Happy New Year!
May 2020 be a year of good health and wealth to ANC and its fans – and may the wise part of that phrase go to who I fear will be the next POTUS.
Happy New Year to all and may 2020 bring growth,compassion and blessings to all that open to that.
Some friends issued a Happy New Year FB post welcoming 2020 with the caption, “2019 will be hard to beat!” Ever the cynic, I assumed that proclamation was meant to be sarcastic on this most arbitrary of holidays. Then I noticed they were holding their baby daughter.
Count your blessings.
The future doesn’t belong to us.
We can all try to be better.
Happy New Year.
Oh piss off Towers!
Just kidding. Happy New Year, Steve, and Happy New Year to everyone.
You’re the ONLY person I would let get away with that.
You guys crack me up.
Ha! I say that to myself pretty much every time I write a long post.
Dear Hal Johnson – Glad you were kidding! From my perspective, that was one, damn, fine and meaningful New Year post. From your pal, “Towers.” What we think we see, is at times different than what we get? For me, I think it’s time to adjust my viewing mirror for the 2020’s. The time is now. Oh, how profound of me. Kidding!
“From my perspective, that was one, damn, fine and meaningful New Year post.”
Yes it was. It is entirely too common to lose sight of what is truly important.
Beautiful, Steve. Happy New Year to you, too. I’m glad you’re here.
Wishing the Cafe Peeps a very Happy New Year.
You, too, Linda. So glad you’re here.
Doni, maybe it’s time for the one day “202o PunFest” to commence?! Last year’s was pretty darn punny!
Soooo, after posting my PunFest ( aka “one off pun off) suggestion I’m thinking that now may not be the best time for that. Barbara, Doni and Joe have enough on their plates getting the Auction organized without having to police puns and jokes. My apologies ANC!
I never met a pun/bad joke I didn’t like.
Barbara, I have, but at the time I was in the hospital suffering from a broken humorous.
It’s getting pretty pungent hereabouts.
A bun is the lowest form of wheat.
“Our president will start a war with Iran because he has absolutely no ability to negotiate. He’s weak and he’s ineffective. So the only way he figures that he’s going to get reelected — and as sure as you’re sitting there — is to start a war with Iran.”
Donald Trump in 2011. He obviously thinks it’s a good idea now.
The president responded to an attack on our embassy by terrorists. It was a reasoned retaliation that killed a bad guy. How do you make the leap that the president wants war or think it’s a good idea?
It will be a miracle if Trump doesn’t cause a nuclear holocaust. He’s done nothing so far but destabilize the Middle East in various ways, and in some cases even strenghtened ISIS.
And so much for his campaign promise to “bring the troops home”. He’s steadily increased troops in that region, with another large surge of new troops in Iran upcoming. Even when he pulled the troops that were protecting our staunch allies, the Kurds, he sent thousands more to Saudi Arabia to protect his royal family buddies who bailed him out of his endless financial troubles at one point, and have spent countless millions on his real estate.
How do we get this demented, self-serving moron to start consulting Congress before he does anything else that threatens world survival?
The President Authorized the Assassignation 7 months ago. Without Congressional Approval or telling anyone. Not saying he should have been on Fox NEWS about it but there are protocol and procedures a President should follow,Constitution etc you know.
It wasn’t because of the protestors at the embassy.
Lindsay Graham says “I was briefed about the potential operation when I was down in Florida,” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who was with the president at Mar-a-Lago earlier this week, told Fox News on Friday morning. “I appreciate being brought into the orbit.”
And it isn’t just me making that leap, but I must say, I’m not a national figure and future presidential candidate making such leaps so I’m sure I’ll be forgiven if, hopefully, it doesn’t come true.
Yeah, the drone assassination plan was hatched well prior the embassy riot, but you can be sure that the Fox News-indoctrinated will be making the false, ass-backward cause-and-effect claim all week long.
As POTUS himself would say: Sad.
Appreciating the term “drone assassination”:
When Bush went into Iraq, I wondered about stirring up a “hornet’s nest,” and also having Suddam Hussein assassinated without a trial. When Obama had Osama bin Laden assassinated, I again wanted to see a fair trial. Now Soleimani has been assassinated without a trial. And apparently VP Pence is making noise about him being involved in 911. However, we will not know this without the investigation a trial might (and I do write might) reveal. I understand the impossible aspects of plucking up these awful individuals into an American court. So really, I’m just pondering.
I realize these are bad people. Killers of so many. On the surface, they deserved to die. My point is that it just feels un-American. However, that’s just me who sat through the history classes where great volume was made about the right to a fair trial. I am seventy now, and more cynical. About a right to a fair trial. And yet, it remains that I just feel that international relations by drone assassination is not only un-American, it’s very dangerous. And an easy “shot.” Diplomacy is much more challenging, and assassination is a much easier path. I get it, there have been times when I would have liked to have…
For the record, this wasn’t an assassination. Soleimani was a terrorist in the middle of planning more terrorist activity while in a foreign country
Right? Trump is pretty smart in that he killed the guy who was planning more attacks to get us out of Iraq which this killing will probably accomplish, due to the fact we’ve pissed off the Iraqi government.
A win-win for Trump and Iran.
That is correct, we killed a terrorist that has and would have continued to kill Americans. What would you have done? Ignored it? Appease Iran like the previous administration did? How did that work out? Why do you suppose Soleimani was in Iraq anyway? Oh yeah.. a diplomatic mission.
For the record, the Iraqi militias killing Americans in Iraq are targeting bases of foreign armed forces who invaded their country. Imagine Russia invading and taking back Alaska. Would militias fighting to get rid of them be labeled “terrorists” by our conservative yahoos?
Soleimani was in Iran at the invitation of Iraq’s prime minister. Iraq is rightly outraged at the assassination of an invited foreign dignitary on their soil.
Iran is also rightly outraged. Thanks to Commander Shinsplints, every general and admiral who drives home from the Pentagon every night is now a legitimate target, using the same logic that we used—they’re planning to do harm to Iran. Commander Shinsplints and Secretary of Misstate Mike Pompeo have both been asked to provide the evidence that Soleimani was planning terrorist acts against America. Were Iran asked to provide similar evidence to justify attacks on our military leaders, they could just point to their assassinated military commander.
Doug, we shouldn’t have invaded Iraq when we did and we shouldn’t be there today.
“Law not war” Ben Ferencz
Now the VEEP is spouting disinformation on behalf of POTUS: Gen. Suleimani was a prime planner and implementer of 9/11. Never that there’s zero evidence to support that. Never mind that Iran’s Shiites hate the Sunni Saudis who carried out 9/11. Long as it supports the post hoc narrative that the mouth-breathing Trumpskateers can get behind.
IMPOTUS the Third. Starting the fuse toward the Dynamite is the latest tit for tat but time will tell how far the retaliation will go and if the escalation was warranted.
Only popular presidents pickup points and poll higher heading into election time, with the threat of war.
We now know that the Loans IMPOTUS got, the hundreds of millions, were guaranteed “personally” by Putin!
Nothing to see here folks! Look….look over there, there is a situation in Iran. We need to get the press off the crimes and impeachment talk, off any Treason talk.A Proportionate Response was called for.
Bought and Paid for by Russia! Your impotus.
Another hint, several Republican Senators have signed on to an abortion brief to the Supreme Court. Notably absent from the signees were Senator McSally of Arizona and Senator Gardner of Colorado. Both are facing elections against strong Democrat opponents.
Bruce – Actually all but 13 Republican senators signed the brief asking the Supreme Court to do away with safe, legal abortion (those 13 are up for reelection in races they are likely to lose to Democrats). This is a party-wide crime against women, and the children Republicans want to force into existence in an over-crowded world only to suffer. I’ve become convinced that right-wing anti-choicers actually hate children (we already know they hate women).
Patricia, I point out that there are cracks in the Republican party and you, like the Democrats, complain that they don’t denounce Trump because of his immoral actions.
No wonder Trump will win in 2020. And those Republicans you think will lose to Democrats is not a proven. McSally and Gardner will win because the Democrats can’t decide on a candidate just like the presidential candidates.
And McSally, who has been in the forefront protecting women’s health does not hate women.
What does the fact that the vast majority of Republican senators are pushing the Supreme Court to do away with safe, legal abortion (a violation of civil rights Trump has been furthering since Day One of his presidency) have to do with that same Republican majority backing Trump? If those 13 Republicans weren’t afraid of losing their seats they would have signed that brief too.
And in what way has McSally been “protecting women’s health”? No one who is anti-abortion, doesn’t consider birth control “health care”, and wants to defund Planned Parenthood (which Trump has already managed to accomplish, to the detriment of millions of girls and women) is interested n “protecting women’s health”.
Patricia, I know you get the same news here in Phoenix that I do so if you don’t know what McSally is doing for women’s, especially in the military, health you are ignoring it. No sense in arguing with you.
Happy New Year! Here, deep in the Red Zone, many people are way out of alignment in regards with the rest of the county, we already knew that. As we go into 2020 here are some thoughts.
Impeachment: The majority of Americans think the evidence supports Trump’s removal
Guns: When it comes to the general sentiment around guns and whether it’s more important to control gun violence or protect gun rights, a majority of Americans say it’s more important to control gun violence (55% to 39%) and ban the sale of semi-automatic assault guns such as the AK-47 or the AR-15 87% (57%) A majority of Americans do not think Congress should pass legislation to allow schoolteachers to carry guns, 57% to 37%,
War: The U.S. Public Still Doesn’t Want War With Iran According to recent polling data, the majority of Americans blame Trump’s policies for heightened tensions with Iran—and the killing of Suleimani won’t change that.
Pro Choice: The public is not divided on abortion. In 2019, public support for abortion rights is the highest it has been in 20 years of polling, according to the Pew Research Center. A reported 61% of Americans believe abortion should be legal in all or most cases, and only 12% of the public want to see abortion made illegal.
Healthcare: Do you think Trump lies? As a candidate for the White House, Donald Trump repeatedly promised that he would “immediately” replace President Barack Obama’s health care law with a plan of his own that would provide “insurance for everybody.” Trump promised his healthcare plan is, “much less expensive and much better” than the Affordable Care. And he put drug companies on notice that their pricing power no longer would be “politically protected. Now he is on the verge of eliminating the ACA. Meantime the uninsured rate has gone up on Trump’s watch, rising in 2018 for the first time in nearly a decade to 8.5% of the population, or 27.5 million people, according to the Census Bureau and a record number of U.S. adults say they have put off receiving medical care due to … costs for health care, according to Gallup’s annual Health and Healthcare poll.
Obamacare has reached new heights of popularity, with a firm majority of Americans holding a favorable view of the health care law. The Kaiser Family Foundation said 54 percent viewed the Affordable Care Act favorably in its February tracking polls, up from 50 percent in January.
Tax: Unless you’re a millionaire, the second birthday of the Trump-GOP tax cuts is nothing to celebrate. Trump predicted the economy — boosted by the “rocket fuel” of his tax cuts — would grow as fast as 6%. Instead, annual growth hasn’t even reached 3%. Multiple polls show only about a third of the country approves of the legislation itself, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, passed by Congress at the end of 2017.
Happy New Year? If you are in the upper 10% economic bracket, sure, and here in Redding we’re just tripping over those folks, so damn many of them. The rest of us…. We will see.
This comes as no surprise, given Trump’s history of blatant racism in his housing projects, and his long history of other racist actions and remarks.
And of course his entire administration has centered around giving privilege to whites (especially white men) at the expense of minorities and women of any race.
This one is for you Doug Cook. Boy, was I surprised by this interview via CNN with the Rand Paul Tea Party loving guy. Feels like at times, anyone is capable of a lucid moment.
I wrote elsewhere that one of the bigger tragedies associated with Trump’s latest rash and stupid decision is that Iran’s liberalizing influences will be crushed. The liberal and moderates will grow even less influential, and the impulses that gave rise to the Green Movement—led mostly by well-educated urbanites—will be entirely snuffed out. Further, Iran has already announced that they will now recognize no constraints on enriching uranium and developing nuclear weapons.
I don’t often agree with Sen. Rand, but on this we’re simpatico.
Anti Iranian sentiment was also growing among Iraqis that felt Iran was wielding too much influence in their country.
It seems that movement will be replaced by nationalism and support for their neighbor against the infidel invader.
And the never ending war marches on.
Steve Towers, nice to hear a sane voice; too bad it doesn’t seem to matter one bit what you
and I think. Sure, we’ll vote but these people have no regard for anything or anyone not orbiting their personal, protected bubbles. I’m so very sick to the core of this president and his conscienceless disciples. Humanity be damned, partisan Trump genuflecting is the order of the day with the current Republican administration. Typically I can count on my son in New York to talk reason to me and look at things objectively and in a reasonable fashion when I get angry, frustrated and frightened at our current shit show. He holds no punches for liberals, conservatives or msm alike when he thinks they’re behaving like jackasses. This time he said “try and focus on something less awful”. Good advice; hard to do right now. Good thing I dropped cable.
Anyone else feel nervous about going to bed tonight; not know what the world will be like tomorrow? 🙁
If I said what I really was thinking I’d have to remove my comment and ban me.
I have many helicopter pilot friends and acquaintances who are in the National Guard and Reserves. I’m *really* nervous for them.
I’m so sorry. I have a candle going for all the military families. It reminds me to send some love when I don’t know what else to do.
Thank you for this. Always good to know I’m not the only one. My recent thinking is that there is too much focus on Trump. He can’t be changed. I would like to see (and join) a march on the Senate. Bypass Trump. Ignore him. If the Senate put pressure on him…
No Doni…I slept like a baby last night. and when I woke up this morning, what did we find? The president addressed the nation, he backed off on any further military action, he rightly imposed more sanctions. Iran “appears to be standing down” was the report. Reports emerged that Iran deliberately used older missiles and was not intending to kill Americans. Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said early Wednesday that Tehran had “concluded” its attacks and did “not seek escalation or war. So what this did was actually make it safer for Americans overseas. It will make Iran think twice before they target Americans. In a week, this will be forgotten and there will be another made up Trump scandal.
I posted the below on my FB page. I really try and avoid politics. However, I’m just so damn angry.
I find it unconscionable that Trump is not addressing the country tonight. He started it, and needs to immediately address it. I’m trying to imagine me getting away with that at work. Only in this case, the American military and their families are suffering. Along with the rest of us. I understand he is not capable. I place my blame on the Republican controlled Senate. In my very angry mind, they are the only ones who could manage this dangerous person. For those who think war is cool, and want to see nukes flying around, I would invite you to consider this: it would take so little to take America down. Without bombs. It’s time for the Senate to stand up. Because all is not really well right now.
So, Barbara Rice. I said what I was really thinking.
In the 2018 election for Arizona Senator the ads against Sinema posted by McSally showed Sinema in a pink tutu protesting the war in Iraq. Sinema won the election and some have called her a DINO while most say she is doing a good job for Arizona while staying out of the DC squabbling. Today Senator Sinema posted that “Iran is an aggressor that must be stopped to protect Arizona families”.
I expect that there will be a lot of “kill the messenger” over this post.
Nervous for those in harm’s way. Deeply saddened for the country and fellow citizens. I do not think this will come to an all out shooting war (largely because I think Iran will show more clear sighted maturity and restraint than our current administration) — although I do think over time there WILL be a reckoning. But the realization of the damage already inflicted even if we manage to pull back from the precipice at this late date .. all come about for little or no apparent REASON. Not even the thinnest tissue of rationale for WHY ARE WE HERE?
And for that — I think we must all be inutterably sad.
“… Iran will show more clear sighted maturity and restraint than our current administration”
Miguel, Why do you believe the US are the bad guys and the Iranians are the victims? Why are you saddened when we took out a terrorist that is hell bent on killing Americans? The Iranian regime has been killing Americans since I was a kid. Soleimani had and was planning more attacks on Americans. The US had enough and it was time to send a message. If you want to kill Americans, we will now do what we can to stop you. Iran got that message loud and clear.
Doug – Because by “taking out a terrorist” we advanced not a single articulable goal benefiting either our country or the region. Because this is “knee-jerk” foreign policy wherein personal gratification seems to trump nuclear deescalation, regional stability, or any other stated agenda. Because we have almost surely re-empowered and re-energized radical elements within Iran and Iraq (and throughout region) and pushed back efforts at moderation (or in the case of Iraq, just plain old functional stable government) most likely for decades. Again. Because we have once again destabilized a region where we had most recently made gains, expended the usual national blood and treasure, in pushing back and marginalizing another virulent radicalization in the form of ISIL — made possible and given rise in the LAST destabilization we introduced to the Middle East.
And because we seem willing to to factor NONE of that — none holding the slightest weight or consideration — because Donnie has a mad.
Of course killing the terrorist benefitted out country. How did it not? It benefitted out country because he will never plan to kill Americans ever again, and his successor will undoubtedly think twice about continuing his reign of terror. Remember, this scum was responsible for killing many Middle Easterns as well as Americans. What response would you prefer? To do nothing? Let him plan and execute more violence against us? Iran made a statement that they concluded their ‘vengeance’. It’s over. A bad dude is dead, and the region is much safer.
Over 4,000 Iraqi non-combatant citizens were killed when we invaded their country under false pretenses. It’s estimated that between 100k and 200k more have died in the unstable conditions that we’ve created. Does that make George Bush and Donald Rumsfeld scum, using Doug’s own logic? If not, do you think he could tell us the difference?
Doug seems to actually believe that 4+ decades of conflict with Iran is over, thanks to Trump’s masterful plan. You can bet that approximately zero people at the Pentagon and at CIA headquarters in Langley agree.
If the region is much safer — then of course we will hear the voices of the inhabitants (and others around the globe) singing praises for our perspicacious and just actions.
There you go putting words in my mouth again…something you do so well. Where did I say that the conflict with Iran is over? I said that the game has changed where now Iran knows that we will not put up with attacks on Americans. We didn’t retaliate when they blew up our drone…but we did when American citizens were attacked and killed.
According to Reuters…”In mid-October, Iranian Major-General Qassem Soleimani met with his Iraqi Shi’ite militia allies at a villa on the banks of the Tigris River, looking across at the U.S. embassy complex in Baghdad.” “Soleimani instructed his top ally in Iraq, Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, and other powerful militia leaders to step up attacks on U.S. targets in the country using sophisticated new weapons provided by Iran, two militia commanders and two security sources briefed on the gathering told Reuters.”
Of course, Steve thinks that Soleimani was just a diplomat.
Miguel — In the mind of Mr. Factiod here, Commander Shinsplints drew a lime in the sand and the Iranians won’t dare cross it.
Praise Jesus! After more than 40 years of hostilities, we’ve finally tamed the ayatollahs! We can all stop worrying about the Middle East now. This will all be a distant memory in a week.
Horrified that 80 American service men and women have reportedly been killed so far in retaliation for Trump’s reckless grandstanding. Will Republicans in Congress ever stand up to this deranged demagogue? Will it take a nuclear holocaust before this clearly dangerous sociopath is finally removed from office?
I find it interesting that you rather believe Iranian propaganda than actual facts. The facts are that no Americans were injured in the rocket attack. Prior to the attack…Iran told Iraq where and when the missiles will drop. and of course the Iraqis told the Americans in time to move any personnel out of the way. This attack was done for nothing more than for Iranian domestic consumption and to save face.
It appears that Iran learned their lesson and is now backing down as is Trump. So your statement about the president starting a nuclear holocaust is once again, more of your hyperbole. In his first address on the conflict with Iran, President Trump declined to order more military action against Iran. This story will be a distance memory in a week.
Ya, Americans should never question “facts” presented to us because our government never participates in propaganda or spin; only other countries are guilty of that and should never be believed. American facts are the only true facts and we know from experience that our government only tells the truth about other governments and their intent even if it’s to our disadvantage to do so. It’s not wrong to question our leaders. In fact I’d say it’s required of us since we as Americans enjoy the hard-won right to do so.
Patrecia — Mr. Factoid wants to lecture us on paying attention to what he says are the facts. Up above he says that the killing of Soleimani was in retaliation for the attack on our embassy a couple days before. But the assassination was planned prior to that embassy riot.
I don’t think we need to pay much attention to lectures from Commander Shinsplints’ #1 fan. Most especially lectures about facts.
So you think that it was a mere coincidence that Soleimani was in Iraq? That he was on a ‘diplomatic mission’? You believe that the embassy riot was spontaneous? Maybe it had something to do with a You Tube video.
So where are we now, Steve? After a couple of days of all of your pearl clutching and angst? A dangerous terrorist is dead, The president initiated more sanctions, the Iranians lobbed a few missiles that did nothing. We don’t have to ‘tame’ the ayatollahs…what we can do is to warn them that if they continue to attack Americans and their allies, that we won’t tolerate it anymore and we are not afraid to take action. The game has changed.
In Doug’s world, Soleimani was in Iraq to orchestrate terrorist attacks on Americans. See, he couldn’t do that from Iran—he had to be in the front row. Never mind that the Prime Minister of Iraq invited him—that doesn’t fit Doug’s story. THAT’s the coincidence…in Doug’s world.
Also in Doug’s world, there is NO WAY that Commander Shinsplints escalated the conflict with Iran as a way of dampening the impeachment process, or to help him win in 2020. Y’know…exactly as Shinsplints (wrongly) predicted Obama would do in 2012. That diversionary tactic would never cross Shinsplints’ mind, right? I mean, it did 8 years ago, but…uh…but…
“…In Doug’s world, Soleimani was in Iraq to orchestrate terrorist attacks on Americans.”
Steve, not to trivialize but aside from the fact that I disagree with most all
things DC says and the topic at hand is a very serious one, I have to ask… is the “Doug’s World” that’s been mentioned several times, a mash-up, spin-off from “Doug” and “Wayne’s World”? Cuz I’d watch that. Just sayin’. Sorry. Carry on.
Candace, In my world, I don’t have the knee jerk reaction that everything the US does is evil. Or at least everything that President Trump does is evil. I have spent an inordinate amount of my adult life in the Middle East. I have a pretty good handle on the dynamics of that region. The last couple of days we have been hearing a lot of rhetoric and over the top comments about the possible repercussions of killing this terrorist. What is the reality? Iran lobbed a few harmless missiles, blowing up a couple of empty buildings. They backed down, sanctions were increased by the president…an evil terrorist is dead. This will be forgotten in about a week. Yes, this is a serious subject, but it is made worse by the Trump haters that think everything he does is dangerous.
The left was strangely quiet when President Obama increased drone attacks during his term. 563 drone attacks with an estimated 800 civilians killed, compared to 57 strikes under Bush. But now, Trump kills an evil terrorist and those on the left are getting the vapors and getting nervous about going to bed at night. This attack on Soleimani is making American citizens safer . It put Iran on notice that this administration will not appease them like the previous administration did. So, sure…make your silly joke about Doug’s World…but Doug’s World spent 20 years in service of our country, proudly flying missions over the Middle East for a large part of that 20 years. Doing my best to protect our interests around the world so Doni can go to sleep without being nervous. Face it…this is nothing but an everything Trump does is bad syndrome. It’s a shame that because of the hatred for our president…many on here would rather support the evil Iran regime than our president.
Per the article below and its various links, civilian deaths have soared under Trump – with six thousand civilian casualties in Iraq and Syria in his first year alone, and many more in other Middle Eastern as the result of U.S.-led attacks.
However, the media has been so focused on Trump’s endless series of scandals and other corrupt and sleazy activities that this fact hasn’t gotten the attention it warrants.
There is also the proven fact that the Trump administration has concealed and lied about these deaths.
Iran TV reports 80 deaths. CNN reports no deaths.
Doug, my silly joke was not aimed at you personally but you’re right, it was definitely meant as just that – a silly joke. I’m sorry if you took it that way but I can see why you did. Bad timing on my part. As far as the rest of what you said I’m not going to rebut it because it’s pointless. Your idea of reality is not mine. Thank you for your service.
Iraqi militias were warning security forces to stay away from US bases starting Sunday. Sounds like the American and Iranian people are being played like a fiddle once again while the Iraqi people continue to be in a war zone of our making.
Don’t you mean that Trump and his minions are claiming no deaths? Since we know Trump lies every time he opens his mouth, it’s more likely that he and his flakey staff are trying to minimize the damage his reckless actions caused.
Trump has surrounded himself with fanatics who actually believe he was put in office by “god” to carry out a series of horrifying actions to fulfill predictions in some brutal primitive religious text – and so does his idiotic base. Do we know when he will next go off the rails without the knowledge and approval of Congress?
Patrecia, Can you find any news source other than Iranian propaganda that has reported any deaths or injuries? You actually believe that killing a terrorist that was responsible for deaths of Americans is a ‘horrifying action’?
Since Bloomberg is a paid site I can’t tell where its information came from. However, below is a Fact Check of all the provable lies Trump has told in connection with this attack. And Doug – you might want to check out the section that begins with the paragraph below:
“Trump frequently lays claim to the strongest economy in U.S. history, but it’s another Bottomless Pinocchio claim (which he’s repeated 242 times as of Dec. 10, by our count). In reality, the unemployment rate has gone lower and GDP growth has been higher in previous administrations”.
It goes on to point out that he is also not responsible for other supposed signs of economic improvement (some of which he’s completely misrepresented), or for the fact that the U.S. is now less dependent on foreign oil. We can’t trust a single claim that comes out of this administration.
Nice deflection, Patrecia. Let’s try this again. Show me any reliable news site that is reporting that anyone was injured or killed in the Iranian missile attack. It’s almost like you are disappointed that no one was killed. Iran got the message loud and clear that attacks on Americans will not be tolerated. This was a successful operation that will make Americans living in the Middle East safer.
Since Trump and his administration are hardly an accurate source of information, I don’t know that the U.S. media has any accurate information to present.
And it wasn’t a “deflection”. You are constantly parroting Trump’s talking points on the economy, so I decided to take the opportunity to point out (once again) what a pathological liar he is.
Here’s my cynical conspiracy theory of the day. Suleimani isn’t dead. No true identification has been made public. Iran’s “retaliation” was just for show as their in-country propaganda expanded on it’s affect. Iraq will kick us out and Trump will be the strong man he claims to be while exiting from Iraq as promised.
Larry, best theory yet.
You got one out of three correct. There is no doubt that he is dead. Nobody disputes that. You are correct though that Iran’s retaliation was just for show. It meant nothing . Iraq will not kick us out of the country. That vote the other day was a non binding resolution by a minority of the government. It’s like declaring Tuesday national blueberry day with about the same amount of seriousness. The more likely scenario is that Iran will begin pulling out of Iraq.
Doug, Soleimani flew from Damascus to Baghdad on a commercial airliner Cham Wings. Pronounced
SHAM WINGS. (mike drop)
And your point being? Soleimani often traveled as if he felt he was untouchable. That was his mistake. He knew that Bush and Obama rejected plans to attack him and assumed Trump would do the same. Wrong. I guess you are still going with the fantasy that he was on a diplomatic mission, correct?
My point being that we, the general public, know nothing of what is really happening. The filter I use is to see who benefits and who doesn’t. We’ve been lied to so many times by our military/intelligence/politicians that I can’t help being cynical and I don’t apologize for it. It’s earned.
I never said he was there on a diplomatic mission. But can you answer this question, why was the Iraqi government working with him and allowing his influence in their country?
Maybe it was Steve that said he was on a diplomatic mission. He was not, he was in Iraq to coordinate attacks on US interests. You can thank President Obama for Iran’s influence in Iraq. With his decision to pull troops out of Iraq prematurely, he allowed the Iranians to fill the vacuum and it is their strategy is to put in place a government in Iraq, friendly to the Iranians, almost a puppet state. Remember, Iran has extended its influence in Lebanon, Syria, Yemen and Afghanistan, and throughout the region.
Is it your belief that Soleimani didn’t deserve to be killed?
He should have been tried and hanged on a guilty verdict.
You didn’t answer about why the Iraqi government was working with him?
And regarding Iran’s influence, there is push back from the Iraqi population. Why do we need to use military force in what should be an internal, sovereign nation problem?
And Doug, the “does he deserve to die” question ignores the issue of how is this death list put together. Should we assassinate Assad in Syria? The Crown in Saudi Arabia? Why stop at the level just below the State leaders that direct these actions. Don’t you think they deserve to die for their sins? The Ayatollah in Iran? The list can go on.
It was I who said that Soleimani was there at the invitation of the Iraqi President, and was on his way to a scheduled meeting with the President when he was offed. I said that because that’s what Iraq’s President said. I think I’ll take his word over yours, Doug.
As for your theory that Obama is responsible for Iran’s influence in Iraq: That became inevitable as soon as Bush II overthrew the minority Sunnis and handed the country over to the majority Shiites.
Any idiot could have predicted that the new Shiite government would seek a close relationship with their powerful Shiite neighbor. Any idiot except Bush II, that is.
Doug sez: “Remember, Iran has extended its influence in Lebanon, Syria, Yemen and Afghanistan, and throughout the region. Is it your belief that Soleimani didn’t deserve to be killed?”
Uh….so spreading your nation’s influence justifies your assassination? (Unless it’s American influence through violence, obviously.) Holy shit, Doug…you’ve ascended to a whole new level of jingoistic arrogance.
What Kerry and Obama did in 2015 through diplomacy with Iran was remarkable. Especially remarkable is that Iran complied. All of that positive diplomacy work has been completely trashed by a reckless moron.
In all probability that same moron with self-assumed executive power decided (without consulting Congress) to suddenly assassinate the second highest ranked Iranian official who happens to be beloved by 90% of his country’s people.
In addition, we now have an unstable situation that’s getting worse by the hour including what appears to be Iran mistakenly shooting down a commercial airliner full of multinationals after taking off from Tehran.
And- it’s likely he didn’t EVEN know who that General was only a few days ago. How awful does this guy have to get before he’s removed? What a freaking mess! Rant over.
If the Iran agreement was so remarkable, why didn’t Obama get it ratified as a treaty? Because it would have been laughed out of the Senate. So, it’s a simple executive agreement, which doesn’t require ratification. Iran promised their own people that it would use the sanctions relief to improve conditions inside of Iran. Instead, they spent the money to support Assad in Syria, buy weapons, and sponsor terrorism and conflict throughout the Middle East. That is where that pallet full of money went. The nuclear agreement was part of the Obama administration’s policy around the proposition that Iran would evolve into a responsible state That was never going to work, not as long as the current regime is in power. The agreement simply gave Iran the time and money to develop their centrifuges and tickets It was a horrible deal that President Trump was correct in dumping.
Dang auto correct..that should be centrifuges and rockets, not tickets
Doug — You know damned well why Obama didn’t get the treaty ratified. A treaty has to be ratified by 2/3 of the US Senate. You couldn’t get the US Senate to ratify a treaty to unite the armed forces of all nations to fend off an invasion by aliens from the Trifid Nebula who want to use us as food.
True, the Iran accord was an imperfect agreement, but at least it was a speed bump. What do we have now? Iran says they have no longer have any incentive to honor any part of the agreement with the US or anyone else. So where does that leave us?
You want us to believe that the whole incident boils down to this: (1) We killed a terrorist. (2) A cowed Iran faked a retaliatory attack. (3) That’s it—the world is a now a safer place.
Tensions are escalated, 177 people aboard a Ukrainian passenger jet are deader than fried chicken, the Iranians will resume full-tilt development of nuclear weapons, and Iran’s moderates and liberals will be increasingly marginalized by hair-on-fire apocalyptic religious fanatics.
Unfortunately moderates and liberals are being increasingly marginalized by “hair-on-fire apocalyptic religious fanatics” right here in America – thanks to the vast number of those types Trump has appointed to head nearly every federal agency and commission (not to mention the damage he’s done to the federal court system).
Peculiar behavior- Hannity threatens GOP senators if they allow witnesses. Uh… could he possibly be indebted to someone? Say maybe- prezident King Con, and/or the Russians or turtle man McConnell or Murdoch, the Fox Corporation or Suzanne Scott perchance? I mean they’re all such outstanding citizens, I just can’t imagine.
Correction- “citizens” is inaccurate. My error.
In really important news, Klma Alizadeit, has defected citing women’s abuse by her home country.
THE Alma Alizadeh?
Spellchecker changes it to Alma. When I googled the name as Bruce spelled it, what came up was an Dutch-Iranian woman who is the lead singer in a metal band. She grew up in the Netherlands. No news on her defection, but anyways, women are treated badly in the Netherlands? Where’s she going to go from there? Themyscira? (Look it up.)
I finally saw that Kimia Alizadeh, the Iranian bronze medalist in Taekwondo, has defected to somewhere in Europe. She became temporarily famous for competing in the Olympics in a head scarf. Her reasons for defecting are a good reminder of why we shouldn’t want the USA to turn into a goddamned theocracy.
“To reproduce and keep the Amazon race alive, the Themyscirans raid ships on the high seas and copulate with men. At the end of the mating, they take their lives and throw their corpses into the sea rather than marry them.”
Thanks for adding to our collective consciousness, Esteban.
Thanks for sparing us what they did with the infant boys.
For the “Right price” you can have a Platoon of Real Soldiers show up at your next event!
Call now, the number is 1-800-BST-RUMP. Payment plans ARE available!
Who’s Bank Account? The Treasury doesn’t have a record of this Billion Dollar Deposit? Or the 500 Million Dollar payout???
Maybe they sent it to Hillary’s email account by MISTAKE? No Wonder they have investigated that 3 times!
Saudis Arabia has been paying the US for military support for years…even under Democrat presidents. During the Iran/Iraq war. Saudi paid the US for Air Refueling support, to refuel the Saudi F-15’s patrolling the border. We had our own hotel supplied by the Saudis. So no…this is not a Trump deal. Carter, Reagan, Clinton and Bush all had the same deal. But of course the left only pays attention when Trump does it. Can you be any more hypocritical?
As I recall the USA was not one of the warring countries in the Iraq/Iran war.
If we refueled planes on behalf of Saudi Arabia , they should have paid for the service.
I would bet we gave them a pretty good deal.
Certainly ours hands were not clean in that particular war.
Didn’t we arm Suddam Hussein to fight Iran after we ruined the Iranian democracy?
That’s what I said, Chad. Saudi Arabia was not one of the warring countries either, but both Iran and Iraq frequently violated Saudi airspace during that war. It was our job to refuel the Saudi fighters that were protecting their airspace from these incursions…and Saudi paid for this service we provided. This is what President Trump is trying to do. Get our Allies to pay for us for their defense. That’s a good thing. NATO has ponied up over a billion more dollars since the president has been pushing them to pay their way.
“Saudi Arabia is paying us for our troops. We have a very good relationship with Saudi Arabia. I said, listen, you’re a very rich country. You want more troops? I’m going to send them to you, but you’ve got to pay us. They’re paying us. They’ve already deposited $1 billion in the bank.” — Trump
Commander Shinsplints has been trumpeting loudly about his deal to get Saudi Arabia to pay us to be their proxy military. If he’s taking credit for it, how is it hypocritical of the left to play along?
By the way, did you read today that he’s saying he should have received the Nobel Peace Prize that went to the President of Ethiopia? Trump claimed that he had cut the deal between Ethiopia and Eritrea: “I saved a country!”
In reality, Trump had absolutely nothing to do with it. ‘Course, it’s not like we didn’t already know he’s egomaniacal, delusional, and pig-ignorant.
Steve a little supporting evidence for your Delusional Assessment! Not fit for the office and is not supporting the Constitution or laws or rules. A Malignant Narcissist on the National Stage! Frightening!
It’s in the Bank Steve, Hahahahahah. Well Commander bone spurs, Whose Account???
Quit while you are behind…..but no….A Malignant Narcissist can never do that…..and all the syc·o·phants are going down with the ship!
Steve, After Iran bombed Saudi oil refineries a few months ago, Trump agreed to send them defensive support. We sent them anti missle batteries and fighter protection. We did not send soldiers, we did not send in the Army or Marines to fight. This is no different than what we did in the 80’s and 90’s. Like it or not, Saudi Arabia are still our Allies. So no…we are not being paid to be a ‘proxy military’. We are providing defense support to an Allie after a damaging attack by Iran. Same thing previous presidents have done…the difference? Trump brags about it. That’s Trump being Trumpian. Same as your shock over the Novel Peace Prize. Trump being Trump, although President Trump deserves the prize just as much as Obama did…
Doug — I’ll go back to Trump’s comment, which you’ve conveniently ignored: “Saudi Arabia is paying us for our troops…”
The issue I was addressing was the disconnect between what Trump said and what you said. Your response: Misdirection, moving the goalposts, etc. Your usual bag of obvious limp-d*** tricks.
Commander Bonespurs tells the fawning mouth-breathers who attend his rallies that he’s getting us out of the Middle East. In truth, he’s sent an additional 14,000 troops to the region, and has dialed up an additional 3,000 since his assassination of Gen. Soleimani.
“The troops that we are sending into Saudi and the enhanced assets are defensive,’’ said Brian H. Hook, the State Department’s special representative for Iran. “They are there to defend our interests and to help Saudi defend itself.” — NY Times
If you don’t think that adds up to providing a proxy military for one of the most repugnant, totalitarian, anti-intellectual, peacocky, misogynistic, vulgar, entitled, undeserving, ungrateful, ass-backward regimes on the planet, then we disagree. He defends the Saudis and Kuwaitis, and abandons the Kurds who actually fought alongside us.
After 9/11, huge crowds of Iranians held candlelight vigils in Tehran and other large cities in sympathy. Saudi Arabia’s response wasn’t celebratory, but it was muted and disturbingly unapologetic, in spite of the fact that it was largely Saudis who carried out the attack. Gallup poles revealed that almost half of Saudi citizens thought the terrorist attack was justified. Later, it was revealed that a Saudi official helped plan the attack. When victims sued the Saudi government in response, the Saudis threatened retaliation.
With friends like that, who needs enemies?
Oh good grief Steve…join the real world. Boo hoo, we have to deal with a repugnant country to protect our interests. Just like every other president has realized they have to do. Foreign policy is ever changing, President Obama pulled troops out of Iraq, but ended up putting thousands back in because the situation changed. The difference? He wasn’t Trump so everyone ignored it.
“The troops that we are sending into Saudi and the enhanced assets are defensive,’’. Yes, Steve…that is exactly what I said. We are setting up anti missile defense systems, fighter support with air refueling tankers that go along with it.. That is what you do when an Allie is threatened. Sorry that you are offended that Saudi is misogynistic. I wonder if you were just as offended when President Obama yukked it up with another brutal totalitarian at a baseball game in Cuba.
I have been to Saudi Arabia dozens of times. I found the citizens there mostly pro American. I was always treated well and I made a lot of friends over there. Be real, Steve…the world relies on Saudi Arabia for energy, it is in our own best interest to ensure that Saudi remains safe and secure. It is interesting, however that under Trump, we have become energy independent, 20 years ago we would have had gas shortages and spiking prices if Iran destroyed half of Saudi’s refinery capability.
No Steve, I didn’t ignore your comment. I agreed with your comment. Saudi pays for our military support. The same way Japan pays for our military presence, Germany pays for our military presence, NATO pays for our military presence… why is that such a big surprise to you? As I explained with my own experience, Saudi paid for the US Air Force’s support in the 80’s and 90’s. Why all of a sudden is it such a dastardly deed now? Oh yeah, because Trump is doing it.
By the way, are you watching the protests in Iran? It’s not the pro regime and pro Soleimani protests you were expecting. They are ripping posters down of Soleimani, they are protesting the ayatollahs. This could be the fuse lit that causes a change in Iran. Face it, this has been another net positive for Trump, and y’all can’t stand that.
Doug — Yes, of course I’m paying attention to the protests in Iran. I’m the person here who has long argued that the urbanites in Iran want to liberalize, and we’ve failed to support that. When the Green Movement was sweeping across the Muslim world, it was put down in Iran by the hard-liners. They did it by bussing in heavily armed pro-regime conservative rubes from rural areas who weren’t shy about murdering demonstrators. (There were plenty of people in the USA who saw that as a potential parallel for what could happen in the United States—myself included.) I think I’ve made my admiration of Iranian culture and potential abundantly clear. I think we’re betting on the wrong horse. You clearly don’t.
As for your and Trump’s claim that we are energy independent thanks to Trump: Fake news.
First of all, we’re not energy independent, and shouldn’t try to be. Source diversification is a hedge against domestic production disruption (e.g., a hurricane on the Gulf Coast). And we have not yet reached a point where our domestic production of BTUs sustainably exceeds our consumption of BTUs. Further, in the past 20 years or so, when production has briefly exceeds consumption, it’s usually been owing to a short-term drop in consumption.
Secondly, our growing energy production is driven mostly by increases in rates of renewables dating back to ~2002 and beyond (Bush II), and natural gas dating back to ~2008 and beyond (Obama). If any Republican should be credited for initiating those trends, it’s Bush II. Trump, as is his habit, is taking credit for trends that long pre-date him. And the chumps who adoringly lick Trump’s boots are letting him take that credit.
Your anecdotal experiences with Saudis don’t move me in the slightest. It’s like me saying I’ve been to Mexico dozens of times, and have always found Mexicans to be cheerful, helpful, and friendly to tourists—therefore I’m an expert on the drug cartels and Mexican police, and they’re really not so bad.
As far as the Green movement, it is sad that President Obama downplayed the Green movement and avoided giving them support. He even ordered the CIA to sever contacts it had with the green movement’s supporters. All this because he wanted a nuclear deal with Iran.
When I said we are energy independent, I should have said that the U.S. dependence on Middle East oil has fallen, about half of what it was in 2008. That helps keep supply and pricing more stable and not tied to Middle East unrest.
You are the one that brought up Saudi citizens not being sympathetic to 9/11. I was just making the observation that it was my experience being in the country many times that the citizens were pro Americans and very kind to us.
Doug — I agree that Obama’s lack of support for the Green Movement was deeply disappointing.
California congressman Kevin McCarthy is reportedly introducing a resolution to voice support for the demonstrators in Iran. McCarthy is a lunatic, and his motivations have nothing to do with supporting the Green Movement, but I nevertheless support the resolutions.
They paid us a Billion, it’s in the bank. But no one knows Whose bank account it went into? WTH?
This may be Trump’s Worst Lie Ever
In recent days, President Trump has come up with a new twist on his justification for killing Iranian general Soleimani, namely that four embassies were targeted. From everything we know now (and from what Congress was told), this is simply made up. The Post reports that embassies themselves were not warned of any such imminent threats. Jennifer Rubin, Washington Post, Jan. 13, 2020 at 6:00 a.m. PST
Based on a 1990 American laws, something trump feels does not apply to him, when actionable threats are made against the USA, not only are the targets notified, I.e. embassies, but also the general public must be made aware of the threats.
Based on trumps claim that at least 4 embassies were in eminent danger so he had to kill Soleimani.
I don’t recall hearing any of these immediate and eminent threats.
Will Assassination/Murder be the next new Article of Impeachment? Time will tell on that charge!
Lev Parnas has now turned over 1000 pages of evidence and all cell phone records to the Dem’s! You might remember him as one of the three stooges that got the million dollar payment from the Russian Oligarch and gave half to Rudy G in the Ukraine Scandal/Extortion.
Dmitry Firtash may have a bit part in the drama and you might see his name come up this week.
On Fox News the Orange guy started in on not taking a salary.When asked where that money goes he replied Elaine Chow gets some of it and Drugs! So the White House posting a picture of it snowing even though it was 60 degrees out might be a tip off? You know, that sniffing all the time,the erratic behavior, hey lets assassinate/kill a guy stuff.
The next two weeks should be more than enough news to wipe out your popcorn and soda stash.Time to restock it’s going to be a VERY interesting rest of the year!
More Articles of Impeachment Coming? I would bet on that one.
Russia hacks again on behalf of the Orange Guy.This time it appears to be to find some Biden info. See before the right was trying to deflect saying it was Ukraine that did the 2016 Presidential hacking…..kind of hard to say that now! They wouldn’t hack themselves.
WE are trying hard for you Comrade! Don’t lose the election you can hear across the G.R.U.
Well it took awhile to come out but most of us already knew Nunes was in on the whole thing! See you later there Devin! It might take awhile, but his time will be up here soon. Deep in the hoopla.
How many more will be going down on the Trumptanic? Time will tell but one thing is clear, if you on board the Trumpanic, you won’t make it off the sinking ship if you don’t grab a lifeboat VERY soon!
Lev got one of the few remaining ones left!
I used to always think that Speaker Pelosi was a shrewd, smart politician. The Democrats, under Pelosi, couldn’t have screwed up this impeachment fiasco any more than they have. Democrats still haven’t accepted the defeat of 2016. They think impeachment would nullify that shocking loss… like it never happened…and allow them to ignore every lesson that came with that election. They can continue to ignore those because Trump was impeached. He was an anomaly. Some weird orange guy showed up for a few years, but we kicked him out. We don’t need to think about why voters would’ve supported him in the first place.
It seems like at the very moment Trump is being impeached, his numbers should be going down, and they’re not. They’re going up. So, it’s possible that instead of securing victory in 2020, these impeachment efforts could be leading the Democrats into a catastrophe. And why wouldn’t that be the case? Because when you strip away all the analysis, here’s the bottom line: Polls show consistently that for most voters, impeaching the president is not even close to the top of their list of priorities.
So, every day the Democrats continue to focus all of their energy on impeachment, they’re also sending a signal to voters that’s pretty clear. It’s we don’t care what you think. And that’s not a winning message over time.
Doug, the House impeachment vote was on Dec. 18. Trump’s average approval rating according to 538 was 43.8 on Dec. 17th. 41.8% on Jan 12. House votes to send articles to the Senate on the 14th and it’s up to 42.7% today.
If you can live with that “surge” of support because of the impeachment, that’s fine by me.
Larry, At this same time in President Obama’s term, he had an approval rating in the low to mid 40’s as well. Those numbers are enough to give President Trump a 2nd term. My point was, that you seemed to have missed, is that impeachment is a catastrophe for the Democrats. It is a flimsy, weak case that will turn into a net negative for them.
The average American is ignoring the impeachment, the average American is ignoring the Democrat candidates for that matter, the last debate got horrific ratings.
Doug — Once again, the lights came on, and your pants were down around your ankles. Larry provides some poll numbers that directly refute your claim that Trump’s approval numbers are surging, and you again move the goalposts.
You must not be an average American, because you’re not ignoring the impeachment. Neither is Larry. Neither am I. Nor are most of the people I know.
Here’s a poll number for you: 71% of Republicans want Moscow Mitch to call witnesses in the Senate trial. Sure, for some it’s because they want Velveeta Voldemort’s team to call the Bidens. But for others it’s that they don’t want the appearance of the Senate sweeping the impeachment charges under the rug. But you can bet your @$$ that McConnell and the White House won’t go along with that. They don’t want Bolton and others to testify under any means. The truth has to remain as obscured as much as possible.
I say: Bring on the witnesses. Bolten, Barr, the Biden—all the B’s, and everyone else both sides of the Senate deems necessary to clear the air.
Trump and his team of TV lawyers are apparently going to present the argument that abuse of power is not an impeachable offense—you have to violate the criminal code. It’s a repetition of Trump’s fantastically bizarre claim that Article 1 of the Constitution grants him the power to do whatever he wants. In other words, he take out an ad in the Washington Post asking Ukraine to investigate every single one of the Democratic candidates, and for Russia to do everything they can in the online world to throw the next election his way—and then argue that no specific statute had been violated in seeking that foreign interference.
And you? You apparently have zero sense of right and wrong. As long as your imaginary poll numbers are supporting Trump, it’s all good.
You’re supporting the notion that any abuse of power is okay, because it’s the POTUS. If that’s the new standard, our representative democracy with its separation of powers is deader than a Texas salad bar.
Doug, you used approval ratings to show the impeachment is giving Trump better numbers. That he is benefiting from it. It’s not as trumped up as you would have us believe. As for comparing numbers to Obama as a sign that Trump could win, you neglect to mention GHW Bush and Jimmy Carter’s numbers. How’d that work out for them. No other President in those charts that starts in 1945 has a President that has NEVER reached 50% approval rating like our present president.
And the latest Dem debate had more viewers than their last two debates. The last debate before Iowa caucuses. People have heard most of what the candidates are running on. The biggest take on the debates from my view was that the gloves are coming off. Time is running short for candidates to take a punch at their rival. CNN did a terrible job and there are lots of commentary afterwards on how biased it was against Sanders. It was painful to watch the disrespect.
As usual, you and Larry like to put words in my mouth. I never said Trump’s numbers were ‘surging’. I said they were going up. Yes, I am interested in the proceedings because I am a Political Science major and a political nerd. Regular Americans don’t care about this circus. And yes again, I do know right from wrong. I know it is wrong to impeach a president for political reasons, for no crimes committed. From what I have seen today, the GOP Senators have stuck together. So Trump will be acquitted and this joke will be forgotten about a week later
Doug, I don’t like to put words in your mouth and I try not to. I put quotation marks around surge to make light of your ratings moving up comment, given that you added this “that impeachment is a catastrophe for the Democrats”. A .9% increase does not a catastrophe make especially since his approval rating is DOWN 1.1 % since the House Inquiry started.
A Political Science major doesn’t make your legal opinion worthy enough for you not to back up your statement that no law was broken.
The independent GAO counters your belief.
“Faithful execution of the law does not permit the President to substitute his own policy priorities for those that Congress has enacted into law,” the report said. “OMB withheld funds for a policy reason, which is not permitted under the Impoundment Control Act (ICA)…Therefore, we conclude that OMB violated the ICA.”
The GAO also said that President Obama violated the law in 2014 in the Berghdal deal. Should he have he been impeached?
We can argue all day long about poll numbers, however the bottom line is this is not hurting the president. The talk about recession the left was all excited about fizzled out, disappointing many I presume. You can now see the Democrat Overlords going after Bernie again. Sending out Hillary to bash him. The establishment doesn’t want him, and will once again sabotage his campaign. With the new Democrat rules for allocating delegates, this could well be a brokered convention. Bottom line is that the Democrats are scared to death over the 2020 election. This is their best strategy, to try and hurt the president. They have been trying to impeach the president since the day he was sworn in. Best they could do is these weak charges. Not enough.
Doug — Yes, Obama broke the law. He traded some Taliban prisoners for Sgt. Berghdal, and failed to give Congress 30 days notice on the release of prisoners from Guantanamo. He did so on humanitarian grounds, on the argument that there was a narrow window for taking action.
You’re trying to equate that with Trump violating the law by withholding military aid in order to strong-arm a strategic ally to announce an investigation of Trump’s political foe, for Trump’s personal gain.
In your world, those are apparently morally and ethically equivalent violations of the law. Just so you know, that makes you look morally and ethically crippled.
You make the assumption that he withheld aide for personal reasons…I and half the country and half of Congress disagree with that assessment. It is now up to the Senate to make that determination. The fact is that Ukraine got their aid with no strings attached.
I’m not making any assumptions. The evidence is compelling, and Trump’s own team has been pre-screening the defense that he did it, but that abuse of power is not an impeachable offense.
You need to pay closer attention, Doug. The “he didn’t do it” narrative got lit up and pissed out weeks ago. Today the Government Accountability Office issued a report saying that Trump’s withholding of the aid was illegal.
Ukraine got the aid with no strings attached, you say? LOL. Yeah, a day or two after some inside whistleblower dropped a dime and Congress started asking questions, Trump’s team of sycophantic yes-men scrambled to minimize the damage. I’m actually embarrassed for you that you brought it up.
Funny how Orange Mussolini and Midnight Mitch are so dead set on making sure John Bolton and others don’t testify, huh? That’s what you do when you’re innocent…gag everyone, lock away all the documents, invoke executive privilege for everything under the sun, and hire scumbag TV attorneys who issue a score of false statements on the first two days of the trial.
“We can lie our way out of this” seems to be this administration’s motto.
Doug, these words in quotes are yours, “I know it is wrong to impeach a president for political reasons, for no crimes committed.”
More words of yours “Yes, I am interested in the proceedings because I am a Political Science major and a political nerd.”
But yet, you didn’t see or acknowledge the GAO report when you make the declarative statement that the impeachment is for political reasons for no crimes committed.
Your opinions are not of a Political Science major, but of an enabler/apologist.
Doug, 0ral arguments presented by House impeachment managers today were clear and indisputable. In addition, recorded text messages and video clips were displayed for back up. This case against your deranged idol is definitely no hoax. In fact- quite the opposite! They brought light on undeniable evidence and Adam Schiff was brilliant.
Your proclamation of “no crimes committed” is ludicrous .
Gary, I have been a juror bon s few trials in my lifetime. In just about every one, after the prosecution delivered the case, I was ready to convict the sumabitch. That’s why we have to hear both sides. This will be the first time that a defense will be presented. I was on one trial that I was convinced after hearing the prosecutions case that this guy was guilty as heck. We ended up acquitting him.
I also found it interesting that 2 of the 4 GOP Senators that may be the swing votes came out and said they were ‘stunned’ and ‘offended’ by some of Nadlers comments during his presentation.
Doug sez: “The talk about recession the left was all excited about fizzled out, disappointing many I presume.”
Nobody on the left is excited about a potential recession. Here are a couple of the left’s actual concerns that I’m sure you’re loath to address:
1. Trump’s tax cuts hare doing the usual GOP work of running up the nation’s credit cards to create the illusion of prosperity. We’re saddling our kids and grandkids with debt for the sake of the usual GOP-prescribed sugar rush.
2. Trump’s policies have put the growing wealth disparity of the United States into overdrive. He openly brags to his rich supporters that he’s making them richer. Meanwhile, his MAGA-rube base of working class and lower middle class supporters continue to fawn over him.
“The social situation of the lower strata, with low levels of education, predisposes them to view politics in simplistic and chiliastic* terms of black and white, good and evil. Consequently, other things being equal, they should be more likely than other strata to prefer extremist movements which suggest easy and quick solutions to social problems and have a rigid outlook rather than those which view the problem of reform or change in complex and gradualist terms and which support rational values of tolerance.” —Esteemed political scientist Seymour Martin Lipset in 1959, the year after my birth
*I had to look it up. It’s another word for millennialism—the belief that we’re living in the end times.
Steve, after the tax cuts, federal tax revenue actually increased. Payroll tax revenue rose about 5% last year due in part to rising employment and rising wages. So why has the federal deficit and debt increased? Simple…we spend too much. The left blame deficits on tax cuts, but the facts show the main culprit is spending. No one in the political class wants to talk about entitlements but that’s where the money is. No one talks about reducing the debt…no one from the GOP or the Democrats. Has it come up once in Democrat debates? I don’t think so. So in your opinion…what do we have to do to lower the debt? You want to tax our way out of it? or start controlling spending? Where do you start? What favorite federal program are you willing to cut? Or at the bare minimum, stop the rate of growth?
The poor and middle class are much better off under Trump, It doesn’t look like that for many of us living in Corruptifornia, where half the homeless live, where we are one of the highest taxed states in the Union….but you can thank the Democrats who have been in power since 1971 for that.
Doug — Simplistic, dumbed-down talk about the debt issue only contributes to the ongoing problem. Revenues went up after Trump’s tax cuts….but revenues always go up, unless we’re in a recession. Spending always goes up, too. When it comes to debt, the important metric is deficit spending as a percentage of gross domestic product. That’s the real measure of how significantly we’re contributing to the federal debt.
The current rate of accumulated debt as a % of GDP under Trump has only been seen three times since I started paying attention in high school: The 70s recession (started in November 1973—Nixon Administration); the 80s recession (started July 1981—Reagan Administration); and the Great Recession (started December 2007—Bush II Administration).
The CBO data are clear on the issue. Here are the big contributors to our growing debt using the above-described metric (highest contributor to lowest):
1. Bush II
3. Bush I
“Reagan proved deficits don’t matter.” — V.P. Dick Cheney, 2004
When Clinton was leaving office, we were poised to start paying down the federal debt—it was central to Gore’s platform. Instead, Bush II was installed in the White House, he cut taxes, and deficit spending exploded. Again.
As for Trump? According to Forbes: “President Trump’s budget deficits as a percentage of GDP will exceed any other President’s during a time of economic expansion.”
Trump doesn’t even have the excuse that he’s trying to checkbook his way out of an inherited recession—he inherited a robust, growing economy. He just doesn’t give a damn about how debt will affect future generations, because he’s not going to be here.
So you ask, what do we do? Stop following the GOP’s lead on its decades-long delusional addiction to Reaganomics….that’s what we do. But before that can happen, dudes like you need to stop parroting simpleton economics: “Tax go down. Revenue go up. That good.”
As for your ongoing rant about the disaster of California’s economy: That doesn’t pass the laugh test. The heated economy here is the *reason* for the homelessness problem. Real estate prices here are insane. Want to house the homeless? Relocate them to the Deep South red states where the economies are perpetually in the toilet and housing is dirt cheap.
Still bringing up Reaganomics is a bit silly. He hasn’t been president since 1989.
“Reagan proved deficits don’t matter.” — V.P. Dick Cheney, 2004
I’m sure you actually know what Cheney was talking about. If you don’t let me enlighten you. He was talking about politically with the American voters, that deficits don’t matter to the voters…and he was of course correct with that assessment.
I am not arguing with you about Trump not caring about the debt. Nobody in Washington cares. I have been saying that for years. Just don’t pretend that this is something new with Trump. President Obama didn’t care, and President Bush didn’t care. How far back do you want to go? Clinton didn’t care. It was Speaker Gingrich, with his Contract with America, probably the last politician that was concerned about the debt that drug Clinton kicking and screaming to be fiscally conservative in his 2nd term. So once again, I’ll ask you. What would you like cut to curb spending? What steps would you take, that you can get through Congress to reduce spending? What programs would you like to see cut? Can you answer that question?
You really believe that California is in good shape economically? If we didn’t have Silicon Valley, we would be bankrupt right now. Housing? Supply and demand, bad government, outdated zoning laws, restrictive regulations. Hey, How about California’s new rent control laws. A first year Econ major knows price controls will do nothing but lower supply. All new homes must have solar now, increasing the price of homes and apartments. It’s a ridiculous notion that because of a strong economy, we don’t have enough homes. It is supply and demand… It is estimated that we need to build 180,000 new housing units a year to keep prices stable. Over the past 10 years, we’ve averaged less than half of that.
By the way…is there a Democrat candidate that is pushing for reducing the debt? Pushing to control spending? What makes you think a Warren candidacy will be better for lowering debt? Her pie in the sky plans for America will cost $30 trillion over 10 years. You think she will get that all from the dreaded rich people?
Doug — The Reagan Revolution—characterized by running up the nation’s credit cards to create the illusion of prosperity and deregulation leading to bubbles and volatility—is ongoing. It’s fair game until it’s over.
I’ll ask again, Steve. Name a politician, from any party other than Sen. Rand Paul that is concerned about the debt. Don’t blame the Republicans, blame both parties. Is there any Democrat candidate talking about the debt? No, of course not. They are all talking about a ridiculous amount of new spending. You also ignored my question about where would you make cuts to balance the budget. What favorite program of yours are you willing to sacrifice. That’s the rub, isn’t it? Everybody wants a balanced budget, but nobody wants to cut any of their favorite federal program. Since entitlement spending is 2/3rds of our federal budget. What are you willing to change to help with the debt?
Doug — All the Demo candidates talk about debt. Particularly, the irresponsibility of Trump’s tax cuts during an economic expansion.
From the official party platform:
“Restore the budget discipline of the 1990s
We believe in balanced budgets and paying down our national debt, while Republicans continue to put huge burdens on future generations by borrowing hundreds of billions of dollars from foreign nations. We want to restore the budget discipline of the 1990s that helped eliminate deficits and spur record economic growth.”
That is utter nonsense, Steve. I can readily admit the GOP isn’t concerned about the debt. But to say the Democrats are is laughable. On the first day of her presidency, a President Warren will excuse a trillion dollars of student loan debt… supposedly, then spend another 30 trillion on her plans for America. And the Democrat party is lapping it up. Bernie is going to spend even more. So you are going to sit there and say the Democrats are fiscally conservative? Good one. I’ll ask you again, since you keep ignoring it. What do you want to cut to balance the budget? What favorite program of yours are you willing to cut (besides the military).
Doug — Arguing with you is pointless, so I’ll just say once more: SCOREBOARD. All you have to do is look at CBO data on which administrations have run up the most debt, and how they did it. While you’re at it, go to the most obvious example: How we were poised to start paying down the federal debt at the end of the Clinton administration, and how Bush II reversed that.
For Republicans, one thing matters more than anything else: Reducing taxes on the wealthy. It doesn’t matter that the economy was humming along when Bush II and Trump took office. Tax cuts for the rich! That’s all that matters.
Russia is still winning the Cyber Warfare game! We can expect more Hacking and Social Media Propaganda very soon.
And for anyone a bit slow out there…. The President has Already Been Impeached! IMPOTUS the Third. Now, will he be removed for his crimes, is the only other question, the Senate Trial will determine that. It’s highly unlikely they will do that.
The House can open up Another Investigation at anytime they want. If Pelosi feels the Senate Trial is a Sham…..she might just do that…..and call witnesses and start it all over again with new Crimes!
In real ground breaking news, Eli Manning is retiring from football. He should be a first ballot HOF if only because he prevented Tom Brady from adding two more Super Bowls to his resume.
Made me laugh, Bruce. Super Bowl MVP twice puts him in rare company, but you’re right. Preventing Brady and the Six Ringland Cheatriots from wearing two more rings is the bigger accomplishment.
Poor guy* won just as many Super Bowls as his big brother, but forever played in Payton’s shadow.
*Poor guy retiring with a net worth of more than $100 million, according to Forbes.
He will need every dime to pay for his wrecked body. No amount of money is worth ones health.
There are a lot of careers, !st Responders for one, that are more hazardous to ones health than sports and pay a lot less. They do it because they love it.
The top five most dangerous jobs are loggers (#1), commercial fishers, aircraft pilots, roofers, and garbage collectors. Neither pro athletes nor first responders are in the top 10.
I’m going to have to dispute the claim that being an aircraft pilot is in the top 5 of most dangerous jobs.
Fatal injuries per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers: 58.9
Total fatal injuries: 70
Source: National Safety Council
Doug, since you’re an ex-military pilot yourself, I’m a little surprised that you dispute that aircraft pilots rank in the top five. Sure, if you consider only military, part 121, and part 135 operations, I could see where you’re coming from, but in that big, wild-ass private sector world covered by part 91 of the Federal Aviation Regulations , pilots die much more often.
Hal, Part 91 pertains to small non-commercial aircraft within the United States, not commercial pilots. The claim was for aircraft jobs. Not private pilots. That is what I disputed.
By the way, Hal. Last night I listened to the ATC recordings from the Kobe Bryant helicopter. Wow, this will be studyed for years as an example of a flight that should have never taken off. The fog was bad, they tried to keep him out of IFR airspace, had him holding for 15 minutes while arrivals to Burbank were coming in. Tried to get him to follow hiways. What a mess it was. I found the recording on You Tube. Early in my flying career, it was beat into me about safety and being cautious, to respect the weather. It had served me well these many decades of flying
Doug, unless the regs have changed in the six years since I retired, there is a LOT of commercial flying that comes under part 91. Much corporate flying takes place under part 91.
You’re correct about corporate flying under Part 91. I’m just very surprised that this falls into the top 5 most dangerous jobs.
Doug, has it been confirmed that the helicopter was flown single pilot?
Single pilot named Ara Zobayan, and 8 passengers.
Never should have taken off under those dense fog conditions
Yeah, all public agency helicopters in the area were grounded at the time of the crash.
Pilots tend to be task-oriented, and the pressure to “get the job done” is very often self-imposed.
I’ve chartered small single-engine planes out of Redding where the pilot says at the airport, “I flew up from Chico for this job, and it’s not a good day to fly. I recommend waiting until tomorrow.” And my response was, “Unless you’re saying you won’t fly, I have to get there this morning.” And then during the flight I see that we definitely should have waited it out.
Geez, low ceilings and visibility–a bad time to be single-pilot.
Again, regulations can change, and I’ve been out of the game for a few years. But, the part of the regs that covers “aircraft operated for hire” allows helicopters to fly with as little visibility as a half mile. I flew the Sikorsky S-76 for the last several years of my career. It’s a great flying machine, but as helicopters go, the visibility out of the cockpit kinda sucks. Even if the pilot had slowed from the normal cruise speed of 140 knots to, say, 90 knots, that wouldn’t have allowed much reaction time to avoid suddenly rising terrain.
Always listen to the pilot, Steve. If he didn’t feel comfortable flying. Don’t push him. As a young Captain in the Air Force, I went toe to toe with a Colonel who was trying to force me to take off in near blizzard conditions in Northern Maine and without the aircraft being properly de-iced. An uncomfortable situation for sure arguing with a superior officer. In the end, the flight was cancelled
Actually, the pilot was a she, and groupthink was a factor in our decision to go (there were two other passengers). It’s also possible that she felt the pressure of being a woman who has to continuously prove she’s got the right stuff in a traditionally male profession.
It was turbulent, and the huge hailstones we flew through in a flying Fiat sounded like a dump-truck full of quarters being unloaded on the windshield from 100 feet above. Not to mention, when we got to San Luis Obispo the cross-wind gusts coming off of the ocean were crazy, and she came within about six inches of putting the tip of the right wing on the runway when we touched down.
Doug, Trump is pushing to sweep back a lot of environmental rules to appease the fossil fuel industry.
Just curious- do you share support on that as well?
Yes I do. It is necessary to counter the restrictive regulations from the Obama administration. President Obama went way to far and we need to find a better balance. We are still an economy that relies on fossil fuels. Literally every person in this country uses fossil fuels. One of the reasons we didn’t have a spike in oil prices when Iran destroyed half of Saudis oil production, is that our oil imports from the Middle East is about half of what it was 12 years ago. That’s a good thing.
Doug, spoken like one who lives where there is no fracking. In Cheyenne, I submitted an article with pictures, showing the damage fracking was doing to Cheyenne when they opened the Samson Oil field but it was never published.
The best argument I have seen about fracking was a High Country News cartoon where a fracking guy was telling a coal guy that fracking can pollute the water and the air faster and cheaper than coal.
Fracking for gas is not a good thing.
And a Colorado environment group sued and stopped the further development of BLM leases in Wyoming and have now forced the same to halt BLM leases in Utah.
Why are so many on the left upset the Orange Guy said “Take Her Out” on the just released tape ? It’s a common phrase uttered probably daily New York or N.J if only weekly in America. It usually goes something like, Take him out Vinny or Take him out Guido.
Perhaps the Prez was just upset that the Ambassador was in the way of him having a “Perfect Conversation” with Ukraine as Lev Parnas said. Perhaps he meant…..Take Her Out…as in Take her out to dinner or take her to lunch right?
Rudy Giuliani has promised to provide evidence that the Biden’s corruptly made millions in Ukraine and the Dems colluded with Ukraine to favor Clinton. For some reason, it takes the President’s lawyer working for his campaign to investigate this.
Bring it on Rudy. Can’t wait after seeing this.
I imagine the Trump defense team is doing all they can to keep Rudy off of the TV.
I tried to watch. I think I might have made it about 3 minutes. It’s just too painful. This is what politics (and to some extent the media) has served up to us. And it is agonizing.
What makes you think I don’t care about clean air or water? A rather odd statement for sure since you know nothing about me. Not every regulation is a good thing, sometimes you can go too far. Of course Kathryn reads a scary headline without digging into the details. This 2015 regulation by the Obama administration was a nightmare, doing little but causing litigation for land owners…but hey, scary headlines get more attention.
Doug, fracking is not a good thing and that tells me you do not investigate like you tell others they don’t do. Scary headlines like the US is dependent on Mideast oil is what got Nebraskans to vote for the first Keystone pipeline but many don’t want the expansion of the new one because of all the lies they were fed about the first one.
The Wheels of Justice are Slow,but they grind exceedingly Fine! With the sheer amount of crimes and corruption this Administration has done it’s just a matter of time before the missing pieces of the puzzle complete the whole picture.
16,200+ Lies since taking his Oath.His Oath to the Constitution and American People. The Classical Malignant Narcissist on the World Stage for everyone to see.
A guy that has paid for Abortions for some former flings showing up at the Pro life rally. NO Hypocrisy there!
In the end and in the History Books it just may be written-” It was the most Corrupt Administration in the History of the United States of America. Self interest and Self Dealing took Precedence over the Rule of Law and the Constitution of the United States.From his Ruthless Obstruction of Justice to his Mob Style Leadership, it is the first time in American History that a President Will Spend the rest of his living years in a Federal Penitentiary. The downfall of the GOP didn’t start with this President, it ended with him.”
On a more current note….watch for the new Article of Impeachment to come out soon….as more and more leaks and info come into the Public’s Purview.
No segue here, but allow me to wade in and mention that we will publish a series here on ANC this week Tuesday through Thursday that you won’t want to miss. I’m pretty excited about it, and I hope you enjoy it as much as I do.
That’s all. Carry on.
Wanting to save Medicaid and “Fix” the Entitlement called SS. He wants to “fix them all”….just like he fixed the ACA! Anyone that thinks he will not do more damage if re elected is foolish.
Call the Witnesses,show the facts. Show the GOP “cover up”…..then….and only then will the public get it.
How about that DEBT after that last Rich Tax Cut!
Like a Frat Boy thrown out of the house….He’s going to burn it down on the way out!
I see that the DNC appointed some of Hillary’s goons to the committees that will oversee the rules and party platform at the Democrat convention. They also appointed committee members that are ‘outright hostile to Bernie Sanders and his supporters’. Looks like the DNC is setting up to do in 2020 what they did in 2016 to the Sanders campaign. With the new rules in how they allocate delegates, I firmly believe the DNC will stack the deck against Sanders again and there will be a contested convention with Hillary riding in on her white horse to save the party. Should be entertaining.
Doug, the DNC wouldn’t be that stupid. Oops, guess they were in 2016, history repeats.
If the DNC machine has a current favorite, it’s Joe, not Hillary.
Heard on MSNBC Steven Rattner, friend and supporter of Bloomberg say that his entering the race wasn’t about winning the primary, but to prevent Sanders from reaching over 50% to force a brokered convention.
Even without Bloomberg, It will be difficult for any of the candidates to get that 50%. Clinton never got 50% of the delegates, it was the super delegates that pushed her over the top. This election, there are no super delegates and delegates are allocated proportionally based on how much of the vote candidates get. If the field doesn’t narrow to a few candidates quickly, the rules could lead to a contested convention.
Bloomberg is willing to spend up to $2 billion on the election…here’s an idea…why not offer President Trump $2 billion to NOT run for a 2nd term. He just may go for it.
Trump would take that deal in a second.
I would hate to see that happen. He is the very last person on earth to deserve any such windfall.
I’m listening to the impeachment trial Q&A, and I’m starting to think that it was a big tactical error by the House Demos to fail to take the ignored subpoenas issue to the courts, even though Schiff’s argument for hurrying the process along was reasonable, if not compelling.
Dershowitz’s argument that quid-pro-quo foreign policy happens all the time was so stupid I was embarrassed for the guy. Even more so after Schiff made a mockery of it.
I agree with the first part of your comment and disagree with the 2nd part. Yes, Quid Pro Quos happen everyday in politics and foreign policy. What he states is it does not rise to an impeachable act. President Obama made a quid pro quo when he talked the Russians into helping his election by holding off on the missile defense issue. Bide threatening to withhold a billion dollars from Ukraine if they didn’t fire the prosecutor is without a doubt a quid pro quo. You make the assumption that Trump was looking forward to 2020 in his wish for an investigation into Burisma and Biden. I still believe he wanted to look into what happened in 2016. Rightly or wrongly…but again, doesn’t rise to the level of impeachment. I know you disagree with that.
I’ve been watching the Q&A today too…somewhat interesting, a lot of preplanned questions to Schiff’s side.
Doug — Answering the GOP’s last question before recessing for dinner, Dershowitz presented the legal theory that abuse of power is not an impeachable offense.
Schiff countered that if that’s true, Trump could tell the Russians that he would abandon Ukraine in exchange for the right to build a Trump Hotel in Moscow. Schiff said that there’s no legal infraction in that—just horrific abuse of power—and Dershowitz is saying it wouldn’t be impeachable.
“Does anyone *really* think that is what the founders intended? Senators, you are not required to leave your common sense at the door.” (Or words time that effect.)
Based on the record of every previous court ruling against trump, repubs knew the courts would rule against stonewalling House ordered subpoenas. So they pressured Schiff’ and Nadler to hurry through an “illegitimate process because the American people shouldn’t have to wait”. “We will quickly put an end to it at the senate stage if it makes it that far”, turtleman said.
Yep. The House should have taken a bit more time to allow the courts to make a ruling but they were pressured and bluffed.
As for Dershowitz — every legal scholar including Turley say more or less the same thing. His argument was absurd. Schiff was not out of line in mocking it.
Nobody—NOBODY!—has said that quid pro quos are flat wrong and never happen when we’re trying to influence other nations. It’s a moronic red herring. “Stop persecuting religious minorities and we’ll give you $X million in aid.” “Start cracking down on cocaine production and we’ll provide $X million in aid.” It’s commonplace.
Trump is that he asked for a personal favor in exchange for release of the aid—interference in our election process for his sole benefit.
It insults everyone’s intelligence that the GOP is trying to convince us that the Demos are crusading against quid pro quos in general. It’s ridiculous. Saying that the two examples in my first paragraph are equivalent to Trump’s crime is flat-out stupid.
As has been pointed out to you more than once, leaders of numerous countries, international organizations, and other U.S. officials demanded the ouster of a provably corrupt State Prosecutor who was interfering with the revamping of Ukraine’s corrupt legal system. Biden just went along with national and international demands. In addition, the pointless investigation into Burisma had already been dropped.
In contrast Trump withheld the $4 million in aid to Ukraine long after Congress approved it, and there isn’t a shred of evidence that he had a single reason other than to blackmail a foreign leader into digging up non-existent dirt on a main political rival. And of course that’s not hard to believe given that Trump has proven to be thoroughly corrupt and dishonest in ALL of his dealings.
Unfortunately, though, it doesn’t matter how overwhelming the evidence (and it is) – Republicans will continue to allow Trump to destroy America.
Minor detail correction: Trump didn’t withhold $4 million in aid to Ukraine. It was $400 million.
Not to be picky but it was exactly $391 million.
Well, I was going for correcting the orders of magnitude. Aren’t we two pedants in a pod?
Fair enough. We’re both in the same ballpark.
That should read “$400 Million”….
So Trump’s defense team has more or less settled on this:
1. He did it? Maybe. We’ve only heard indirect testimony to that effect. A shitload of it, plus his own confessions, but….yeah….
2. Even if he did it, it’s not abuse of power if the POTUS thinks that cheating his way to victory is in the nation’s best interests, and not just his own.
3. And anyway, horrific abuse of power isn’t literally a crime, and you can only impeach if the infraction is some violation of federal law. If the charges ain’t shit, you must acquit.
If that stands, we are so screwed. We might as well be crowning Trump as our Putin.
Trump is his own worse enemy, obviously. If he would have just said, yes…of course I asked Ukraine to look into this potential corruption. There would be no issues. You keep making the assumption that he was trying to affect the 2020 election. You think it is a horrific abuse of power, I don’t. The charges are in fact s**t. That is why he will be acquitted rather easily. I know, I know…you will accuse me of spouting right wing talking points, but that is exactly what you do .. spout left wing talking points. I took in most of the Q&A’s yesterday and most of the defense’s case. It further cemented my belief that this is far from an impeachable offense.
Doug — Asking a foreign power to investigate a political rival* who is also actively running for president isn’t okay, no matter how much you wish to be so. Then ne doubled-down by asking China to investigate Biden, too. Nothing screams more loudly of “if the shoe were on the other foot…” than this absurdity that you keep repeating. Seriously, dude….it makes you come off as a bit unhinged.
Trump will be acquitted rather easily for the same reasons Clinton was acquitted rather easily—impeachment is at its heart a political process. The acquittal will have nothing to do with guilt or innocence—it’ll be along party lines. Any claim that either POTUS is 100% exonerated by acquittal is naive at best, and stupid at worst.
*Trump didn’t even require Ukraine investigate Biden. He only required that Ukraine *announce* an investigation in order to receive the aid. If you only need one smoking gun proving that his sole intention was to smear Biden, it’s that. If you want more, why was Trump so focused on Biden delivering the USA’s message that a corrupt Ukrainian prosecutor needed to go—a message repeated by our NATO and EU allies in Europe? Trump’s obsession with that is either the *opposite* of being concerned with corruption (my bet), or he’s just dumber than dog s***.
Your last paragraph is the crux of the issue. It wasn’t about corruption in Ukraine but about corrupting both Ukraine and our elections.
Steve, I always find it interesting that although we both have a different opinion on this matter, I can readily accept your position, and can understand why you believe what you do. But I’m ‘unhinged’ in my beliefs, and other disparaging name calling you have thrown my way. Half the country believes he shouldn’t be impeached, the other half does. It’s the ‘Im correct, so you must be an idiot’ syndrome that permeates the left. I see it a lot
Doug — Sorry if I hurt your feelings, but I didn’t say you were unhinged. I said that your insistence regarding this particular opinion makes you “come off as a bit unhinged.” It was a criticism of the singularly absurd opinion. I didn’t say you were stupid. In fact, in person I’ve told other ANC regulars that one of the reasons I continue to respond to your posts is that you’re *not* stupid. Debating stupid people is boring.
Beyond that, you’re doing now what you always do—obfuscating, putting words in my mouth, moving the goalposts, playing the victim card….your tactics annoy me, not your lack of intelligence.
I have zero interest in “I’m right, you’re wrong” debating. In the very post that offended you, I said that Trump will be acquitted for the same reason Clinton was acquitted. THAT is where we differ, Doug. I think both were clearly guilty of crimes. You, on the other hand, are so hyper-partisan that you’ll never abandon your belief that Clinton was guilty, but Trump is innocent. Your worldview is 100% tribalistic.
Me? I was an independent for decades until Trump got elected. I can’t stand Hillary—I’ll never forgive her arrogance that cost her the election. I can’t stand Uncle Bernie—I can’t see that self-righteous, grouchy crank getting anyone to work with him on anything. I greatly respected John McCain and grudgingly respect Mitt Romney (but we’ll see where that goes, maybe as early as today).
And you? Owing to your rabid political loyalty to the GOP, you’re still holding onto this fantasy that Trump is totally innocent—that he was concerned about the 2016 election, not the upcoming election. Even as his legal team has abandoned that defense in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, you cling to it. (Though I’ll admit, yesterday they put a muzzle on Alan Dershowitz and tried to walk back some of the previous day’s “he did it, but so what?” defense, probably because Trump got unglued.)
A few corrections, Steve. I specifically said that I am not offended by such remarks. I just find theme odd. I also disagree with your assessment that I am ‘hyper-partisan’. I am far from that. I have on many occasions voted for Democrats, and would have easily voted Democrat candidate for president if a reasonable one would have run. I even made the argument for voting for Biden a few months ago, but I lost interest in him for good reason. In addition, at the time as well as now, I believed impeaching President Clinton was wrong as well. It shouldn’t happened. I have no loyalty to President Trump. I did not vote for the man and wish we had a different Republican running the country. With that being said, if the evidence would have convinced me he was guilty, I would have been right there with the Democrats. But they did not prove their case to me…not even close. Why do I defend the President? Because he is doing a lot of good for the country, and gets zero credit. The economy? Well, it is all due to Obama, Trump has nothing to do with it. That is nonsense. There are millions out there like me. Voters that didn’t support Trump in 2016 that will back him this time because we look beyond the hate the left has for him. This impeachment was a mistake from the beginning, as I stated months ago. It will be all over today, the president is stronger, the Dems are weaker. Bernie will more than likely be the candidate…and the Democrat party will be scratching their heads come November asking what the hell happened.
Doug — My EQ must suck out loud—I would have bet money that you were offended. You’ve repeatedly defended Trump asking foreign powers to investigate political opponents—and I said the repetition of that position made you “come off as a bit unhinged.” Your translation mutation: “Steve called me stupid!” To me, that seemed a little thin-skinned….a little offended. If not, my bad.
As for your level of non-partisanship, I’ve never seen any real evidence of it, except for your occasional claims to it. But you’re going to say the same about me….and go ahead. Currently, you’re right. I am rabidly hyper-partisan when it comes to Trump. And since the GOP sees fit to support every work that comes out of his festering gob, I have become rabidly hyper-partisan in my disgust with the GOP (not so much in my support for Democrats).
I think Trump is wanna-be banana republic dictator. I believe his intensions to be evil and self-serving to the core. He’s a wholly amoral, coarse, angry, petty, vindictive, egotistical lunatic. He does nothing to hide his admiration for and envy of dictators. He’s halved the already low level of political discourse in this country and halved it again, largely by example. He tells outrageous lies on a daily basis, because he doesn’t recognize it as a virtue, and in doing so dilutes the value of telling the truth on a daily basis. He cares 0% about loyalty to the country and the Constitution, and 100% about loyalty to himself. His pubic solicitations of foreign interference in our elections *alone* are worthy of his removal from office, dating back to asking the Russians to hack Hillary Clinton’s and the DNC’s computers (which they then did). He’s the most toxic and unfit president of my lifetime, going back to Eisenhower.
It just boggles my mind that anyone could support such an un-American dumpster fire of a leader. Boggles. My. Mind.
Doug, You are still ignoring a whole lot of established and compelling evidence.
So tell me Gary…did you watch the Trump defense team give their case? Did you keep an open mind as they were presenting their case? Or was it just…orange man bad. Or how about this? What do you think of his Palestine/Israel peace plan? Orange man bad?
Doug, what case? They have none other than using legal sophistry to try and obscure corruption. Heck, they’re not even trying to obscure it; they’re just saying “so what?” What someone thinks about Trump’s Palestine/Israel Peace plan doesn’t erase his obvious abuse of power for personal political gain in our next election. Yes, “orange man bad”. “Orange man rotten”.
Candace, I hope if I’m ever a defendent in a trial, that you aren’t a member of the jury.
As are you Gary…
Yea. So why bother with enforcing Federal law, or conducting a fair trial, or respecting democracy and the constitution for that matter? After all team trump doesn’t feel they fall in line with national interest. So why should ordinary citizens?
The proof that this was a thoroughly corrupt (and, yes, quite impeachable) deal can be clearly found in the reactions, on all sides, when it was discovered. Virtually everyone,within the administration and on both sides of the aisle, said “holy sh*t .. this stinks like week old garbage” or words to that effect when they found out what was going on. People pleaded with the president NOT to take this action .. and when it was uncovered, to the disbelief, scorn and mutual outrage on the hill, it was quickly reversed (funds released). And, as a final stroke, the administration concocted six different stories about what, why and how this all took place .. many of them contradictory, and almost all of them transparently lies. EVERYONE, from the president on down to the mail-clerk in the basement, knew this was an abuse of power .. and quite clearly against the interests of the country .. from the very moment that the sordid scheme was unveiled.
And that is why the GOP is holding their noses and rapidly blinking their eyes .. while trying to pretend that these actions fall within the purview of normal presidential conduct and powers.
If witnesses are called and I’m a US Senator, my first question to John Bolten is: “Why did you refer to this scheme as a ‘drug deal’.”
I think he says something like: “Because, Senator Towers, drug deals are sordid, sneaky, and illegal, and this was sordid, sneaky, and probably illegal. And if not illegal, then extra-legal in a way that harmed the interests of this country and a strategic ally, for the sole purpose of benefitting the President.”
Moot point, they don’t have enough votes for more witnesses. This will be all wrapped up by tomorrow and then you’ll have to find something else to get outraged about. I’m sure you will find something.
Yeah, I’ll probably be outraged about something else. That’ll likely be Trump’s self-congratulatory gloating, his insults hurled far and wide, and his ridiculous claims that he’s 100% exonerated.
Remember how Clinton just got on with business? Didn’t go on a tour of celebratory rallies, didn’t denounce his enemies and vow revenge, didn’t call the House prosecution manager “Fat Boy Henry Hide” a loser for failing to convict.
Is that what we expect from Trump? LOL It’ll probably take him a matter of days before he again calls for Russia to investigate his political opponents. And why wouldn’t he?
That’s because Clinton actually committed a crime and had his sex life exposed. Of course he didn’t gloat. Yes, President Trump will make the most of this, nobody Trolls better than him. It will be an interesting State of the Union for sure.
I wonder if Pelosi will introduce him at the state of the union as the Impeached President of the USA?
I think all of trumps introductions from now on should include title.
No name calling! Self-righteous group behavior categorization of others and arrogant dismissiveness only! Good grief man, there are limits!
My point being Candace is that everybody has an opinion. My opinions and beliefs are just as valid as yours. You may disagree with mine and visa versa but you try to convince by facts.. not ad hominem attacks. You are able to make your arguments respectfully, many on here cannot. Again, to attack someone’s intelligence just because I look at politics differently than them is odd to me. I was part of debate teams in college, that would never be allowed. Your argument is lost when you start with attacks on those you disagree with. I’m a big boy, and don’t get offended by being called names. Again, I just find it odd that it is a tactic to try and prove a point. It doesn’t work.
Doug — I addressed your hurt feelings up above. But again I have to point out that I didn’t call you stupid. I said that your dogged adherence to a particular absurd, oft-repeated opinion made you come off as a bit unhinged. I didn’t attack your intelligence. This is one of your favorite tactics that get under my skin—you re-word what people say to fashion straw men that are easier for you to slay.
You might want to look up what the word “valid” means. Having a heartfelt opinion doesn’t make it just as valid as any other opinion. If in your opinion the Earth is flat, your opinion isn’t as valid as my opinion that it’s roughly spherical. If in your opinion I am a greater and more destructive violator of civil political discourse than the $#!+-posting POTUS who you defend on a daily basis, your opinion is not just as valid as someone who thinks, correctly, that Trump is the more ruinous of the two of us, if primary because he has millions of followers on Twitter.
Here’s another of your tactics that drives me nuts: Someone makes a solid point, and you ignore it. You don’t even deflect….you just don’t respond and move on. You don’t even acknowledge the point that was made. They teach you that tactic on the debate squad? Every time you do it, I do a little victory jig in my mind. It doesn’t work.
Since Tim left here, I appear to be the last remaining conservative. Try as I may… especially with a full time job, I cannot respond to every point that is made. Yes, sometimes I ignore yours and others talking points. You may think it is a solid point that deserves a rebuttal. Often times I don’t. Do your victory jig if you wish, but repetitive points that I have already addressed, or I feel it is pointless to refute does not mean you won the argument. It may mean I’m too busy to respond…or too bored with the conversation.
If there are readers who buy that you don’t bother rebutting because you’re such a busy guy, I have a harp-shaped bridge in town I’d like to sell them. I get the strong impression that you prefer low-hanging fruit. And you’re as guilty of repeatedly pounding the same key on the piano as any of us.
But y’know what? In a day or two the slate gets wiped clean, and I’ll attempt to be less of a needler next month. I accept your critique that I need to try harder to not be such a dick (in the parlance of my youth).
Doug — You’re not the last remaining conservative at ANC, unless you’re calling Bruce a RINO. (I’m positive most other Repubs would call Bruce a RINO, since he doesn’t like Trump and is a fan of Sen. Romney.)
I’ll give you high credit for not being one of those conservatives who only wants to hang out in echo chambers, though. But that said, you think the ride is rough for you here? You think liberals are uncivil? You should see the counterpoints I elicit on Fox News, which isn’t even the most conservative site out there for comment posting—not by a long shot. Much of it along the lines of: “Go f*** yourself, libtard.” Or, “I’m imagining how great a red laser sight dot would look on your forehead.”
Seriously, I lost my taste for posting comments on the Record Searchlight’s website when literal threats aimed at me turned toward my daughter. “I know where she works…”
We can both agree that the world is not flat because we have definitive proof that it is not. You do not have definitive proof about Trump’s guilt. That is your opinion based on the testimony you listened to. My opinion is that Trump tus not guilty based on the testimony that I heard Both views are valid. 17 witnesses, and none of them had first hand knowledge, just speculation and presumptions.
Doug — If Bolton and others provided first-hand testimony that Trump is guilty as charged, would it change your mind? If not, then your point about the 17 witnesses if pointless. If so, then you understand exactly why the GOP is so dead set on ensuring that such evidence is not presented to the Senate, even if you won’t admit that to us.
Steve, we’re just going around and around here and not getting anywhere. During the Schiff Show, Bolton went to District Court for a ruling on his testimony. He wanted to testify. It was Schiff that said his testimony was not needed and it was dropped. Bolton wants to sell a book. Bolton’s testimony is meaningless to me, because I disagree with the basic charges. Obstruction of Congress is nothing, abuse of power in this case is vague and not impeachable
Thanks for confirming that your “17 witnesses without firsthand knowledge” point was pointless. That affirmation was unexpected, but appreciated.
Bolton wants to sell a book, so of course he would go before the Senate and perjure himself by saying that it was absolutely a quid pro quo—that Trump unlawfully withheld aid to an ally until that ally smeared his political rival. Bolton would tell this blatant lie to the Senate to…..you know….sell his book.
Schiff has repeatedly made the point: Trump withheld aid from an ally until that ally smeared his political opponent. An ally that desperately needed that aid because it was at war with our adversary. He did everything he could to keep it a secret until the whistleblower dropped a dime. If that isn’t an impeachable offense as a grotesque abuse of power, then nothing is.
“I don’t need to hear any more evidence to decide that the president did what he’s charged with doing,” — Sen. Lamar Alexander (R—TN),
This is what I mean by the whole show leaving you behind, Doug. Schiff made his case, and everyone knows Trump did it. Some Republicans are even brave enough to admit it. The Republicans are now just saying it’s okay that he did it. It’s okay to solicit foreign interference in an election. It’s not an impeachable offense, says Sen. Alexander.
“…Schiff made his case, and everyone knows Trump did it”
Then why do you need Bolton’s testimony?
Because it’s a trial, and without his testimony most of the GOP senators can continue to deny there was a quid pro quo (just like you).
Why do you think Team Trump were so desperate to keep witnesses out of the picture?
Doug, you say “Your argument is lost when you start with attacks on those you disagree with…” and “Again, I just find it odd that it is a tactic to try and prove a point. It doesn’t work.”
Then you say things like “Candace, I hope if I’m ever a defendent in a trial, that you aren’t a member of the jury.”
You mean like that? Or is implying things ok as long as one doesn’t use actual words like “stupid”, “un-hinged” etc. when critiquing an argument? Also, you repeatedly saying you find it “odd” when people resort to ad hominem attacks in place of arguing the facts seems like a strange word choice to me. Like Steve said, you’re no dummy and if you’ve been involved in debate teams where that wouldn’t be allowed you know it’s not “odd” when someone does so, it just does nothing to further healthy debate. Not only do I believe you’re no dummy, neither do I believe you’re that naive. As far as owning the title of the last living conservative on ANC representing conservative ideas I beg to differ. I believe there are other conservatives reading, they may just not feel the need nor have a desire to comment. Finally, as Steve said, new month, clean slate soon (I still think Orange Guy is guilty as sin and new first-hand witnesses should be allowed. That said, barring a miracle after Senator Murkowski’s “No” vote, it’s a moot point – the fix is in). Happy almost February.
Doug, I feel the need to clarify something. I’m not a conservative (duh, lol) but I don’t necessarily equate conservatism with being an automatic supporter of Trump and his administration. I know conservatives who are appalled at Trump’s White House just as I know those who are not.
Steve, the wholly depressing thing about this horror show is that with the current Trump-owned Republican administration it’s completely “f***ing believable and expected. I’d expect no less from them. Last night it was reported that McConnell had a huge smile on his face when he entered his office at the end of the night. We can all agree the McConnell smiling is an anomaly. The fix was in. Corruption breeds corruption.
“Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) called Trump on Friday evening to brief him on the updated timetable, and the president signed off on it, according to an official familiar with the conversation.“. —Fox News
The head juror called the defendant for permission to implement the plan, and the defendant signed off on it.
Yeah, that’s legit.
What a joke we’ve become.
Whats there to sign off on? It’s over…they vote, impeachment ends and the Democrats slink back to their corner embarrassed. Once I agree with you…this was a joke put on by the Democrats.
before this whole impeachment process, trump thought he could do whatever he wanted. now he knows it. worse times are coming.
toni…blame the Democrats. They are the ones that totally screwed this up. They never should have pushed for impeachment, the outcome was already set. Why are you so surprised now?
“… trump thought he could do whatever he wanted”
Just like when President Obama said in no uncertain terms, “…“We’re not just going to be waiting for legislation…“I’ve got a pen and I’ve got a phone and I can use that pen to sign executive orders and take executive actions and administrative actions ”
Were you against Obama doing whatever he wanted?
A Cover-up in Plain View
The Senate has basically told Trump he has been completely exonerated. Not only that but they emphasized that the reason he was exonerated is because as President he can do whatever he wants to do, and that’s exactly what trump wanted to hear. Warning: Stay off of 5th Avenue!
The GOP does not deserve to survive this travesty in the face of new evidence emerging everyday!
“I want nothing to do with a party led by the deluded and the dishonest. I fervently hope our democracy survives this debacle. I fervently hope the Republican Party does not”. Max Boot, Columnist, The Washington Post
Oh good grief, Gary…give it up. It’s over. Schiff didn’t prove his case. The charges were weak to begin with. Move on…The Democrats wanted to impeach Trump since before he was sworn in. It didn’t work. You put all your eggs in Russian collusion, when that fell apart, you all were desperate to find something else. This is the best you could come up with, and it failed miserably. This is why Pelosi didn’t want this fiasco to go forward.
It is not the GOP that has to be worried about surviving…it is the Democrat party that does. It is likely that Sanders gets the nomination. You think that will make the Democrat party stronger? Or give you any chance of winning in 2020? A huge miscalculation of the Trump hating progressive wing of the Democrat party.
Doug, My last word; Schiff DID eloquently prove his case and the Senate is complicit with a cover-up. Final stop!
We could go around indefinitely. So I’m willing to let go for now and see what happens at mid-next-week.. Until then — have a happy Super Bowl Sunday.
Source Shasta County HHSA