Letter from White House counsel to Pelosi explaining why the administration won’t cooperate with the House impeachment inquiry.
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/6459905-White-House-Letter-to-Pelosi-Impeachment.html
Tell that to the people in Alabama.
Or maybe it’s Florida; I forget.
https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2019/10/08/hillary-maybe-we-need-rematch-with-me-and-trump-i-can-beat-him-again/?fbclid=IwAR21LoCFR6UDRSaipzCcNw2OWt05jdxHJ4NN2loersMIUykv_Mp1DeiGeuc
Hillary: Maybe We Need ‘Rematch’ with Me and Trump, ‘I Can Beat Him Again’
make it happen DNC!!!
”I think that Crooked Hillary Clinton should enter the race to try and steal it away from Uber Left Elizabeth Warren. Only one condition. The Crooked one must explain all of her high crimes and misdemeanors including how & why she deleted 33,000 Emails AFTER getting “C” Subpoena!” - President Trump
If Hillary really wanted to, i think she could get the nomination… i’d be pretty worried for my safety if I was one of the other nominees!
I think the real question is what in the hell the last administration was thinking betraying our actual alliance with Turkey for short term gains with the Kurds in Syria. I agree that once they took the S400’s you had to remove them from the F35 program (on which they’d already spent billions USD that went unrefunded), but that sends a much clearer message to actual partner allies like Japan and the UK than whatever STL is PMSing about. You’d think this would clearly factor in on future decisions to join long time horizon development platforms with the US. Layer on that Turkey will now have to find planes and most definitely will go to Russia and you’ve fully turned a powerful regional ally to the Russians.
But of course, that was the Obama administration and finally a congressional move (their hands were tied at that point) so everyone nodded along for the past decade. Then you have other precedents in literally every administration and conflict, notably wunderkind JFK betraying Cubans he sent on a suicide mission in the Bay of Pigs (is he enemy of the state, full stop?) and Clinton’s betrayal of Pakistan in 1999 in favor of a new relationship with India. Up until then Pakistan had been an ally and base of operations for mid east conflicts, Clinton made the decision (which I agree with) to side with India as the future for its potential. But make no mistake, we burned one ally to build with another and Pakistan has been uncooperative since in the middle east.
Yet there’s always the idiots running around waving their NYT op-eds knowing nothing about anything.
GOP Lawmakers Watch Silently As Trump Strangles Each Of Their Loved Ones In Turn
https://politics.theonion.com/gop-lawmakers-watch-silently-as-trump-strangles-each-of-1838885386
WASHINGTON—Opting to take more of a wait-and-see approach instead of rushing to pass judgment, Republican lawmakers reportedly looked on in silence Tuesday as President Trump worked his way through each of their families and, one by one, strangled all their loved ones to death. “After I watched the president slowly and methodically squeeze the life out of my wife’s body as she gasped, futilely, for breath, he gave me his personal assurance that he was not responsible for her death, so I continue to stand by this administration,” said Rep. Scott DesJarlais (R-TN), who along with every Republican in both the House and Senate stated that while killing off their families in cold blood might not be entirely proper, it was certainly not an impeachable offense, no matter how the media tried to spin it. “Now, this is not an action I would have taken myself. I personally would not have wrapped my hands around my 5-year-old son’s neck and crushed his windpipe. But if Donald Trump’s approach to governing is sometimes a bit outside the ordinary, that’s because Donald Trump is no ordinary president. And maybe that’s not such a bad thing.” Later, with his beloved sister’s face turning purple as the commander-in-chief asphyxiated her with a length of barbed wire, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) appeared on several television news networks and said impeaching the president for her imminent death would be “insane.”
BS - you’re still missing the point. I know this won’t work, but try to just answer yes or no to the following questions and we’ll see if we’re on the same page.
- Should any president - and especially one with no military experience - make strategic decisions without consulting his generals and/or the Pentagon first?
- Is it proper for the President to signal our military operations to a foreign leader before telling anyone in his own military?
- Should America tell another government that we’re leaving a group of people (they are/were our allies regardless of your expert opinion, but even if they weren’t…) defenseless when said government has expressly declared they’re intent to commit genocide?
Just curious if any of that sits well with you.
Everyone should check out the actual audio recordings from the Oval Office about the Cuban Missile Crisis. They include JFK, McNamara, Gen. Taylor, RFK, etc…
https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu//nsa/cuba_mis_cri/audio.htm
Saturday, October 27, 5:00 P.M., Cabinet Room, The White House.
On the early afternoon of Saturday, October 27, as the Soviet freighter Grozny approached Cuba toward the now inevitable confrontation with the blockade force, an American U-2 spy plane was reported overdue from a reconnaissance flight over Cuba. With these issues impending, the president and his advisers grappled with how to respond to conflicting messages from Khrushchev; one received the night before and another received that morning. The first indicated that Khrushchev would be willing to remove the missiles in exchange for Kennedy’s pledge not to invade Cuba. The second, however, proposed that the removal be contingent upon the removal of similarly placed U.S. Jupiter missiles in Turkey.
The president begins with a discussion of NATO and concerns that European allies might have with the removal of the Jupiters from Turkey. Rusk is hopeful that NATO solidarity might shake Khrushchev “off his pony.” Ball then proposes that they simply ignore Khrushchev’s second letter [regarding the exchange] and simply respond to the first. As guidance for Thomas Finletter, U.S. ambassador to NATO, the president suggests that he tell them, if they don’t support the removal of the Jupiters, to prepare for some retaliatory action from the Soviets in Berlin or Turkey. Rusk raises the possibility that the missiles (both U.S. and Soviet) be turned over to the United Nations for destruction. The president is most concerned with the reaction of the Turks to which McNamara responds.
Several more issues are raised, and Bundy at one point suggests an enlargement of the blockade. At the end of the clip, in response to a point raised by Ambassador Llewellyn Thompson, the president warns of what might happen if an invasion takes place. “We all know how quickly everybody’s courage goes when the blood starts to flow,” he notes, adding that, the removal of the Jupiters might later seem like “a pretty good proposition” after the Soviets take Berlin.
Saturday, October 27, 10:00 P.M., Oval Office and Cabinet Room, The White House.
On Saturday evening, October 27, with the Soviet freighter Grozny rapidly approaching the blockade, the president sent off a letter to Moscow accepting the terms of the October 26 letter, the removal of the missiles in Cuba in exchange for a U.S. non-invasion pledge. At the same time, the president instructed his brother to privately assure Soviet Ambassador Anatoly Dobrynin that the Jupiter missiles in Turkey would be removed but that this pledge could not be made publicly.
Just before he left for his meeting with Dobrynin, Robert Kennedy had this exchange with McNamara:
RFK: How are you doing Bob? McNamara: Well. How about yourself? RFK: All right. McNamara: You got any doubts? RFK: Well, no. I think that we’re doing the only thing we can do, and well, you know. [Inaudible] McNamara: I think the one thing, Bobby, we ought to seriously do before we act is be damned sure they understand the consequences. In other words, we need to really show them where we are now, because we need to have two things ready: a government for Cuba, because we’re going to need one–we go in with bombing aircraft; and, secondly, plans for how to respond to the Soviet Union in Europe, because sure as hell they’re going to do something there.
The conversation continues as Dillon rejoins the discussion:
Dillon: You have to pick out the things they might-- McNamara: Well, I think, that’s right. [Unclear] McNamara: I would suggest that it will be an eye for an eye. Dillon: That’s the mission. Unidentified: I’d take Cuba back. Unidentified: I’d take Cuba away from Castro. Unidentified: Suppose we make Bobby mayor of Havana.
LOL, leave it to the NYT crowd try to oversimplify. No STL, you’re actually just moving the goalposts, you ranted about betraying American Allies then ignored my counterpoint.
Rebut or acknowledge my response, then I’ll address your points. That’s how debates work.
https://theintercept.com/2019/10/07/kurds-syria-turkey-trump-betrayal/ "Nothing in this world is certain except death, taxes, and America betraying the Kurds.
The U.S. has now betrayed the Kurds a minimum of eight times over the past 100 years. The reasons for this are straightforward.
The Kurds are an ethnic group of about 40 million people centered at the intersection of Turkey, Syria, Iran, and Iraq. Many naturally want their own state. The four countries in which they live naturally do not want that to happen.
On the one hand, the Kurds are a perfect tool for U.S. foreign policy. We can arm the Kurds in whichever of these countries is currently our enemy, whether to make trouble for that country’s government or to accomplish various other objectives. On the other hand, we don’t want the Kurds we’re utilizing to ever get too powerful. If that happened, the other Kurds — i.e., the ones living just across the border in whichever of these countries are currently our allies — might get ideas about freedom and independence."
Turkey started an offensive into northern Syria this morning. Pictures of airstrikes on Turkish television below.
Note that the US supported the Kurds to fight against ISIS. Note that Turkey is a NATO ally. So we have two parties we’ve been friends with now at risk of fighting each other. That seems to me a failure of American foreign policy and diplomacy. I have my doubts that this shift in our foreign policy was done in the best interests of Americans. Maybe I should note also that there is a Trump property in Istanbul.
The Kurds in Syria are a large group. This is an attack on PKK allied Kurds, the PKK are not our allies. I love the libtards saying we should be defending them with US troops in their hurry to pretend to know what they’re talking about. Comical, thanks for the laugh!
Kind of like STL trying to spin this as genocide, 20% of Turkey is Kurdish, they’re not attacking Kurds everywhere or claiming that, this is a pointed attack on highly armed Syrian groups supporting the PKK.
There is no foreign policy shift… Trump ran on defeating isis and leaving the region. In fact, if you listen to his debates prior to the election, he mentioned he would potentially side with russian/assad in accomplishing this task. This has been his platform all along…
It’s been years since I lost count of the numerous areas in which you pretend to be an expert.
Why the shift in American policy? Do you think it was done in the best interests of the United States? Do you think this was the well-considered decision of an inter-agency process? I don’t. I think this is Donald Trump being impulsive, incompetent, narcissistic, and mentally unwell.
isolationism is excellent government policy that has made america great.
So people who aren’t spouting uninformed opinions on topics they know nothing about must be pretending to be experts? What I said is factually accurate, you failed to even attempt a rebuttal, so I’ll take it you are either going to dispute literal facts or you agree.
I’ll let WYG take this one.
And just to educate you, the Kurds including those from Syria and the PKK have been fighting through the entire Obama administration. They briefly had a ceasefire, which was going well, until an ISIS bomber hit a Kurdish town and the PKK used it as an excuse to openly begin attacking Turkish police with their new indirect US weapons (while acknowledging it was an ISIS bomber). There has been a non-stop flow over of weapons from the heavily armed Syrian Kurds and oh by the way, they both follow the teachings of Ocalan, basically PKK’s Bin Laden. Lets add that the PKK is a NATO recognized terrorist group and is recognized as such by the US officially as well.
The reason we keep using and recycling the Kurds is because they’re in four countries composed of different ethnicities and religions and miraculously all they want to do in each country is fight and they have violent separatist movements in each, so they make great tools when you need to go in, arm some people and instantly grow your forces. It’s telling that when we finally established a corner of land for them in Iraq back in the 90’s and they finally had what they wanted, with no interference, it took less than a year for them to turn on themselves and devolve into full scale civil war. These aren’t allies, they’re useful warlords.
But yes, lets continue burning bridges with Turkey and keep American lives at risk defending terrorist allied groups in a war that has ended. Also, try reading a book sometime.
BS - So you’re not able to answer those questions? Because that was my gripe with Trump this whole time. You’re hung up on the Kurds. I’m talking about the guy that’s in charge of the biggest military in the world making snap decisions while getting his ass handed to him by other foreign leaders. You seem okay with it, which I find odd given your profound military expertise. You can troll and shi t post all you want, but to hold yourself out as an expert and then demonstrate the inability to recognize such dangerous ineptitude by Trump is mystifying to me.
Though I’m pretty sure if I’d taken the other side, you’d be making my point for me. I’ll have to try that next time.
I’d love to answer those questions and will if we move past the first issue, but I’m going to work through this one issue at a time, not play move the goalposts.
Ok, so you’re agreeing that you were wrong about the allies thing and that when you said “worst of all…”, you actually meant “its not even my main point”? And when you said “Regardless of what anyone thinks, the US does not leave its allies hanging” you actually meant, “this is the eight time we did this to the Kurds alone and the US has a long history of burning allies, I’m ignoring our actual alliance with Turkey which we destroyed and by the way the Kurds were never an actual alliance.”
Or at least more broadly that I am right about my overall points regarding Turkey and the Kurds?
If we establish that, then we can move on to the next question set you had.
honestly, this turkey thing is really de minimis.
the largest mistake djt did was reduce taxes. that was prolly the stupidest thing he did. 1 trillion deficit expected for next year! we have a bout 22 trillion in debt.