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

[jhu72]

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.

Apparently 224 House members dispute the fact that Trump had this authority, otherwise why did they just hold that vote in the House. As Molly Hatchet sang.....they are flirting with disaster when time is of the essence. Is their goal to wait for catastrophe, and then react?

Their goal is to express some Congressional authority over this narrow but important aspect of foreign policy: the decision to use mortal force overseas. The War Powers Act has, since its passage in 1973, been a bone of contention. It was a response to the so-called Imperial Presidency. Nixon tried to veto it, and every President since -- D or R -- has basically ignored it. Authority has to be exercised in order to exist, in order to avoid the waiver of any authority. So it is that Congress has to, from time to time, make these sorts of declarations. And the need to do so is, with this President, particularly acute.

Their goal is not to "wait for catastrophe;" the goal is for the Executive Branch to work cooperatively with the Legislative Branch in this most important of issues.

So why then now if it has been a bone of contention since 73' ? Pelosi is on record as agreeing BHO had complete authority without notification to Congress in 2011? Just appears on the surface as more bickering and futile exercises of partisanship...the vote was down party lines with the exception of ~3-6 flips.

IF YOU CAN'T SHOW THE INTEL SUPPORTING IMMENIENT THREAT TO CONGRESSIONAL REPRESENTATIVES AFTER THE FACT, THERE WAS NO IMMENIENT THREAT and hence plenty of time for consultation.

[jhu72]

Rachel has jumped the shark. Making excuses for the Iranian shootdown. Unbelievable.

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/wat ... 6395077612

No shark jumping here, no excuse. Just a fair representation of what happened. Only you seem to think Fog of War had nothing to do with this shooting down. She did not blame anyone, she explained how this kind of thing happens. She did not blame it on the US; she did not blame it on Trump.

[cradleandshoot]

NBC's Peter Alexander asked Pompeo at today WH briefing: If you killed Soleimani to avert an imminent danger- now that Soleimani is dead, is that imminent danger gone?

Pompeo said the attack was imminent but they didn't know when or where!

Not knowing when is the opposite of imminent.

Yup. Some pretty thin gruel coming out the mouths of these Trumpnista. The only people who believe this nonsense are the morons in Trump's base. Even the republicans who are voting in support of his actions don't believe this beans. They are worse, traitors to the republic.

The gruel was just as thin when Obama ordered well south of 300 plus drone attacks inside Pakistan and assassinated countless bad guys to include women and children and old folks. You need to practice more at being a hypocrite 72. Splain to me how drones ordered by BHO that kill folks are better and more justifiable than Trumps drone attacks that kill people? Trick question... there ain't no difference. The only thing I can tell is that the gruel you speak of is coming out the left side of the mouth for one POTUS and coming out of the right side of the mouth for another POTUS.

[Typical Lax Dad]

NBC's Peter Alexander asked Pompeo at today WH briefing: If you killed Soleimani to avert an imminent danger- now that Soleimani is dead, is that imminent danger gone?

Pompeo said the attack was imminent but they didn't know when or where!

Not knowing when is the opposite of imminent.

Yup. Some pretty thin gruel coming out the mouths of these Trumpnista. The only people who believe this nonsense are the morons in Trump's base. Even the republicans who are voting in support of his actions don't believe this beans. They are worse, traitors to the republic.

The gruel was just as thin when Obama ordered well south of 300 plus drone attacks inside Pakistan and assassinated countless bad guys to include women and children and old folks. You need to practice more at being a hypocrite 72. Splain to me how drones ordered by BHO that kill folks are better and more justifiable than Trumps drone attacks that kill people? Trick question... there ain't no difference. The only thing I can tell is that the gruel you speak of is coming out the left side of the mouth for one POTUS and coming out of the right side of the mouth for another POTUS.

Two negatives can make a positive.

[youthathletics]

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.

Apparently 224 House members dispute the fact that Trump had this authority, otherwise why did they just hold that vote in the House. As Molly Hatchet sang.....they are flirting with disaster when time is of the essence. Is their goal to wait for catastrophe, and then react?

Their goal is to express some Congressional authority over this narrow but important aspect of foreign policy: the decision to use mortal force overseas. The War Powers Act has, since its passage in 1973, been a bone of contention. It was a response to the so-called Imperial Presidency. Nixon tried to veto it, and every President since -- D or R -- has basically ignored it. Authority has to be exercised in order to exist, in order to avoid the waiver of any authority. So it is that Congress has to, from time to time, make these sorts of declarations. And the need to do so is, with this President, particularly acute.

Their goal is not to "wait for catastrophe;" the goal is for the Executive Branch to work cooperatively with the Legislative Branch in this most important of issues.

So why then now if it has been a bone of contention since 73' ? Pelosi is on record as agreeing BHO had complete authority without notification to Congress in 2011? Just appears on the surface as more bickering and futile exercises of partisanship...the vote was down party lines with the exception of ~3-6 flips.

IF YOU CAN'T SHOW THE INTEL SUPPORTING IMMENIENT THREAT TO CONGRESSIONAL REPRESENTATIVES AFTER THE FACT, THERE WAS NO IMMENIENT THREAT and hence plenty of time for consultation.

Are you serious? Why even bother with National Security procedures or Security Clearances if you want everything wide open transparent. And yet you all complain about things like Jared getting a clearnace...seems its not important if everyone should know everything. Or maybe that is what you really want.

EDIT: Just saw your response to cradle...got it, you don't like anyone in politics, me either.

[jhu72]

NBC's Peter Alexander asked Pompeo at today WH briefing: If you killed Soleimani to avert an imminent danger- now that Soleimani is dead, is that imminent danger gone?

Pompeo said the attack was imminent but they didn't know when or where!

Not knowing when is the opposite of imminent.

Yup. Some pretty thin gruel coming out the mouths of these Trumpnista. The only people who believe this nonsense are the morons in Trump's base. Even the republicans who are voting in support of his actions don't believe this beans. They are worse, traitors to the republic.

The gruel was just as thin when Obama ordered well south of 300 plus drone attacks inside Pakistan and assassinated countless bad guys to include women and children and old folks. You need to practice more at being a hypocrite 72. Splain to me how drones ordered by BHO that kill folks are better and more justifiable than Trumps drone attacks that kill people? Trick question... there ain't no difference. The only thing I can tell is that the gruel you speak of is coming out the left side of the mouth for one POTUS and coming out of the right side of the mouth for another POTUS.

Sorry there general. I opposed Obama's undeclared drone warfare. No splainin for me to do. I also opposed not limiting Obama's ability to conduct war without congressional approval, just as with earlier presidents. There is a difference however between Obama and Trump. Obama actually requested a new AUMF and congressional republicans refused to give him one. They all conduct war and nobody wants to take responsibility for it - not even Trump. His tune, claims of responsibility for this strike will change as things move forward and things go south. Which they will.

It is long past time for the citizens to take control of this process. This citizen is f**king tired of it! The hands of presidents, congress persons and the military - NONE OF THEM ARE CLEAN ON THIS ISSUE!

[jhu72]

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.

Apparently 224 House members dispute the fact that Trump had this authority, otherwise why did they just hold that vote in the House. As Molly Hatchet sang.....they are flirting with disaster when time is of the essence. Is their goal to wait for catastrophe, and then react?

Their goal is to express some Congressional authority over this narrow but important aspect of foreign policy: the decision to use mortal force overseas. The War Powers Act has, since its passage in 1973, been a bone of contention. It was a response to the so-called Imperial Presidency. Nixon tried to veto it, and every President since -- D or R -- has basically ignored it. Authority has to be exercised in order to exist, in order to avoid the waiver of any authority. So it is that Congress has to, from time to time, make these sorts of declarations. And the need to do so is, with this President, particularly acute.

Their goal is not to "wait for catastrophe;" the goal is for the Executive Branch to work cooperatively with the Legislative Branch in this most important of issues.

So why then now if it has been a bone of contention since 73' ? Pelosi is on record as agreeing BHO had complete authority without notification to Congress in 2011? Just appears on the surface as more bickering and futile exercises of partisanship...the vote was down party lines with the exception of ~3-6 flips.

IF YOU CAN'T SHOW THE INTEL SUPPORTING IMMENIENT THREAT TO CONGRESSIONAL REPRESENTATIVES AFTER THE FACT, THERE WAS NO IMMENIENT THREAT and hence plenty of time for consultation.

Are you serious? Why even bother with National Security procedures or Security Clearances if you want everything wide open transparent. And yet you all complain about things like Jared getting a clearnace...seems its not important if everyone should know everything. Or maybe that is what you really want.

So congressional representatives should not be allowed to see the supporting intel?? Sorry, you are just plain wrong. The law does not require and no one I know expects every congressman to be allowed to see the intel. Gang of 8 and Intel Committees need to see it! You may feel comfortable blindly trusting Orange Duce, 60% of America does not! This is not even really a Trump issue, this national secrets horseshlt, is something most every one of the recent presidents has used as an excuse.

[youthathletics]

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.

Apparently 224 House members dispute the fact that Trump had this authority, otherwise why did they just hold that vote in the House. As Molly Hatchet sang.....they are flirting with disaster when time is of the essence. Is their goal to wait for catastrophe, and then react?

Their goal is to express some Congressional authority over this narrow but important aspect of foreign policy: the decision to use mortal force overseas. The War Powers Act has, since its passage in 1973, been a bone of contention. It was a response to the so-called Imperial Presidency. Nixon tried to veto it, and every President since -- D or R -- has basically ignored it. Authority has to be exercised in order to exist, in order to avoid the waiver of any authority. So it is that Congress has to, from time to time, make these sorts of declarations. And the need to do so is, with this President, particularly acute.

Their goal is not to "wait for catastrophe;" the goal is for the Executive Branch to work cooperatively with the Legislative Branch in this most important of issues.

So why then now if it has been a bone of contention since 73' ? Pelosi is on record as agreeing BHO had complete authority without notification to Congress in 2011? Just appears on the surface as more bickering and futile exercises of partisanship...the vote was down party lines with the exception of ~3-6 flips.

IF YOU CAN'T SHOW THE INTEL SUPPORTING IMMENIENT THREAT TO CONGRESSIONAL REPRESENTATIVES AFTER THE FACT, THERE WAS NO IMMENIENT THREAT and hence plenty of time for consultation.

Are you serious? Why even bother with National Security procedures or Security Clearances if you want everything wide open transparent. And yet you all complain about things like Jared getting a clearnace...seems its not important if everyone should know everything. Or maybe that is what you really want.

So congressional representatives should not be allowed to see the supporting intel?? Sorry, you are just plain wrong. The law does not require and no one I know expects every congressman to be allowed to see the intel. Gang of 8 and Intel Committees need to see it! You may feel comfortable blindly trusting Orange Duce, 60% of America does not! This is not even really a Trump issue, this national secrets horseshlt, is something most every one of the recent presidents has used as an excuse.

I agree with gang of eight....your blanket comments earlier made it sound like anyone in congress can see and hear whatever they heck they want b/c they have a clearance. Your first sentence (in red) even says it again as a blanket statement, not distinguishing a specific group.

But lets be clear....congress cant even agree on anything and they are not privy to what our IC briefs the POTUS on daily.

[njbill]

NBC's Peter Alexander asked Pompeo at today WH briefing: If you killed Soleimani to avert an imminent danger- now that Soleimani is dead, is that imminent danger gone?

Pompeo said the attack was imminent but they didn't know when or where!

Not knowing when is the opposite of imminent.

He meant imminent geologically speaking.

[Trinity]

It’s now four embassies.

[LandM]

72,
Back in the day we had beepers - 1 hour - you were gone - bags were packed and ready to go
It is not the 82nd Airborne with time to deploy but I think they got out in 48 hours
I cannot even image getting the Gang of 8 together in 24 hours let alone 48 hours - strike while the iron is hot
The Articles of Impeachment have been hanging around for at least three weeks - bad guys (think Bin Laden) have lots of time to move as we missed him on multiple, multiple occasions. Is your idea to play handsy pansy for days while you get approval - maybe smoke some smores? Based on the way the R and D's are playing, it could take a year.
Going to war is way different then a strategic strike

Just so you sleep tonight:
1. we are not getting into WW3;
2. We are not going to take on Iran on their soil;
3. We do have competent people in high places giving guidance and direction

Two of my former teammates sons are on stand-by - they were supposed to have been in Baghdad yesterday. Fear mongering is not a good solution, there is a reason they both are on US soil. If you want to raise the flag go do it and if you are too old have your kids go do it. It is easy to jabber.

[tech37]

What was imminent was the opportunity to take that POS out... good for them

[jhu72]

72,
Back in the day we had beepers - 1 hour - you were gone - bags were packed and ready to go
It is not the 82nd Airborne with time to deploy but I think they got out in 48 hours
I cannot even image getting the Gang of 8 together in 24 hours let alone 48 hours - strike while the iron is hot
The Articles of Impeachment have been hanging around for at least three weeks - bad guys (think Bin Laden) have lots of time to move as we missed him on multiple, multiple occasions. Is your idea to play handsy pansy for days while you get approval - maybe smoke some smores? Based on the way the R and D's are playing, it could take a year.
Going to war is way different then a strategic strike

Just so you sleep tonight:
1. we are not getting into WW3;
2. We are not going to take on Iran on their soil;
3. We do have competent people in high places giving guidance and direction

Two of my former teammates sons are on stand-by - they were supposed to have been in Baghdad yesterday. Fear mongering is not a good solution, there is a reason they both are on US soil. If you want to raise the flag go do it and if you are too old have your kids go do it. It is easy to jabber.

I am not concerned about WW3. I am less sanguine than you about competent people in high places. It is not a question of getting the Gang of 8 together before hand. I specifically said after - it needs to be justified. I am not buying the nonsense that the Gang of 8 and Intel Committees should not be briefed on the details of the source intel. It is so clear in this case that it does not exist.

[Brooklyn]

In reading some of the posts above, I note how righties condemn Obama's use of drones in killing Iraqis but they have no problem with traitor Bush's lies about WMD which caused the war. No outrage over Abu Ghraib, no outrage over the needless deaths of Americans, no outrage over the USA's loss of international estimation, and no outrage over the incredible increase in the nation's debt because of this needless imperialistic war.

Double standards, much???

[youthathletics]

What was imminent was the opportunity to take that POS out... good for them

Yes...those coward basitiges travel with the general population so innocent civilians will not be collateral damage. Now I am hearing that there were a total of 7 that were targeted and they did not get them all. Juan Williams indicated this today.

[old salt]

Rachel has jumped the shark. Making excuses for the Iranian shootdown. Unbelievable.

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/wat ... 6395077612

No shark jumping here, no excuse. Just a fair representation of what happened. Only you seem to think Fog of War had nothing to do with this shooting down. She did not blame anyone, she explained how this kind of thing happens. She did not blame it on the US; she did not blame it on Trump.

What "military confrontation" ? What "lethal exchange of force" ? The US did nothing to threaten Iranian territory or airspace.

What Fog of War ? Iran was not under attack. The Iranians didn't even have the situational awareness (&/or regard for innocent life) to shutdown their airspace when they were initiating a potential air war.

Rachel was just making excuses for the poor Iranians & trying to shift the blame for the loss of life onto Trump & the US.
Linking the body count to what we "set off". Then going on to impeachment & wagging the dog.

She explained nothing new. She fills a 15 min segment with 3 min worth of info & arm waving hyperbole & propaganda.
...is her audience really that clueless ?

[old salt]

The equipment worked (against non-maneuvering large non-stealthy aircraft without countermeasures, flying at high altitude).
The defect is in the operators.

I understand that part.

What I mean is: we don't know how the humans handled all of it. Did the Mullahs order this shot? Or a military leader? Did the crew go rogue? What does the decision tree look like for Iran's military?

Was it a mistake as in "whoops", the crew misidentified the plane? Or did they take it out on purpose?

Who the heck knows. That is my point. I don't think we'll ever find out.

There wasn't time for the Mullahs to ok the shot.
The shot is taken (or not) based on preset rules of engagement (ROE) & the status of the SAM battery set by higher authority.
The SAM battery's status is "weapons free" or "weapons tight", to engage a target within the ROE..

No reason to do it on purpose. There's no way to portray this as a + for the Iranians.
It was a horrendous screwup by an incompetent military, up to the level of tactical commander who took the shot or set the rules of engagement that allowed it, & higher authority that failed to restrict access to their airspace.

If they intended that airspace to be a free fire zone, it was their responsibility to warn & prevent civil aircraft from entering.

[old salt]

72,
Back in the day we had beepers - 1 hour - you were gone - bags were packed and ready to go
It is not the 82nd Airborne with time to deploy but I think they got out in 48 hours
I cannot even image getting the Gang of 8 together in 24 hours let alone 48 hours - strike while the iron is hot
The Articles of Impeachment have been hanging around for at least three weeks - bad guys (think Bin Laden) have lots of time to move as we missed him on multiple, multiple occasions. Is your idea to play handsy pansy for days while you get approval - maybe smoke some smores? Based on the way the R and D's are playing, it could take a year.
Going to war is way different then a strategic strike

Just so you sleep tonight:
1. we are not getting into WW3;
2. We are not going to take on Iran on their soil;
3. We do have competent people in high places giving guidance and direction

Two of my former teammates sons are on stand-by - they were supposed to have been in Baghdad yesterday. Fear mongering is not a good solution, there is a reason they both are on US soil. If you want to raise the flag go do it and if you are too old have your kids go do it. It is easy to jabber.

I am not concerned about WW3. I am less sanguine than you about competent people in high places. It is not a question of getting the Gang of 8 together before hand. I specifically said after - it needs to be justified. I am not buying the nonsense that the Gang of 8 and Intel Committees should not be briefed on the details of the source intel. It is so clear in this case that it does not exist.

I don't trust Schiff to not leak to scuttle a pending mission he disagreed with.
The other 7 I'd be more inclined to trust, but I'd give them as little advance notice as possible, to keep them off of tv.

[Trinity]

Yeah, Schiff is the traitor.

[DocBarrister]

72,
Back in the day we had beepers - 1 hour - you were gone - bags were packed and ready to go
It is not the 82nd Airborne with time to deploy but I think they got out in 48 hours
I cannot even image getting the Gang of 8 together in 24 hours let alone 48 hours - strike while the iron is hot
The Articles of Impeachment have been hanging around for at least three weeks - bad guys (think Bin Laden) have lots of time to move as we missed him on multiple, multiple occasions. Is your idea to play handsy pansy for days while you get approval - maybe smoke some smores? Based on the way the R and D's are playing, it could take a year.
Going to war is way different then a strategic strike

Just so you sleep tonight:
1. we are not getting into WW3;
2. We are not going to take on Iran on their soil;
3. We do have competent people in high places giving guidance and direction

Two of my former teammates sons are on stand-by - they were supposed to have been in Baghdad yesterday. Fear mongering is not a good solution, there is a reason they both are on US soil. If you want to raise the flag go do it and if you are too old have your kids go do it. It is easy to jabber.

I am not concerned about WW3. I am less sanguine than you about competent people in high places. It is not a question of getting the Gang of 8 together before hand. I specifically said after - it needs to be justified. I am not buying the nonsense that the Gang of 8 and Intel Committees should not be briefed on the details of the source intel. It is so clear in this case that it does not exist.

I don't trust Schiff to not leak to scuttle a pending mission he disagreed with.
The other 7 I'd be more inclined to trust, but I'd give them as little advance notice as possible, to keep them off of tv.

No one would need to leak anything ... Trump would have already leaked classified information to our adversaries in the Oval Office (e.g., the Russians) or through calls on his unsecured cell phone.

DocBarrister