Originally Posted by Pete F. (Post 1180962)

But don't worry the laughable GOP report says, yes, Trump did it. But his motives were pure!

Originally Posted by detbuch (Post 1180971)

You keep repeating yourself. As if reinforcing your own opinions makes them more valid.

Originally Posted by Pete F. (Post 1180973)

Well, I am still waiting for you to produce the shred of evidence that Floridaman turned over to the house IC..........

Originally Posted by Pete F. (Post 1180977)

You previously said that Floridaman had produced a shred to prove me wrong when I said zero.
Apparently I was correct.

Originally Posted by detbuch (Post 1181001)

Well, he did, and I must admit that it is becoming too tiresome to keep riding your anti-Trump merry go round.
He did not,"The president informed every department for which we sought records — the State Dept. the Office of Management and Budget ... the Defense Department, his own White House personnel — to refuse to turn over a single document."

I don't have the energy that you do to keep going back and pointing out what was said by whom. And it is getting to the point with me to not even care. It will all continue to morph from one accusation, one investigation, one condemnation and pearl clutching OMG, one supposedly impeachable or criminal offense, that all fail, into the next one that you hope will work. It is obvious what's going on. Sea Dangles approach is looking more and more an attractive one.

Like jim said. It is not possible to talk to you. I have stopped reading your long cut and pastes because they have all been uncritical politically slanted opinions. I used to debunk them line by line for which you had no answer. The last one, except for a few shorter ones, that I read was by some retired CIA "expert" that analyzed Trump to be a useful idiot for Putin. It was amazing to me that you, or any analytically minded person, could not see that this "expert's" analysis could equally, or more so, show most of the Presidents since, and especially including, FDR to be useful idiots either of Russia or China. And that Trump is a piker as useful idiot compared to others.

I mean, TO THIS DAY, (so it is not merely an old so-called whataboutism), Franklin D. Roosevelt is considered to be the Democrats greatest President. And yet he was by far, indisputably and demonstrably, the most egregious useful idiot for the Soviet Union that occupied the Oval Office. His policies were directly responsible for handing over Eastern Europe to Russia and eventually China into the soviet sphere.

And, as far as policies that are useful to those communist regimes, The Democrat Party association with the CPUSA as well as our Progressive's policy in general have been aids to those regimes. When Kruschev said "We will bury you" he understood the direction Progressives were taking this country, and he knew well how our educational system, especially the academic, were disposed toward communist style views toward social and political outcomes.

Further, that useful idiocy has been extended by "great" or mediocre past Presidents in giving aid to Russia's partner China. Nixon started it and all the others, before Trump, continued and expanded it. They all allowed China to rape the wealth we produced, and aided it by things like granting China favored nation status which helped it into the WTO. The supposed useful idiot Trump is the only one that is seriously trying to reverse that.

That CIA expert, if you critically analyzed his analysis, showed Trump to be "presidential" in terms of his critique. Trump was being what all the pasts Presidents were in that respect. It was one of those many articles which actually, if critically looked at, contradicted your view of Trump. It even debunked your notion that Trump conspired with Putin. It showed that Trump's personality, as the "expert" saw it, would not have made that possible--he could only be a supposed "useful idiot" not a conspiratorial partner.

You just keep piling on those long and boring opinions without critically analyzing them. Just taking them as gospel.

Hopefully, better men than me will keep pushing back. I tire of fruitlessly going round and round with your relentless horse-blinder views.

Originally Posted by Pete F. (Post 1181006)

I have only two requirements from the Democratic nominee. First, he or she must not be obviously mentally unstable.

Originally Posted by Pete F. (Post 1181006)

Your belief, like Floridamans that we are better off alone against the world is foolish.

It is foolish to believe that there is this whole world out there against us. Or that what there is of such a world is unified within itself. There have always been disagreements between members in the alliance. Trump has done nothing to weaken that alliance. By demanding that the members pull their own weight, he may be strengthening it.

The John Birch Society went out in the 70s, perhaps you can revive it, I hope not.

I'm not interested, thanks for mentioning it though.

We cannot singlehandedly force anyone to do anything. Floridaman is currently claiming that we might not honor NATO treaties, specifically article 5. We are the only ones who have ever called for help based on that and received it and more.
Next time will likely be different.

Originally Posted by Pete F. (Post 1181006)

He did not,"The president informed every department for which we sought records — the State Dept. the Office of Management and Budget ... the Defense Department, his own White House personnel — to refuse to turn over a single document."

Originally Posted by detbuch (Post 1181027)

Has Trump made a current claim about article 5. In 2017 he made a strong commitment to it in his Poland speech. He is known to give seemingly different (at least in the brains of his critics)"signals" for strategic purposes. He has criticized NATO's effectiveness and its members lack of commitment to paying their share, but I don't think he has ever specifically said that we would not commit to article 5.
If he has, as you say, "currently" that we would not honor it, when was that? "Might not" does not carry much weight since he, as I said, gives off different signals for strategic (bluffs to get desired action) reasons.

Originally Posted by Pete F. (Post 1181061)

Try today

It carries a lot of weight if you’re also a NATO signatory planning your foreign policy or a possible ally deciding what path to pursue.
That’s why we are the United States and this is what we stand for, do and expect. The world knew that for decades, the last administration faltered and this one has thrown it away.
A fickle feckless friend is worth little more than nothing.
Never know when those bonespurs are gonna act up.
And don’t dream that the diplomats of the world didn’t see how Pompeo failed his staff, just as sleazy.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Originally Posted by detbuch (Post 1181064)

What did he say?

Originally Posted by Pete F. (Post 1181068)

Watch his pressers, you love those long verbose videos.

The other heads of state found his performance quite comical, he does love to get a laugh out of the crowd
This time he was the subject, again.
There’s a Floridaman tweet for that.
I’ll have to find it tomorrow to go with the clip.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device