2018-04-13, 11:23 | Link #1641 |
AS Oji-kun
Join Date: Nov 2006
Age: 74
|
Really? I don't watch Fox so I wouldn't know. But what's their opinion on Iran or North Korea? John Bolton used to appear regularly on Fox before becoming National Security Advisor. Both he and Secretary of State-designate Mike Pompeo are ardent opponents of the "Iran deal," and Bolton recently wrote an op-ed claiming it would be legal to attack the DPRK. (A good analysis of how wrong-headed Bolton's position is appears here.)
Syria is a mess, and intervention there would be fruitless. (The only "solution" would be the overthrow of Assad, and that's a non-starter.) But there are plenty of other places in the world where the Administration could get us into another military conflict.
__________________
|
2018-04-14, 14:45 | Link #1644 |
formerly ogon bat
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Mexico
Age: 53
|
Let's not forget the ethnic cleansing or Rohingya at Myanmar/Bhurma (whatever it is called), if that had happened while Obama was president you can bet your pay check that Fox would be all over the administration for allowing such reprehensible behavior, they would have called them Nazi¡s and whatnot, but now that does not seem (to them) to be a bad thing, Hail Trumpo!
|
2018-04-14, 18:45 | Link #1645 | |
books-eater youkai
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Betweem wisdom and insanity
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
2018-04-14, 19:02 | Link #1646 | |
formerly ogon bat
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Mexico
Age: 53
|
Quote:
|
|
2018-04-14, 19:31 | Link #1647 | |
books-eater youkai
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Betweem wisdom and insanity
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
2018-04-15, 00:20 | Link #1648 | |
I disagree with you all.
Join Date: Dec 2005
|
Quote:
|
|
2018-04-15, 01:33 | Link #1649 |
formerly ogon bat
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Mexico
Age: 53
|
You fail to realize that is how the USA has labeled themselves for decades to enter about any military conflict (to preserve "world order") they are interested in without declaring a war, so "Globocop" is far from a nickname. You are so literal it is not even funny.
|
2018-04-15, 02:21 | Link #1650 | |
I disagree with you all.
Join Date: Dec 2005
|
Quote:
|
|
2018-04-15, 03:35 | Link #1651 |
formerly ogon bat
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Mexico
Age: 53
|
That is the point, it is propaganda, they announce themselves as saviors and calling them on it is not "on me" just like calling on putin's lies is not "on me". Either they act according to their statements or they are called liars by the world at large. It is a sensible stance, not a cynical one like you try to portray it.
|
2018-04-15, 04:57 | Link #1652 |
I disagree with you all.
Join Date: Dec 2005
|
It isn't sensible to expect them to intervene everywhere and solve everything, no matter what caricatures you've seen about them. And there's no reason to treat them differently from all those other countries which also send their armed forces abroad for similar reasons. They're bigger and richer, that's all. It doesn't make them better, but it doesn't make them worse.
|
2018-04-20, 03:28 | Link #1653 |
cho~ kakkoii
Moderator
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: 3rd Planet
|
Donnie tweets:
James Comey Memos just out and show clearly that there was NO COLLUSION and NO OBSTRUCTION. Also, he leaked classified information. WOW! Will the Witch Hunt continue?To answer his question, "Oh yes." Only because his reactions are so entertaining.
__________________
|
2018-04-20, 10:06 | Link #1655 |
AS Oji-kun
Join Date: Nov 2006
Age: 74
|
Nothing in the memos supports Trump's opinion. For instance, the memo that most annoyed him was unclassified.
See Philip Bump's article from this morning for further corroboration: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...d-information/
__________________
Last edited by SeijiSensei; 2018-04-20 at 10:32. |
2018-04-20, 18:32 | Link #1657 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Age: 38
|
Obviously not. I'm more just wondering where he and his supporters would point to for this. Especially since these memos were written before Comey was fired. And his firing is what prompted the obstruction investigation. So it's kind of impossible for them to demonstrate proof that there was no obstruction.
|
2018-04-21, 16:50 | Link #1658 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
|
Quote:
|
|
2018-05-03, 17:29 | Link #1660 |
AS Oji-kun
Join Date: Nov 2006
Age: 74
|
Actually the path of the money is pretty complex. Trump supposedly paid a "retainer" to Michael Cohen of $35,000 per month to build up a slush fund to deal with any "problems" like Ms. Clifford (aka Ms. Daniels) and the former Playboy Playmate Karen McDougal. Cohen set up a shell company (an "LLC") to which the money was paid, and the shell company paid Ms. Clifford. This all fits with Cohen's characterization of the transaction as his "facilitating" the transfer of funds. Still that doesn't really jibe with Cohen's borrowing the $130K against the equity in his home as he has claimed publicly. Supposedly the slush fund had, at one point, more than $400K. Was there an even broader flurry of payoffs right before the election besides those to Clifford and McDougal? Inquiring minds want to know.,
All U.S. Federal candidates have the right to contribute as much of their own money as they want to their campaigns without any legal jeopardy. What's at issue here is what are called "in-kind" contributions. If I host a big soiree for a candidate rather than donate the funds directly, US law treats both contributions identically. For Michael Cohen, the issue is whether paying Clifford so close to the election constituted an in-kind contribution on his part. Since it is way in excess of the $2,700 legal limit, he could be charged with felony violation of the election laws. That's pretty unlikely in my mind. I suspect Cohen has a lot of baggage that was hiding in closets until the Feds showed up with that subpoena.
__________________
|
|
|