Agreed, kinda. I think the only two viable positions for Dem candidates are total rejection (the Bernie position) or acknowledging that it may have been a good move if there’s an actual plan behind it (which there may not be).
Political Discussion
- Thread starter David A.
- Start date
Agreed, kinda. I think the only two viable positions for Dem candidates are total rejection (the Bernie position) or acknowledging that it may have been a good move if there’s an actual plan behind it (which there may not be).
BjorgenFjorgen
Well-Known Member
The plan is continuing to sell neverending war in the Middle East to a country who doesn't belong there enriching defence contractors, boosting Trump's approval ratings amid impeachment hearings, playing to America's bloodlust and imperialism. Congrats, continue to enjoy that.
We just launched an other Airstrike in Iraq targeting a convoy full of people planning to protest tomorrow.
Uh oh.
Uh oh.
Lacubrious
Member
If this is accurate then Trump, well I can’t say it’s all time low because he’s most likely committed some pretty fucking despicable acts but this is bad.
This has been confirmed by the Iraqi Prime Minister.
I thought that it would be hard to be a bigger piece of shit than he already is but this just proves me wrong.
This has been confirmed by the Iraqi Prime Minister.
I thought that it would be hard to be a bigger piece of shit than he already is but this just proves me wrong.
Phaneronic
Well-Known Member
Jdiddlydawg
Active Member
I like to think this war will be kneecapped by the house and any remaining adults in the room, but surely Trump the master negotiator realizes the position he put us in for both Iraq and Iran
Djxfactor511
Well-Known Member
Castro just endorsed Warren, which isn't a huge shocker. I wasn't a big fan of how Castro handled himself during the debates while he was still in the race, but the prospect of a diverse ticket like Warren/Castro is very appealing.
Looks like the nuclear option is on the table to dismiss Trumps Impeachment.
If they do this, expect no witnesses. If they don't outright dismiss the trial expect it to be swift and unfair.
If they do this, expect no witnesses. If they don't outright dismiss the trial expect it to be swift and unfair.
Dtknuckles
Well-Known Member
Meh...it never was going to be fair. Dems had to take a stand to bad they waited till do it when it hurt the political class rather than all the other reasons he should be impeached.
Because it was never going to be fair, the Dems may have held onto the articles of impeachment until after the 2020 elections. That way, in the event Trump was re-elected and the Dems one the majority of the senate they could hold a fair trial.
The nuclear option would make that impossible. Of course they say holding the articles of impeachment that long is unconstitutional. But they had no problem not allowing a vote to confirm Obama's Supreme Court nomination for a year and a half when it was in their favor.
The nuclear option would make that impossible. Of course they say holding the articles of impeachment that long is unconstitutional. But they had no problem not allowing a vote to confirm Obama's Supreme Court nomination for a year and a half when it was in their favor.
I really dislike Mitch McConnell.
Today he stated that it is not the Senate's Job to collect evidence, interview witnesses and make the case. Their job is to listen to the evidence the house found and pass judgment.
He wants to hold the trial. Then we can worry about interviewing witnesses later on after the trial.
This statement comes this afternoon after Bolton said he would appear as a witness for the Senate after refusing to do so for the House.
It sounds very much like he is on board with changing the Senate rules and starting the trial without the Articles of Impeachment from the House.
Also the Republicans are saying the reason why the House is withholding the Articles of Impeachment is because they have nothing. Only hear say from second hand witnesses. Very weak at best so they want to wait it out until the Dems protential have control of the Senate so they have have a "unfair vote" that is politically motivated.
Today he stated that it is not the Senate's Job to collect evidence, interview witnesses and make the case. Their job is to listen to the evidence the house found and pass judgment.
He wants to hold the trial. Then we can worry about interviewing witnesses later on after the trial.
This statement comes this afternoon after Bolton said he would appear as a witness for the Senate after refusing to do so for the House.
It sounds very much like he is on board with changing the Senate rules and starting the trial without the Articles of Impeachment from the House.
Also the Republicans are saying the reason why the House is withholding the Articles of Impeachment is because they have nothing. Only hear say from second hand witnesses. Very weak at best so they want to wait it out until the Dems protential have control of the Senate so they have have a "unfair vote" that is politically motivated.
During a closed door lunch today Mitch McConnell told fellow republicans that he had enough votes to set trial rules without any support from Democrats.
On the bright side, he says he has no intention of holding the trial at this time until the Democrats hand over the articles of impeachment.
On the bright side, he says he has no intention of holding the trial at this time until the Democrats hand over the articles of impeachment.
I would just never send it over personally if I am the democrats, Just let it expire like Merrick Garland's supreme court nomination.
Indymisanthrope
Well-Known Member
Send it during the Republican convention in August.
Things are escalating tonight.
Iran has launched ballistic missiles at 2 US Bases in Iraq.
These are conventional, cross border that require a sophisticated organized military attack. This is Irans military responding.
Iran has launched ballistic missiles at 2 US Bases in Iraq.
These are conventional, cross border that require a sophisticated organized military attack. This is Irans military responding.
dbarila
Well-Known Member
At least with Afghanistan and Iraq there was a concrete reason to get involved in a conflict (whether it turned out legitimate or not). I can't name a single reason we should be starting a war with Iran right now.
Oil?
Trump Wants it.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I have nothing
Trump Wants it.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I have nothing
TrainFan73
Frothy
He told us:
Trump repeatedly claimed in 2011 and 2012 that Obama would start a war with Iran to win reelection
In media appearances prior to the 2012 election, Donald Trump repeatedly predicted that then-President Barack Obama would start a war with Iran in order to win reelection.
www.google.com
DownIsTheNewUp
Well-Known Member
World’s richest 500 people saw their wealth jump 25 percent in 2019
In 2019, the world’s richest 500 people saw their collective net worth jump by 25 percent or $1.2 trillion, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index published Friday.Combi…
thehill.com
DownIsTheNewUp
Well-Known Member
Also this:
www.businessinsider.com
GOP Sen. Mike Lee furious after an 'insulting' Senate briefing on Trump's Iran strike: 'The worst briefing ... on a military issue I've seen in 9 years'
GOP Sen. Mike Lee told reporters the briefing was so "demeaning" that he changed his mind on a resolution to limit Trump's power to attack Iran.
www.businessinsider.com