So much for those brilliantly disappearing headlines. And you know what's best? That by doing so he opened up himself and others present to investigation, including preservation of documents, interviews and subpoenas. Oh Jared boy? Oh Jared dear boy, fetch me my Christmas party list, will you dear boy?
So now there's story and lawsuit alleging that Trump himself was involved with and told Fox to run the fake Seth Rich murder story a couple months ago?
It is impossible for this man to be more stupid. God help us when the shit its the fan with NK or something else. We are fucked.
I'm struggling to wrap my head around the idea that his approval ratings are that high. He is utterly lacking in redeeming qualities. I wouldn't hire him to mow my lawn, let alone vote for him to be president. Are there that many angry people in this country who just wanted to vote for the embodiment of their rage?
No.
The majority of his base support comes from simple yokels that think chocolate milk comes from brown cows and that he is going to make America great again by building a wall.
I'm struggling to wrap my head around the idea that his approval ratings are that high. He is utterly lacking in redeeming qualities. I wouldn't hire him to mow my lawn, let alone vote for him to be president. Are there that many angry people in this country who just wanted to vote for the embodiment of their rage?
No.
The majority of his base support comes from simple yokels that think chocolate milk comes from brown cows and that he is going to make America great again by building a wall.
He touched on a lot of "tropes" that rile people up
Those who think that Obama's presidency was solely to place Obamaphones in the hands of every black person who refuses to work.
Those who think that we can go back to the 50s, where entire communities work at the same factory, go to the same church, can leave doors unlocked, and cool apple pies on every windowsill
Those who hate people, especially politicians who are intellectual and educated.
Those who think we can go back to a time without smartphones, video games, and computers, and 10 year olds will be forced to do manual farm labor
Those who want to beat our chests and threaten to attack any nation or people at any perceived current or possible future slight.
Those elderlies who have been searching for another Eisenhower for 50-60 years and would believe a rock is Eisenhower if he was an Elephant and posed in front of troops rattling a bunch of sabers.
I'm struggling to wrap my head around the idea that his approval ratings are that high. He is utterly lacking in redeeming qualities. I wouldn't hire him to mow my lawn, let alone vote for him to be president. Are there that many angry people in this country who just wanted to vote for the embodiment of their rage?
No.
The majority of his base support comes from simple yokels that think chocolate milk comes from brown cows and that he is going to make America great again by building a wall.
He touched on a lot of "tropes" that rile people up
Those who think that Obama's presidency was solely to place Obamaphones in the hands of every black person who refuses to work.
Those who think that we can go back to the 50s, where entire communities work at the same factory, go to the same church, can leave doors unlocked, and cool apple pies on every windowsill
Those who hate people, especially politicians who are intellectual and educated.
Those who think we can go back to a time without smartphones, video games, and computers, and 10 year olds will be forced to do manual farm labor
Those who want to beat our chests and threaten to attack any nation or people at any perceived current or possible future slight.
Those elderlies who have been searching for another Eisenhower for 50-60 years and would believe a rock is Eisenhower if he was an Elephant and posed in front of troops rattling a bunch of sabers.
Yup.
The deep, dark, troubling part of the American psyche.
Ultimately revealing there is still much work to be done.
Nine years ago, Glenn Greenwald published a book, Great American Hypocrites, about our cultural/ political infatuation with the swaggering war hero stereotype. Think John Wayne; key point being that Wayne avoided combat at a time when his peers (such as actual war hero Jimmy Stewart) were fighting in WWII. But we love, we idealize, the loud swagger, regardless of what is real. In that vein, 45 is a loud, bullying, empty suit, all bluster, no substance, no muscle, just posturing.
From http://brooklynrail.org/2008/05/express/a-party-of-frauds : <<<To this day, John Wayne is the prototype of the uber-patriotic, uber-masculine, uber-courageous Moral Republican Warrior. His imagery is the template that pioneered the brand and that the Right uses to this day to build up their political leaders. In 1995—18 years after his death—he remained the most admired film actor in America. The Los Angeles Times said that, even nearly two decades after his death, his image “exemplified the ideal American fighting man.” After 9/11, Peggy Noonan wrote a column hailing the return of “the Duke”—of “real men” who bellow: “Yer in a whole lotta trouble now, Osama-boy.”
Yet John Wayne was one of America’s biggest and most repugnant frauds—in exactly the way that most modern right-wing leaders are. At a time when virtually nobody avoided combat, Wayne did exactly that, using the most dishonorable means imaginable, throughout all of World War II. Because the most successful male actors, including older ones, went to fight, he was able to stay in Hollywood and become extremely rich playing war heroes. He spent the rest of his life glorifying every American war and accusing war opponents of being cowards, Communists and traitors. He crusaded for traditional American morality, attacking others whom he perceived to deviate, while he engaged in compulsive womanizing and adultery, repeatedly breaking up his own family, and wallowing in pill addictions. Before there was Rush Limbaugh, Dick Cheney, Newt Gingrich, George Bush, Bill Kristol, David Vitter, and even John McCain—there was John Wayne. One finds key parts of Wayne in each of them. To this day, he’s the role model for how the Right conducts itself and the methods they use to swindle the American public.>>>
And while Greenwald is specifically attacking Republicans/ conservatives for this behavior, I think there is an important lesson in critical thinking here for all of us.
All those who seek to destroy the liberties of a democratic nation ought to know that war is the surest and shortest means to accomplish it.
So now there's story and lawsuit alleging that Trump himself was involved with and told Fox to run the fake Seth Rich murder story a couple months ago?
It is impossible for this man to be more stupid. God help us when the shit its the fan with NK or something else. We are fucked.
Behind Fox News' Baseless Seth Rich Story: The Untold Tale
Is the reporter's chief criticism that of glorifying warriors, or that some warriors are frauds. I would ague both have been a part of human nature for almost 3k years+
I'm sorry, you think Preet and Lindsey are wrong? I think you may have the finger pointed in the wrong direction.
Preet dead wrong...Lindsays opinion can't be wrong technically since he uses the word inappropriate. Any poli sci gurus know more than a US attorney?
A unitary executive doesn't mean they have limitless power. The DOJ didn't even exist when the Constitution was written. It's the nation's chief law enforcement tool. It's not Trump's personal vendetta squad. You actually still have to meet the standards of prosecution in order to prosecute. Care to explain how Preet is wrong vs. just stating it as if it's a fact? I'm pretty sure he's a helluva lot more qualified than you considering he held the most prestigious US Attorney post in the country.
preet is banking on people being gullible and naive and trusting his sour grapes comments. for those that don't know, I'm of the opinion that the presidency has gained too much power over the last 18 years. anyone have any thoughts on why Congress let the office of independent counsel die in 1999? why would Congress let a very powerful check and balance to the president expire? an office for Congress independent of the AG and DoJ? if it were still around today, we wouldn't be having any conversation about Trump firing Sessions and orMueller, we wouldn't be talking about a president trying to "dictate prosecution". maybe preet knows
None of these criticisms have anything to do with your central point... evidently that Preet and Lindsey are wrong and Trump can prosecute his political enemies. Try addressing that point rather than trying to throw curve balls.
took last min vacation, what did I miss? trump cleaning house? I never responded the preets bs, sorry for the delay... anyway the vesting clause, the take care clause or faithful execution clause and of course the pardon prove preets tweet dead wrong. he should know this already (so should an informed citizenry)?
I'm struggling to wrap my head around the idea that his approval ratings are that high. He is utterly lacking in redeeming qualities. I wouldn't hire him to mow my lawn, let alone vote for him to be president. Are there that many angry people in this country who just wanted to vote for the embodiment of their rage?
No.
The majority of his base support comes from simple yokels that think chocolate milk comes from brown cows and that he is going to make America great again by building a wall.
He touched on a lot of "tropes" that rile people up
Those who think that Obama's presidency was solely to place Obamaphones in the hands of every black person who refuses to work.
Those who think that we can go back to the 50s, where entire communities work at the same factory, go to the same church, can leave doors unlocked, and cool apple pies on every windowsill
Those who hate people, especially politicians who are intellectual and educated.
Those who think we can go back to a time without smartphones, video games, and computers, and 10 year olds will be forced to do manual farm labor
Those who want to beat our chests and threaten to attack any nation or people at any perceived current or possible future slight.
Those elderlies who have been searching for another Eisenhower for 50-60 years and would believe a rock is Eisenhower if he was an Elephant and posed in front of troops rattling a bunch of sabers.
And that's a lot of people. After adjusting for the electoral college and what I'm suspecting will be brazen and transparent efforts to disenfranchise the non-white, maybe even the majority. See you in 2024.
1995 Milwaukee 1998 Alpine, Alpine 2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston 2004 Boston, Boston 2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty) 2011 Alpine, Alpine 2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
I'm sorry, you think Preet and Lindsey are wrong? I think you may have the finger pointed in the wrong direction.
Preet dead wrong...Lindsays opinion can't be wrong technically since he uses the word inappropriate. Any poli sci gurus know more than a US attorney?
A unitary executive doesn't mean they have limitless power. The DOJ didn't even exist when the Constitution was written. It's the nation's chief law enforcement tool. It's not Trump's personal vendetta squad. You actually still have to meet the standards of prosecution in order to prosecute. Care to explain how Preet is wrong vs. just stating it as if it's a fact? I'm pretty sure he's a helluva lot more qualified than you considering he held the most prestigious US Attorney post in the country.
preet is banking on people being gullible and naive and trusting his sour grapes comments. for those that don't know, I'm of the opinion that the presidency has gained too much power over the last 18 years. anyone have any thoughts on why Congress let the office of independent counsel die in 1999? why would Congress let a very powerful check and balance to the president expire? an office for Congress independent of the AG and DoJ? if it were still around today, we wouldn't be having any conversation about Trump firing Sessions and orMueller, we wouldn't be talking about a president trying to "dictate prosecution". maybe preet knows
None of these criticisms have anything to do with your central point... evidently that Preet and Lindsey are wrong and Trump can prosecute his political enemies. Try addressing that point rather than trying to throw curve balls.
took last min vacation, what did I miss? trump cleaning house? I never responded the preets bs, sorry for the delay... anyway the vesting clause, the take care clause or faithful execution clause and of course the pardon prove preets tweet dead wrong. he should know this already (so should an informed citizenry)?
So your reading of the Take Care clause (as an example) and the others is that the POTUS wields unlimited power to investigate and prosecute a person, regardless of whether that person is in actual violation of a statute. HRC has already been cleared by the FBI, yet that doesn't satisfy Trump (or you). You must believe that the Constitution bestows Kingly powers on the POTUS to make such an argument. Most humanoids read into it what it actually says "Take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed"..not to override professional prosecutors or create new laws on a whim. Yes, you are quite the informed citizenry aren't you, contorting your logic in 15 different ways to support Trump while simultaneously calling yourself progressive or liberal. As your king might say... SAD!
I'm sorry, you think Preet and Lindsey are wrong? I think you may have the finger pointed in the wrong direction.
Preet dead wrong...Lindsays opinion can't be wrong technically since he uses the word inappropriate. Any poli sci gurus know more than a US attorney?
A unitary executive doesn't mean they have limitless power. The DOJ didn't even exist when the Constitution was written. It's the nation's chief law enforcement tool. It's not Trump's personal vendetta squad. You actually still have to meet the standards of prosecution in order to prosecute. Care to explain how Preet is wrong vs. just stating it as if it's a fact? I'm pretty sure he's a helluva lot more qualified than you considering he held the most prestigious US Attorney post in the country.
preet is banking on people being gullible and naive and trusting his sour grapes comments. for those that don't know, I'm of the opinion that the presidency has gained too much power over the last 18 years. anyone have any thoughts on why Congress let the office of independent counsel die in 1999? why would Congress let a very powerful check and balance to the president expire? an office for Congress independent of the AG and DoJ? if it were still around today, we wouldn't be having any conversation about Trump firing Sessions and orMueller, we wouldn't be talking about a president trying to "dictate prosecution". maybe preet knows
None of these criticisms have anything to do with your central point... evidently that Preet and Lindsey are wrong and Trump can prosecute his political enemies. Try addressing that point rather than trying to throw curve balls.
took last min vacation, what did I miss? trump cleaning house? I never responded the preets bs, sorry for the delay... anyway the vesting clause, the take care clause or faithful execution clause and of course the pardon prove preets tweet dead wrong. he should know this already (so should an informed citizenry)?
So your reading of the Take Care clause (as an example) and the others is that the POTUS wields unlimited power to investigate and prosecute a person, regardless of whether that person is in actual violation of a statute. HRC has already been cleared by the FBI, yet that doesn't satisfy Trump (or you). You must believe that the Constitution bestows Kingly powers on the POTUS to make such an argument. Most humanoids read into it what it actually says "Take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed"..not to override professional prosecutors or create new laws on a whim. Yes, you are quite the informed citizenry aren't you, contorting your logic in 15 different ways to support Trump while simultaneously calling yourself progressive or liberal. As your king might say... SAD!
Nope, you're saying all that, you're also bringing in Hilliary for some reason. I'm simply saying the president does have the power to dictate who gets prosecuted and who gets let off, obvious clear contradiction to the prestigious US attorney Preet Bharara tweet. Try more rebuttal and less of putting words in mouths.
I'm sorry, you think Preet and Lindsey are wrong? I think you may have the finger pointed in the wrong direction.
Preet dead wrong...Lindsays opinion can't be wrong technically since he uses the word inappropriate. Any poli sci gurus know more than a US attorney?
A unitary executive doesn't mean they have limitless power. The DOJ didn't even exist when the Constitution was written. It's the nation's chief law enforcement tool. It's not Trump's personal vendetta squad. You actually still have to meet the standards of prosecution in order to prosecute. Care to explain how Preet is wrong vs. just stating it as if it's a fact? I'm pretty sure he's a helluva lot more qualified than you considering he held the most prestigious US Attorney post in the country.
preet is banking on people being gullible and naive and trusting his sour grapes comments. for those that don't know, I'm of the opinion that the presidency has gained too much power over the last 18 years. anyone have any thoughts on why Congress let the office of independent counsel die in 1999? why would Congress let a very powerful check and balance to the president expire? an office for Congress independent of the AG and DoJ? if it were still around today, we wouldn't be having any conversation about Trump firing Sessions and orMueller, we wouldn't be talking about a president trying to "dictate prosecution". maybe preet knows
None of these criticisms have anything to do with your central point... evidently that Preet and Lindsey are wrong and Trump can prosecute his political enemies. Try addressing that point rather than trying to throw curve balls.
took last min vacation, what did I miss? trump cleaning house? I never responded the preets bs, sorry for the delay... anyway the vesting clause, the take care clause or faithful execution clause and of course the pardon prove preets tweet dead wrong. he should know this already (so should an informed citizenry)?
So your reading of the Take Care clause (as an example) and the others is that the POTUS wields unlimited power to investigate and prosecute a person, regardless of whether that person is in actual violation of a statute. HRC has already been cleared by the FBI, yet that doesn't satisfy Trump (or you). You must believe that the Constitution bestows Kingly powers on the POTUS to make such an argument. Most humanoids read into it what it actually says "Take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed"..not to override professional prosecutors or create new laws on a whim. Yes, you are quite the informed citizenry aren't you, contorting your logic in 15 different ways to support Trump while simultaneously calling yourself progressive or liberal. As your king might say... SAD!
Nope, you're saying all that, you're also bringing in Hilliary for some reason. I'm simply saying the president does have the power to dictate who gets prosecuted and who gets let off, obvious clear contradiction to the prestigious US attorney Preet Bharara tweet. Try more rebuttal and less of putting words in mouths.
The President can dictate the veracity under which specific laws are prosecuted (marijuana laws are a good example). However, that person can only be prosecuted within a statute where there is a probability that it was violated. Hillary is being brought up because that's the actual issue at hand in both Preet's and Graham's tweet. She was investigated and ultimately cleared. No amount of Trump twitting can actually create a violation of a statute.
I'm struggling to wrap my head around the idea that his approval ratings are that high. He is utterly lacking in redeeming qualities. I wouldn't hire him to mow my lawn, let alone vote for him to be president. Are there that many angry people in this country who just wanted to vote for the embodiment of their rage?
No.
The majority of his base support comes from simple yokels that think chocolate milk comes from brown cows and that he is going to make America great again by building a wall.
He touched on a lot of "tropes" that rile people up
Those who think that Obama's presidency was solely to place Obamaphones in the hands of every black person who refuses to work.
Those who think that we can go back to the 50s, where entire communities work at the same factory, go to the same church, can leave doors unlocked, and cool apple pies on every windowsill
Those who hate people, especially politicians who are intellectual and educated.
Those who think we can go back to a time without smartphones, video games, and computers, and 10 year olds will be forced to do manual farm labor
Those who want to beat our chests and threaten to attack any nation or people at any perceived current or possible future slight.
Those elderlies who have been searching for another Eisenhower for 50-60 years and would believe a rock is Eisenhower if he was an Elephant and posed in front of troops rattling a bunch of sabers.
And that's a lot of people. After adjusting for the electoral college and what I'm suspecting will be brazen and transparent efforts to disenfranchise the non-white, maybe even the majority. See you in 2024.
Possibly... but even as the economy continues to improve, he is leaking voters a lot faster than I imagined. I thought I saw he has completely lost something like 10% of his voters.... which is gargantuan considering how the 2016 election went.... especially since his opposition is as motivated as ever and I dont expect anyone to sleep on Trump. I expect him to erode some more base. The economy is going to be due to recess a bit. The 50's utopia isnt going to return in any way. This wall isnt going to happen, and if they try, it will be an incomplete waste of money. The tax "plan" is going to come up and once people learn that they will not 'save' much in taxes (many middle class expected to increase).... while the wealthy make out like bandits, it will further erode. I dont think anyone should be complacent or count on it... but if a general election were to happen today, against nearly ANY opponent, it would be a landslide. Electoral and popular.
I think the only way Trump can salvage a chance at 2020 is for a war/large scale military action where many people unite behind him, like GWB in 2001. I wouldn't put it past him and Bannon to fabricate a pretext for war (if we arent witnessing it with NK).
well, hopefully the Mueller investigation/findings could kick their legs out before that. You would also think the "Ivanka Wing" would be against killing innocents and possibly sway him.
well, hopefully the Mueller investigation/findings could kick their legs out before that. You would also think the "Ivanka Wing" would be against killing innocents and possibly sway him.
Ivanka doesn't have an ounce of sway with her lecherous father. She's an attractive prop that he trots out to reflect well on him. His past statements and behavior make that obvious.
I'm sorry, you think Preet and Lindsey are wrong? I think you may have the finger pointed in the wrong direction.
Preet dead wrong...Lindsays opinion can't be wrong technically since he uses the word inappropriate. Any poli sci gurus know more than a US attorney?
A unitary executive doesn't mean they have limitless power. The DOJ didn't even exist when the Constitution was written. It's the nation's chief law enforcement tool. It's not Trump's personal vendetta squad. You actually still have to meet the standards of prosecution in order to prosecute. Care to explain how Preet is wrong vs. just stating it as if it's a fact? I'm pretty sure he's a helluva lot more qualified than you considering he held the most prestigious US Attorney post in the country.
preet is banking on people being gullible and naive and trusting his sour grapes comments. for those that don't know, I'm of the opinion that the presidency has gained too much power over the last 18 years. anyone have any thoughts on why Congress let the office of independent counsel die in 1999? why would Congress let a very powerful check and balance to the president expire? an office for Congress independent of the AG and DoJ? if it were still around today, we wouldn't be having any conversation about Trump firing Sessions and orMueller, we wouldn't be talking about a president trying to "dictate prosecution". maybe preet knows
None of these criticisms have anything to do with your central point... evidently that Preet and Lindsey are wrong and Trump can prosecute his political enemies. Try addressing that point rather than trying to throw curve balls.
took last min vacation, what did I miss? trump cleaning house? I never responded the preets bs, sorry for the delay... anyway the vesting clause, the take care clause or faithful execution clause and of course the pardon prove preets tweet dead wrong. he should know this already (so should an informed citizenry)?
So your reading of the Take Care clause (as an example) and the others is that the POTUS wields unlimited power to investigate and prosecute a person, regardless of whether that person is in actual violation of a statute. HRC has already been cleared by the FBI, yet that doesn't satisfy Trump (or you). You must believe that the Constitution bestows Kingly powers on the POTUS to make such an argument. Most humanoids read into it what it actually says "Take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed"..not to override professional prosecutors or create new laws on a whim. Yes, you are quite the informed citizenry aren't you, contorting your logic in 15 different ways to support Trump while simultaneously calling yourself progressive or liberal. As your king might say... SAD!
Nope, you're saying all that, you're also bringing in Hilliary for some reason. I'm simply saying the president does have the power to dictate who gets prosecuted and who gets let off, obvious clear contradiction to the prestigious US attorney Preet Bharara tweet. Try more rebuttal and less of putting words in mouths.
You wish for Trump to prosecute people in the absence of evidence of a crime being committed? Keep grasping and misrepresenting. Order up!
well, hopefully the Mueller investigation/findings could kick their legs out before that. You would also think the "Ivanka Wing" would be against killing innocents and possibly sway him.
Ivanka doesn't have an ounce of sway with her lecherous father. She's an attractive prop that he trots out to reflect well on him. His past statements and behavior make that obvious.
well, hopefully the Mueller investigation/findings could kick their legs out before that. You would also think the "Ivanka Wing" would be against killing innocents and possibly sway him.
The Ivanka wing is completely corrupt in my opinion. She's no different than the rest of the clan. Ironically, if there is anyone that would prevent a war, it would be Bannon I would think. He's more aligned with the Pat Buchanan wing and they are fiercely isolationist.
I'm sorry, you think Preet and Lindsey are wrong? I think you may have the finger pointed in the wrong direction.
Preet dead wrong...Lindsays opinion can't be wrong technically since he uses the word inappropriate. Any poli sci gurus know more than a US attorney?
A unitary executive doesn't mean they have limitless power. The DOJ didn't even exist when the Constitution was written. It's the nation's chief law enforcement tool. It's not Trump's personal vendetta squad. You actually still have to meet the standards of prosecution in order to prosecute. Care to explain how Preet is wrong vs. just stating it as if it's a fact? I'm pretty sure he's a helluva lot more qualified than you considering he held the most prestigious US Attorney post in the country.
preet is banking on people being gullible and naive and trusting his sour grapes comments. for those that don't know, I'm of the opinion that the presidency has gained too much power over the last 18 years. anyone have any thoughts on why Congress let the office of independent counsel die in 1999? why would Congress let a very powerful check and balance to the president expire? an office for Congress independent of the AG and DoJ? if it were still around today, we wouldn't be having any conversation about Trump firing Sessions and orMueller, we wouldn't be talking about a president trying to "dictate prosecution". maybe preet knows
None of these criticisms have anything to do with your central point... evidently that Preet and Lindsey are wrong and Trump can prosecute his political enemies. Try addressing that point rather than trying to throw curve balls.
took last min vacation, what did I miss? trump cleaning house? I never responded the preets bs, sorry for the delay... anyway the vesting clause, the take care clause or faithful execution clause and of course the pardon prove preets tweet dead wrong. he should know this already (so should an informed citizenry)?
So your reading of the Take Care clause (as an example) and the others is that the POTUS wields unlimited power to investigate and prosecute a person, regardless of whether that person is in actual violation of a statute. HRC has already been cleared by the FBI, yet that doesn't satisfy Trump (or you). You must believe that the Constitution bestows Kingly powers on the POTUS to make such an argument. Most humanoids read into it what it actually says "Take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed"..not to override professional prosecutors or create new laws on a whim. Yes, you are quite the informed citizenry aren't you, contorting your logic in 15 different ways to support Trump while simultaneously calling yourself progressive or liberal. As your king might say... SAD!
Nope, you're saying all that, you're also bringing in Hilliary for some reason. I'm simply saying the president does have the power to dictate who gets prosecuted and who gets let off, obvious clear contradiction to the prestigious US attorney Preet Bharara tweet. Try more rebuttal and less of putting words in mouths.
The President can dictate the veracity under which specific laws are prosecuted (marijuana laws are a good example). However, that person can only be prosecuted within a statute where there is a probability that it was violated. Hillary is being brought up because that's the actual issue at hand in both Preet's and Graham's tweet. She was investigated and ultimately cleared. No amount of Trump twitting can actually create a violation of a statute.
I stated that preets tweet was dead wrong..."Right. In America we don't let the President dictate who gets prosecuted and who gets let off." When you apply the vesting clause, take care clause and pardons he couldn't be more wrong. I never referenced context nor do I care about the issue at hand, Hilliary or otherwise. My issue is with a prestigious US attorney tweeting "inaccuracies" (instead of calling it a lie) confident that his followers know little about the powers vested in the president and expanded over the last 18 years. I don't get too involved in congressional dog and pony investigations, nothing ever comes of them. All I remember about the "Hilliary investigations" were a bunch of immunity deals, extraordinary number of 5th pleadings and the word INTENT / INTEND. In any case, yes it is my opinion based on the last 18 years of expanding presidential powers without oversight checks and balances that a better description for our presidents is emperor. Does anything illustrate empirical powers over the last 18 years than bombing half the planet without a declaration of war?
^^ You're criticizing the Us Attorney in general, whereas he was making a very specific point regarding HRC and the tweets Trump was unleashing.
Don't let context and nuance get in the way of misrepresenting. Congress still exists. That they've abdicated their responsibilities is not Preet's fault but rather a reflection of them and the voters that keep them there.
Is the reporter's chief criticism that of glorifying warriors, or that some warriors are frauds. I would ague both have been a part of human nature for almost 3k years+
If you're replying to me, I'd say his point is that our culture, GOP culture in particular, glorifies the trappings of hyper-masculinity, posturing over action, dick-swinging over actual courage and bravery. If you read the links I shared, he points to John Wayne as the archetype, with more contemporary examples being Rush Limbaugh, Dick Cheney, or, here in 2017, that fat jackass who wanted to challenge Susan Collins to a duel or the Orange Menace himself. The trappings of manliness, the "good thing you held me back, otherwise I would've TOTALLY kicked his ass!" attitude, the eagerness to dismiss opponents by painting them as weak and unmanly despite their actual service record (Jimmy Carter, John Kerry), loud threats and talk of war from men who never served who are hiding behind microphones and bully pulpits, that sort of thing.
So the issue isn't glorifying warriors; it's closer to "some warriors are frauds." It's people who avoided the draft who like to pretend that they are the stars of their own action movie franchise. Jimmy Carter is ten times the man Limbaugh or Agent Orange ever could hope to be.
All those who seek to destroy the liberties of a democratic nation ought to know that war is the surest and shortest means to accomplish it.
Comments
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
www.cluthelee.com
www.cluthe.com
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/trump_administration/prez_track_jul31
It is impossible for this man to be more stupid. God help us when the shit its the fan with NK or something else. We are fucked.
The majority of his base support comes from simple yokels that think chocolate milk comes from brown cows and that he is going to make America great again by building a wall.
Those who think that Obama's presidency was solely to place Obamaphones in the hands of every black person who refuses to work.
Those who think that we can go back to the 50s, where entire communities work at the same factory, go to the same church, can leave doors unlocked, and cool apple pies on every windowsill
Those who hate people, especially politicians who are intellectual and educated.
Those who think we can go back to a time without smartphones, video games, and computers, and 10 year olds will be forced to do manual farm labor
Those who want to beat our chests and threaten to attack any nation or people at any perceived current or possible future slight.
Those elderlies who have been searching for another Eisenhower for 50-60 years and would believe a rock is Eisenhower if he was an Elephant and posed in front of troops rattling a bunch of sabers.
The deep, dark, troubling part of the American psyche.
Ultimately revealing there is still much work to be done.
From http://brooklynrail.org/2008/05/express/a-party-of-frauds :
<<<To this day, John Wayne is the prototype of the uber-patriotic, uber-masculine, uber-courageous Moral Republican Warrior. His imagery is the template that pioneered the brand and that the Right uses to this day to build up their political leaders. In 1995—18 years after his death—he remained the most admired film actor in America. The Los Angeles Times said that, even nearly two decades after his death, his image “exemplified the ideal American fighting man.” After 9/11, Peggy Noonan wrote a column hailing the return of “the Duke”—of “real men” who bellow: “Yer in a whole lotta trouble now, Osama-boy.”
Yet John Wayne was one of America’s biggest and most repugnant frauds—in exactly the way that most modern right-wing leaders are. At a time when virtually nobody avoided combat, Wayne did exactly that, using the most dishonorable means imaginable, throughout all of World War II. Because the most successful male actors, including older ones, went to fight, he was able to stay in Hollywood and become extremely rich playing war heroes. He spent the rest of his life glorifying every American war and accusing war opponents of being cowards, Communists and traitors. He crusaded for traditional American morality, attacking others whom he perceived to deviate, while he engaged in compulsive womanizing and adultery, repeatedly breaking up his own family, and wallowing in pill addictions. Before there was Rush Limbaugh, Dick Cheney, Newt Gingrich, George Bush, Bill Kristol, David Vitter, and even John McCain—there was John Wayne. One finds key parts of Wayne in each of them. To this day, he’s the role model for how the Right conducts itself and the methods they use to swindle the American public.>>>
More here: http://www.antiwar.com/orig/greenwald.php
And while Greenwald is specifically attacking Republicans/ conservatives for this behavior, I think there is an important lesson in critical thinking here for all of us.
http://www.npr.org/2017/08/01/540783715/lawsuit-alleges-fox-news-and-trump-supporter-created-fake-news-story
I never responded the preets bs, sorry for the delay... anyway the vesting clause, the take care clause or faithful execution clause and of course the pardon prove preets tweet dead wrong. he should know this already (so should an informed citizenry)?
anyway a decent read regarding the office of independent counsel
https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2017/05/19/politics-could-still-block-muellers-investigation-i-know-i-wrote-the-rules/
2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
Yes, you are quite the informed citizenry aren't you, contorting your logic in 15 different ways to support Trump while simultaneously calling yourself progressive or liberal. As your king might say... SAD!
Try more rebuttal and less of putting words in mouths.
I think the only way Trump can salvage a chance at 2020 is for a war/large scale military action where many people unite behind him, like GWB in 2001. I wouldn't put it past him and Bannon to fabricate a pretext for war (if we arent witnessing it with NK).
My biggest fear.
We can all laugh at Trump's follies, but keep in mind there is the potential for something brutal.
She's an attractive prop that he trots out to reflect well on him.
His past statements and behavior make that obvious.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
When you apply the vesting clause, take care clause and pardons he couldn't be more wrong.
I never referenced context nor do I care about the issue at hand, Hilliary or otherwise. My issue is with a prestigious US attorney tweeting "inaccuracies" (instead of calling it a lie) confident that his followers know little about the powers vested in the president and expanded over the last 18 years.
I don't get too involved in congressional dog and pony investigations, nothing ever comes of them. All I remember about the "Hilliary investigations" were a bunch of immunity deals, extraordinary number of 5th pleadings and the word INTENT / INTEND.
In any case, yes it is my opinion based on the last 18 years of expanding presidential powers without oversight checks and balances that a better description for our presidents is emperor.
Does anything illustrate empirical powers over the last 18 years than bombing half the planet without a declaration of war?
Last word is yours, I'm back to vacationing.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
If you're replying to me, I'd say his point is that our culture, GOP culture in particular, glorifies the trappings of hyper-masculinity, posturing over action, dick-swinging over actual courage and bravery. If you read the links I shared, he points to John Wayne as the archetype, with more contemporary examples being Rush Limbaugh, Dick Cheney, or, here in 2017, that fat jackass who wanted to challenge Susan Collins to a duel or the Orange Menace himself. The trappings of manliness, the "good thing you held me back, otherwise I would've TOTALLY kicked his ass!" attitude, the eagerness to dismiss opponents by painting them as weak and unmanly despite their actual service record (Jimmy Carter, John Kerry), loud threats and talk of war from men who never served who are hiding behind microphones and bully pulpits, that sort of thing.
So the issue isn't glorifying warriors; it's closer to "some warriors are frauds." It's people who avoided the draft who like to pretend that they are the stars of their own action movie franchise. Jimmy Carter is ten times the man Limbaugh or Agent Orange ever could hope to be.