![]() |
Quote:
How low can you go defending and supporting anti-government actions? Elections have consequences and either be on the team or quit; staying on, just to work to disrupt and sabotage is sedition -- it is the very definition of the word.
|
Quote:
|
I’ve long said (w/ others) that the WH and especially the president are astoundingly, even historically, weak in their ability to assert executive power to control what happens within the administration. The Executive branch response to the impeachment inquiry is revealing.
On 10-8, WHC Cipollone said that to avoid “lasting institutional harm on the Executive Branch and lasting damage to the separation of power, Trump *cannot permit his Administration to participate in this partisan inquiry under these circumstances*.” https://assets.documentcloud.org/doc...10-08-2019.pdf This was, like many Trumpian threats, empty. In the last few weeks we have seen former and, more amazingly, current officials of the Trump administration appearing before Congress to discuss intimate presidential conversations related to core presidential responsibilities. Yovanovitch, Kent, Cooper, Taylor, and Sondland, all current executive officials, have testified to the president’s detriment on Ukraine matter and in defiance of WH instructions not to cooperate. I think Vidman defied the WH as well, but cannot confirm that. This is a really remarkable breakdown of soft and hard presidential power. Congress might have legal authority to access some of this info. It’s a complicated question how much. But the WH isn't even putting up a fight. The WH is asserting no legal authorities, and does not appear even to be trying to manage what executive officials can and cannot say. The WH has no juice, no tools. The Cipollone letter was pure bluster. In so, so many ways, Trump is a weak, not a strong, president. Jack Goldsmith Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
It's interesting that Vindman admitted to sharing readouts of the call (which he did listen in on) without telling the committee who those people were, or at least stating if he knew those people possessed clearances at a level to read such a document. When questioned by a Republican about this point of interest, Schiff shut down the questioning and ordered Vindman to not answer the question. Was the "whistleblower" one of the people Vindman gave a readout to? After quitting the White House in 2017, under suspicion of leaking, did the "whistleblower" possess a top secret clearance? Quote:
|
When Vindman was asked to go along with a transaction that had nothing to do with policy, but only the president's personal interests, he was taken aback.
Perhaps someone knows of any anti corruption agenda that this administration put forth other than ones that involve his political adversaries Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
|
Quote:
He doesn't need to "be strong", he doesn't need to keep people from testifying. He knows the House Dumbocrats will do what Democrats do and he will wear it as a badge of honor. What the hell will the Democrats screaming "we impeached him" do, how will their "impeached" screeching and bleating be more damaging than what they are already screeching and bleating about? He is eager to see the 31 vulnerable,Trump won district Democrats act dumb and vote party and then many lose their seats next November. He doesn't need to play any game that the Democrats recognize as "powerful", he knows he isn't going to be convicted and removed by the Senate and he knows he will emerge stronger than ever in the eyes of sane citizens and he knows most of all, he will win a resounding victory in 2020. When the IG report and Durham's indictments and Barr's prosecutions send Democrat favorites to prison, it will just make victory all the sweeter. https://i.postimg.cc/8CW6PZnk/Barr_Mind.jpg |
Guys like Pete and Paul would rather ignore the truth and continue to believe what the media feeds them. Liberal fools.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
"Scumminess" is three pages of the loopyleftie posters here wondering in abject, purposeful, self-imposed ignorance about what Durham is investigating . . . And then, when I exactingly lay out plenty of Obama administration illegality that led directly to the Russian collusion hoax and the fake investigation into it, you ignore it. Scumminess is ignoring facts you asked for and instead running back under your mommy's apron of another safe, mindless false narrative of the left, only peeking out enough to shake your fist and say orange man bad . . . So pathetic and so predictable, keep parroting what you think is a cudgel until it is destroyed and then turn and shift to another BS cudgel. Please, you said I wasn't worth your time, prove it. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Why recoil from the label? Isn't sedition the very mission statement of embedded Obama holdovers and members of "The Resistance"? From holdovers in the White House and the State Department and the "intelligence Community" (and even the federal judiciary), "The Resistance" program has been to frustrate and delay and hobble the Trump "agenda" no matter what your actual job description is, or what your official duties are. You admit as much, you hold the "whistleblower" in high regard because he was (as a analyst working deep in the bowels of Langly) driven to expose the President. What BS! Same for Vindman, you say, "He was not going to stand for the Pres. trying to get a foreign power to interfere with our election" . . . Well, first off, that's a characterization entirely driven by politics completely divorced from the fact that the power to drive foreign policy is exclusively the President's and Vindman's job, and the State Department's job is to implement the President's initiatives and agenda, not their own (or the previous administration's agenda). Stop acting like you don't get this. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
While it wouldn't change my opinion of him, I have not heard any reporting that Eric Ciaramella, outed as the "whistleblower" was a war hero . . . My sedition comment was directed to him. Reading comprehension, it isn't just for conservatives. |
he's a little irrational right now...
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
That you distort, misrepresent and mischaracterize what was actually said and find it so easy to mistakenly assign a mind-set / belief to another person, explains completely why you are what you are and why you do what you do. |
Quote:
Sedition = scummy. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
No more proof is needed that they exist within an information bubble that they rigidly maintain. They find it impossible to reply in the context of what they quote or even make any attempt to actually rebut it.
My use of "sedition" was specifically assigned to a person who uses his position to purposefully disrupt and sabotage the administration he works for. I did not assign or associate that term with anyone but the whistleleaker and the last posts saying I did, (or that was what was in my mind), are only the pitiful mutterings of a useless leftist partisan who can only misrepresent and lie. |
The whistleblower knew what Trump did was wrong and went up the chain of command to inform people of it. His actions where not sedition and to call him that is dishonest and scummy.
Embrace your scumminess. |
Quote:
|
paul is on a roll....good grief...talk about struggling with reality
|
Quote:
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
Quote:
|
Quote:
If this isn't impeachable nothing is, and the GOP is freaking out. |
Quote:
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:12 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1998-20012 Striped-Bass.com