monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

@izzythepush,

I think you’re right, it must be incrediblely sad to be him.......but on the hand....he’s a lost cause and so what. .? He can stew in his own filthy juices.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

The Senate exists solely to give small states and small populations the boost you're talking about. The Presidency is the ONLY election that is supposed to represent ALL of us. It is the only one that dokesn't. Elections, and votes, are decided by majority vote,EXCEPT for the one election that is supposed to be for all of us. 60,000 "votes" there, outweighed the 2.8 million actual voters,as oopposed to the fictive people in the EC.48 states' electoral votes are mandated by laws in those states trequire their electors to vote for the popular vote winner in those state. It is the extra electors in the leass populous states which subvert the actual voters and make it undemocratic. And the GOP did NOT try to work with Obama They stonewalled him on reswtoring the economy after Republiconomics crashed it, they stonewalled health care. They stonewalled him, on background checks, despite over 90% public approval of them, they tried to shut down the government over Planned Parenthood, despite over 60% public approval of it. Everything Trump has foisted on us has been opposed by super majorities of the country, yet he dopes them anyway

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

He exhibited no anger that I saw. But I did notice your usual mean-spiritedness.

0 Replies

@coldjoint,

And I repeat, the voter in the special elections have pretty consistently refused to support Trump's trumpeted candidate. The GOP is panicing. Good.

0 Replies

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

And the GOP did NOT try to work with Obama

That is incorrect. John Boehner tried to make a deal with Obama. It fell through when Obama gave in to leftist extremists and reneged on the deal that he had made.

MontereyJack wrote:

They stonewalled him on reswtoring the economy after Republiconomics crashed it,

Bill Clinton's deregulation had just as much to do with the crash as any Republicans did.

MontereyJack wrote:

they stonewalled health care.

The Republicans did not agree with it. That is their right.

MontereyJack wrote:

They stonewalled him, on background checks, despite over 90% public approval of them,

That wasn't the Republicans. That was me and my NRA compatriots. Obama should have known better than to disobey our instructions. Doing so shattered his presidency and got Trump elected.

MontereyJack wrote:

they tried to shut down the government over Planned Parenthood, despite over 60% public approval of it.

Not sure what you are talking about here. The abortion debate bores me and I seldom pay attention to it.

2 Replies

@oralloy,

Quote:

That is incorrect. John Boehner tried to make a deal with Obama. It fell through when Obama gave in to leftist extremists and reneged on the deal that he had made.

A deal on what, exactly? Considering the GOP has reneged on the deals they promised the holdouts on the their tax plan, as well as on the DACA deal thye made with the Dems,,I don't think I would trust any deal they make with anybody.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

The GOP refused to talk about healthcare for eight years. They refused to talk about immig.ration refokrm. They pDufing the Bush years they deliberately cut down on reulations and funding for them, and that what letTook Obama years to get the economy back on trakc. You really should infor yourself about the GOPO's attempt to shut dokwn the government. If the N the economy meltdown and endanger the world. Nothing to do with Clinton. If the non-elected, non-reprewsentative NRA (and you) attempt to dictate hwat our elected government has to do, that is reason enough right there to outlaw them.

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

A deal on what, exactly?

A fairly sizable tax increase and fairly sizable reductions in military spending in exchange for fairly sizable cuts in Social Security and Medicare, resulting in a balanced budget.

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

They pDufing the Bush years they deliberately cut down on reulations and funding for them, and that what letTook Obama years to get the economy back on trakc. You really should infor yourself about the GOPO's attempt to shut dokwn the government. If the N the economy meltdown and endanger the world. Nothing to do with Clinton.

That is incorrect. The deregulation laws that allowed for the meltdown were signed into law by Bill Clinton.

That's why no bankers were prosecuted. Everything they did was legal thanks to Bill Clinton.

MontereyJack wrote:

If the non-elected, non-reprewsentative NRA (and you) attempt to dictate hwat our elected government has to do, that is reason enough right there to outlaw them.

The First Amendment protects us.

2 Replies

@oralloy,

From the description that would be entirely unacceptable to pretty much every Democrat. Did they actually reach a deal, or was that justr a non-starter that Boehner proposed but was never actually agree on? Doesn't sound like something Obama would ever agree to. Or that the country would accept. Did you edit that post after you posted it? Didn't read the same when I just ;osted as it did before.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

The First Amendment protects us

To express an opinion, yes. To dictate, no.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Somehow you forgot to mention that the banking deregulation was a Republican initiative, for which they profited greatly from political donations from the banker. All Clinton did was agree to it. Unwise move on his part, just proves he was actually a centrist, not the radical you persisted in characterizing him as. GOP had pushed similar initiatives for years. Itproved unwise in the extreme. The GOP has been ppushing similar flawed repeals of Dodd-Frank. You guys just kldon't learn from your mistakes, but instead insis on repeating them.

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

From the description that would be entirely unacceptable to pretty much every Democrat.

Not all Democrats are happy with massive budget deficits.

MontereyJack wrote:

Did they actually reach a deal, or was that justr a non-starter that Boehner proposed but was never actually agree on?

They reached a deal at first, but then the left demanded that Obama get higher tax increases from the Republicans. Obama sided with the left and demanded higher tax increases than had been agreed to, and that caused support for the deal to collapse on the Republican side. Later he tried to go back to the original deal but by that time the Republicans who wanted to fight had the upper hand over the Republicans who wanted to negotiate, and it was over.

MontereyJack wrote:

Doesn't sound like something Obama would ever agree to.

Well he did briefly before the left persuaded him to demand more.

MontereyJack wrote:

Did you edit that post after you posted it? Didn't read the same when I just ;osted as it did before.

Yes. I added in the cuts in military spending to go along with the tax increases that the Republicans were offering.

0 Replies

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

To express an opinion, yes. To dictate, no.

Democracy itself is what gives us the power to dictate to the government.

0 Replies

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

Somehow you forgot to mention that the banking deregulation was a Republican initiative, for which they profited greatly from political donations from the banker. All Clinton did was agree to it.

Maybe if "agree" means "sign into law".

MontereyJack wrote:

Unwise move on his part, just proves he was actually a centrist, not the radical you persisted in characterizing him as.

Have I characterized him as a radical (aside from Second Amendment issues)?

MontereyJack wrote:

You guys just kldon't learn from your mistakes, but instead insis on repeating them.

Us guys who? The Democrats?

0 Replies

Quote:

‏Verified account
@Amy_Siskind
The storm in Trump's head has become the chaos in our lives and has impacted people's lives at a very personal level - including w/in the regime, Donald Jr. and now Scavino. Blink twice if need our help Melania!

0 Replies

Quote:

Randy Kennedy
‏@randyrocks08
The incoming head of the CIA can't travel to Europe because there is a warrant for her arrest for war crimes ....Let that sink in .

I assume this is true.

2 Replies

@blatham,

Just destroy whatever country issued the arrest warrant.

Only if they refuse to withdraw it of course.

1 Reply

@blatham,

Quote:

After Haspel was named deputy CIA director, the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights asked German prosecutors to issue a warrant for her arrest over her role in the interrogations. Federal prosecutors never issued the warrant because the case lacked a connection to Germany. But the rights group's allegations against Haspel remain part of a preliminary investigation that German authorities could revive if they receive evidence that any of the parties have links to Germany.

NYT

Quote:

Three years ago, the Federal Public Prosecutor's Office in Karlsruhe opened a so-called review process in this matter. With its current addition of Gina Haspel's crimes to the criminal charges, ECCHR wants the German authorities to start investigations and, for example, hear the three witnesses of the US torture program currently living in Germany - two Iraqis and Murat Kurnaz from Bremen. The prominent Guantanamo victim from Germany has never been questioned by law enforcement authorities about his knowledge of the entire US torture program.

In addition, the human rights lawyers want to force the highest German public prosecutor to deal with the complex topic and legal considerations. If Gina Haspel or another suspect travels to Europe in the future, the Attorney General could issue an arrest warrant.

Translated from a ZEIT report

1 Reply

@oralloy,

I believe it's Germany. Our ally. Great foreign policy, oralloy. Declare war on the EU, our ally.

0 Replies

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know