goldfly (04-23-2018)
Meanwhile, Scott Pruitt seems to be an uncapped well of sewage.
Got a huge mortgage loan that his income did not support, hired the banker who gave it to him at EPA despite the fact that the guy had gotten the death professional penalty from federal banking regulators.
Bought a house below market value and hired the lobbyist who sold it to him. Another lobby group with business in front of him made up the difference to the seller.
Got a sweetheart deal on a condo in DC. The lobbyist who rented it to him first claimed that he had no business with EPA, but it was subsequently determined that he did.
Expensive flights and office renovation, fired or reassigned career employees who flagged it.
Dude is the living embodiment of the swamp. How does he still have a job?
jpx7 (04-23-2018)
What a world we live in where celebrities feel the need to apologize for saying they'd vote for trump.
The Daily Caller
Verified account @DailyCaller
Trump Orders Homeland Security Not To Let Illegal Immigrant Caravans Into The US
David Corn
Verified account @DavidCornDC
18m18 minutes ago
David Corn Retweeted The Daily Caller
Still waiting for this headline:
"Trump Orders Homeland Security To Do Everything Possible
To Prevent Russian Intervention in 2018 Mid-Term Elections."
The best way to stop a bad guy with a gun is to make sure he doesn’t get a gun.
It's called a warning order and it is standard operating procedure in instances like this.
Turkey, Iran, Russia, France, Great Britain (among others) have troops in Syria.
You just don't start bombing.
That would be stupid.
Innocents could be killed.
A major war could be started.
And then you would be in here whining about an operation that was hastily executed.
In fact, I'm pretty sure that you've argued that the recent bombings were just a ploy anyways. Or was that the Libby pardon?
Are you willing to give Trump credit for the idea in these instances?
Honestly, I get lost in this harebrained **** that our resident Facebook-as-news triumvirate upchucks on a daily basis.
You've contorted an oval office meeting, sanctions play, and state meetings into some sort of ominous "deference".
Yet when I submit that diplomacy between global superpowers is complicated (and earnestly ask for an alternative approach) I'm the one stretching things?
We need more!
You said ominous, not me. Given the circumstances, those choices seem unusually deferential towards Putin and his government.
Let's say Trump hadn't had Lavrov and Kislyak over for tea in the Oval*, hadn't publicly stated that he believed Putin's disavowal of the election hacks, had acted more expeditiously on sanctions, and hadn't invited Putin to exchange state visits.
You're saying that would have amounted to a dangerous diplomatic provocation, or something?
There was nothing earnest about your question.
*and boy, didn't that go swimmingly
The left has lost its mind
Rand is not his father, unfortunately
I’m confused.
Are these particular events you’ve outlined significant or not?
If they are significant - and the alternative, as you infer, was simply ‘not’ - then what do diplomatic relations between the two countries look like in the realm of not? A President refusing to meet with the Russian foreign minister, refusing to entertain a state visit. Keep in mind, these actions would represent a normalization of relations between the two countries.
The ‘not’ category would be history repeating. And look where that dithering got us.
Last edited by Hawk; 04-23-2018 at 09:43 PM.
acesfull86 (04-24-2018)
"For there is always light, if only we are brave enough to see it. If only we are brave enough to be it." Amanda Gorman
"When Fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross"