore my perspective is even more correct and deserving of respect than yours, because I think my own party is a bunch of fascists.
The FBI is part of the executive branch and hence part of the Obama administration and if you think the DOJ and the FBI and CIA and NSA were investigating the president's political opponents and he didn't know - no doubt like everything else that happened while he was president he first read about it the papers - then you're pretty naive. I do appreciate your faith in the national security apparatus and your support for secret judicial processes and the PATRIOT Act. Personally I'm suspicious of a government that acts in secret. But then I'm a registered democrat.
Except you, because you don't take sides. How very fair you are.
No argument. If Trump colluded with the Russians to fix the US election he should be impeached. The only problem with that is there is absolutely no evidence that anything like that happened. And if Obama did anything illegal so be it: he'll get a 65 million advance for his memoirs, which will sell 16 copies, enabling him to spend his golden year golfing. Because if there is in fact any evidence of wrongdoing, look ------> a squirrel
The biggest lie in this whole affair is everyone acting aghast that the Russians might have tried to influence the US election. Of course they did. They've been doing it for 100 years, just as the US has been trying to influence political events in the Soviet Union; just like Obama tried to affect the outcome of the recent election in Israel. The Soviet Union spent trillions of dollars over the past century trying to effect the outcome of US elections. The difference is that before Trump anyone who complained about Soviet propaganda efforts was an evil McCarthyite trying to smear their opponents with unfounded accusations of treason. Whereas now they're patriots.
Spoken like a true independent.
I had that same problem with FDR and those damned newfangled fire side chats of his. Put down the radio mike I said, and start governing. And then I went out and shook my cane at those damned kids on my front lawn.
beast of the east
Active member
I agree with one pronouncement you've made - that Israel is emboldened by US support to push through with settlements that raise Palestinian ire. I don't think Netanyahu is particularly religious or pandering to the right, but instead knows that the security of Israel is paramount and West Bank settlements help fortify that.
Palestine is insatiable in their demands and will not stop until they control Jersusalem.
This is an unfair fight, because I do not know (or care to learn) how to do that thing where you split the text and respond in chunks. As a result of this inequity, I am requesting a monetary entitlement.
Fun, look, having not registered with either party, I am technically an independent. That said, I don't think I have ever hid my deference to the left. My point is that I can acknowledge that the democratic party is complete with hypocrites, frauds and insincere opportunists. While you seem to work up the furor of a man scorned while declaring all leftists cognitively bankrupt and righteously aloof, I have no illusions. I see deplorable representatives and policy on both sides.
I am happy to accept immigration reform, realize the ACA cannot remain as presently constituted, and desperately support a debt conscious budget. These initiative were not going to happen under President Obama or, frankly, any democrat. I do almost always side with democrats on social issues. I was someone who did not want to vote for Hillary (I did), but in the end could not support the reality tv star.
I am getting the sense you do not believe it is possible to distrust both sides equally, have a specific lean, and remain open minded. I understand that. My wife always says she likes both Yankees and the Mets. She also says she roots for the Giants, Jets and Bills (don't forget them) because they are "New York teams". I say BS, you pick one and stick with it.....for life!
For me, politics has never been like that. I voted for Reagan and three times I pulled the lever for the last name Bush. But.....I absolutely detest Donald Trump. I happen to think he is a Lavin-like bafoon. Problem is, he's not coaching my team.....he's running my country.
Johnny Fan, I have respect for you on voting for Ronald Reagan , the only President I truly believed in. My thoughts are that Obama , Carter and the Bush duet were among worst Presidents we every had.
Obama , he could done so much toward race relations and managed to make it worst. You know, yes we were all prejudice before Martin Luther King , before him if a black person move into the neighborhood , we feared that the neighborhood would lose market value and would turn bad. Rev. King changed our thinking and the prejudice is not in most of the white people, at least not in me and my family. Obama managed to increase the black person's prejudices against the white and the police officer. Obama was not able to look at himself as only a good person but only as a black person who he believed endured so much.
Even though I did not vote for him{due to my right to life belief}, I said to myself when he got elected , give him a chance, prayed for his success as POTUS.
I voted for Rubio in the Primaries. Trump was the last person I wanted on the Republican ticket. However voted for Trump over crooked, lying and say anything to get elected Hillary. How anyone could have voted for her is beyond me.
Now this your chance, Johnny Fan ,as I am, to give Trump a chance. Pray and wish the best for the POTUS, so that we all could have a better life
Obama , he could done so much toward race relations and managed to make it worst. You know, yes we were all prejudice before Martin Luther King , before him if a black person move into the neighborhood , we feared that the neighborhood would lose market value and would turn bad. Rev. King changed our thinking and the prejudice is not in most of the white people, at least not in me and my family. Obama managed to increase the black person's prejudices against the white and the police officer. Obama was not able to look at himself as only a good person but only as a black person who he believed endured so much.
Even though I did not vote for him{due to my right to life belief}, I said to myself when he got elected , give him a chance, prayed for his success as POTUS.
I voted for Rubio in the Primaries. Trump was the last person I wanted on the Republican ticket. However voted for Trump over crooked, lying and say anything to get elected Hillary. How anyone could have voted for her is beyond me.
Now this your chance, Johnny Fan ,as I am, to give Trump a chance. Pray and wish the best for the POTUS, so that we all could have a better life
Thanks, Frank. A fair assessment.
Regarding Trump, I acknowledge it is in our country's best interest (and my best interest) if he protects our nation and governs in a manner that results in civility and prosperity. If he does, he deserves credit.
I will never "like" him and I have already given him a chance. I have watched, listened and read for two years now. I believe I know what he is. Moving forward, Obama is gone and Hillary lost. Trump can create new enemies (like the media, Meryl Streep, Arnold Schwarzenegger, etc.), but at some point people will want less drama and more successful policy. Those coal miners are waiting.
I'll take one cheap shot here but only because you threw a fastball down the middle, just as Denny McClain did to Mickey Mantle when the Mick had 534 home runs: "‘Want us to groove one for you?" Jim Price said.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/09/sports/baseball/09mclain.html
You just grooved one. Yes, this is an unfair fight.
You clip the text and put it between the [qwote] [/qwote] marks. Even lawmanfan figured it out, so it's hardly rocket science.
Okay and I'm technically a democrat. The emphasis being on technically and to the extent it's true it means nothing.
Sorry but I think this is nonsense, because you mentioned your technical affiliation specifically to deflect accusations that you might be a partisan. I hate everyone but I don't pretend that my hating everyone makes me more or less believable than anyone else. I am proudly conservative, which affiliation I came to in reliance on logic and reason. You otoh present your independence as prima facie evidence of your reasonableness. That does not fly with me. If you make a compelling argument I'll agree with you. If you claim your argument is compelling because you're an independent or a moderate I'll spit at you with the same vehemence that I spit at everyone else and probably more. At least libtards are willing to man up and take it. You say you see deplorables on either side of the argument but your rhetoric belies your argument. This thread is three months old: point to where you argued that the left was just as reprehensible as the right except as a jumping off point to the right being reprehensible, to show how reasonable you are. You can't do it, because it never happened, because I just went back and looked. To he extent that you mention your affiliations you're virtue signalling and I don't buy it.
I don't care who you voted for: that's a matter of conscience. But let me ask you based upon my experience with the left. Which of the liberties guaranteed by the bill of rights do you agree with? I agree with freedom of speech: you can say whatever you want to whoever you want whenever you want, even if like the former titular head of the democratic party Robert Byrd you want to drop an N bomb on national television in prime time. I might not associate with you, as did so many like you who give "deference to the left" but I would protect your right to do so. I am very much for freedom of association: I believe you should be able to operate a restaurant that excludes blacks in a country club that excludes jews, although I might not eat there, unless the food was very good. Guessing you don't. I believe that anyone should be able to own whatever gun they want up to and including a tank, depending on where they live and subject to reasonable regulation. I believe that everyone - even Donald Trump - should be free from government intrusion into his privacy, even if they have not released their tax returns. I believe that no one should have their property taken by the government absent compensation, even Christians who don't want to bake cakes for homosexuals and muslims who dont want to carry seeing service dogs in their cabs because dogs are dirty. Guessing you disagree. And I believe that every right and liberty that is not mentioned explicitly in the Constitution and granted to the federal government is reserved to the people - from abortion, which I am in favor of because the fewer people there are the better, to prostitution, because the more pussy there is the better, to freely available drugs, especially for me, to fewer crimes and prisons, to a smaller military and foreign policy footprint, and fewer taxes and in general the smaller boot in the face of the people, forever. And I don't believe you believe in any of that or at least most of it, despite your claims of independence and I'd be happy to have you on the record defying my predictions and you can start with school choice which you oppose because the government does such a good job at educating our ignorant youth. Sure, you believe in immigration reform - meaning that not everyone who decides to cross the border is entitled to citizenship - and the ACA - which mandates that the government can force citizens to enter into private contractual relationships - and recognize that a 20 trillion dollar budget is unsustainable: how reasonable of you. Good grief, who do you think you're fooling other than yourself, to the extent you believe your own prose.
I'm sorry but that's ridiculous. I don't trust anyone. I'm such a cynic that I don't even believe in my own skepticism anymore. I didn't trust my parents, or my teachers, or Santy Claus, or the baby Jesus, or my first several wives. All I have learned 50 years on this earth is that the more anyone says something the more likely it is to be false and especially the louder the voice in which it is proclaimed. I don't believe in anything. Which is why I believe [sic] that in this political climate - where the media and academia and the arts walk in lockstep - that what is presumed to be common knowledge is false. Which is why I support DJ Trump to the extent hat I support any politician: because if so many people announce that he's dangerous so loudly he must not be so bad after all.
So you "hate" GW Bush but you voted for him at least once and assuming that's true for his father twice? Seeing that I don't believe anything I don't believe that. No offense.
- Status