• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The more you read Mattis’s resignation letter, ....

"The more you read Mattis’s resignation letter, the clearer it becomes that Trump had not read it before he sent his tweet."

A tweet by Kaitlan Collins.



No, I don't know who she is, but yes, I was kind of surprised that Trump had such kind words for Mattis in spite of Mattis' damning resignation letter.

Either Trump didn't read it or he didn't understand it.



I'm waiting for some delayed reaction tweets from Trump where he walks back his praise of Mattis and gets closer to calling Mattis dumb as a rock.
Trump doesn’t read.
 
"The more you read Mattis’s resignation letter, the clearer it becomes that Trump had not read it before he sent his tweet."

A tweet by Kaitlan Collins.



No, I don't know who she is, but yes, I was kind of surprised that Trump had such kind words for Mattis in spite of Mattis' damning resignation letter.

Either Trump didn't read it or he didn't understand it.



I'm waiting for some delayed reaction tweets from Trump where he walks back his praise of Mattis and gets closer to calling Mattis dumb as a rock.

More of the LYING ASS DOUBLE TALK from the **** TALKING LEFT, as Pres.Trump seeks to replace Gen.Mattis, for their policy differences...declared a "CRISIS FOR OUR DEMOCRACY"....and "PROOF OF HOW WEAK TRUMP HAS MADE AMERICA"....by the same LYING ASS LEFT who IGNORED Obama's going through FOUR SECRETRIES OF DEFENSE, ALL OF WHOM WHE WERE CRITICAL OF HIS LACK OF LEADERSHIP (balls) in DEFENSE MATTERS.

A "little reminder" for the Hypocrisy as a Lifestyle Choice left....



Obama on the defense again as another defense secretary speaks

.President Obama has not had an easy time with his secretaries of defense.

Two of his defense secretaries wrote books critical of his administration after they left office, and his third was essentially fired. On Tuesday, the White House scrambled to clarify remarks by Obama’s fourth defense secretary, Ashton B. Carter, who said over the weekend that Iraqi forces who collapsed in their defense of Ramadi lacked the “will to fight” Islamic State militants.

Carter’s pronouncement, unusual for its bluntness, angered senior Iraqi officials in Baghdad and seemed to suggest that the president’s strategy, built around supporting Iraqi forces with training and airstrikes, was failing. “Airstrikes are effective, but neither they nor really anything we do can substitute for the Iraqi forces’ will to fight,” Carter said in an interview with CNN. He added that the Iraqi government force, which “vastly outnumbered” the Islamic State attackers, simply refused to fight in Ramadi.



https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...=.edc306b89c22
 
Remember that "big" letter from Kim Jong Un? The one Trump called "beautiful"? Yeah, he also admitted at the time that he had not read it.

I'm going with "did not read".
 
Whole thing? I doubt he read any of it.
Hey, I think the world can handle another of your in-depth...

[tho unanswered as to certified] undeniably deeply flawed psycho-profiles. Actually more of a Rorschach of the post itself. You know, a profile in liberal courage, nicely succinct your virtue signal to the collective.

So I will be succinct in return, based on precisely what in Mattis' LOR and the President's tweet, brings you to that illogical conclusion?
 
I suddenly find myself once again wondering how many of these ridiculous DP posts are generated out of the IRA in St. Petersburg and I don't mean Florida.
 
Remember that "big" letter from Kim Jong Un? The one Trump called "beautiful"? Yeah, he also admitted at the time that he had not read it.

I'm going with "did not read".
Sources for that "go with"? I am going to go with "you made that up"... or you are reading some loon that made it up.

Fake news ring any bells? Tinkle tinkle tinkle.
 
Sources for that "go with"? I am going to go with "you made that up"... or you are reading some loon that made it up.

Fake news ring any bells? Tinkle tinkle tinkle.

I was wrong about "beautiful". He called it "very nice" but then admitted he had not read it.

Trump admits he has not read a letter from Kim Jong-un right after saying it was ‘very nice’

Reporters gamely asked what was actually in the letter, while Mr Trump egged them on, saying “How much? How much?”

But, later, Mr Trump admitted that he could not actually tell the reporters what was in it.

“I haven’t seen it yet,” Mr Trump said.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=41&v=4MaBh48R2nQ
 
I was wrong about "beautiful". He called it "very nice" but then admitted he had not read it.

Trump admits he has not read a letter from Kim Jong-un right after saying it was ‘very nice’

Reporters gamely asked what was actually in the letter, while Mr Trump egged them on, saying “How much? How much?”

But, later, Mr Trump admitted that he could not actually tell the reporters what was in it.

“I haven’t seen it yet,” Mr Trump said.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=41&v=4MaBh48R2nQ
And you are suggesting from this just having gotten the letter... that it went unopened in perpetuity, is that your thinking is it?

Think that is logical, seriously? Also, think it might, especially if handwritten [ you know so much about it, was it?] it just might be in Korean and not English? You think he never found out what was in the letter.

I mean, this starts, you must admit, getting rather stupid on the part of libs to make such lame suppositions.

I mean like yours. Right?
 
I doubt there will be any such need unless he starts trash talking the president.

Can you point out something in the letter that would make Trump mad at him? I don't see it... and it seems apparent that Trump was understanding of the position and gracious in accepting the resignation.

What more could you ask or expect of two public servants?

Here Mattis is saying that Trump does not share Mattis' views about treating allies with respect, about being clear-eyed about who the bad guys are, or about dedicating ourselves to taking actions which are conducive to our security, prosperity and values. If Trump did share those values, Mattis wouldn't feel obligated to step down to allow Trump to find someone more suited to his vision.

My views on treating allies with respect and also being clear-eyed about both malign actors and strategic competitors are strongly held and informed by over four decades of immersion in these issues. We must do everything possible to advance an international order that is most conducive to our security, prosperity and values, and we are strengthened in this effort by the solidarity of our alliances.

Because you have the right to have a Secretary of Defense whose views are better aligned with yours on these and other subjects, I believe it is right for me to step down from my position.




That is not the kind of statement which Trump usually takes calmly. We have years of Trump's truculent Twitter reactions to go by in observing that Trump's response yesterday is uncharacteristic and suggests that he didn't let the money quotes from Mattis' resignation letter sink in before he made his generous comments on Mattis.

So, if Trump does stick with his generous comments and not lash out, that will be interesting.


But, since Mattis will probably be doing some news talk interviews, he'll probably elaborate in an unflattering way on his reasons for resignation and what it was like to serve under Trump, so probably then you and Trump will agree that Mattis is trashtalking him and that it's okay for Trump to lash out.
 
And you are suggesting from this just having gotten the letter... that it went unopened in perpetuity, is that your thinking is it?

No. Where did you get the idea I was suggesting this? Projection?

Think that is logical, seriously? Also, think it might, especially if handwritten [ you know so much about it, was it?] it just might be in Korean and not English? You think he never found out what was in the letter.

Why ask me? I never suggested as much. I am comparing the two scenarios.

Trump got a letter from Kim. Said it was "very nice" based on...what? Nice stationary? Pleasant scent? Then after calling it "very nice", admits he has not even looked at it.

Trump got a resignation letter from Mattis. Praised Mattis on twitter although there was zero praise for Trump in the letter.

It is known that Trump dislikes reading.

Thus my conclusion (which is based on past actions and his character) is that he did not read the letter before tweeting.

Is that not what this thread is about? I thought so.

I mean, this starts, you must admit, getting rather stupid on the part of libs to make such lame suppositions.

I mean like yours. Right?

What part is stupid to you? That people are making guesses on a forum that is based on political discussion and speculation?
 
Or maybe you are sure that there is no chance that Trump would ever be found being the decent guy....which is not just wrong but way wrong in my opinion.

I think that we will some day know the truth here.

I am not making a call at this time.

Go sit in a corner and blow your raspberries there.
 
Here Mattis is saying that Trump does not share Mattis' views about treating allies with respect, about being clear-eyed about who the bad guys are, or about dedicating ourselves to taking actions which are conducive to our security, prosperity and values. If Trump did share those values, Mattis wouldn't feel obligated to step down to allow Trump to find someone more suited to his vision.






That is not the kind of statement which Trump usually takes calmly. We have years of Trump's truculent Twitter reactions to go by in observing that Trump's response yesterday is uncharacteristic and suggests that he didn't let the money quotes from Mattis' resignation letter sink in before he made his generous comments on Mattis.

So, if Trump does stick with his generous comments and not lash out, that will be interesting.


But, since Mattis will probably be doing some news talk interviews, he'll probably elaborate in an unflattering way on his reasons for resignation and what it was like to serve under Trump, so probably then you and Trump will agree that Mattis is trashtalking him and that it's okay for Trump to lash out.
You totally make my case, Trump would be fully within his rights if Mattis does as you indicate...thank you.

As someone primarily for America and against the globalists, if Mattis is more concerned with our allies than America, he was right to step down as their visions do not match.

The president deserves his top military commander to be in near total alignment. Nuff said.
 
No. Where did you get the idea I was suggesting this? Projection?



Why ask me? I never suggested as much. I am comparing the two scenarios.

Trump got a letter from Kim. Said it was "very nice" based on...what? Nice stationary? Pleasant scent? Then after calling it "very nice", admits he has not even looked at it.

Trump got a resignation letter from Mattis. Praised Mattis on twitter although there was zero praise for Trump in the letter.

It is known that Trump dislikes reading.

Thus my conclusion (which is based on past actions and his character) is that he did not read the letter before tweeting.

Is that not what this thread is about? I thought so.



What part is stupid to you? That people are making guesses on a forum that is based on political discussion and speculation?
So you are so indicating that you have not a real clue as to whether he ever obtained the contents of the letter, that from this off the cuff to reporters statement right after he received the letter, you believe he never read it.


That is, simply put, a very stupid supposition and probably, if one wanted to put some effort into it, easily proven verifiably false.

Yano?

Why are you asking me why he said it was very nice... all those scenarios could be true some of them could be, maybe none of them are true. Trump called it very nice for whatEVER reasons he so desired at the moment. Could have been the words Kim J said upon delivery... I don't know and stupid suppositions merely due to the fact that you dont like/disagree with the man only transforms those stupid suppositions into very stupid suppositions.

Yano [#2]?

It is known by whom [ the left? Bwwwhahahahahaha, that is solely par ] that Trump doesn't like reading? I know a lotta lefties here who don't like reading, complain of it ALL the time.

Does that make them stupid? No, its more the whole lefty off the rails thing that leaves us little doubt of that.

"Based on past actions and character"... too too funny... and again, pretty damn lame. :lamo

Based on no political discussion but solely lame, unsupportable speculation... epic failure. But I am being redundant. My bad.

If you are like many lamers here, you will do the "tldr" thing to this post ...lol and so this is a shout out to all them using that additional lameness as to exactly what you think of them.

:applaud
 
You totally make my case, Trump would be fully within his rights if Mattis does as you indicate...thank you.

As someone primarily for America and against the globalists, if Mattis is more concerned with our allies than America, he was right to step down as their visions do not match.

The president deserves his top military commander to be in near total alignment. Nuff said.


Being considerate about our allies doesn't make one more concerned about our allies than about America.

For America's prosperity we need good relations with our allies.

Backstabbing our allies and sucking up to authoritarian dictators is against America's interests.

Mattis saw it. Trump doesn't.

If we ever get a top military commander in alignment with Trump's world view, heaven help us. Fortunately such a person will have trouble being confirmed by the Senate.
 
Being considerate about our allies doesn't make one more concerned about our allies than about America.

For America's prosperity we need good relations with our allies.

Backstabbing our allies and sucking up to authoritarian dictators is against America's interests.

Mattis saw it. Trump doesn't.

If we ever get a top military commander in alignment with Trump's world view, heaven help us. Fortunately such a person will have trouble being confirmed by the Senate.
We, however, do not need rainy day allies, allies that not only do not pay their fair share of their own defense burden but not even the agreed upon much lesser share.

Mattis has revealed himself more the globalist in his thinking. And by the way, he is not omniscient, Trumps instincts are far better, not as regimentally rigid as are Mattis'. You can side with Mattis, I can side with Trump, but Trump was elected as the President, not Mattis... you do understand that, correct?

Ummm, you do also understand that we, the Republicans, hold the Senate and so the confirmation process is on our side. Right? Our allies and our enemies have been put on notice that things are gonna change in America's favor. You may disagree with that, its a free country so that is your choice.

Trump has no intention of our being an overbearing tyrant to the rest of the world [ if you think that is the case, please point out the specifics], but we do expect our guys to be on our side, protecting our interests...and the other guys to be on their own nation's sides, Trump brings this up quite often...

And we do the dance from there.
 
We, however, do not need rainy day allies, allies that not only do not pay their fair share of their own defense burden but not even the agreed upon much lesser share.

Mattis has revealed himself more the globalist in his thinking. And by the way, he is not omniscient, Trumps instincts are far better, not as regimentally rigid as are Mattis'. You can side with Mattis, I can side with Trump, but Trump was elected as the President, not Mattis... you do understand that, correct?

Ummm, you do also understand that we, the Republicans, hold the Senate and so the confirmation process is on our side. Right? Our allies and our enemies have been put on notice that things are gonna change in America's favor. You may disagree with that, its a free country so that is your choice.

Trump has no intention of our being an overbearing tyrant to the rest of the world [ if you think that is the case, please point out the specifics], but we do expect our guys to be on our side, protecting our interests...and the other guys to be on their own nation's sides, Trump brings this up quite often...

And we do the dance from there.


Republicans in the Senate are angry at Trump's withdrawal from Syria. Lindsey Graham said his move was Obama-like. Last I heard only Rand Paul and Mike Lee are on Trump's side here. Even with his party in charge, Trump will find it difficult to find someone the GOP senators consider qualified who also meets Trump's needs.
 
Republicans in the Senate are angry at Trump's withdrawal from Syria. Lindsey Graham said his move was Obama-like. Last I heard only Rand Paul and Mike Lee are on Trump's side here. Even with his party in charge, Trump will find it difficult to find someone the GOP senators consider qualified who also meets Trump's needs.
Be not your precious heart worried, Trump will find a way, he always does.
 
Maybe Trump was being generous to an old soldier who had mostly served this nation well.

We'll likely find out.

Oh good Lord...you actually believe that!:lamo
 
"The more you read Mattis’s resignation letter, the clearer it becomes that Trump had not read it before he sent his tweet."

A tweet by Kaitlan Collins.



No, I don't know who she is, but yes, I was kind of surprised that Trump had such kind words for Mattis in spite of Mattis' damning resignation letter.

Either Trump didn't read it or he didn't understand it.



I'm waiting for some delayed reaction tweets from Trump where he walks back his praise of Mattis and gets closer to calling Mattis dumb as a rock.

I don't think Individual 1 knows how to read.

As usual, he made an ass of himself, and his cult followers have done the same...exponentially.
 
So you are so indicating that you have not a real clue as to whether he ever obtained the contents of the letter, that from this off the cuff to reporters statement right after he received the letter, you believe he never read it.

Either you are not reading my response or you are not reading my response.

Or a 3rd choice is you don't understand my response.

A 4th choice is that you are trolling me.

None of those bode well for your end of the "argument" (or "rant" which seems more appropriate from what words you have typed).


That is, simply put, a very stupid supposition and probably, if one wanted to put some effort into it, easily proven verifiably false.

Or you could stick your head in a koi pond and breathe goldfish effluent. I'm not sure the result would be much different on your end of the conversation.


Guano? Probably.

Why are you asking me why he said it was very nice...

I am not. I am assuming you were not there. Even if you were, I would assume you would not know.

all those scenarios could be true some of them could be, maybe none of them are true. Trump called it very nice for whatEVER reasons he so desired at the moment. Could have been the words Kim J said upon delivery... I don't know and stupid suppositions merely due to the fact that you dont like/disagree with the man only transforms those stupid suppositions into very stupid suppositions.

Yano?

Book 'em Danno.

It is known by whom [ the left? Bwwwhahahahahaha, that is solely par ] that Trump doesn't like reading? I know a lotta lefties here who don't like reading, complain of it ALL the time.

OK. Don't remember discussing any of them. Not sure I want to start discussing them now. They are not my president.

Does that make them stupid? No, its more the whole lefty off the rails thing that leaves us little doubt of that.

"Based on past actions and character"... too too funny... and again, pretty damn lame. :lamo

Based on no political discussion but solely lame, unsupportable speculation... epic failure. But I am being redundant. My bad.

Damn. Broken clock, twice a day, you nailed it.

If you are like many lamers here, you will do the "tldr" thing to this post

Why judge me against others?

...lol and so this is a shout out to all them using that additional lameness as to exactly what you think of them.

:applaud

I have seen that in my short time here. As a newcomer, I looked at their posting history basics (# of posts, join date) and simply assumed they already knew your MO. They handle things a bit differently than I; I would have just ignored you.
 
Either you are not reading my response or you are not reading my response.

Or a 3rd choice is you don't understand my response.

A 4th choice is that you are trolling me.

None of those bode well for your end of the "argument" (or "rant" which seems more appropriate from what words you have typed).




Or you could stick your head in a koi pond and breathe goldfish effluent. I'm not sure the result would be much different on your end of the conversation.



Guano? Probably.



I am not. I am assuming you were not there. Even if you were, I would assume you would not know.



Book 'em Danno.



OK. Don't remember discussing any of them. Not sure I want to start discussing them now. They are not my president.



Damn. Broken clock, twice a day, you nailed it.



Why judge me against others?



I have seen that in my short time here. As a newcomer, I looked at their posting history basics (# of posts, join date) and simply assumed they already knew your MO. They handle things a bit differently than I; I would have just ignored you.
Too funny, "newcomer"...

Somehow you missed the most obvious 5th choice, [which to those knowledgable would have been the first ] as aptly described in my previous replies, being that yours is an obliviously stupid supposition... and why you are spending so much time defending such a laughably ludicrous stab in the dark is, well, rather takes it from simply laugable to the hilarious.

You know as well as I do, if you have anything at all going on up there, that the letter from Kim was read and understood. Case closed.

Ummmm, in debate, those of us who actually do it here don't gainfully argue by advising others to stick their head in the various ponds that they themselves seemingly frequent, much less advise to start sniffing filth to which they themselves are apparently addicted. Are you a "koi pond" pusher are ya, pimping goldfish ****, are ya? It is on par with leftist thinking, so go ahead, cut a line of the **** using Occam's razor... then take a sniff, eh?

Naughty naughty.

This next is just additional inconsequential blather that most certainly is not debate. Reaching way down deep for those profoundly lame answers are ya?

Now, wow, completely backing off your claim that Trump doesn't read, then forward to your lame "character and past actions" claims... cannot support any of those, so I would agree, dropping them like a hot rock is your best bet. Got it.

Listen, I address lefties here on site all the time, a reply post of mine is not simply to you, its a shot across the bow of all lefties... even if they label themselves independents, moderates, etc... especially those who want to ridicule the president for made up ****, like yours, and then go on to be representative of that which they say they despise.

In this case, those who hate to read.

Yano? No, of course not, you've easily proven that you are horribly challenged that way.

Hey, after getting their butts kicked every time, if it were me I would probably start ignoring me also. And I hope ya do, you have provided no intellectual stimulation, none, just another all too common waste of my time. Some initially show so much promise... then they start typing their replies. Such tripe as yourself express here.

Ah, such is life. Still in search of a worthy opponent from the other side... next... step right up...
 
Republicans in the Senate are angry at Trump's withdrawal from Syria.

Yes, I saw them drinking tea yesterday. Their pinkies were genuinely quivering with discomfort and concern.

Screen Shot 2018-12-21 at 9.00.47 PM.jpg
 
Last edited:
Yes, I saw them drinking tea yesterday. Their pinkies were genuinely quivering with discomfort and concern.

View attachment 67246502



LOL. Yes, they do talk a lot and often not follow through. But at least it's some resistance, and in this instance it is widespread.

Will be interesting to see if Trump can find someone with a satisfactory defense resume who shares his vision on letting Russia take charge in the Middle East.
 
LOL. Yes, they do talk a lot and often not follow through. But at least it's some resistance, and in this instance it is widespread.

Will be interesting to see if Trump can find someone with a satisfactory defense resume who shares his vision on letting Russia take charge in the Middle East.

D45B92C8-B867-479A-9725-123913876ACA.jpg

The next two years of republican senators furrowing their brows in concern will definitely put trump in his place.
 
Back
Top Bottom