Donald Trump
Comments
-
The subpoena is not for Congress to interfere with the process, it's about conducting oversight on any executive function, which is their established duty. You're right that they cannot veto a clearance, but they can and should investigate the process and circumstances that overrode the career employee's decision to not grant it.Halifax2TheMax said:
You’ll (in the general sense) spend the next 20 years litigating executive privilege. Congress would need to pass s law requiring all executive branch appointments, advisers, aides, or anyone having access to classified materials would be required to go through the same security clearance process as any other executive branch employee. A formal process for exemptions would have to be established and requests vetted. All of which would have to be written so as to withstand a SC challenge as impinging upon executive privilege.mrussel1 said:
I disagree. While you're right that it's an executive branch function, it's critical that we understand who has top secret access and why they were denied initially. Depending in the circumstances, this could easily be a new article to add. I would argue that it's at least as important as the obstruction chargesHalifax2TheMax said:
Security clearance issue is dead in the water as the POTUS has the legal authority to grant clearances, just as they do to declassify as an exercise of their executive authority. Sure, hold hearings and get witness testimony to describe the red flags but it’s not a violation of law. Impeachment is the only way Team Trump Treason is held to some level of accountability.mrussel1 said:Testimony by McGahn and others will be in the official record. It's not necessary to start the articles on order for the testimony to be a part of the process.
The House has other, equally critical battles to wage, including the security clearance issue, which the White House has refused top cooperate with.0 -
I agree that holding hearings, carefully picking which issues are most important, are a very important way to expose the abuses that have occurred during this Presidency. If you take away people who are extremely in tune with politics on a daily basis and are not Trump supporters and people who are ardent Trump supporters, you are left with the majority of the country who are not keeping up with all of the scandals or are more concerned with issues that affect their daily life. (Although Trump's presidency can arguably be affecting people's lives without them being aware). They are not reading the Mueller report and are just seeing headlines that may or may not affect how they feel about this President.mrussel1 said:
I disagree. While you're right that it's an executive branch function, it's critical that we understand who has top secret access and why they were denied initially. Depending in the circumstances, this could easily be a new article to add. I would argue that it's at least as important as the obstruction chargesHalifax2TheMax said:
Security clearance issue is dead in the water as the POTUS has the legal authority to grant clearances, just as they do to declassify as an exercise of their executive authority. Sure, hold hearings and get witness testimony to describe the red flags but it’s not a violation of law. Impeachment is the only way Team Trump Treason is held to some level of accountability.mrussel1 said:Testimony by McGahn and others will be in the official record. It's not necessary to start the articles on order for the testimony to be a part of the process.
The House has other, equally critical battles to wage, including the security clearance issue, which the White House has refused top cooperate with.
If you have all of the people who are in the Mueller report - the inner circle of Trump staff that are the main information source for the Mueller report in the obstruction document. They are also prominent in the conspiracy document which was in part stymied by lying, stalling, destruction of evidence and encryption of data. Have all of these people come before the appropriate committee and air it in prime time and ask each of these people if what they said was correct. Also ask them why they lied or destroyed or encrypted. Ask their intent. They can not claim executive privilege or plead the 5th because they have already testified to these matters.
People will learn more about the Mueller report and perhaps what is missing in the report through the questioning of these major witnesses. Sure the Republicans will go all Uranium One and deep state and no collusion but that only really plays well with the ardent Trump supporters who we have excluded. The Republicans not taking a cyber act of war by Russia on our country seriously will make a lot of people uncomfortable. And if the Democrats carefully plan out their questions, this could be more effective than just moving to impeach.
For the other scandals that would be brought before the committees, air them in prime time and a lot of people will learn things that they had never known because of the insane amount of information this President and his administration produce. With the security clearances, there could also be a discussion of the anti-nepotism statute which Trump chose to ignore but which has been largely honored and considered a norm since 1967. The fact that they have financial and business interests which would make them ineligible for the clearances they clearly do not need or deserve will be exposed and people can see the facts and come to their own conclusions.
No obstruction, no collusion is an easy bumper sticker slogan and easier to digest than reading even the summaries of the Mueller report. There is no easy slogan that Democrats can create which encapsulates all the abuses. Saying Trump is bad/corrump/unfit does not help, it only plays into Trump's favorite playbook. Having his own people speaking about the abuses is more powerful. It has to be done carefully and there should not be any demonizing of Trump because that plays right into his victim role and twitter feed.
The candidates for President should stay away from discussing Trump because he makes himself the headline enough, there is no need to help him. Don't react to his childish tweets. Go about the business of oversight as a co-equal branch of government while also working on the issues important to most Americans.
If there is an impeachment it should be after all the redacted and background information is provided to the Committees and hearings are held which can educate and move public opinion on impeachment. They should definitely hold Trump responsible for abusing his power but it should be done without ferocity so that the the most important action - beating Trump in 2020 - is not harmed by over zealous actions (regardless of the appropriate reaction to his actions) and a tight rope needs to be walked with both oversight and beating Trump always balanced. Pelosi is good at this and thankfully she is the Speaker at this delicate time.0 -
Which is fine if you have a friendly witness but if you have Team Trump Treason lackeys then they’ll refuse to answer based on executive privilege or claim the same as the reason. It might make for dramatic television but it’ll be viewed the same way Dark of Night Nunes was viewed waving paper in the air and slinking off to the WH was, with a shrug, because there’s no violation of law.mrussel1 said:
The subpoena is not for Congress to interfere with the process, it's about conducting oversight on any executive function, which is their established duty. You're right that they cannot veto a clearance, but they can and should investigate the process and circumstances that overrode the career employee's decision to not grant it.Halifax2TheMax said:
You’ll (in the general sense) spend the next 20 years litigating executive privilege. Congress would need to pass s law requiring all executive branch appointments, advisers, aides, or anyone having access to classified materials would be required to go through the same security clearance process as any other executive branch employee. A formal process for exemptions would have to be established and requests vetted. All of which would have to be written so as to withstand a SC challenge as impinging upon executive privilege.mrussel1 said:
I disagree. While you're right that it's an executive branch function, it's critical that we understand who has top secret access and why they were denied initially. Depending in the circumstances, this could easily be a new article to add. I would argue that it's at least as important as the obstruction chargesHalifax2TheMax said:
Security clearance issue is dead in the water as the POTUS has the legal authority to grant clearances, just as they do to declassify as an exercise of their executive authority. Sure, hold hearings and get witness testimony to describe the red flags but it’s not a violation of law. Impeachment is the only way Team Trump Treason is held to some level of accountability.mrussel1 said:Testimony by McGahn and others will be in the official record. It's not necessary to start the articles on order for the testimony to be a part of the process.
The House has other, equally critical battles to wage, including the security clearance issue, which the White House has refused top cooperate with.
09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR;
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©0 -
I am completely with you on this.mrussel1 said:I understand and empathize the desire to address it and put it on the record. My opinion may change after hearing the testimony of McGahn and Mueller. For now, I'm loathe to do anything that increases his chances of reelection, and using history as a guide, this might.
I hate to sound like a politician, but I am data driven, so I'd like to see where independent Americans stand as well.
In a normal world, articles of impeachment should be drawn up immediately, but the world has shifted in the past two years and norms have been demolished.
Nothing should be done which harms chances of beating Trump in 2020. Investigate the shit out of him but the world has tilted and what seems obvious is not. Black is white, good is bad. It's a difficult dance for Congress.0 -
Good reasoned argumentnjnancy said:
I agree that holding hearings, carefully picking which issues are most important, are a very important way to expose the abuses that have occurred during this Presidency. If you take away people who are extremely in tune with politics on a daily basis and are not Trump supporters and people who are ardent Trump supporters, you are left with the majority of the country who are not keeping up with all of the scandals or are more concerned with issues that affect their daily life. (Although Trump's presidency can arguably be affecting people's lives without them being aware). They are not reading the Mueller report and are just seeing headlines that may or may not affect how they feel about this President.mrussel1 said:
I disagree. While you're right that it's an executive branch function, it's critical that we understand who has top secret access and why they were denied initially. Depending in the circumstances, this could easily be a new article to add. I would argue that it's at least as important as the obstruction chargesHalifax2TheMax said:
Security clearance issue is dead in the water as the POTUS has the legal authority to grant clearances, just as they do to declassify as an exercise of their executive authority. Sure, hold hearings and get witness testimony to describe the red flags but it’s not a violation of law. Impeachment is the only way Team Trump Treason is held to some level of accountability.mrussel1 said:Testimony by McGahn and others will be in the official record. It's not necessary to start the articles on order for the testimony to be a part of the process.
The House has other, equally critical battles to wage, including the security clearance issue, which the White House has refused top cooperate with.
If you have all of the people who are in the Mueller report - the inner circle of Trump staff that are the main information source for the Mueller report in the obstruction document. They are also prominent in the conspiracy document which was in part stymied by lying, stalling, destruction of evidence and encryption of data. Have all of these people come before the appropriate committee and air it in prime time and ask each of these people if what they said was correct. Also ask them why they lied or destroyed or encrypted. Ask their intent. They can not claim executive privilege or plead the 5th because they have already testified to these matters.
People will learn more about the Mueller report and perhaps what is missing in the report through the questioning of these major witnesses. Sure the Republicans will go all Uranium One and deep state and no collusion but that only really plays well with the ardent Trump supporters who we have excluded. The Republicans not taking a cyber act of war by Russia on our country seriously will make a lot of people uncomfortable. And if the Democrats carefully plan out their questions, this could be more effective than just moving to impeach.
For the other scandals that would be brought before the committees, air them in prime time and a lot of people will learn things that they had never known because of the insane amount of information this President and his administration produce. With the security clearances, there could also be a discussion of the anti-nepotism statute which Trump chose to ignore but which has been largely honored and considered a norm since 1967. The fact that they have financial and business interests which would make them ineligible for the clearances they clearly do not need or deserve will be exposed and people can see the facts and come to their own conclusions.
No obstruction, no collusion is an easy bumper sticker slogan and easier to digest than reading even the summaries of the Mueller report. There is no easy slogan that Democrats can create which encapsulates all the abuses. Saying Trump is bad/corrump/unfit does not help, it only plays into Trump's favorite playbook. Having his own people speaking about the abuses is more powerful. It has to be done carefully and there should not be any demonizing of Trump because that plays right into his victim role and twitter feed.
The candidates for President should stay away from discussing Trump because he makes himself the headline enough, there is no need to help him. Don't react to his childish tweets. Go about the business of oversight as a co-equal branch of government while also working on the issues important to most Americans.
If there is an impeachment it should be after all the redacted and background information is provided to the Committees and hearings are held which can educate and move public opinion on impeachment. They should definitely hold Trump responsible for abusing his power but it should be done without ferocity so that the the most important action - beating Trump in 2020 - is not harmed by over zealous actions (regardless of the appropriate reaction to his actions) and a tight rope needs to be walked with both oversight and beating Trump always balanced. Pelosi is good at this and thankfully she is the Speaker at this delicate time.0 -
Congress not doing anything legitimizes trump and his actions and lowers their chances in 2020.njnancy said:
I am completely with you on this.mrussel1 said:I understand and empathize the desire to address it and put it on the record. My opinion may change after hearing the testimony of McGahn and Mueller. For now, I'm loathe to do anything that increases his chances of reelection, and using history as a guide, this might.
I hate to sound like a politician, but I am data driven, so I'd like to see where independent Americans stand as well.
In a normal world, articles of impeachment should be drawn up immediately, but the world has shifted in the past two years and norms have been demolished.
Nothing should be done which harms chances of beating Trump in 2020. Investigate the shit out of him but the world has tilted and what seems obvious is not. Black is white, good is bad. It's a difficult dance for Congress.0 -
I just fired off letters just like this to my state's members of the House of Representatives. First Class Mail bitches.
Turns out they like the paper yo.The Honorable Steny Hoyer
Majority Leader US House of Representatives1705 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Majority Leader Hoyer:
The redacted Mueller Report documents both unethical and criminal behavior by President Don Trump. As an unabashed proponent of impeachment since he took the oath, I believe that the Mueller Investigation, the related investigations, and just watching TV for the past 24 months have shown solid evidence that Don Trump has committed both crimes and misdemeanors while serving in office.
If Don Trump directed Michael Cohen to make an excessive campaign contribution, a crime that Michael Cohen has already been sentenced for, and then Don Trump paid Cohen back on lay-a-way while he was President, well…I’m not an attorney…but that seems really illegal. Michael Cohen would not have made ANY “contribution” to anyone, if not for Don Trump.
If Don Trump’s inability to convince White House Lawyer Don McGahn to have Dept. Attorney General Rod Rosenstein fire the Special Counsel Robert Mueller is not considered Obstruction of Justice, then shouldn’t the ability to successfully convince Dept. Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to write a letter about the Clinton e-mail issue as a predicate for firing FBI Director James Comey be considered Obstruction? Don Trump went on TV and admitted to NBC’s Lester Holt that he fired Director Comey because of Russia. He had a meeting in the oval office with Russian officials and claimed the Russia “pressure” was off him now because he fired that “nut-job” Comey.
Much like shouting fire in a movie theater, agitating even one person to violence in a large group of people is illegal! When a member of the audience jumped onto a riser and attacked a cameraman from the BBC during a Don Trump MAGA “rally” held in El Paso Texas on February 11th, that is considered disturbing the peace and/or disorderly conduct. Again, I’m not an attorney, but in the state of Texas, that is a misdemeanor. There is video of this incident easily found online.
I have many concerns about this President’s fitness for office. He likens himself as an authoritarian, a fascist, really. Combined with nonstop lies, the racist overtones, and an endless supply of bad ideas, Don Trump uses fear for motivation and is more divisive than any other WORLD LEADER that I can remember in my 52 years. I understand that you cannot impeach someone because of policy differences. I am not suggesting that. He has committed actual crimes that the Mueller Report painstakingly documents. Some have suggested that the Mueller Report is the blueprint to impeachment.
To impeach the President is something that must be initiated in the House of Representatives. Knowing of his crimes, I believe that you have the responsibility to initiate and participate in the impeachment procedure. Because the Senate is unlikely to convict does not change the fact that he deserves to be impeached and that you as a member of the House are obligated to START the ball rolling.
If impeachment still is completely off the table for you and the rest of Democratic leadership, censure may be a way forward for the House of Representatives. This is a way to historically rebuke this President, and regardless of the progress of impeachment proceedings, censure should be undertaken by the House of Representatives immediately.
Thank you for your attention in this matter and if there is anything that I can assist you with in any way, please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
ya boy TikiBristow 05132010 to Amsterdam 2 061320180 -
Uranium 1...HILARIOUSBristow 05132010 to Amsterdam 2 061320180
-
Funny, I fired off an email "letter" to my house representative today and to my state's repub party yesterday. I'm waiting to hear back. My rep also works out at the same gym so I'll respectfully ask if I can bend his ear while he works out next time I see him. I hate to bother someone at the gym but these are dire times. I will probably call or email my senators as well, requesting that they put their finger in the chest of their repub colleagues and ask WTF? Particularly Mitchy Baby and Lindsey.Tiki said:I just fired off letters just like this to my state's members of the House of Representatives. First Class Mail bitches.
Turns out they like the paper yo.The Honorable Steny Hoyer
Majority Leader US House of Representatives1705 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Majority Leader Hoyer:
The redacted Mueller Report documents both unethical and criminal behavior by President Don Trump. As an unabashed proponent of impeachment since he took the oath, I believe that the Mueller Investigation, the related investigations, and just watching TV for the past 24 months have shown solid evidence that Don Trump has committed both crimes and misdemeanors while serving in office.
If Don Trump directed Michael Cohen to make an excessive campaign contribution, a crime that Michael Cohen has already been sentenced for, and then Don Trump paid Cohen back on lay-a-way while he was President, well…I’m not an attorney…but that seems really illegal. Michael Cohen would not have made ANY “contribution” to anyone, if not for Don Trump.
If Don Trump’s inability to convince White House Lawyer Don McGahn to have Dept. Attorney General Rod Rosenstein fire the Special Counsel Robert Mueller is not considered Obstruction of Justice, then shouldn’t the ability to successfully convince Dept. Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to write a letter about the Clinton e-mail issue as a predicate for firing FBI Director James Comey be considered Obstruction? Don Trump went on TV and admitted to NBC’s Lester Holt that he fired Director Comey because of Russia. He had a meeting in the oval office with Russian officials and claimed the Russia “pressure” was off him now because he fired that “nut-job” Comey.
Much like shouting fire in a movie theater, agitating even one person to violence in a large group of people is illegal! When a member of the audience jumped onto a riser and attacked a cameraman from the BBC during a Don Trump MAGA “rally” held in El Paso Texas on February 11th, that is considered disturbing the peace and/or disorderly conduct. Again, I’m not an attorney, but in the state of Texas, that is a misdemeanor. There is video of this incident easily found online.
I have many concerns about this President’s fitness for office. He likens himself as an authoritarian, a fascist, really. Combined with nonstop lies, the racist overtones, and an endless supply of bad ideas, Don Trump uses fear for motivation and is more divisive than any other WORLD LEADER that I can remember in my 52 years. I understand that you cannot impeach someone because of policy differences. I am not suggesting that. He has committed actual crimes that the Mueller Report painstakingly documents. Some have suggested that the Mueller Report is the blueprint to impeachment.
To impeach the President is something that must be initiated in the House of Representatives. Knowing of his crimes, I believe that you have the responsibility to initiate and participate in the impeachment procedure. Because the Senate is unlikely to convict does not change the fact that he deserves to be impeached and that you as a member of the House are obligated to START the ball rolling.
If impeachment still is completely off the table for you and the rest of Democratic leadership, censure may be a way forward for the House of Representatives. This is a way to historically rebuke this President, and regardless of the progress of impeachment proceedings, censure should be undertaken by the House of Representatives immediately.
Thank you for your attention in this matter and if there is anything that I can assist you with in any way, please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
ya boy Tiki09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR;
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©0 -
What a shitshow.I LOVE MUSIC.
www.cluthelee.com
www.cluthe.com0 -
Such a teeny, tiny man.Furious Trump orders officials to boycott Correspondents' DinnerThe president, angry at the political media, throws a wrench into its annual gala.https://www.politico.com/story/2019/04/23/trump-orders-boycott-of-white-house-correspondents-dinner-1287871
I think the Gala should invite many activist political celebrities...Rob Reiner comes to mind, Alyssa Milano, Bob DeNiro, and any Repub celebrities who are politically active and not insane. lol . The thug loves Hollywood usually and might turn colors besides orange.
Falling down,...not staying down0 -
Smokey eyes lol0
-
https://twitter.com/funder/status/1120475971524661249?s=21
He just is such a sad human telling kids the wall is being built nah he’s not sad he’s a piece of shit !jesus greets me looks just like me ....0 -
he did if he didnt want to be seen snd accused of skewing the election to hillary.my2hands said:mickeyrat said:
Obama would have been seen a fucking with the election and you know it. Talk to Mitch. THAT fucker got what he wanted......cincybearcat said:
Certainly not the same thing and not equal. But disturbing to me that Obama did so little. Maybe disturbing isn't right...disappointing?mrussel1 said:
So not doing enough or otherwise being ineffective at stopping the hacking is the same thing as exploiting it for your political benefit?my2hands said:
And when that took place, for a few YEARS leading up to the election, what did the administration actually in power at the time do about it to stop it?
But it is disturbing to me that we now have had 2 administrations either mostly ignore, ignore, or accept this. Sickening. Trump should be impeached, not for collusion but for failing to fulfill his duty as president to protect the republic from foreign attacks of all kinds. Not fit for duty if you look out for yourself over country. Of course...I'm no politician so I have no idea if what I am saying could even happen...just how I feel.
this started happening well before 2016 and they knew it.... they even told intelligence agencies to stand down... because Obama wanted/needed Russia to play nice on the Iran deal and Syria... also, the POTUS didn't need Mitch's blessing to protect the country and the election
_____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '140 -
Exactly - President Obama wanted to issue a BIPARTISAN statement about Russia's act of cyber warfare against the United States. That would be the way that most Americans would want to hear about such an unheard of occurrence. Both sides agreeing that Russia was attacking us, not one side or the other claiming this was occurring.mickeyrat said:
he did if he didnt want to be seen snd accused of skewing the election to hillary.my2hands said:mickeyrat said:
Obama would have been seen a fucking with the election and you know it. Talk to Mitch. THAT fucker got what he wanted......cincybearcat said:
Certainly not the same thing and not equal. But disturbing to me that Obama did so little. Maybe disturbing isn't right...disappointing?mrussel1 said:
So not doing enough or otherwise being ineffective at stopping the hacking is the same thing as exploiting it for your political benefit?my2hands said:
And when that took place, for a few YEARS leading up to the election, what did the administration actually in power at the time do about it to stop it?
But it is disturbing to me that we now have had 2 administrations either mostly ignore, ignore, or accept this. Sickening. Trump should be impeached, not for collusion but for failing to fulfill his duty as president to protect the republic from foreign attacks of all kinds. Not fit for duty if you look out for yourself over country. Of course...I'm no politician so I have no idea if what I am saying could even happen...just how I feel.
this started happening well before 2016 and they knew it.... they even told intelligence agencies to stand down... because Obama wanted/needed Russia to play nice on the Iran deal and Syria... also, the POTUS didn't need Mitch's blessing to protect the country and the election
If Obama had made a statement to the American people without any Republican support it would not have been seen as the act of war that it was (and continues to be), it would have been seen as trying to slant the election.
they also did not know the extent of the attack until after the election, they just knew it was an attack and all of our elected officials should have been equally concerned about an act of war by an adversary and made a joint appearance. It was despicable that Mitch refused, unpatriotic and one day it will come back to haunt him.
But those Republicans do have the playbook on obstructing and accusing - just as @OnWis97 described several pages ago. they would be in impeachment full throttle right now and hauling everyone in for countless investigations and they would get away with it in a way that the Democrats just have not mastered.0 -
yo that's a lot of tweets...Bristow 05132010 to Amsterdam 2 061320180
-
So regarding no collusion...
I still feel like he’s a Russian asset. Or is he simply just that smitten with Putin?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
2024 Napa, Wrigley, Wrigley0 -
Dittomickeyrat said:
he did if he didnt want to be seen snd accused of skewing the election to hillary.my2hands said:mickeyrat said:
Obama would have been seen a fucking with the election and you know it. Talk to Mitch. THAT fucker got what he wanted......cincybearcat said:
Certainly not the same thing and not equal. But disturbing to me that Obama did so little. Maybe disturbing isn't right...disappointing?mrussel1 said:
So not doing enough or otherwise being ineffective at stopping the hacking is the same thing as exploiting it for your political benefit?my2hands said:
And when that took place, for a few YEARS leading up to the election, what did the administration actually in power at the time do about it to stop it?
But it is disturbing to me that we now have had 2 administrations either mostly ignore, ignore, or accept this. Sickening. Trump should be impeached, not for collusion but for failing to fulfill his duty as president to protect the republic from foreign attacks of all kinds. Not fit for duty if you look out for yourself over country. Of course...I'm no politician so I have no idea if what I am saying could even happen...just how I feel.
this started happening well before 2016 and they knew it.... they even told intelligence agencies to stand down... because Obama wanted/needed Russia to play nice on the Iran deal and Syria... also, the POTUS didn't need Mitch's blessing to protect the country and the electionjesus greets me looks just like me ....0 -
he is just hell bent jealous on trying to become a dictator. he really believes people love their dictators. he doesn't care that it's forced perceived love through fear.OnWis97 said:So regarding no collusion...
I still feel like he’s a Russian asset. Or is he simply just that smitten with Putin?By The Time They Figure Out What Went Wrong, We'll Be Sitting On A Beach, Earning Twenty Percent.0 -
OnWis97 said:So regarding no collusion...
I still feel like he’s a Russian asset. Or is he simply just that smitten with Putin?you mean , so regarding conspiracy to defraud the united states.......unwitting asset who is very smitten with putin_____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '140
Categories
- All Categories
- 148.9K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110.1K The Porch
- 275 Vitalogy
- 35.1K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.2K Flea Market
- 39.2K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.8K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help