Jump to content

Usa Thread

Recommended Posts

Why does that transcript read like two nine year olds playing pretend?

It seems deeply offensive to any citizen of either country that their highest elected officials talk about, well, nothing! Like zero substance! That they have such thumb twiddling time in their daily schedules just seems wrong.

It might be a phone call as opposed to a face to face meeting but you would expect some sort of plan, an oob of some sort, not that kiddie drivel. The world makes more progress when I phone my Mum!



Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Why does that transcript read like two nine year olds playing pretend?"

One' is a Fucking Moron and the other is a comedian who gained office by playing a President in a Soapie.


And Cav, the problem is, that Trump asked for help from a foreign govt for his personal political benefit. 

Whether or not there was pressure, or crime or any other deflection is immaterial. And that's from reality, a reality that knows the facts.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Talking about presidents and women ...

As Hillary Clinton Cheers Impeachment, Juanita Broaddrick Has a Message for ‘Idiot’ Clinton

Juanita Broaddrick was having none of it.

Mrs. Boaddrick, who has long contended that in 1978 she was raped by former President Bill Clinton and that Hillary helped cover it up, shot back at Hillary, “You idiot. Every time you open your mouth, another Democrat walks straight to the Republican Party and puts on a Red MAGA hat.”

Broaddrick has never hesitated to give the former Secretary of State a piece of her mind.

On the eve of Hillary locking up the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination, Broaddrick told BizPac Review that when Hillary had said that all sexual assault victims should be “heard” and “believed,” she couldn’t believe it.

“When I first heard that … I thought ‘my gosh how disgusting,” Broaddrick said. “Shame on you, Hillary; you’re the last one in the world that should be making that statement after what you’ve done to me and the other women.”


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Flashback: Nadler Admits Impeachment Is All About ‘Undoing a National Election’

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler is a driving force behind the Democrat push to impeach President Trump, but his views were vastly different in 1998.

In fact, as video demonstrates, Nadler’s efforts to defend former President Bill Clinton against impeachment over tangible violations of the public trust – perjury and obstruction of justice – inadvertently pull back the curtain on what today’s inquiry is all about.

The New York Democrat argues that impeachment is essentially an “undoing of a national election” designed to tell American voters that their choice for President “must be set aside.”

“They knew quite properly that an impeachment of a president is an undoing of a national election,” a younger, more rotund Nadler argues.

“And one of the reasons we all feel so angry about what they are doing is that they are ripping from us, they are ripping our votes,” he added. “They are telling us that our votes don’t count and that the election must be set aside.”

Huh … That’s exactly what Democrats are now telling you. The people they look down on as ‘deplorables’ – their vote doesn’t count. And they’ve been trying to send that message for three years on.



Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

And from a notriously non-leftist site:

Revealed: Democrats Wrote to Ukraine in May 2018, Demanding It Investigate Trump

The demand, which came from U.S. Senators Robert Menendez (D-NJ), Dick Durbin (D-IL), and Patrick Leahy (D-VT), resurfaced Wednesday in an opinion piece written by conservative Marc Thiessen in the Washington Post.





Ironically, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) declared Tuesday that the mere possibility that President Trump had asked Ukraine to continue an investigation of former Vice President Joe Biden — even without a quid pro quo — was enough to trigger an impeachment inquiry.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sent to me by a friend, source not given:

The Democrats are in the process of destroying the office of the presidency, which requires that the President have conversations with other world leaders without fear of having those conversations become public fodder.

The ability of any president to speak forthrightly with other leaders is essential for effective foreign policy. The Democrats are basing their attack on a source who admits that there is no first hand knowledge of the nature of conversations with Ukrainian leaders and they are trying to force revealing the content. If done, no world leader will ever trust that any conversations can be held with confidentiality.

But the Democrats do not care how much harm they want to inflict on our nation. The Russian thing was a huge nothing and waste of time and money. So what do they do? They move on to the next probable nothing.




Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Republicans are great at making mountain out of molehills. I'll give them that. The Dems are the opposite. They have a mountain of a case and Pelosi is reducing it to a mole hill. 

As far as 'what about them' (preceding posts), 1. why didn't it have legs at the time? and 2. if there is something there, by all means do something about it. I have no problem with investigating and prosecuting ANY legal act. Doesn't matter who it is, kf legally possible.

Impeachment is a political process. It's about removal of office, not jail time. Just removal of office. Whether its done to undo an election as the reason isn't a great reason in my opinion but its not improper to do so. Impeaching Clinton was very unpopular in the '90s. Clinton won election by a landslide. The GOP was never going to get the votes in the senate but they went ahead anyway. They felt they were right and that the President did impeachable acts and tried to get a conviction but you need both parties. So, you can't undue an election unless both parties are for it unless you have 67 senators in the Senate and a commanding majority in the House. If Trump is out, its clear that enough Republicans agree that he has done acts that will have them undo an election. I have no issues with that. Trump won by one of the biggest landslides in history in '72. Would anyone argue it was wrong to undue an election that showed a clear mandate to lead? 

The legal scholar Cav names, with all due respect, so what? Doesn't matter what any of us say, even the Supreme court justices who presumably know the constitution better than anyone. "high crimes and misdemeanors" are what ever the majority of the House and Senate say it is. 

I'm not sure how clear asking for a foreign leader to investigate your political opponent has to be. Trump was flat out, out of line and its illegal. Bottom line. Had the DOJ or FBI done it, it wouldn't look great but its legal. Trump directly asking is. Doesn't have to be quid pro quo (although it appears to be extorted help with the aid). The whole thing stinks and that is being completely unbiased about it. If anyone saying it wasn't, would say the same had Obama did it, it wouldn't be impeachable, say it. I recall a hot mic Obama asking the Russian president  not to make waves until after the election in 2012. I recall the first time I heard it saying "this doesn't sound right at all"  

Anyway,  Trump has the numbers not to be found guilty as did Clinton before him. But its clear cut violation. No ways around it. I understand Cav and Flash, its your guy and completely get the view it isn't but for me, as unbiased as I can be about it, its not even questionable. Its clear, 100% violation. Same as my viewing Obama (and Trump dong the same) committing ex Judicial murder on citizens as not only impeachable  but criminal. 



Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Flashermac said:

The ability of any president to speak forthrightly with other leaders is essential for effective foreign policy.

Here y'go, the POTUS Rant.

Below is a transcript from a 9-minute video of Trump's remarks obtained by The Washington Post. The video begins as US Ambassador to the United Nations Kelly Craft leaves the stage and Trump takes the podium:

"They tell you you're going to be a star, the only way you're going to be a star, no matter how you look or feel or talk is when you make good deals. I found that out over the years, you've got to make good deals otherwise it's over. And [Craft] is going to make great deals.

I was with her now for three days and she's developed incredible relationships in a very short period of time and we appreciate it. (Looks at her) You'll be out there. You'll be in the firing line today for us. For instance, today I just heard while I'm coming up here, you know they have a whistleblower (laughter) he turned out to be a fake, he's a fake, a highly partisan whistleblower. The lawyer contributed to Biden, they contributed to - the whole thing is - but more importantly, you know what the whistleblower [complaint] is? The same letter that we announced yesterday, which was perfect, I couldn't have written it better if I wrote it myself. I could not have said or had a better conversation.

And we had a really nice gentleman in the president of Ukraine yesterday. And he was, he was good. They said, 'Was he pressuring you?' You know, these animals in the press. They're animals. Some of the worst human beings you'll ever meet. (An audience member yells: "Fake news!") They're scum, many of them are scum. (good start) You have some good reporters, but not many I'll be honest with you. And that's one of the things we battle. (Looks at Craft) You'll find out, but they'll probably like you better than they like me, but I had to get us here right?

They are total, just terrible dishonest people. And they were crazy - they couldn't figure out, 'what do we say bad about this conversation?' Then it turns out they had senators, Democrat senators who went over there and strong-armed the guy: "You better damn well do this or you're not going to get any money from Congress." Oh I see, that's OK? And then you have Sleepy Joe Biden, who's dumb as a rock. (laughter)

This guy was dumb on his best day, and he's not having his best day right now. He's dumb as a rock. So you have Sleepy Joe, and he goes up, and his kid, who's got a lot of problems, he got thrown out of the Navy for problems. I mean, look, I'm not going to - it's a problem, that's a problem, so we won't get into why and all that. But he got thrown out of the Navy, and now this kid goes into Ukraine, walks away with millions of dollars, and he becomes a consultant for $50,000 a month. And he doesn't know anything compared to anybody in this room. OK? He's a stiff, he knows nothing. He's walking away with $50,000, or as you would say in the old days 50K a month. Not bad. Would anybody else in this room like to represent Ukraine for $50,000?

That's on top (points to the audience and says, you got the job) that's on top of hundreds of thousands and millions of dollars. But that's not the best one. The best one was China. This came up. So now he goes to China, and I was with the head of Blackstone which is the big deal. Steve Schwarzman. I said, "Steve, is that possible?" "No, why? Why? Who got that? Who got that?" I said. "Biden's son." "Ooh," Well, then, you know, he says, "Maybe I shouldn't get involved, you know it's very political." I say, "Steve, what happens when you come off a vice presidential plane, it's called Air Force Two, your father's with you, you walk into a room in China and they give you a fund of $1.5 billion, billion, you make hundreds of thousands of dollars and millions of dollars off that. And that's probably not all they gave him. They gave him plenty more, I'm sure. We might never find out.

And then they talk about me, and I didn't do anything. I don't know if I'm the most innocent person in the world. (correct, he doesn't know) But, you know, you look at that - most presidential, I'm the most presidential, except for possibly Abe Lincoln when he wore the hat - that was tough to beat.

Remember we used to do that during the campaign. They used to say, when I speak, the crowd would be crazy, I'd go crazy (believable)  - we would all go crazy. We're going to have a lot of fun together . . . We've never had an empty seat. From the day I came down the escalator, with a potential unbelievable woman (potential? actual, no-one can believe her.) who became our first lady [applause] . . . the crowds love her, the people love her. But we've never had an empty seat - not one. I really believe that.

There was one case where we had a tremendous snowstorm and it was just about frozen, it was a monster storm. I don't even remember how we got there. I said, 'How's the crowd?' 'It's just about full, sir.' I said, 'What does that mean, like there are about two seats on top. Thousands and thousands could get there. So they show pictures of the empty seats. They don't say this is the worst storm they've had in years. They show pictures of like nine empty seats and it could've been people who just went to the bathroom.

I always say, just get the biggest arena. Good location if you can, but get the biggest arena. We did it the other night. Tuesday night we had two congressmen. One was possibly going to win. He was up by two. He won by about 27, I think, or something like that - a lot. The other one was down by 17. And they said, 'Sir, don't campaign for him please.' Why? 'Because if he loses they're going to kill you in the press.' I said they're going to kill me whether I campaign or not. It's not going to matter. It'll make it a little bit worse. They'll say, he worked and he failed. Trump failed. The guy was down 17 points and he ended up winning by a lot. He ended up winning by a lot.

In fact the whole night, CNN built the most beautiful, $2 billion maybe they spent, no wonder they're losing . . . they have no ratings and they're building studios all over the place, but they had a studio. The studio was going to stay up for weeks. And toward the end of the night they were taking it down. The so called stars were leaving. They're not really stars, I'll tell you. The stars were leaving and they didn't want to report it.

The candidate Dan Bishop won by a lot. He was down by 17, and they had lines a mile long. I mean the lines going into those voting booths were unbelievable. And without the rally speech, and a couple of tweets, and Twitter stuff is good. We have, like, way over 100 million people on six or seven different platforms. It's actually much higher than that, even, higher than just about everybody. And it helps. It helps. They have signs oftentimes when I speak. It said, please keep .... This woman the other night, beautiful woman, she's got a son: (I saw a woman, I got a boner)  "Please keep tweeting sir, it matters." And it does matter, because we get our voice out. If we don't do that, we don't get the voice out.

I can't say what a great job Kelly [Craft] is doing, and I can't say what a wonderful husband he is [pointing to Joe Craft]. Look at how devoted he is. He's a rich man, too. He's loaded. What are you doing here? Why aren't you working? He's so proud of his wife he can't leave his office. That's really great though, huh? Are you all proud of her? He said very much. And he's really a fantastic guy, he's been a friend of mine for a long time. Before I met Kelly, I met Joe. And Joe impressed me because of his knowledge of energy. Now he could be paid. OK, you're going to pay a guy 50 . . . for him that's not quite good enough, although he might. He might. It's easy money, Joe, you have to say. But he would be an expert on energy, he would be a real expert. He would be somebody you would pay a lot of money to, but not Joe Biden's son.

So the whistleblower came out and said nothing. Said, "a couple of people told me he had a conversation with Ukraine." We're at war. These people are sick. They're sick. (Trump's hand picked staff) And nobody's called it out like I do. I don't understand. People are afraid to call it out. They're afraid to say that the press is crooked. We have a crooked press. We have a dishonest media. So now they're devastated, but they'll always find something. I'm sure there'll be something they'll find in this report that will suit their lie. But basically that person never saw the report, never saw the call. Never saw the call. Heard something, and decided that he or she or whoever the hell it is - sort of like almost a spy. I want to know who's the person that gave the whistle-blower, who's the person that gave the whistleblower the information, (Trump's hand picked staff, more than a few of them, many of them)because that's close to a spy. You know what we used to do in the old days when we were smart? Right? With spies and treason, right?(You don't have to have a spy when the POTUS releases the information to the public)


(He then said, "We used to handle them a little differently than we do now," (look to any unexplained deaths in Trump's orbit, from about a week ago and ongoing)according to a recording of the remarks obtained by the Los Angeles Times.)


(comments in blue are mine)




Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Create New...