JUST the Stolen Documents/Mar-A-Lago/"Judge" Cannon Trial

[cradleandshoot]

Let us all review here. Barack Obama vaporized many many bad guys to include old men and women and children with his drone strikes while he was POTUS. So let me hear all of the outrage from you FLP weeds here about that. Even our Casper milquetoast resident republican on these boards may have to pull his nose out of the arses of the FLP folks he sucks up to and admit something ain't right here.

What is FLP?

sorry... FAR LEFT PROGRESSIVE. A despicable reprobate that predominates on this forum.

But we still love them just like we love the Three Stooges. They entertain us with their stupidity.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Let us all review here. Barack Obama vaporized many many bad guys to include old men and women and children with his drone strikes while he was POTUS. So let me hear all of the outrage from you FLP weeds here about that. Even our Casper milquetoast resident republican on these boards may have to pull his nose out of the arses of the FLP folks he sucks up to and admit something ain't right here.

What is FLP?

Everyone that doesn’t agree with him.

Chickenchit response. Justify what Obama did. Anytime you disagree with me I know I am correct in what I am thinking.

You have the same old rotten tooth philosophy. When did Obama order the assassination of a high ranking general on another country’s soil without letting them know? It’s a false equivalency. The Middle East people are going to do what they are going to do....right? The rotten tooth philosophy. Ignore your teeth. They will go away.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Happy New Year

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/05/us/milit ... index.html

[youthathletics]

Let us all review here. Barack Obama vaporized many many bad guys to include old men and women and children with his drone strikes while he was POTUS. So let me hear all of the outrage from you FLP weeds here about that. Even our Casper milquetoast resident republican on these boards may have to pull his nose out of the arses of the FLP folks he sucks up to and admit something ain't right here.

What is FLP?

Everyone that doesn’t agree with him.

Chickenchit response. Justify what Obama did. Anytime you disagree with me I know I am correct in what I am thinking.

You have the same old rotten tooth philosophy. When did Obama order the assassination of a high ranking general on another country’s soil without letting them know? It’s a false equivalency. The Middle East people are going to do what they are going to do....right? The rotten tooth philosophy. Ignore your teeth. They will go away.

Obama killed countless innocent people in unannounced drone strikes of significant targets.

Obama’s DHS Sec. Jeh Johnson said Trump had every right to do this unannounced on Meet The Press. Sadly, Meet the press has posted every other segment but this one piece.....wonder why? It is on social media however.

[CU88]

...merely that their govt' and religious leaders are and have been creating a climate of tension and fighting.

This is on going in the USA, no?

[a fan]

Obama killed countless innocent people in unannounced drone strikes of significant targets.

I like how the right is bringing that up now.....back then, FoxNation was telling viewers that Obama was weak, and doing nothing about terrorism.

Guess not, right?

Obama’s DHS Sec. Jeh Johnson said Trump had every right to do this unannounced

Who disputes that, outside of the far left, who also called Obama a war criminal? No one.

The discussion is about: does this fit into long term US strategy regarding Iran and the ME as a whole?

It does if we're staying in the ME.

It doesn't if, as some here claim, we're not staying in the ME.

[tech37]

Now Trump's a bad CinC because he believed his intel community & acted upon their findings.

Trump believed and acted upon the immediate intelligence
as to Soleimani’s location. My point, which I think you understand, is that I suspect he didn’t even ask for input on the possible short and long-term consequences of the killing. He drove his Trump Truck into the kindergarten school yard without checking to see whether the kids were out at recess or it was Sunday afternoon.

So in your mind, there is no way that Trump's advisors had already determined and weighed the long and short-term consequences and were just waiting for the most opportune time to strike? There certainly was time to determine the consequences of taking S out, since the drone shoot down (6/19) and attack on Aramco in SA (9/19). Seems the attack on US Embassy was the "red line"... and with the latest intel (if accurate) all that was needed was Trump's affirmative nod.

[CU88]

That is just silly. Of course I see that. You originally stated that we should prepare to send out kids to die because we have a Republican in office. I stated historically that President Obama increased troupe deployment by some 70,000 in Afghanistan. So, it appears that increasing troupe deployment in foreign conflict is not endemic to a singular party.

If Brookies Dems had voted no on the Iraq invasion, we would not have invaded. It's on them. Yep, it was Bush's idea....but he put it to a vote. The Dems failed.

And the liberals, as usual, told America what would happen. Shocker. They were right. Again. For like the tenth straight war.

I think the vast majority of all average Americans, Republican or Democrat, desire less war, less dead Americans.

Polling suggests otherwise. The average American wanted us to go to both Iraq and Afghanistan. What Americans do, is play the "golly willikers, this war didn't play out like we thought" game. And then they don't want all the consequences that come with choosing to go to war.

Rinse. Repeat.

I have had conversations with friends who are both democrat and republican and to a person, everyone of them has said they hope this does not drag us into another war. They may disagree on the strike itself but not one wants to see us go to war.

And people who have sex without birth control hope they don't pregnant.

We have to grow up and take responsibility for actions that paint us into a corner. We do it again and again and again. We've been at war almost without pause since WWII. Saying Americans don't want war is utterly laughable when you look at the scoreboard.

Yes. Yes we DO want war. Denial isn't just a river in Egypt.

If we didn't want war, we wouldn't have troops deployed all around the world. If you want to talk about whether it's justified, or if we're keeping the peace, you can certainly do that. But you can't say a country that's been at war for decades doesn't want war. It's just a silly claim on its face.

I had written a response with questions, replies and such and just erased it. I got tired and my simple brain hurt. I will say 2 things:
1. the unprotected sex line was fantastic
2. i can see the geopolitical reasons for certain actions. I see the need to protect our selves and I can even see the need to go to war to protect our assets and those of our allies. that being said, i do not WANT to see more of our young soldiers die. i do not WANT to be at war. i can accept that during certain situations it is warranted.

you win the internet today............

+1

[CU88]

Now Trump's a bad CinC because he believed his intel community & acted upon their findings.

Trump believed and acted upon the immediate intelligence
as to Soleimani’s location. My point, which I think you understand, is that I suspect he didn’t even ask for input on the possible short and long-term consequences of the killing. He drove his Trump Truck into the kindergarten school yard without checking to see whether the kids were out at recess or it was Sunday afternoon.

So in your mind, there is no way that Trump's advisors had already determined and weighed the long and short-term consequences and were just waiting for the most opportune time to strike? There certainly was time to determine the consequences of taking S out, since the drone shoot down (6/19) and attack on Aramco in SA (9/19). Seems the attack on US Embassy was the "red line"... and with the latest intel (if accurate) all that was needed was Trump's affirmative nod.

Pretty lame "red line". How many Americans died? And were they still in the Embassy when drone was launched, or had they already dispersed?

"We are very confident that the integrity of that embassy is strong and it is highly unlikely to be physically overrun by anyone. There is sufficient combat power there, the air and ground. Anyone who attempts to overrun that will run into a buzzsaw,” Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Mark Milley told reporters at the Pentagon Thursday.

Maybe you are calling Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Mark Milley a liar?

Oh, that "mysterious" intel that no one has seen...

[njbill]

Now Trump's a bad CinC because he believed his intel community & acted upon their findings.

Trump believed and acted upon the immediate intelligence
as to Soleimani’s location. My point, which I think you understand, is that I suspect he didn’t even ask for input on the possible short and long-term consequences of the killing. He drove his Trump Truck into the kindergarten school yard without checking to see whether the kids were out at recess or it was Sunday afternoon.

So in your mind, there is no way that Trump's advisors had already determined and weighed the long and short-term consequences and were just waiting for the most opportune time to strike? There certainly was time to determine the consequences of taking S out, since the drone shoot down (6/19) and attack on Aramco in SA (9/19). Seems the attack on US Embassy was the "red line"... and with the latest intel (if accurate) all that was needed was Trump's affirmative nod.

Sure, that is possible. I just don’t think Trump gave any serious thought to the consequences. Just my opinion.

[old salt]

All the whining about anything we did pre-2014 is irrelevant to the situation we confront today vis a vis Iran.
Iranian proxies have begun attacking us in Iraq. We are responding.

It's relevant because we're using the same strategy and worldview that brought us to the ME in the first place. You're too stubborn to listen, so here you and I are.
Trump's not.

It can be reasonably argued that Trump's actions are being done to withdraw from the ME.

No. No it can't.

If we're withdrawing from the ME, why did Trump pull out of the JCPOA? Because it had nothing to do with us withdrawing. By financing Iranian adventurism, it increased the reason's we'd stay.Why would he care if Iran is fomenting terrorism if we're leaving? Because they can & will still strike us.And he sure as *hit wouldn't intentionally try and pressure Iranians to incite a Civil War as he is with the severe sanctions.The sanctions are to get Iran to knock off the proxy wars & come back to the table to enter a verifiable denuc agreement that not just a fig leaf for delay, while they recover & rearm.

Speaking as someone who actually wants to leave? The JCPOA is our ticket out. The signees are on the hook for Iran now. It's their problem. Walk away.Right. The other signees will hold Iran accountable .

Look at the nature of the forces we are sending in.

That's a change in tactics, not strategy. You just don't want to hear it. Nothing Trump has done or said tells you that our strategy has changed in this region.You keep saying that - thinking it makes you sound smart. You're just looking at numbers. The nature of the forces signals our intentions.

If our forces are getting attacked by Iran, and Trump REALLY wanted to leave? His reaction wouldn't be to send reinforcements. His reaction would be to pull every last troop out. Have you ever heard of covering a retreat ? He's sending Marines in V-22's & paratroopers. We have to protect our troops & diplomats until they're guaranteed safe passage out. The other forces we sent were for air defense of our other forces alteady there, in our Gulf State allied nations.

Trump---and you----is still using same worldview. Trump cares if Iran causes trouble. He cares if Iran increases its reach in the region. Someone who wanted to leave would. not. care.

They'd simply leave. Now it's someone else's problem.
We still have allies & interests in the region (they're just not in Iraq & Syria), AND he's serious about Iran not getting nucs & he knows that JCPOA was an ineffective fig leaf.

[tech37]

Now Trump's a bad CinC because he believed his intel community & acted upon their findings.

Trump believed and acted upon the immediate intelligence
as to Soleimani’s location. My point, which I think you understand, is that I suspect he didn’t even ask for input on the possible short and long-term consequences of the killing. He drove his Trump Truck into the kindergarten school yard without checking to see whether the kids were out at recess or it was Sunday afternoon.

So in your mind, there is no way that Trump's advisors had already determined and weighed the long and short-term consequences and were just waiting for the most opportune time to strike? There certainly was time to determine the consequences of taking S out, since the drone shoot down (6/19) and attack on Aramco in SA (9/19). Seems the attack on US Embassy was the "red line"... and with the latest intel (if accurate) all that was needed was Trump's affirmative nod.

Sure, that is possible. I just don’t think Trump gave any serious thought to the consequences. Just my opinion.

Thank you. Right, I think that's possible. The point is, advisors did due diligence and only needed Trump's approval as SOP.

[old salt]

Now Trump's a bad CinC because he believed his intel community & acted upon their findings.

Trump believed and acted upon the immediate intelligence
as to Soleimani’s location. My point, which I think you understand, is that I suspect he didn’t even ask for input on the possible short and long-term consequences of the killing. He drove his Trump Truck into the kindergarten school yard without checking to see whether the kids were out at recess or it was Sunday afternoon.

So in your mind, there is no way that Trump's advisors had already determined and weighed the long and short-term consequences and were just waiting for the most opportune time to strike? There certainly was time to determine the consequences of taking S out, since the drone shoot down (6/19) and attack on Aramco in SA (9/19). Seems the attack on US Embassy was the "red line"... and with the latest intel (if accurate) all that was needed was Trump's affirmative nod.

Bill -- you don't know how long we've been tracking Soleimani or what he'd just done in Damascus, planned to do in Baghdad, & then consult with the Ayatollah in Tehran. We designated Soleimani & the IRGC as terrorists in Apr 2019.
You think Trump's advisers didn't discuss possible long & short term consequences with him ?

[Typical Lax Dad]

Let us all review here. Barack Obama vaporized many many bad guys to include old men and women and children with his drone strikes while he was POTUS. So let me hear all of the outrage from you FLP weeds here about that. Even our Casper milquetoast resident republican on these boards may have to pull his nose out of the arses of the FLP folks he sucks up to and admit something ain't right here.

What is FLP?

Everyone that doesn’t agree with him.

Chickenchit response. Justify what Obama did. Anytime you disagree with me I know I am correct in what I am thinking.

You have the same old rotten tooth philosophy. When did Obama order the assassination of a high ranking general on another country’s soil without letting them know? It’s a false equivalency. The Middle East people are going to do what they are going to do....right? The rotten tooth philosophy. Ignore your teeth. They will go away.

Obama killed countless innocent people in unannounced drone strikes of significant targets.

Obama’s DHS Sec. Jeh Johnson said Trump had every right to do this unannounced on Meet The Press. Sadly, Meet the press has posted every other segment but this one piece.....wonder why? It is on social media however.

Different issue and he caught heat for it.

[Trinity]

https://www.axios.com/trump-iraq-parlia ... f76cd.html

Trump asks Iraq for a favor, is rebuffed.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Now Trump's a bad CinC because he believed his intel community & acted upon their findings.

Trump believed and acted upon the immediate intelligence
as to Soleimani’s location. My point, which I think you understand, is that I suspect he didn’t even ask for input on the possible short and long-term consequences of the killing. He drove his Trump Truck into the kindergarten school yard without checking to see whether the kids were out at recess or it was Sunday afternoon.

So in your mind, there is no way that Trump's advisors had already determined and weighed the long and short-term consequences and were just waiting for the most opportune time to strike? There certainly was time to determine the consequences of taking S out, since the drone shoot down (6/19) and attack on Aramco in SA (9/19). Seems the attack on US Embassy was the "red line"... and with the latest intel (if accurate) all that was needed was Trump's affirmative nod.

Sure, that is possible. I just don’t think Trump gave any serious thought to the consequences. Just my opinion.

Thank you. Right, I think that's possible. The point is, advisors did due diligence and only needed Trump's approval as SOP.

Advisors: we have 5 options....including assassinating the General but we don’t recommend it.

Trump: Assassinate him. It’s easier.

[ggait]

Sure, that is possible. I just don’t think Trump gave any serious thought to the consequences. Just my opinion.

After all we have seen from Trump for years now, it is just really hard to believe much he says. Or to believe his actions are ever motivated by anything other than what Trump thinks is good for Donald Trump.

So when situations like this arise, it is a serious problem that POTUS has zero credibility with most of America and most of the western world. That just was never a problem with any prior president I can think of -- D or R. Most think W and Colin Powell were wrong, not lying or stupid or wagging the dog.

So when reports like this come out, most people think yeah -- I could totally see Trump doing that. And can also easily imagine the Pentagon guys kicking themselves: What moron put the crazy option on Trump's list? Who thought crazy Trump wouldn't pick the crazy option? What the heck!!!

In the chaotic days leading to the death of Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani, Iran’s most powerful commander, top American military officials put the option of killing him — which they viewed as the most extreme response to recent Iranian-led violence in Iraq — on the menu they presented to President Trump. They didn’t think he would take it. In the wars waged since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, Pentagon officials have often offered improbable options to presidents to make other possibilities appear more palatable.

Pentagon officials reportedly offered US President Donald Trump a list of other, less-severe options for dealing with escalating tensions with Iran.
He was given the option to strike Iranian ships, missile facilities, or Iranian-backed militia groups in Iraq, according to The Times. The officials offered the possibility of killing Soleimani mainly to make the other options seem more appealing, which The Times said is a common tactic US officials take with presidents.

Trump initially elected to strike against militia groups. On Sunday, the US military struck three locations in Iraq and two in Syria that were controlled by an Iranian-backed militia, The Times also reported. But, after protesters supporting an Iranian-backed militia stormed Iraq's US Embassy in Baghdad on Tuesday, Trump went for the "most extreme" option of targeting Soleimani, the publication reported. By late Thursday, the president had gone for the extreme option.

Top Pentagon officials were stunned.

I mean his own departed guys are the ones who call him an eff-ing moron

[a fan]

]Because it had nothing to do with us withdrawing. By financing Iranian adventurism, it increased the reason's we'd stay.

1. Iran supported terrorism before the JCPOA
2. Iran supported terrorism after the JCPOA
3. Iran supported and supports terrorism after the JCPOA was dropped.

And from this, you conclude that the JCPOA caused Iran's terrorism. Neat.

BTW, you told us years ago that getting Iran to sign off on... no nuke program, no ballistic program, and to not support terrorism was easy...and that Obama and Kerry just suck. So how's your Trumpy doing? How come he didn't get this deal you thought was so easy to get?

The sanctions are to get Iran to knock off the proxy wars & come back to the table to enter a verifiable denuc agreement

They are , huh? How's that workin' out for you? Gonna cave any day now, right?

And what's your plan if a Civil War starts? Then what? Do you even care?

And they're done with the nuke deal as of this week. You have a brilliant answer for that? Because you think them getting a nuke is no big deal, right? The JCPOA was a pointless...what did you call it?....Oh yeah.... "a fig leaf". So a nuclear armed Iran is just no big deal. Top shelf thinking right there.

Right. The other signees will hold Iran accountable .

There it is. You think the US has to do it.

And yet your sales pitch is we're leaving the Middle East, right? You can't keep your own nonsense theories straight.

You keep saying that - thinking it makes you sound smart. You're just looking at numbers. The nature of the forces signals our intentions.

The nature of the combat has changed here in 2019. So yep, they're changing what are assets are. That has NOTHING to do with the idea of retreat from this region.

Tell you what, though. This isn't the old forum, so we can wager. If you're right, and I'm such an idiot, how'd you like to make an easy $10K off of "a fan"? I'm wagering we'll still have bases and troops all over the Middle East next year. You in? Should be the easiest money you ever made, right? Trump is...how did you put it.....covering a retreat, right?

We still have allies & interests in the region (they're just not in Iraq & Syria), AND he's serious about Iran not getting nucs & he knows that JCPOA was an ineffective fig leaf.

There it is again. Maybe you should read that sentence out loud and in front of a mirror. What in that sentence would signal to anyone that we're leaving the Middle East?

[njbill]

Now Trump's a bad CinC because he believed his intel community & acted upon their findings.

Trump believed and acted upon the immediate intelligence
as to Soleimani’s location. My point, which I think you understand, is that I suspect he didn’t even ask for input on the possible short and long-term consequences of the killing. He drove his Trump Truck into the kindergarten school yard without checking to see whether the kids were out at recess or it was Sunday afternoon.

So in your mind, there is no way that Trump's advisors had already determined and weighed the long and short-term consequences and were just waiting for the most opportune time to strike? There certainly was time to determine the consequences of taking S out, since the drone shoot down (6/19) and attack on Aramco in SA (9/19). Seems the attack on US Embassy was the "red line"... and with the latest intel (if accurate) all that was needed was Trump's affirmative nod.

Bill -- you don't know how long we've been tracking Soleimani or what he'd just done in Damascus, planned to do in Baghdad, & then consult with the Ayatollah in Tehran. We designated Soleimani & the IRGC as terrorists in Apr 2019.
You think Trump's advisers didn't discuss possible long & short term consequences with him ?

Yes, I don’t know how long we have been tracking him, although reports are it has been for a very long time. I also don’t know what the intelligence was about his recent activities, whether we simply knew where he was and who he may have met with or whether we actually know what was discussed.

My point is that the proper thing for a president to have done in this situation would have been to request and listen to a detailed briefing on the possible consequences. That isn’t something that could be done between the eighth and ninth holes on a golf course. It is possible (hopefully likely) that his advisers offered to give him a detailed briefing, but I don’t believe Trump has the patience to sit down and listen to the type of briefing that would be required here. So I don’t think he did it. Just my opinion.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Now Trump's a bad CinC because he believed his intel community & acted upon their findings.

Trump believed and acted upon the immediate intelligence
as to Soleimani’s location. My point, which I think you understand, is that I suspect he didn’t even ask for input on the possible short and long-term consequences of the killing. He drove his Trump Truck into the kindergarten school yard without checking to see whether the kids were out at recess or it was Sunday afternoon.

So in your mind, there is no way that Trump's advisors had already determined and weighed the long and short-term consequences and were just waiting for the most opportune time to strike? There certainly was time to determine the consequences of taking S out, since the drone shoot down (6/19) and attack on Aramco in SA (9/19). Seems the attack on US Embassy was the "red line"... and with the latest intel (if accurate) all that was needed was Trump's affirmative nod.

Bill -- you don't know how long we've been tracking Soleimani or what he'd just done in Damascus, planned to do in Baghdad, & then consult with the Ayatollah in Tehran. We designated Soleimani & the IRGC as terrorists in Apr 2019.
You think Trump's advisers didn't discuss possible long & short term consequences with him ?

Yes, I don’t know how long we have been tracking him, although reports are it has been for a very long time. I also don’t know what the intelligence was about his recent activities, whether we simply knew where he was and who he may have met with or whether we actually know what was discussed.

My point is that the proper thing for a president to have done in this situation would have been to request and listen to a detailed briefing on the possible consequences. That isn’t something that could be done between the eighth and ninth holes on a golf course. It is possible (hopefully likely) that his advisers offered to give him a detailed briefing, but I don’t believe Trump has the patience to sit down and listen to the type of briefing that would be required here. So I don’t think he did it. Just my opinion.

Waiting to see if there is any truth to the story that he was lured to Iraq to be assassinated and the Iraqis were duped.