- Joined
- Jul 7, 2015
- Messages
- 39,417
- Reaction score
- 10,121
- Location
- California
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
They pleaded guilty to LYING to Congress.
You can keep your opinion of my post to yourself.
They pleaded guilty to LYING to Congress.
You can keep your opinion of my post to yourself.
I don't see why you think my opinion is invalid, while asserting your own, obviously uninformed opinion.
We have, today, a whistleblower explaining that Flynn was eager to tear up Russian sanctions to free up money for a nuclear deal in the Middle East, which would serve as a pretext for a new US military presence, while President Trump was lying during his inauguration address by claiming that every decision he made would be based on what's best for American families.
An unnamed source no doubt.
Your ignorant argument is based solely on what narrative you find most desirable. Do you find that suspicious?
This whole thing is political vapour-ware.
They're gonna f-up a bunch of peoples' lives...because Hillary-Billary didn't win.
Its a good thing the west is so PC-soaked now that whiners can make themselves out as the heroes.
Not to long ago, when common sense was a little more important, such whining would have been laughed off as sour grapes and immaturity.
Today its normal to cry about anything Trump. Literally cry.
Its f-in' nutz man...
So today he makes his great Jerusalem announcement...LOL!
More crying. Its embarrassing.
O the hubris of those brave, brave ****ers at Trumpco who're willing to risk other Americans' lives.Well, the troops' faces anyway. Maybe Trump can burn a few Qur'ans as the embassy moves to sweeten the mistake.
Fizzled because Ross got the date wrong?We had Brian Ross' hot scoop that candidate Trump told Flynn to contact the Russians, which fizzled.
Maybe.Now a New York Times scoop is getting the same treatment.
That's quite the theory.What is bringing all this to white hot intensity is the fact that Trump is on the verge of succeeding bigly. If they can't take him down before the economy gets really good then they will have lost for good in the same way they lost to Reagan. That's Victor David Hanson's theory [video link, long], anyway.
We had Brian Ross' hot scoop that candidate Trump told Flynn to contact the Russians, which fizzled.
Now a New York Times scoop is getting the same treatment. Again on the Russia story.
These guys want the Russia collusion story to be true sooooo baaaaad that they keep getting ahead of themselves. They keep trying to turn speculation and innuendo into facts.
What is bringing all this to white hot intensity is the fact that Trump is on the verge of succeeding bigly. If they can't take him down before the economy gets really good then they will have lost for good in the same way they lost to Reagan. That's Victor David Hanson's theory [video link, long], anyway.
The sooner those that have come to believe the scam that is the "Russia Collusion Investigation", the sooner their credibility will return. [best case]
We had Brian Ross' hot scoop that candidate Trump told Flynn to contact the Russians, which fizzled.
Now a New York Times scoop is getting the same treatment. Again on the Russia story.
These guys want the Russia collusion story to be true sooooo baaaaad that they keep getting ahead of themselves. They keep trying to turn speculation and innuendo into facts.
What is bringing all this to white hot intensity is the fact that Trump is on the verge of succeeding bigly. If they can't take him down before the economy gets really good then they will have lost for good in the same way they lost to Reagan. That's Victor David Hanson's theory [video link, long], anyway.
I have no problem with legitimate hate for Trump, but that investigation was just nothing but a **** show to begin with.
There's no "vapour-ware", Flynn and Papadopolous' guilty pleas are proof of that. Flynn getting fired was proof of that. The dozen or so of President Trump's advisors who had contacts with Russians and then lied about them across more than 50 distinct communications, that's no mere vapor.
Meanwhile, President Trump is slurring speech like he's advancing into the next stage of dementia, humiliating the US while his handwriting changes dramatically. We have Flynn bragging via text about a nuclear deal that they'll fund by tearing up Russian sanctions. The writing on the wall is pretty clear and obvious.
O the hubris of those brave, brave ****ers at Trumpco who're willing to risk other Americans' lives.
Trumpco et al know that the ME is actually very simple.
It's just that none of those other guys tried to handle the ME the Trumpco way. They got it all wrong.
Trumpco knows just how those guys screwed up.
Trumpco'll get in there and get it all sorted straight away.
It might be messy at first.
But hey, Democracy's messy, right?
The whole thing is actually simpler than people think, it's just not going to be and never was going to be neat. We are just too stupid to see it. Conservatives argued it wrong as they supported Bush no matter what, while Liberals criticized no matter what. Those Bush arguments led people away from the problem and into talking points like "WMD" or "Democracy" for the simple sake of democracy. Like I argued even back then on this site, this was never just about Iraq.
Then comes the Arab Spring, where Obama refused to get off the fence even as millions of Muslims across the region protested for socioeconomic justice, dignity, and democracy. He only began to turn when Mubarak got ousted; and even then, he was careful not to upset the autocracies that may keep the balance on their side. Along comes Egypt's first democratic election and their crappy choice is either Mubarak's former Prime Minister (Shafik) or a representative of the Muslim Brotherhood (Morsi). Perhaps Americans can sympathize with that choice after last year (Trump Vs. Clinton). Morsie narrowly wins and American Conservatives and Liberals argue that this (added to Iran's Revolution) is proof that democracy in the ME will only lead to Islamism. Yet, inside a year, as Morsi began introducing Islamism into the government, Egyptians went right back to the street to protest until the Army deposed and ran another election.
Our foreign policy has been wrong headed. The region is struggling through a philosophical argument between Islamic Modernists (Arab Spring) and Islamists (Al-Qaeda, IS, Boko Haram). They have been struggling since the late nineteenth century and throughout the twentieth century, Islamists became more and more desperate against their dictators and against how the world had developed, until they began adopting militant tactics, assassinations, and terror. As much as people want "the terrorists" to be about them in their little homes in New York or Idaho, this is a local issue. And it is one that could have been sorted out long ago, before the Islamist mood turned entirely sour and began lashing out, had we recognized throughout the Cold War what was actually going on. Understanding this in the 1990s, alone, would have been enough to make 9/11 non-existent.
But Trump? He's just a moron. This Jerusalem move is as stupidly off-the-cuff as his Tweets. General Mattis' job just got intensely harder. If you have a wasps nest you deal with it properly. You don't take a stick and start wacking while you boast to your neighbor how manly you are. Of course, in this case, Trump tossed the hornets nest into his neighbor's yard and started throwing bricks.
The sooner those that have come to believe the scam that is the "Russia Collusion Investigation", the sooner their credibility will return. [best case]
The whole thing is actually simpler than people think, it's just not going to be and never was going to be neat. We are just too stupid to see it. Conservatives argued it wrong as they supported Bush no matter what, while Liberals criticized no matter what. Those Bush arguments led people away from the problem and into talking points like "WMD" or "Democracy" for the simple sake of democracy. Like I argued even back then on this site, this was never just about Iraq.
Then comes the Arab Spring, where Obama refused to get off the fence even as millions of Muslims across the region protested for socioeconomic justice, dignity, and democracy. He only began to turn when Mubarak got ousted; and even then, he was careful not to upset the autocracies that may keep the balance on their side. Along comes Egypt's first democratic election and their crappy choice is either Mubarak's former Prime Minister (Shafik) or a representative of the Muslim Brotherhood (Morsi). Perhaps Americans can sympathize with that choice after last year (Trump Vs. Clinton). Morsie narrowly wins and American Conservatives and Liberals argue that this (added to Iran's Revolution) is proof that democracy in the ME will only lead to Islamism. Yet, inside a year, as Morsi began introducing Islamism into the government, Egyptians went right back to the street to protest until the Army deposed and ran another election.
Our foreign policy has been wrong headed. The region is struggling through a philosophical argument between Islamic Modernists (Arab Spring) and Islamists (Al-Qaeda, IS, Boko Haram). They have been struggling since the late nineteenth century and throughout the twentieth century, Islamists became more and more desperate against their dictators and against how the world had developed, until they began adopting militant tactics, assassinations, and terror. As much as people want "the terrorists" to be about them in their little homes in New York or Idaho, this is a local issue. And it is one that could have been sorted out long ago, before the Islamist mood turned entirely sour and began lashing out, had we recognized throughout the Cold War what was actually going on. Understanding this in the 1990s, alone, would have been enough to make 9/11 non-existent.
But Trump? He's just a moron. This Jerusalem move is as stupidly off-the-cuff as his Tweets. General Mattis' job just got intensely harder. If you have a wasps nest you deal with it properly. You don't take a stick and start wacking while you boast to your neighbor how manly you are. Of course, in this case, Trump tossed the hornets nest into his neighbor's yard and started throwing bricks.
What you describe sounds like a different version of the same problem we face from the same crew of politicos.
I think that lobbyists and autocrats are exploiting the same weaknesses in our system.
Our politicos can't stop buttering their bread even in the face of an oncoming locomotive.
They keep getting rewarded by (lobbyists/autocrats) for doing things which are wrong-headed and even counter-productive for everyone but the (lobbyists/autocrats).
So their obdurance persists.
The USG is for hire.
It's a systemic issue based on exploiting game-breaking bugs.
Maybe we'll all team up fix it.
What you describe sounds like a different version of the same problem we face from the same crew of politicos.
I think that lobbyists and autocrats are exploiting the same weaknesses in our system.
Our politicos can't stop buttering their bread even in the face of an oncoming locomotive.
They keep getting rewarded by (lobbyists/autocrats) for doing things which are wrong-headed and even counter-productive for everyone but the (lobbyists/autocrats).
So their obdurance persists.
The USG is for hire.
It's a systemic issue based on exploiting game-breaking bugs.
Maybe we'll all team up fix it.
"Exploiting game breaking bugs". Great way to say it.
I've used the analogy that capitalism is great but due for a 400 year service.
The "Arab Spring" was an islamic uprising to establish a caliphate. It was not, nor ever was it a protest for "socioeconomic justice, dignity, and democracy." that's what the administration, hillary, and the media tried to sell it as. The "arab spring" was almost exclusively a disaster.
The sooner those that have come to believe the scam that is the "Russia Collusion Investigation", the sooner their credibility will return. [best case]
No it wasn't. It was exactly what I stated. I don't care what Hillary told you. The three new constitutions that came from the uprising (Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya) were all liberal. The Arab Spring was evidence that the Islamist philosophy had become bankrupt. This is one of the reasons they lash out so violently now. 9/11, Al-Qaeda, and the so-called Islamic State are all only symptoms.
As for the Arab Spring being a disaster, I would point out that it took the French over a hundred years to get democracy right after the French Revolution. In the mean time, they elected Napoleon, who went on to terrorize Europe and the Middle East and proclaim himself Emperor. And still, during World War II, French democracy took a back seat to Vichy France. I would also point out our own history, where we fought a "Revolution" after declaring that all men are equal. Still, we had to later fight a civil war to free slaves. Still, we had to march for civil rights.
The Arab Spring was merely a step in a process. We Americans are far too quick to declare the failure in others. Cosuder this as well...
Since it took Western financial backing and support to ensure the stability of dictators during the Cold War, its stands to reason that Western financial backing and support is also necessary to help strengthen new democracies. The United States committed $128 billion in today’s dollars during the four years of the Marshall Plan in post-World War II Western Europe. In the first year and a half after the Arab Spring uprisings, the United States proposed only $2.2 billion in new aid to affected countries in the MENA. The United States gave Muslim dictators far much more of a chance to survive than it gave these new Muslim democracies.
Like I stated before, our foreign policy is wrong headed because we remain ignorant to shat is happening right before our very eyes.
We had Brian Ross' hot scoop that candidate Trump told Flynn to contact the Russians, which fizzled.
Now a New York Times scoop is getting the same treatment. Again on the Russia story.
These guys want the Russia collusion story to be true sooooo baaaaad that they keep getting ahead of themselves. They keep trying to turn speculation and innuendo into facts.
What is bringing all this to white hot intensity is the fact that Trump is on the verge of succeeding bigly. If they can't take him down before the economy gets really good then they will have lost for good in the same way they lost to Reagan. That's Victor David Hanson's theory [video link, long], anyway.
I don't think it's capitalism per se.
It seems to be more focused on the fact that it's more efficiently rewarding for a candidate to please a dozen donors than to please the majority of their constituents.
If you're playing the get-elected-politics game, it's an eminently productive strategy to embrace—especially since your competition is also embracing that strategy.
This creates a handle on the politicos and their organizations which can be wielded by our enemies foreign and domestic.
The intention of democratic forms of government is to guard against the problem of a small group of people bending the entire nation to their will.
But this loophole we're discussing effectively short circuits the gears because the electorate's support has become a tertiary concern for the political players.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?