Discussion:
OT? - So Sad
(too old to reply)
George Anthony
2017-03-01 15:22:21 UTC
Permalink
I watched Trump's speech last night. Who's idea was it to make all those
democrats show up on the same day all of their dogs died. What a bunch of
sour, defeated faces.

TRUMP WON... and he continues to WIN!!
nothermark
2017-03-01 18:48:25 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 15:22:21 -0000 (UTC), George Anthony
Post by George Anthony
I watched Trump's speech last night. Who's idea was it to make all those
democrats show up on the same day all of their dogs died. What a bunch of
sour, defeated faces.
TRUMP WON... and he continues to WIN!!
Watched Chucky this morning on the Today show. He can't say anything
good about a Republican. Glad I never voted for the scumbag.
Hank
2017-03-01 19:39:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by nothermark
On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 15:22:21 -0000 (UTC), George Anthony
Post by George Anthony
I watched Trump's speech last night. Who's idea was it to make all those
democrats show up on the same day all of their dogs died. What a bunch of
sour, defeated faces.
TRUMP WON... and he continues to WIN!!
Watched Chucky this morning on the Today show. He can't say anything
good about a Republican. Glad I never voted for the scumbag.
Saw that interview. Matt Lauer asked him something like " Is there anything you agreed with about Trumps Speech?" He said no. I guess he doesn't agree with the possibility of lower insurance, drugs, and lower premiums for doctors malpractice insurance. Or " My job isn't to take care of the world, my job is to take care of America."

Sad man.

Hank
George Anthony
2017-03-01 20:32:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Hank
Post by nothermark
On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 15:22:21 -0000 (UTC), George Anthony
Post by George Anthony
I watched Trump's speech last night. Who's idea was it to make all those
democrats show up on the same day all of their dogs died. What a bunch of
sour, defeated faces.
TRUMP WON... and he continues to WIN!!
Watched Chucky this morning on the Today show. He can't say anything
good about a Republican. Glad I never voted for the scumbag.
Saw that interview. Matt Lauer asked him something like " Is there anything you agreed with about Trumps Speech?" He said no. I guess he doesn't agree with the possibility of lower insurance, drugs, and lower premiums for doctors malpractice insurance. Or " My job isn't to take care of the world, my job is to take care of America."
Sad man.
Hank
Like I said, they all looked like their dogs died. The sad part is,
that's how they always look. I heard Chris Wallace today say the
democrats can't take "yes" for an answer. Very perceptive comment. It
just shows they couldn't care less about the country or even their
sycophant voters. It's all about power to control every aspect of our
lives. They like to call Trump, Hitler but they are the ones behaving
like dictators.
vito
2017-03-02 00:25:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Anthony
Post by Hank
Post by nothermark
On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 15:22:21 -0000 (UTC), George Anthony
Post by George Anthony
I watched Trump's speech last night. Who's idea was it to make all those
democrats show up on the same day all of their dogs died. What a bunch of
sour, defeated faces.
TRUMP WON... and he continues to WIN!!
Watched Chucky this morning on the Today show. He can't say anything
good about a Republican. Glad I never voted for the scumbag.
Saw that interview. Matt Lauer asked him something like " Is there anything you agreed with about Trumps Speech?" He said no. I guess he doesn't agree with the possibility of lower insurance, drugs, and lower premiums for doctors malpractice insurance. Or " My job isn't to take care of the world, my job is to take care of America."
Sad man.
Hank
Like I said, they all looked like their dogs died. The sad part is,
that's how they always look. I heard Chris Wallace today say the
democrats can't take "yes" for an answer. Very perceptive comment. It
just shows they couldn't care less about the country or even their
sycophant voters. It's all about power to control every aspect of our
lives. They like to call Trump, Hitler but they are the ones behaving
like dictators.
Absolutely! Including using 'brown shirts' to disrupt opponants'
rallys.
kmiller
2017-03-01 20:50:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Hank
Post by nothermark
On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 15:22:21 -0000 (UTC), George Anthony
Post by George Anthony
I watched Trump's speech last night. Who's idea was it to make all those
democrats show up on the same day all of their dogs died. What a bunch of
sour, defeated faces.
TRUMP WON... and he continues to WIN!!
Watched Chucky this morning on the Today show. He can't say anything
good about a Republican. Glad I never voted for the scumbag.
Saw that interview. Matt Lauer asked him something like " Is there anything you agreed with about Trumps Speech?" He said no. I guess he doesn't agree with the possibility of lower insurance, drugs, and lower premiums for doctors malpractice insurance. Or " My job isn't to take care of the world, my job is to take care of America."
Sad man.
Hank
It's Obama's fault.
Hunter Hampton
2017-03-01 22:30:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by kmiller
Post by Hank
Saw that interview. Matt Lauer asked him something like " Is there
anything you agreed with about Trumps Speech?" He said no. I guess he
doesn't agree with the possibility of lower insurance, drugs, and
lower premiums for doctors malpractice insurance. Or " My job isn't to
take care of the world, my job is to take care of America."
Sad man.
Hank
It's Obama's fault.
If only he wasn't lying and bullshitting.... and seriously, exploiting
the widow of the man he's responsible for killing..... that was a low point.
Hank
2017-03-01 22:50:54 UTC
Permalink
Time will tell if he's bullshitting or not. But he is trying to do what he said he would do. He even admitted that that ACA is much more complicated than he thought. For him to admit he doesn't know everything is a major step forward. 😀

Also, he has been consistent in his respect for the veterans. So believe what you want.

Hank
nothermark
2017-03-01 23:10:17 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 17:30:54 -0500, Hunter Hampton
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by kmiller
Post by Hank
Saw that interview. Matt Lauer asked him something like " Is there
anything you agreed with about Trumps Speech?" He said no. I guess he
doesn't agree with the possibility of lower insurance, drugs, and
lower premiums for doctors malpractice insurance. Or " My job isn't to
take care of the world, my job is to take care of America."
Sad man.
Hank
It's Obama's fault.
If only he wasn't lying and bullshitting.... and seriously, exploiting
the widow of the man he's responsible for killing..... that was a low point.
I wonder what you will be saying if he is starting to deliver a year
from now. I really wonder what you will be saying if it becomes clear
that the reason he is not delivering is that he is being blocked by
the Democrats with a handful of jealous Conservatives. Of course the
last two will not be reported by the NY run media.
George Anthony
2017-03-01 23:42:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by nothermark
On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 17:30:54 -0500, Hunter Hampton
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by kmiller
Post by Hank
Saw that interview. Matt Lauer asked him something like " Is there
anything you agreed with about Trumps Speech?" He said no. I guess he
doesn't agree with the possibility of lower insurance, drugs, and
lower premiums for doctors malpractice insurance. Or " My job isn't to
take care of the world, my job is to take care of America."
Sad man.
Hank
It's Obama's fault.
If only he wasn't lying and bullshitting.... and seriously, exploiting
the widow of the man he's responsible for killing..... that was a low point.
I wonder what you will be saying if he is starting to deliver a year
from now. I really wonder what you will be saying if it becomes clear
that the reason he is not delivering is that he is being blocked by
the Democrats with a handful of jealous Conservatives. Of course the
last two will not be reported by the NY run media.
You are responding to two people who have no sense of decency... or any
sense at all. Every president since Reagan (who started the "tradition")
has had people in the gallery, or even at his side, to drive home a
point. Obama was infamous for it. I didn't hear the twins complaining
about that. Furthermore, even if he was "exploiting" her, it couldn't be
done without her permission.

The Hampton twins have to be two of the nuttiest fruit cakes on the shelf.
vito
2017-03-02 00:27:26 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 17:30:54 -0500, Hunter Hampton
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by kmiller
Post by Hank
Saw that interview. Matt Lauer asked him something like " Is there
anything you agreed with about Trumps Speech?" He said no. I guess he
doesn't agree with the possibility of lower insurance, drugs, and
lower premiums for doctors malpractice insurance. Or " My job isn't to
take care of the world, my job is to take care of America."
Sad man.
Hank
It's Obama's fault.
If only he wasn't lying and bullshitting.... and seriously, exploiting
the widow of the man he's responsible for killing..... that was a low point.
What man is that?
Hunter Hampton
2017-03-02 01:03:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by vito
What man is that?
The Navy SEAL... how many is he responsible for? How many widows did he
parade out last night?
nothermark
2017-03-02 03:56:44 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 20:03:54 -0500, Hunter Hampton
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by vito
What man is that?
The Navy SEAL... how many is he responsible for? How many widows did he
parade out last night?
What would you do if you had been told there was a mission that had
been in planning for months and conditions matched what was needed so
they had to go then?
vito
2017-03-02 05:51:44 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 20:03:54 -0500, Hunter Hampton
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by vito
What man is that?
The Navy SEAL... how many is he responsible for? How many widows did he
parade out last night?
But Hunter, the mission that led to his death was concieved, planned
and set in motion under Obama. It happened only days after Trump took
office. It's more than likely that Trump didn't even know about it.
At most, Trump could have canceled it - but why? So how is the man's
death Trump's fault? And what other deaths of the same pattern are
you talking about? Does trying to honor their widows make him
responsible? How? I simply cannot imagine.
Hunter Hampton
2017-03-02 16:59:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by vito
But Hunter, the mission that led to his death was concieved, planned
and set in motion under Obama. It happened only days after Trump took
office. It's more than likely that Trump didn't even know about it.
At most, Trump could have canceled it - but why? So how is the man's
death Trump's fault? And what other deaths of the same pattern are
you talking about? Does trying to honor their widows make him
responsible? How? I simply cannot imagine.
Obama chose not to do the raid. Good grief, turn off faux News.

U.S. military officials told Reuters that Trump approved his first
covert counterterrorism operation without sufficient intelligence,
ground support, or adequate backup preparations.

As a result, three officials said, the attacking SEAL team found itself
dropping onto a reinforced Al Qaeda base defended by landmines, snipers,
and a larger than expected contingent of heavily armed Islamist extremists
D-R
2017-03-02 20:28:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Hunter Hampton
Obama chose not to do the raid. Good grief, turn off faux News.
U.S. military officials told Reuters that Trump approved his first
covert counterterrorism operation without sufficient intelligence,
ground support, or adequate backup preparations.
As a result, three officials said, the attacking SEAL team found itself
dropping onto a reinforced Al Qaeda base defended by landmines, snipers,
and a larger than expected contingent of heavily armed Islamist extremists
You are letting your hate cloud your judgment. Obama was in when it
was planned and Trump was in when it was executed. Neither is
responsible!!!!! It was an intelligence failure. Do you really think
the POTUS goes over the minute detail of every military operation.. I
really hope not 'cause if so we would still be fighting WWI.
BUT not standing as a tribute for a widow and making it political is
beyond reprehensible. As someone who has lost friends in combat I would
like to see them all taken to the wood shed ... even got some
volunteers that will take them!
--
AJ - Enjoying Arizona
nothermark
2017-03-03 00:45:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by D-R
Post by Hunter Hampton
Obama chose not to do the raid. Good grief, turn off faux News.
U.S. military officials told Reuters that Trump approved his first
covert counterterrorism operation without sufficient intelligence,
ground support, or adequate backup preparations.
As a result, three officials said, the attacking SEAL team found itself
dropping onto a reinforced Al Qaeda base defended by landmines, snipers,
and a larger than expected contingent of heavily armed Islamist extremists
You are letting your hate cloud your judgment. Obama was in when it
was planned and Trump was in when it was executed. Neither is
responsible!!!!! It was an intelligence failure. Do you really think
the POTUS goes over the minute detail of every military operation.. I
really hope not 'cause if so we would still be fighting WWI.
BUT not standing as a tribute for a widow and making it political is
beyond reprehensible. As someone who has lost friends in combat I would
like to see them all taken to the wood shed ... even got some
volunteers that will take them!
take them, yes. Bring them back.....
Hunter Hampton
2017-03-03 14:19:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by D-R
BUT not standing as a tribute for a widow and making it political is
beyond reprehensible. As someone who has lost friends in combat I would
like to see them all taken to the wood shed ... even got some
volunteers that will take them!
They did stand. Fake news. The photo was taken at a different time.
D-R
2017-03-03 22:10:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by D-R
BUT not standing as a tribute for a widow and making it political is
beyond reprehensible. As someone who has lost friends in combat I would
like to see them all taken to the wood shed ... even got some
volunteers that will take them!
They did stand. Fake news. The photo was taken at a different time.
They did stand for the first but there is some debate about how long
they stood for the actual honor time.... believe whatever side you want
I really don't care but it would be nice to have some actual
investigative reporters..
But Fake News and/or slanted new is rampant... Look at all the
hoopla about meeting with the Russians..... Pelosi got caught
complaining but was forced to admit that she had lunch with him.....
The status quo is two crooks pointing at the other yelling "Thief"...
--
AJ - Enjoying Arizona
Frank Howell
2017-03-03 02:17:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by vito
But Hunter, the mission that led to his death was concieved, planned
and set in motion under Obama. It happened only days after Trump took
office. It's more than likely that Trump didn't even know about it.
At most, Trump could have canceled it - but why? So how is the man's
death Trump's fault? And what other deaths of the same pattern are
you talking about? Does trying to honor their widows make him
responsible? How? I simply cannot imagine.
Obama chose not to do the raid. Good grief, turn off faux News.
I agree, he didn't, but according to Newsweek: 1/20/2017

"Barack Obama’s war on terror in the eight years of his presidency left
up to 117 civilians dead in drone strikes and other counter-terror
actions, a U.S. intelligence report released late Thursday said.

The public report was released as part of the Obama administration’s bid
to be more transparent about its overseas operations. It came a day
before the inauguration of President-elect Donald Trump, who rights
groups fear will be more heavy-handed with drone action abroad.

The report by National Intelligence Director James Clapper stated that
U.S. strikes under Obama killed between 2,803 and 3,022 combatants.
Between 64 and 117 civilians also died in the strikes, it said."

http://tinyurl.com/gqqy4nn
--
Frank Howell
vito
2017-03-03 05:01:35 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 2 Mar 2017 11:59:50 -0500, Hunter Hampton
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by vito
But Hunter, the mission that led to his death was concieved, planned
and set in motion under Obama. It happened only days after Trump took
office. It's more than likely that Trump didn't even know about it.
At most, Trump could have canceled it - but why? So how is the man's
death Trump's fault? And what other deaths of the same pattern are
you talking about? Does trying to honor their widows make him
responsible? How? I simply cannot imagine.
Obama chose not to do the raid. Good grief, turn off faux News.
OK. Got a cite?
Post by Hunter Hampton
U.S. military officials told Reuters that Trump approved his first
covert counterterrorism operation without sufficient intelligence,
ground support, or adequate backup preparations.
Who are these 'military officials'??
Post by Hunter Hampton
As a result, three officials said, the attacking SEAL team found itself
dropping onto a reinforced Al Qaeda base defended by landmines, snipers,
and a larger than expected contingent of heavily armed Islamist extremists
And lost only one man? Hmmmm ....
Hunter Hampton
2017-03-03 14:20:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by vito
OK. Got a cite?
It's a shame you don't have any way to look up information yourself.

try www.google.com
vito
2017-03-04 02:51:44 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 3 Mar 2017 09:20:07 -0500, Hunter Hampton
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by vito
OK. Got a cite?
It's a shame you don't have any way to look up information yourself.
try www.google.com
Again, you resort to personal disparagement, having backed youresl
into a corner. " so sad" Why force me to hunt your source when
surely youhaveit at your finger tips?
Hunter Hampton
2017-03-04 02:56:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by vito
Again, you resort to personal disparagement, having backed youresl
into a corner. " so sad" Why force me to hunt your source when
surely youhaveit at your finger tips?
oh poor you..... you are as needy as LZ, it seems you have taken up the
mantle.

Because you don't know what most of the world knows, I should do your
legwork?
Major Oz
2017-03-04 03:35:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by vito
Again, you resort to personal disparagement, having backed youresl
into a corner. " so sad" Why force me to hunt your source when
surely youhaveit at your finger tips?
oh poor you..... you are as needy as LZ, it seems you have taken up the
mantle.
Because you don't know what most of the world knows, I should do your
legwork?
Nope.

But, when you make an assertion, you should be prepared to back it up.

YOU should. The claimant has that responsibility.

Without proof, it's simple babble.
RMcBane
2017-03-04 04:39:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Major Oz
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by vito
Again, you resort to personal disparagement, having backed youresl
into a corner. " so sad" Why force me to hunt your source when
surely youhaveit at your finger tips?
oh poor you..... you are as needy as LZ, it seems you have taken up the
mantle.
Because you don't know what most of the world knows, I should do your
legwork?
Nope.
But, when you make an assertion, you should be prepared to back it up.
YOU should. The claimant has that responsibility.
Without proof, it's simple babble.
That is the way it works in engineering and
science fields. We are trained to be skeptics and
expect evidence to support any claim. Hunter's
world may operate differently which is too bad.
--
Richard McBane
vito
2017-03-04 18:23:29 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 3 Mar 2017 21:56:51 -0500, Hunter Hampton
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by vito
Again, you resort to personal disparagement, having backed youresl
into a corner. " so sad" Why force me to hunt your source when
surely youhaveit at your finger tips?
oh poor you..... you are as needy as LZ, it seems you have taken up the
mantle.
I, for one, deeply miss Linus. Altho we disagreed on much he was
always ready to reveal his sources.
Post by Hunter Hampton
Because you don't know what most of the world knows, I should do your
legwork?
No, you should understnd that most of your world is based on "fake
news" and be prepared to provide your sources so that the rest of us
here in the real world can validate your assertions. That's only
fair. For example, "most of the world" does NOT "know" that Trump
sent a SEAL to his death.
Hunter Hampton
2017-03-04 19:07:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by vito
For example, "most of the world" does NOT "know" that Trump
sent a SEAL to his death.
Then most of the world is uninformed.


http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2017/mar/01/what-donald-trump-left-out-about-successful-yemen-/
Owen McKenzie
2017-03-04 20:53:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by vito
For example, "most of the world" does NOT "know" that Trump
sent a SEAL to his death.
Then most of the world is uninformed.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2017/mar/01/what-donald-trump-left-out-about-successful-yemen-/
I'm not sure this link supports the point you're trying to make. The
following quotes are from it. It seems to me there is no consistency to
the various opinions.

"Some lawmakers, pundits and news reports have criticized the raid —
said to be an intelligence-gathering operation — because it turned into
a lengthy firefight that killed Owens and potentially dozens of
civilians, wounded three American soldiers, and destroyed a $70 million
Osprey. They have also questioned the quality of the intelligence gathered.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., called the operation "a failure" because the
terrorists were allegedly tipped off in advance."

Notice the use of the words "potentially" and "allegedly" above.

"News reports, citing anonymous administration officials, have produced
inconsistent reports about the quality of the intelligence gathered. For
example, NBC reported Feb. 28 that the raid "yielded no significant
intelligence." On the same day, however, the Associated Press reported
that it yielded "valuable intelligence," such as "data on the explosives
they're manufacturing and the types of threats they're developing."

"There's no way to assess how successful the raid has been in terms of
intelligence collection when there are conflicting reports. The actual
intelligence gleaned from the raid isn't publicly available," said
Daveed Gartenstein-Ross, counterterrorism expert and senior fellow at
the Foundation for Defense of Democracies."

NBC says one thing, the AP says another, and the conterterrorism
"expert" says there's no way to know.

I know you'll either ignore this or accuse me of seeing what I want to
read into it, but I honestly don't see anything in this article that
would support what appears to be your assertion that Trump "sent a SEAL
to his death.

Enlighten me.
--
Owen McKenzie

“Be kind to unkind people. They need it the most.”
― Ashleigh Brilliant
Hunter Hampton
2017-03-04 21:05:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Owen McKenzie
I know you'll either ignore this or accuse me of seeing what I want to
read into it, but I honestly don't see anything in this article that
would support what appears to be your assertion that Trump "sent a SEAL
to his death.
Enlighten me.
Owen, The raid was unnecessary, achieved nothing but getting the SEAL,
and civilians killed, and a bazillion dollar helicopter was destroyed.

http://www.politicususa.com/2017/02/02/donald-trump-orders-raid.html
Frank Howell
2017-03-04 23:55:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by Owen McKenzie
I know you'll either ignore this or accuse me of seeing what I want to
read into it, but I honestly don't see anything in this article that
would support what appears to be your assertion that Trump "sent a SEAL
to his death.
Enlighten me.
Owen, The raid was unnecessary, achieved nothing but getting the SEAL,
and civilians killed, and a bazillion dollar helicopter was destroyed.
http://www.politicususa.com/2017/02/02/donald-trump-orders-raid.html
If you were really really concerned about civilians killed, why do you
not criticize Obama? Are you really giving him a free pass for the
following:

"Barack Obama’s war on terror in the eight years of his presidency left
up to 117 civilians dead in drone strikes and other counter-terror
actions, a U.S. intelligence report released late Thursday said.

Obama ordered 526 drone strikes in his presidency, between January 2009
and December 2016, ten times the number issued by his predecessor George
W. Bush, according to estimates non-government organizations , USA Today
reported.

The report by National Intelligence Director James Clapper stated that
U.S. strikes under Obama killed between 2,803 and 3,022 combatants.
Between 64 and 117 civilians also died in the strikes, it said."

Obama is knee deep in the blood of innocents, but that doesn't bother
you does it?
--
Frank Howell
Hunter Hampton
2017-03-05 00:37:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Frank Howell
If you were really really concerned about civilians killed, why do you
not criticize Obama? Are you really giving him a free pass for the
"Barack Obama’s war on terror in the eight years of his presidency left
up to 117 civilians dead in drone strikes and other counter-terror
actions, a U.S. intelligence report released late Thursday said.
Obama ordered 526 drone strikes in his presidency, between January 2009
and December 2016, ten times the number issued by his predecessor George
W. Bush, according to estimates non-government organizations , USA Today
reported.
The report by National Intelligence Director James Clapper stated that
U.S. strikes under Obama killed between 2,803 and 3,022 combatants.
Between 64 and 117 civilians also died in the strikes, it said."
Obama is knee deep in the blood of innocents, but that doesn't bother
you does it?
What bothers me is how you Trumpers deflect to Obama when ever your
asshole King is brought up.

We aren't discussing Obama, we are discussing Trump.
George Anthony
2017-03-05 01:05:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by Frank Howell
If you were really really concerned about civilians killed, why do you
not criticize Obama? Are you really giving him a free pass for the
"Barack Obama’s war on terror in the eight years of his presidency left
up to 117 civilians dead in drone strikes and other counter-terror
actions, a U.S. intelligence report released late Thursday said.
Obama ordered 526 drone strikes in his presidency, between January 2009
and December 2016, ten times the number issued by his predecessor George
W. Bush, according to estimates non-government organizations , USA Today
reported.
The report by National Intelligence Director James Clapper stated that
U.S. strikes under Obama killed between 2,803 and 3,022 combatants.
Between 64 and 117 civilians also died in the strikes, it said."
Obama is knee deep in the blood of innocents, but that doesn't bother
you does it?
What bothers me is how you Trumpers deflect to Obama when ever your
asshole King is brought up.
We aren't discussing Obama, we are discussing Trump.
BWA HA HA HA!! When your hypocrisy is exposed you have no recourse but
to "deflect" yourselves. How much time did you two spend under Obama's
desk? Why not be honest and admit Obama was a horrific excuse for a
president. Trump may be hyperbolic but Obama is a flat out liar and evil
person.

You would think two brains would make you two smarter but instead it
seems it just makes you twice as clueless.
Frank Howell
2017-03-05 02:12:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by Frank Howell
If you were really really concerned about civilians killed, why do you
not criticize Obama? Are you really giving him a free pass for the
"Barack Obama’s war on terror in the eight years of his presidency left
up to 117 civilians dead in drone strikes and other counter-terror
actions, a U.S. intelligence report released late Thursday said.
Obama ordered 526 drone strikes in his presidency, between January 2009
and December 2016, ten times the number issued by his predecessor George
W. Bush, according to estimates non-government organizations , USA Today
reported.
The report by National Intelligence Director James Clapper stated that
U.S. strikes under Obama killed between 2,803 and 3,022 combatants.
Between 64 and 117 civilians also died in the strikes, it said."
Obama is knee deep in the blood of innocents, but that doesn't bother
you does it?
What bothers me is how you Trumpers deflect to Obama when ever your
asshole King is brought up.
We aren't discussing Obama, we are discussing Trump.
Just to bring you up to speed, this is what you were discussing:

"The raid was unnecessary, achieved nothing but getting the SEAL,
and civilians killed, and a bazillion dollar helicopter was destroyed."

My interpretation was that you were concerned with needless deaths but I
now stand corrected.

The idea that you can hide behind your statement "We aren't discussing
Obama, we are discussing Trump," to avoid commenting on Obama's murder
spree is a textbook case of blind allegiance.

PS I voted for Gary Johnson, not that it has an iota of meaning to you.
--
Frank Howell
Hunter Hampton
2017-03-05 02:58:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Frank Howell
PS I voted for Gary Johnson, not that it has an iota of meaning to you.
PS I wasn't talking to you, I was replying to Owen.
George Anthony
2017-03-05 04:24:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by Frank Howell
PS I voted for Gary Johnson, not that it has an iota of meaning to you.
PS I wasn't talking to you, I was replying to Owen.
Another HA HA HA. Take your marbles and go home you unartful dodgers. You
know what to do when you find yourselves in a hole...?
George Anthony
2017-03-05 00:49:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Frank Howell
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by Owen McKenzie
I know you'll either ignore this or accuse me of seeing what I want to
read into it, but I honestly don't see anything in this article that
would support what appears to be your assertion that Trump "sent a SEAL
to his death.
Enlighten me.
Owen, The raid was unnecessary, achieved nothing but getting the SEAL,
and civilians killed, and a bazillion dollar helicopter was destroyed.
http://www.politicususa.com/2017/02/02/donald-trump-orders-raid.html
If you were really really concerned about civilians killed, why do you
not criticize Obama? Are you really giving him a free pass for the
"Barack Obama’s war on terror in the eight years of his presidency left
up to 117 civilians dead in drone strikes and other counter-terror
actions, a U.S. intelligence report released late Thursday said.
Obama ordered 526 drone strikes in his presidency, between January 2009
and December 2016, ten times the number issued by his predecessor George
W. Bush, according to estimates non-government organizations , USA Today
reported.
The report by National Intelligence Director James Clapper stated that
U.S. strikes under Obama killed between 2,803 and 3,022 combatants.
Between 64 and 117 civilians also died in the strikes, it said."
Obama is knee deep in the blood of innocents, but that doesn't bother
you does it?
The brilliant military strategists, the Hampton twins, have declared the
raids unnecessary. What more proof do you need?
bill horne
2017-03-05 06:09:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Anthony
Post by Frank Howell
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by Owen McKenzie
I know you'll either ignore this or accuse me of seeing what I want to
read into it, but I honestly don't see anything in this article that
would support what appears to be your assertion that Trump "sent a SEAL
to his death.
Enlighten me.
Owen, The raid was unnecessary, achieved nothing but getting the SEAL,
and civilians killed, and a bazillion dollar helicopter was destroyed.
http://www.politicususa.com/2017/02/02/donald-trump-orders-raid.html
If you were really really concerned about civilians killed, why do you
not criticize Obama? Are you really giving him a free pass for the
"Barack Obama’s war on terror in the eight years of his presidency
left
up to 117 civilians dead in drone strikes and other counter-terror
actions, a U.S. intelligence report released late Thursday said.
Obama ordered 526 drone strikes in his presidency, between January 2009
and December 2016, ten times the number issued by his predecessor George
W. Bush, according to estimates non-government organizations , USA Today
reported.
The report by National Intelligence Director James Clapper stated that
U.S. strikes under Obama killed between 2,803 and 3,022 combatants.
Between 64 and 117 civilians also died in the strikes, it said."
Would some statistics expert please enlighten me? If they can't get
any closer than "between 64 and 117", why not just say "between 60 and
120"? Same for "2,803 and 3,022". Why not just "2800 and 3000"?
Post by George Anthony
Post by Frank Howell
Obama is knee deep in the blood of innocents, but that doesn't bother
you does it?
Whatever a Democrat does is the Right Thing to Do. The outcome is
irrelevant.
Post by George Anthony
The brilliant military strategists, the Hampton twins, have declared
the raids unnecessary. What more proof do you need?
--
bill
Theory don't mean squat if it don't work.
Frank Howell
2017-03-05 18:01:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Frank Howell
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by Owen McKenzie
I know you'll either ignore this or accuse me of seeing what I want to
read into it, but I honestly don't see anything in this article that
would support what appears to be your assertion that Trump "sent a SEAL
to his death.
Enlighten me.
Owen, The raid was unnecessary, achieved nothing but getting the SEAL,
and civilians killed, and a bazillion dollar helicopter was destroyed.
http://www.politicususa.com/2017/02/02/donald-trump-orders-raid.html
If you were really really concerned about civilians killed, why do you
not criticize Obama? Are you really giving him a free pass for the
"Barack Obama’s war on terror in the eight years of his presidency
left
up to 117 civilians dead in drone strikes and other counter-terror
actions, a U.S. intelligence report released late Thursday said.
Obama ordered 526 drone strikes in his presidency, between January 2009
and December 2016, ten times the number issued by his predecessor George
W. Bush, according to estimates non-government organizations , USA Today
reported.
The report by National Intelligence Director James Clapper stated that
U.S. strikes under Obama killed between 2,803 and 3,022 combatants.
Between 64 and 117 civilians also died in the strikes, it said."
Would some statistics expert please enlighten me? If they can't get any
closer than "between 64 and 117", why not just say "between 60 and 120"?
Same for "2,803 and 3,022". Why not just "2800 and 3000"?
Post by Frank Howell
Obama is knee deep in the blood of innocents, but that doesn't bother
you does it?
Whatever a Democrat does is the Right Thing to Do. The outcome is
irrelevant.
Apparently so, but in Hunter's case, it doesn't even exist, which I
guess could be construed as a form of irrelevant.
--
Frank Howell
Major Oz
2017-03-05 18:42:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by bill horne
Would some statistics expert please enlighten me? If they can't get
any closer than "between 64 and 117", why not just say "between 60 and
120"? Same for "2,803 and 3,022". Why not just "2800 and 3000"?
I suspect that the presenter was giving the range that "his people" gave.

....Charlie said 64....Joe said 117, etc.
bill horne
2017-03-05 19:17:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Major Oz
Post by bill horne
Would some statistics expert please enlighten me? If they can't get
any closer than "between 64 and 117", why not just say "between 60 and
120"? Same for "2,803 and 3,022". Why not just "2800 and 3000"?
I suspect that the presenter was giving the range that "his people" gave.
....Charlie said 64....Joe said 117, etc.
I think it could be related to something I think I read long ago: The
more decimal points a measurement has, the more likely people are to
believe it.
--
bill
Theory don't mean squat if it don't work.
Major Oz
2017-03-05 21:34:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by bill horne
Post by Major Oz
Post by bill horne
Would some statistics expert please enlighten me? If they can't get
any closer than "between 64 and 117", why not just say "between 60 and
120"? Same for "2,803 and 3,022". Why not just "2800 and 3000"?
I suspect that the presenter was giving the range that "his people" gave.
....Charlie said 64....Joe said 117, etc.
I think it could be related to something I think I read long ago: The
more decimal points a measurement has, the more likely people are to
believe it.
Unless they are familiar with the process.

In that case, the more decimal places, the more likely I will suspect BS.
bill horne
2017-03-05 22:46:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Major Oz
Post by bill horne
Post by Major Oz
Post by bill horne
Would some statistics expert please enlighten me? If they can't get
any closer than "between 64 and 117", why not just say "between 60 and
120"? Same for "2,803 and 3,022". Why not just "2800 and 3000"?
I suspect that the presenter was giving the range that "his people" gave.
....Charlie said 64....Joe said 117, etc.
I think it could be related to something I think I read long ago: The
more decimal points a measurement has, the more likely people are to
believe it.
Unless they are familiar with the process.
In that case, the more decimal places, the more likely I will suspect BS.
In that case, my recent Walmart post is gonna bounce your meter off
the peg. As it should, I might add.
--
bill
Theory don't mean squat if it don't work.
kmiller
2017-03-06 16:40:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Anthony
Post by Frank Howell
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by Owen McKenzie
I know you'll either ignore this or accuse me of seeing what I want to
read into it, but I honestly don't see anything in this article that
would support what appears to be your assertion that Trump "sent a SEAL
to his death.
Enlighten me.
Owen, The raid was unnecessary, achieved nothing but getting the SEAL,
and civilians killed, and a bazillion dollar helicopter was destroyed.
http://www.politicususa.com/2017/02/02/donald-trump-orders-raid.html
If you were really really concerned about civilians killed, why do you
not criticize Obama? Are you really giving him a free pass for the
"Barack Obama’s war on terror in the eight years of his presidency
left
up to 117 civilians dead in drone strikes and other counter-terror
actions, a U.S. intelligence report released late Thursday said.
Obama ordered 526 drone strikes in his presidency, between January 2009
and December 2016, ten times the number issued by his predecessor George
W. Bush, according to estimates non-government organizations , USA Today
reported.
The report by National Intelligence Director James Clapper stated that
U.S. strikes under Obama killed between 2,803 and 3,022 combatants.
Between 64 and 117 civilians also died in the strikes, it said."
Would some statistics expert please enlighten me? If they can't get any closer than "between 64 and 117", why not just say "between 60 and 120"? Same
for "2,803 and 3,022". Why not just "2800 and 3000"?
Post by George Anthony
Post by Frank Howell
Obama is knee deep in the blood of innocents, but that doesn't bother
you does it?
Whatever a Democrat does is the Right Thing to Do. The outcome is irrelevant.
Whatever a Republican does you be sure that discussion will be diverted to "False News", "Alternative Facts", "Enemy of the People" or the actions of
some past president.
Post by George Anthony
The brilliant military strategists, the Hampton twins, have declared
the raids unnecessary. What more proof do you need?
JohnGeorge speaks - all should kneel.
George Anthony
2017-03-04 03:17:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by vito
On Fri, 3 Mar 2017 09:20:07 -0500, Hunter Hampton
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by vito
OK. Got a cite?
It's a shame you don't have any way to look up information yourself.
try www.google.com
Again, you resort to personal disparagement, having backed youresl
into a corner. " so sad" Why force me to hunt your source when
surely youhaveit at your finger tips?
All you'll get from the twins is liberal bluster. They have no data.
Jan Orme
2017-03-04 23:23:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Anthony
Post by vito
On Fri, 3 Mar 2017 09:20:07 -0500, Hunter Hampton
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by vito
OK. Got a cite?
It's a shame you don't have any way to look up information yourself.
try www.google.com
Again, you resort to personal disparagement, having backed youresl
into a corner. " so sad" Why force me to hunt your source when
surely youhaveit at your finger tips?
All you'll get from the twins is liberal bluster. They have no data.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
It is their current method of operation as they grasp for straws to get out of the corner they are in. They currently are on a major campaign to get anywhere near where Obama led them to.

Here is an example of what the are now doing as they struggle:

I found the following not only interesting, but rather alarming. I guess Obama doesnt' believe in the peaceful transition of power mandated by the constitution..

When Ronald Reagan beat Jimmy Carter, Carter went back to Plains, Georgia, started building houses for Habitat for Humanity, and began his third act in life as a monitor of elections in places where balloting is suspect.

When Ronald Reagan was succeeded by his Vice President, George. H.W. Bush, he stayed out of the new President’s grill. Of course, that would only be expected since they were of the same party, and Bush was nominally extending the Reagan years.

Then H.W. was succeeded by Bill Clinton, and not only kept his mouth shut, but became fast friends with the man who beat him.

Clinton’s chance for Presidency extension was Al Gore. But Gore lost in a squeaker, and Clinton had to watch G.W. Bush take over, and do what he did. Bubba was not a big Bush supporter, but by and large he avoided the temptation to hector from the wings, and he did not interfere.

And G.W. Bush virtually disappeared for the Obama Presidency.. He painted self portraits, portraints of heroes and cats.

But now we’re hearing that former President Obama intends to take just the opposite course from all previous Presidents.

First former Attorney General Eric Holder said recently that former President Obama “is ready to roll,” and he’ll be coming back soon.

Then a story in the Daily Mail, which says the new Obama home in the Washington, D.C. area known as Kalorama will be the “nerve center” of an Obama led anti Trump campaign. The story says Valerie Jarret has moved in, and has urged the former President to go to war with President Trump because Trump is intent on dismantling Obama’s legacy. Jarret argues Obama cannot let this happen.

So what are they aiming for? The story cites a source close to both who says the Obama objective is “resignation or impeachment” of President Trump.

Why do Obama and Holder and Jarret (and, no doubt, Michelle) think they are still entitled to run the world?

The word “narcissism” comes to mind. They do not accept the judgment of the country because they believe they actually did win the election by a margin of a few million votes from California, New York, and Massachusetts. They think they are smarter, more enlightened, and more elevated than Trump himself and his (racist, deplorable, wrong side of history) voters. They harbor a self righteousness that allows them to dismiss the result of the election, the message of which was that their time had passed.

It is not unusual that an opposition party would work to thwart or defeat the party in power. Tom Perez is leading the Democrat National Committee and it is his job to oppose Republicans. No surprise. No objection.

But the former President, his svengali adviser –one so close she actually moves in with the former First Couple–, and his former Attorney General actively working to take down the sitting President by either forcing a resignation or maneuvering events toward an impeachment–that seems to me is totally new.
And totally out of bounds.

Trump is President, for better or worse. He deserves a chance to do what he promised, the actions he put forward which got him elected. It is not the end of the world if a new President reverses the direction the previous President set for the country. It happens all the time.

What doesn’t happen is an entitled former President, full of self regard, throwing his weight and his energies into voiding the result of the election of his replacement.

Barack Obama should ask Valerie Jarret to vacate the premises, but he won’t. As long as she is the voice on his shoulder whispering ‘legacy‘, he will find the call to organize Trump’s demise irresistible.

The Failed Presidency Of Obama had 8 years to get things turned around and on an even keel. They Did NOT! THEY FAILED! "PERIOD!"

Jan Eric Orme
Dusty
2017-03-05 16:08:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Anthony
Post by vito
On Fri, 3 Mar 2017 09:20:07 -0500, Hunter Hampton
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by vito
OK. Got a cite?
It's a shame you don't have any way to look up information
yourself.
try www.google.com
Again, you resort to personal disparagement, having backed
youresl into a corner. " so sad" Why force me to hunt your
source when surely youhaveit at your finger tips?
All you'll get from the twins is liberal bluster. They have no data.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ It is their
current method of operation as they grasp for straws to get out of
the corner they are in. They currently are on a major campaign to get
anywhere near where Obama led them to.
I found the following not only interesting, but rather alarming. I
guess Obama doesnt' believe in the peaceful transition of power
mandated by the constitution..
When Ronald Reagan beat Jimmy Carter, Carter went back to Plains,
Georgia, started building houses for Habitat for Humanity, and began
his third act in life as a monitor of elections in places where
balloting is suspect.
When Ronald Reagan was succeeded by his Vice President, George. H.W.
Bush, he stayed out of the new President’s grill. Of course, that
would only be expected since they were of the same party, and Bush
was nominally extending the Reagan years.
Then H.W. was succeeded by Bill Clinton, and not only kept his mouth
shut, but became fast friends with the man who beat him.
Clinton’s chance for Presidency extension was Al Gore. But Gore lost
in a squeaker, and Clinton had to watch G.W. Bush take over, and do
what he did. Bubba was not a big Bush supporter, but by and large he
avoided the temptation to hector from the wings, and he did not
interfere.
And G.W. Bush virtually disappeared for the Obama Presidency.. He
painted self portraits, portraints of heroes and cats.
But now we’re hearing that former President Obama intends to take
just the opposite course from all previous Presidents.
First former Attorney General Eric Holder said recently that former
President Obama “is ready to roll,” and he’ll be coming back soon.
Then a story in the Daily Mail, which says the new Obama home in the
Washington, D.C. area known as Kalorama will be the “nerve center” of
an Obama led anti Trump campaign. The story says Valerie Jarret has
moved in, and has urged the former President to go to war with
President Trump because Trump is intent on dismantling Obama’s
legacy. Jarret argues Obama cannot let this happen.
So what are they aiming for? The story cites a source close to both
who says the Obama objective is “resignation or impeachment” of
President Trump.
Why do Obama and Holder and Jarret (and, no doubt, Michelle) think
they are still entitled to run the world?
The word “narcissism” comes to mind. They do not accept the judgment
of the country because they believe they actually did win the
election by a margin of a few million votes from California, New
York, and Massachusetts. They think they are smarter, more
enlightened, and more elevated than Trump himself and his (racist,
deplorable, wrong side of history) voters. They harbor a self
righteousness that allows them to dismiss the result of the election,
the message of which was that their time had passed.
It is not unusual that an opposition party would work to thwart or
defeat the party in power. Tom Perez is leading the Democrat National
Committee and it is his job to oppose Republicans. No surprise. No
objection.
But the former President, his svengali adviser –one so close she
actually moves in with the former First Couple–, and his former
Attorney General actively working to take down the sitting President
by either forcing a resignation or maneuvering events toward an
impeachment–that seems to me is totally new. And totally out of
bounds.
Trump is President, for better or worse. He deserves a chance to do
what he promised, the actions he put forward which got him elected.
It is not the end of the world if a new President reverses the
direction the previous President set for the country. It happens all
the time.
What doesn’t happen is an entitled former President, full of self
regard, throwing his weight and his energies into voiding the result
of the election of his replacement.
Barack Obama should ask Valerie Jarret to vacate the premises, but he
won’t. As long as she is the voice on his shoulder whispering
‘legacy‘, he will find the call to organize Trump’s demise
irresistible.
The Failed Presidency Of Obama had 8 years to get things turned
around and on an even keel. They Did NOT! THEY FAILED! "PERIOD!"
Jan Eric Orme
Very well said, Jan. Sadly, too many reading here will never grasp the
portent of your words.

Dusty
--
"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they
are free.” – Goethe
Jan Orme
2017-03-06 00:06:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dusty
Post by George Anthony
Post by vito
On Fri, 3 Mar 2017 09:20:07 -0500, Hunter Hampton
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by vito
OK. Got a cite?
It's a shame you don't have any way to look up information yourself.
try www.google.com
Again, you resort to personal disparagement, having backed
youresl into a corner. " so sad" Why force me to hunt your
source when surely youhaveit at your finger tips?
All you'll get from the twins is liberal bluster. They have no data.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ It is their
current method of operation as they grasp for straws to get out of
the corner they are in. They currently are on a major campaign to get
anywhere near where Obama led them to.
I found the following not only interesting, but rather alarming. I
guess Obama doesnt' believe in the peaceful transition of power
mandated by the constitution..
When Ronald Reagan beat Jimmy Carter, Carter went back to Plains,
Georgia, started building houses for Habitat for Humanity, and began
his third act in life as a monitor of elections in places where
balloting is suspect.
When Ronald Reagan was succeeded by his Vice President, George. H.W.
Bush, he stayed out of the new President’s grill. Of course, that
would only be expected since they were of the same party, and Bush
was nominally extending the Reagan years.
Then H.W. was succeeded by Bill Clinton, and not only kept his mouth
shut, but became fast friends with the man who beat him.
Clinton’s chance for Presidency extension was Al Gore. But Gore lost
in a squeaker, and Clinton had to watch G.W. Bush take over, and do
what he did. Bubba was not a big Bush supporter, but by and large he
avoided the temptation to hector from the wings, and he did not
interfere.
And G.W. Bush virtually disappeared for the Obama Presidency.. He
painted self portraits, portraints of heroes and cats.
But now we’re hearing that former President Obama intends to take
just the opposite course from all previous Presidents.
First former Attorney General Eric Holder said recently that former
President Obama “is ready to roll,” and he’ll be coming back soon.
Then a story in the Daily Mail, which says the new Obama home in the
Washington, D.C. area known as Kalorama will be the “nerve center” of
an Obama led anti Trump campaign. The story says Valerie Jarret has
moved in, and has urged the former President to go to war with
President Trump because Trump is intent on dismantling Obama’s
legacy. Jarret argues Obama cannot let this happen.
So what are they aiming for? The story cites a source close to both
who says the Obama objective is “resignation or impeachment” of
President Trump.
Why do Obama and Holder and Jarret (and, no doubt, Michelle) think
they are still entitled to run the world?
The word “narcissism” comes to mind. They do not accept the judgment
of the country because they believe they actually did win the
election by a margin of a few million votes from California, New
York, and Massachusetts. They think they are smarter, more
enlightened, and more elevated than Trump himself and his (racist,
deplorable, wrong side of history) voters. They harbor a self
righteousness that allows them to dismiss the result of the election,
the message of which was that their time had passed.
It is not unusual that an opposition party would work to thwart or
defeat the party in power. Tom Perez is leading the Democrat National
Committee and it is his job to oppose Republicans. No surprise. No
objection.
But the former President, his svengali adviser –one so close she
actually moves in with the former First Couple–, and his former
Attorney General actively working to take down the sitting President
by either forcing a resignation or maneuvering events toward an
impeachment–that seems to me is totally new. And totally out of
bounds.
Trump is President, for better or worse. He deserves a chance to do
what he promised, the actions he put forward which got him elected.
It is not the end of the world if a new President reverses the
direction the previous President set for the country. It happens all
the time.
What doesn’t happen is an entitled former President, full of self
regard, throwing his weight and his energies into voiding the result
of the election of his replacement.
Barack Obama should ask Valerie Jarret to vacate the premises, but he
won’t. As long as she is the voice on his shoulder whispering
‘legacy‘, he will find the call to organize Trump’s demise
irresistible.
The Failed Presidency Of Obama had 8 years to get things turned
around and on an even keel. They Did NOT! THEY FAILED! "PERIOD!"
Jan Eric Orme
Very well said, Jan. Sadly, too many reading here will never grasp the
portent of your words.
Dusty
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Thank you, Dusty. Some but not all of those words are mine. Much is also from a wise conservative friend who has also gleened and put together some important facts, about past and also wise Presidents, that are self apperent, about the turning over of the POTUS position in fair and just manner.

We are a Nation Of Laws and as said above, the rightful peaceful transition of power mandated by the constitution. Obama has all along, during his 2 terms, ignored not just the above type of common decency, but also his own words to be transparent and sworn to honor His Own Presidency Position.

The way that this person and his Pelosi Type Minions has dishonored the position is and open disgrace with their attitude of "you have to pass it to see what's in it."

Now....these Rat Bastards are so vile and upset over Hillary's monumental loss of the election and waste of Billions of raised Buck$ down the rat hole...that they are out for more ill doings RIGHT IN THE SEAT OF OUR NATION as Obama sets up his War Room right on the other side of town.

You could see it in their evil eye as they sat on their hands during the Joint Session Of Congress.

Now it is so bad that I fear it will be Open War and fist fights on the floor of Congress. Proper Decorum at this point looks to be out the window with a past President setting up his own War Room just on the over side of town.

Ass Clowns Are Among Us!

Our nation has gone through some of this kinda crud in the past. So what's next? Pistol Duels At Dawn?

Jan
Bruce
2017-03-03 03:25:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by nothermark
On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 17:30:54 -0500, Hunter Hampton
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by kmiller
Post by Hank
Saw that interview. Matt Lauer asked him something like " Is there
anything you agreed with about Trumps Speech?" He said no. I guess he
doesn't agree with the possibility of lower insurance, drugs, and
lower premiums for doctors malpractice insurance. Or " My job isn't to
take care of the world, my job is to take care of America."
Sad man.
Hank
It's Obama's fault.
If only he wasn't lying and bullshitting.... and seriously, exploiting
the widow of the man he's responsible for killing..... that was a low point.
What man is that?
I suspect she is referring to the Seal who died conducting an action
that was set up by 0bama and for which Trump's only involvement is that
he didn't say no after he took office -- three days before the incident.
--
Bruce

"It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from it's
government." -- Thomas Paine
bill horne
2017-03-03 05:24:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bruce
Post by nothermark
On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 17:30:54 -0500, Hunter Hampton
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by kmiller
Post by Hank
Saw that interview. Matt Lauer asked him something like " Is there
anything you agreed with about Trumps Speech?" He said no. I guess he
doesn't agree with the possibility of lower insurance, drugs, and
lower premiums for doctors malpractice insurance. Or " My job isn't to
take care of the world, my job is to take care of America."
Sad man.
Hank
It's Obama's fault.
If only he wasn't lying and bullshitting.... and seriously, exploiting
the widow of the man he's responsible for killing..... that was a low point.
What man is that?
I suspect she is referring to the Seal who died conducting an action
that was set up by 0bama and for which Trump's only involvement is
that he didn't say no after he took office -- three days before the
incident.
People die in combat. That has always been true, and will continue to
be. One of the many reasons that people die in combat is that the
leaders, planners, and participants NEVER have all the information
that they need before committing to combat. That will also always be true.
--
bill
Theory don't mean squat if it don't work.
K Miller
2017-03-05 15:28:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by bill horne
Post by Bruce
Post by nothermark
On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 17:30:54 -0500, Hunter Hampton
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by kmiller
Post by Hank
Saw that interview. Matt Lauer asked him something like " Is
there anything you agreed with about Trumps Speech?" He said no.
I guess he
doesn't agree with the possibility of lower insurance, drugs, and
lower premiums for doctors malpractice insurance. Or " My job isn't to
take care of the world, my job is to take care of America."
Sad man.
Hank
It's Obama's fault.
If only he wasn't lying and bullshitting.... and seriously,
exploiting the widow of the man he's responsible for killing.....
that was a low point.
What man is that?
I suspect she is referring to the Seal who died conducting an action
that was set up by 0bama and for which Trump's only involvement is
that he didn't say no after he took office -- three days before the
incident.
People die in combat. That has always been true, and will continue to
be. One of the many reasons that people die in combat is that the
leaders, planners, and participants NEVER have all the information
that they need before committing to combat. That will also always be true.
Usually, at least in the recent past, the CIC has taken responsibilty. Not
so any more, apparently.
bill horne
2017-03-05 18:50:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by K Miller
Post by bill horne
Post by Bruce
Post by nothermark
On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 17:30:54 -0500, Hunter Hampton
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by kmiller
Post by Hank
Saw that interview. Matt Lauer asked him something like " Is
there anything you agreed with about Trumps Speech?" He said no.
I guess he
doesn't agree with the possibility of lower insurance, drugs, and
lower premiums for doctors malpractice insurance. Or " My job isn't to
take care of the world, my job is to take care of America."
Sad man.
Hank
It's Obama's fault.
If only he wasn't lying and bullshitting.... and seriously,
exploiting the widow of the man he's responsible for killing.....
that was a low point.
What man is that?
I suspect she is referring to the Seal who died conducting an action
that was set up by 0bama and for which Trump's only involvement is
that he didn't say no after he took office -- three days before the
incident.
People die in combat. That has always been true, and will continue to
be. One of the many reasons that people die in combat is that the
leaders, planners, and participants NEVER have all the information
that they need before committing to combat. That will also always be true.
Usually, at least in the recent past, the CIC has taken responsibilty. Not
so any more, apparently.
I'm not disputing that yet - but when? And to quote a recent
candidate, "What difference, at this point, does it make?".
--
bill
Theory don't mean squat if it don't work.
kmiller
2017-03-06 16:45:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by bill horne
Post by K Miller
Post by bill horne
Post by Bruce
Post by nothermark
On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 17:30:54 -0500, Hunter Hampton
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by kmiller
Post by Hank
Saw that interview. Matt Lauer asked him something like " Is
there anything you agreed with about Trumps Speech?" He said no.
I guess he
doesn't agree with the possibility of lower insurance, drugs, and
lower premiums for doctors malpractice insurance. Or " My job isn't to
take care of the world, my job is to take care of America."
Sad man.
Hank
It's Obama's fault.
If only he wasn't lying and bullshitting.... and seriously,
exploiting the widow of the man he's responsible for killing.....
that was a low point.
What man is that?
I suspect she is referring to the Seal who died conducting an action
that was set up by 0bama and for which Trump's only involvement is
that he didn't say no after he took office -- three days before the
incident.
People die in combat. That has always been true, and will continue to
be. One of the many reasons that people die in combat is that the
leaders, planners, and participants NEVER have all the information
that they need before committing to combat. That will also always be true.
Usually, at least in the recent past, the CIC has taken responsibilty. Not
so any more, apparently.
I'm not disputing that yet - but when?
"It has not always been so. Historically, great and not-so-great presidents have taken responsibility for military operations and setbacks, even when
presidential responsibility was more attenuated than in this case. Shortly after taking office in 1961, President John Kennedy ordered the disastrous
Bay of Pigs invasion; he publicly accepted responsibility for that operation on national television. When the 1980 Desert One mission to rescue
hostages in Iran failed spectacularly, President Jimmy Carter similarly went on national television to accept responsibility, saying, “It was my
decision to attempt the rescue operation. It was my decision to cancel it when problems developed in the placement of our rescue team for a future
rescue operation. The responsibility is fully my own.”

In 1983, when Hezbollah militants demolished a Marine barracks in Beirut and killed 241 US service members, President Ronald Reagan held a news
conference the next day to answer questions about the bombing and the Marines’ mission. More recently, President Barack Obama pointed the finger at
himself after the deadly attack in Benghazi, Libya, in 2012 that left four Americans dead. “I’m the president. And I’m always responsible,” he said at
the time.

In each of these cases, there were a thousand errors at lower echelons of command that contributed to the ultimate failure. Such is the fog and
friction of war. However, each of these prior presidents understood the dictum of Truman’s sign: The buck stopped in the Oval Office, with the
president personally. Both the nation and the troops expected no less."

http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/2/28/14766918/trump-blame-military-yemen-seal-botched-raid-pentagon-fox
Post by bill horne
And to quote a recent candidate, "What difference, at this point, does it make?".
It would let me see that the current president will take responsibility for his own actions instead of shifting the blame to others.
Bruce
2017-03-06 17:18:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by kmiller
"It has not always been so. Historically, great and not-so-great
presidents have taken responsibility for military operations and
setbacks, even when presidential responsibility was more attenuated than
in this case. Shortly after taking office in 1961, President John
Kennedy ordered the disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion; he publicly
accepted responsibility for that operation on national television. When
the 1980 Desert One mission to rescue hostages in Iran failed
spectacularly, President Jimmy Carter similarly went on national
television to accept responsibility, saying, “It was my decision to
attempt the rescue operation. It was my decision to cancel it when
problems developed in the placement of our rescue team for a future
rescue operation. The responsibility is fully my own.”
In 1983, when Hezbollah militants demolished a Marine barracks in Beirut
and killed 241 US service members, President Ronald Reagan held a news
conference the next day to answer questions about the bombing and the
Marines’ mission. More recently, President Barack Obama pointed the
finger at himself after the deadly attack in Benghazi, Libya, in 2012
that left four Americans dead. “I’m the president. And I’m always
responsible,” he said at the time.
In each of these cases, there were a thousand errors at lower echelons
of command that contributed to the ultimate failure. Such is the fog and
friction of war. However, each of these prior presidents understood the
dictum of Truman’s sign: The buck stopped in the Oval Office, with the
president personally. Both the nation and the troops expected no less."
http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/2/28/14766918/trump-blame-military-yemen-seal-botched-raid-pentagon-fox
Post by bill horne
And to quote a recent candidate, "What difference, at this point, does it make?".
It would let me see that the current president will take responsibility
for his own actions instead of shifting the blame to others.
Interesting though that you never (not one time in 8 years) made the
same demand of 0bama.
--
Bruce

"It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from it's
government." -- Thomas Paine
Frank Howell
2017-03-06 21:19:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bruce
Post by kmiller
"It has not always been so. Historically, great and not-so-great
presidents have taken responsibility for military operations and
setbacks, even when presidential responsibility was more attenuated than
in this case. Shortly after taking office in 1961, President John
Kennedy ordered the disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion; he publicly
accepted responsibility for that operation on national television. When
the 1980 Desert One mission to rescue hostages in Iran failed
spectacularly, President Jimmy Carter similarly went on national
television to accept responsibility, saying, “It was my decision to
attempt the rescue operation. It was my decision to cancel it when
problems developed in the placement of our rescue team for a future
rescue operation. The responsibility is fully my own.”
In 1983, when Hezbollah militants demolished a Marine barracks in Beirut
and killed 241 US service members, President Ronald Reagan held a news
conference the next day to answer questions about the bombing and the
Marines’ mission. More recently, President Barack Obama pointed the
finger at himself after the deadly attack in Benghazi, Libya, in 2012
that left four Americans dead. “I’m the president. And I’m always
responsible,” he said at the time.
In each of these cases, there were a thousand errors at lower echelons
of command that contributed to the ultimate failure. Such is the fog and
friction of war. However, each of these prior presidents understood the
dictum of Truman’s sign: The buck stopped in the Oval Office, with the
president personally. Both the nation and the troops expected no less."
http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/2/28/14766918/trump-blame-military-yemen-seal-botched-raid-pentagon-fox
Post by bill horne
And to quote a recent candidate, "What difference, at this point, does it make?".
It would let me see that the current president will take responsibility
for his own actions instead of shifting the blame to others.
Interesting though that you never (not one time in 8 years) made the
same demand of 0bama.
Known as the Hunter syndrome, AKA as selective memory loss.
--
Frank Howell
bill horne
2017-03-06 17:40:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by kmiller
Post by bill horne
Post by K Miller
Post by bill horne
Post by Bruce
Post by nothermark
On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 17:30:54 -0500, Hunter Hampton
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by kmiller
Post by Hank
Saw that interview. Matt Lauer asked him something like " Is
there anything you agreed with about Trumps Speech?" He said no.
I guess he
doesn't agree with the possibility of lower insurance, drugs, and
lower premiums for doctors malpractice insurance. Or " My job isn't to
take care of the world, my job is to take care of America."
Sad man.
Hank
It's Obama's fault.
If only he wasn't lying and bullshitting.... and seriously,
exploiting the widow of the man he's responsible for killing.....
that was a low point.
What man is that?
I suspect she is referring to the Seal who died conducting an action
that was set up by 0bama and for which Trump's only involvement is
that he didn't say no after he took office -- three days before the
incident.
People die in combat. That has always been true, and will continue to
be. One of the many reasons that people die in combat is that the
leaders, planners, and participants NEVER have all the information
that they need before committing to combat. That will also always be true.
Usually, at least in the recent past, the CIC has taken
responsibilty. Not
so any more, apparently.
I'm not disputing that yet - but when?
"It has not always been so. Historically, great and not-so-great
presidents have taken responsibility for military operations and
setbacks, even when presidential responsibility was more attenuated
than in this case. Shortly after taking office in 1961, President John
Kennedy ordered the disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion; he publicly
accepted responsibility for that operation on national television.
When the 1980 Desert One mission to rescue hostages in Iran failed
spectacularly, President Jimmy Carter similarly went on national
television to accept responsibility, saying, “It was my decision to
attempt the rescue operation. It was my decision to cancel it when
problems developed in the placement of our rescue team for a future
rescue operation. The responsibility is fully my own.”
In 1983, when Hezbollah militants demolished a Marine barracks in
Beirut and killed 241 US service members, President Ronald Reagan held
a news conference the next day to answer questions about the bombing
and the Marines’ mission. More recently, President Barack Obama
pointed the finger at himself after the deadly attack in Benghazi,
Libya, in 2012 that left four Americans dead. “I’m the president. And
I’m always responsible,” he said at the time.
In each of these cases, there were a thousand errors at lower echelons
of command that contributed to the ultimate failure. Such is the fog
and friction of war. However, each of these prior presidents
understood the dictum of Truman’s sign: The buck stopped in the Oval
Office, with the president personally. Both the nation and the troops
expected no less."
http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/2/28/14766918/trump-blame-military-yemen-seal-botched-raid-pentagon-fox
Post by bill horne
And to quote a recent candidate, "What difference, at this point, does it make?".
It would let me see that the current president will take
responsibility for his own actions instead of shifting the blame to
others.
You just told me that
----------------------------------------------------------------------
In each of these cases, there were a thousand errors at lower echelons
of command that contributed to the ultimate failure.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The trouble with high level officials "taking responsibility" or
"holding themselves accountable" is that it is mostly symbolic -
rarely is there any actual accounting.

Besides, you're out of line - you leftwingnuts have told us
rightwingnuts that the past can't be compared with the present - or be
used to justify it.
--
bill
Theory don't mean squat if it don't work.
kmiller
2017-03-06 18:12:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by bill horne
Post by kmiller
Post by bill horne
Post by K Miller
Post by bill horne
Post by Bruce
Post by nothermark
On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 17:30:54 -0500, Hunter Hampton
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by kmiller
Post by Hank
Saw that interview. Matt Lauer asked him something like " Is
there anything you agreed with about Trumps Speech?" He said no.
I guess he
doesn't agree with the possibility of lower insurance, drugs, and
lower premiums for doctors malpractice insurance. Or " My job isn't to
take care of the world, my job is to take care of America."
Sad man.
Hank
It's Obama's fault.
If only he wasn't lying and bullshitting.... and seriously,
exploiting the widow of the man he's responsible for killing.....
that was a low point.
What man is that?
I suspect she is referring to the Seal who died conducting an action
that was set up by 0bama and for which Trump's only involvement is
that he didn't say no after he took office -- three days before the
incident.
People die in combat. That has always been true, and will continue to
be. One of the many reasons that people die in combat is that the
leaders, planners, and participants NEVER have all the information
that they need before committing to combat. That will also always be true.
Usually, at least in the recent past, the CIC has taken
responsibilty. Not
so any more, apparently.
I'm not disputing that yet - but when?
"It has not always been so. Historically, great and not-so-great
presidents have taken responsibility for military operations and
setbacks, even when presidential responsibility was more attenuated
than in this case. Shortly after taking office in 1961, President John
Kennedy ordered the disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion; he publicly
accepted responsibility for that operation on national television.
When the 1980 Desert One mission to rescue hostages in Iran failed
spectacularly, President Jimmy Carter similarly went on national
television to accept responsibility, saying, “It was my decision to
attempt the rescue operation. It was my decision to cancel it when
problems developed in the placement of our rescue team for a future
rescue operation. The responsibility is fully my own.”
In 1983, when Hezbollah militants demolished a Marine barracks in
Beirut and killed 241 US service members, President Ronald Reagan held
a news conference the next day to answer questions about the bombing
and the Marines’ mission. More recently, President Barack Obama
pointed the finger at himself after the deadly attack in Benghazi,
Libya, in 2012 that left four Americans dead. “I’m the president. And
I’m always responsible,” he said at the time.
In each of these cases, there were a thousand errors at lower echelons
of command that contributed to the ultimate failure. Such is the fog
and friction of war. However, each of these prior presidents
understood the dictum of Truman’s sign: The buck stopped in the Oval
Office, with the president personally. Both the nation and the troops
expected no less."
http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/2/28/14766918/trump-blame-military-yemen-seal-botched-raid-pentagon-fox
Post by bill horne
And to quote a recent candidate, "What difference, at this point, does it make?".
It would let me see that the current president will take
responsibility for his own actions instead of shifting the blame to
others.
You just told me that
----------------------------------------------------------------------
In each of these cases, there were a thousand errors at lower echelons of command that contributed to the ultimate failure.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes. So what? How does that absolve the current president of ultimate responsibility?
Post by bill horne
The trouble with high level officials "taking responsibility" or "holding themselves accountable" is that it is mostly symbolic - rarely is there any
actual accounting.
Yes. So what? How does that absolve the current president of ultimate responsibility?
Post by bill horne
Besides, you're out of line - you leftwingnuts have told us rightwingnuts that the past can't be compared with the present - or be used to justify it.
Yes. So what? How does that absolve the current president of ultimate responsibility?
bill horne
2017-03-06 18:28:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by kmiller
Post by bill horne
Post by kmiller
Post by bill horne
Post by K Miller
Post by bill horne
Post by Bruce
Post by nothermark
On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 17:30:54 -0500, Hunter Hampton
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by kmiller
Post by Hank
Saw that interview. Matt Lauer asked him something like " Is
there anything you agreed with about Trumps Speech?" He said no.
I guess he
doesn't agree with the possibility of lower insurance, drugs, and
lower premiums for doctors malpractice insurance. Or " My job isn't to
take care of the world, my job is to take care of America."
Sad man.
Hank
It's Obama's fault.
If only he wasn't lying and bullshitting.... and seriously,
exploiting the widow of the man he's responsible for
killing.....
that was a low point.
What man is that?
I suspect she is referring to the Seal who died conducting an action
that was set up by 0bama and for which Trump's only involvement is
that he didn't say no after he took office -- three days before the
incident.
People die in combat. That has always been true, and will
continue to
be. One of the many reasons that people die in combat is that the
leaders, planners, and participants NEVER have all the information
that they need before committing to combat. That will also
always be
true.
Usually, at least in the recent past, the CIC has taken
responsibilty. Not
so any more, apparently.
I'm not disputing that yet - but when?
"It has not always been so. Historically, great and not-so-great
presidents have taken responsibility for military operations and
setbacks, even when presidential responsibility was more attenuated
than in this case. Shortly after taking office in 1961, President John
Kennedy ordered the disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion; he publicly
accepted responsibility for that operation on national television.
When the 1980 Desert One mission to rescue hostages in Iran failed
spectacularly, President Jimmy Carter similarly went on national
television to accept responsibility, saying, “It was my decision to
attempt the rescue operation. It was my decision to cancel it when
problems developed in the placement of our rescue team for a future
rescue operation. The responsibility is fully my own.”
In 1983, when Hezbollah militants demolished a Marine barracks in
Beirut and killed 241 US service members, President Ronald Reagan held
a news conference the next day to answer questions about the bombing
and the Marines’ mission. More recently, President Barack Obama
pointed the finger at himself after the deadly attack in Benghazi,
Libya, in 2012 that left four Americans dead. “I’m the president. And
I’m always responsible,” he said at the time.
In each of these cases, there were a thousand errors at lower echelons
of command that contributed to the ultimate failure. Such is the fog
and friction of war. However, each of these prior presidents
understood the dictum of Truman’s sign: The buck stopped in the Oval
Office, with the president personally. Both the nation and the troops
expected no less."
http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/2/28/14766918/trump-blame-military-yemen-seal-botched-raid-pentagon-fox
Post by bill horne
And to quote a recent candidate, "What difference, at this point, does it make?".
It would let me see that the current president will take
responsibility for his own actions instead of shifting the blame to
others.
You just told me that
----------------------------------------------------------------------
In each of these cases, there were a thousand errors at lower
echelons of command that contributed to the ultimate failure.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes. So what? How does that absolve the current president of ultimate responsibility?
Post by bill horne
The trouble with high level officials "taking responsibility" or
"holding themselves accountable" is that it is mostly symbolic -
rarely is there any
actual accounting.
Yes. So what? How does that absolve the current president of ultimate responsibility?
Post by bill horne
Besides, you're out of line - you leftwingnuts have told us
rightwingnuts that the past can't be compared with the present - or
be used to justify it.
Yes. So what? How does that absolve the current president of ultimate responsibility?
"ultimate responsibility" in this context means practically nothing -
and since I think that's the case, I agree that Trump should go ahead
and "take responsibility" - since it's nearly meaningless. History has
shown that he's likely to lose nothing by "taking responsibility". He
might even gain something.
--
bill
Theory don't mean squat if it don't work.
George Anthony
2017-03-06 18:10:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by kmiller
Post by bill horne
Post by K Miller
Post by bill horne
Post by Bruce
Post by nothermark
On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 17:30:54 -0500, Hunter Hampton
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by kmiller
Post by Hank
Saw that interview. Matt Lauer asked him something like " Is
there anything you agreed with about Trumps Speech?" He said no.
I guess he
doesn't agree with the possibility of lower insurance, drugs, and
lower premiums for doctors malpractice insurance. Or " My job isn't to
take care of the world, my job is to take care of America."
Sad man.
Hank
It's Obama's fault.
If only he wasn't lying and bullshitting.... and seriously,
exploiting the widow of the man he's responsible for killing.....
that was a low point.
What man is that?
I suspect she is referring to the Seal who died conducting an action
that was set up by 0bama and for which Trump's only involvement is
that he didn't say no after he took office -- three days before the
incident.
People die in combat. That has always been true, and will continue to
be. One of the many reasons that people die in combat is that the
leaders, planners, and participants NEVER have all the information
that they need before committing to combat. That will also always be true.
Usually, at least in the recent past, the CIC has taken
responsibilty. Not
so any more, apparently.
I'm not disputing that yet - but when?
"It has not always been so. Historically, great and not-so-great
presidents have taken responsibility for military operations and
setbacks, even when presidential responsibility was more attenuated than
in this case. Shortly after taking office in 1961, President John
Kennedy ordered the disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion; he publicly
accepted responsibility for that operation on national television. When
the 1980 Desert One mission to rescue hostages in Iran failed
spectacularly, President Jimmy Carter similarly went on national
television to accept responsibility, saying, “It was my decision to
attempt the rescue operation. It was my decision to cancel it when
problems developed in the placement of our rescue team for a future
rescue operation. The responsibility is fully my own.”
In 1983, when Hezbollah militants demolished a Marine barracks in Beirut
and killed 241 US service members, President Ronald Reagan held a news
conference the next day to answer questions about the bombing and the
Marines’ mission. More recently, President Barack Obama pointed the
finger at himself after the deadly attack in Benghazi, Libya, in 2012
that left four Americans dead. “I’m the president. And I’m always
responsible,” he said at the time.
In each of these cases, there were a thousand errors at lower echelons
of command that contributed to the ultimate failure. Such is the fog and
friction of war. However, each of these prior presidents understood the
dictum of Truman’s sign: The buck stopped in the Oval Office, with the
president personally. Both the nation and the troops expected no less."
http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/2/28/14766918/trump-blame-military-yemen-seal-botched-raid-pentagon-fox
Post by bill horne
And to quote a recent candidate, "What difference, at this point, does it make?".
It would let me see that the current president will take responsibility
for his own actions instead of shifting the blame to others.
Like Obama tried to shift the blame for everything to Bush?
bill horne
2017-03-06 18:33:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Anthony
Post by kmiller
Post by bill horne
Post by K Miller
Post by bill horne
Post by Bruce
Post by nothermark
On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 17:30:54 -0500, Hunter Hampton
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by kmiller
Post by Hank
Saw that interview. Matt Lauer asked him something like " Is
there anything you agreed with about Trumps Speech?" He said no.
I guess he
doesn't agree with the possibility of lower insurance, drugs, and
lower premiums for doctors malpractice insurance. Or " My job isn't to
take care of the world, my job is to take care of America."
Sad man.
Hank
It's Obama's fault.
If only he wasn't lying and bullshitting.... and seriously,
exploiting the widow of the man he's responsible for killing.....
that was a low point.
What man is that?
I suspect she is referring to the Seal who died conducting an action
that was set up by 0bama and for which Trump's only involvement is
that he didn't say no after he took office -- three days before the
incident.
People die in combat. That has always been true, and will
continue to
be. One of the many reasons that people die in combat is that the
leaders, planners, and participants NEVER have all the information
that they need before committing to combat. That will also always be true.
Usually, at least in the recent past, the CIC has taken
responsibilty. Not
so any more, apparently.
I'm not disputing that yet - but when?
"It has not always been so. Historically, great and not-so-great
presidents have taken responsibility for military operations and
setbacks, even when presidential responsibility was more attenuated than
in this case. Shortly after taking office in 1961, President John
Kennedy ordered the disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion; he publicly
accepted responsibility for that operation on national television. When
the 1980 Desert One mission to rescue hostages in Iran failed
spectacularly, President Jimmy Carter similarly went on national
television to accept responsibility, saying, “It was my decision to
attempt the rescue operation. It was my decision to cancel it when
problems developed in the placement of our rescue team for a future
rescue operation. The responsibility is fully my own.”
In 1983, when Hezbollah militants demolished a Marine barracks in Beirut
and killed 241 US service members, President Ronald Reagan held a news
conference the next day to answer questions about the bombing and the
Marines’ mission. More recently, President Barack Obama pointed the
finger at himself after the deadly attack in Benghazi, Libya, in 2012
that left four Americans dead. “I’m the president. And I’m always
responsible,” he said at the time.
In each of these cases, there were a thousand errors at lower echelons
of command that contributed to the ultimate failure. Such is the fog and
friction of war. However, each of these prior presidents understood the
dictum of Truman’s sign: The buck stopped in the Oval Office, with the
president personally. Both the nation and the troops expected no less."
http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/2/28/14766918/trump-blame-military-yemen-seal-botched-raid-pentagon-fox
Post by bill horne
And to quote a recent candidate, "What difference, at this point, does it make?".
It would let me see that the current president will take responsibility
for his own actions instead of shifting the blame to others.
Like Obama tried to shift the blame for everything to Bush?
What's wrong with you? That's past history. You can't use that. Only
liberals can use the past. The rightwingnut buck stops here now - not
there yesterday.
--
bill
Theory don't mean squat if it don't work.
K Miller
2017-03-07 03:53:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by bill horne
Post by George Anthony
Post by kmiller
Post by bill horne
Post by K Miller
Post by bill horne
Post by Bruce
Post by nothermark
On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 17:30:54 -0500, Hunter Hampton
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by kmiller
Post by Hank
Saw that interview. Matt Lauer asked him something like " Is
there anything you agreed with about Trumps Speech?" He said no.
I guess he
doesn't agree with the possibility of lower insurance, drugs, and
lower premiums for doctors malpractice insurance. Or " My job isn't to
take care of the world, my job is to take care of America."
Sad man.
Hank
It's Obama's fault.
If only he wasn't lying and bullshitting.... and seriously,
exploiting the widow of the man he's responsible for
killing..... that was a low point.
What man is that?
I suspect she is referring to the Seal who died conducting an action
that was set up by 0bama and for which Trump's only involvement
is that he didn't say no after he took office -- three days
before the incident.
People die in combat. That has always been true, and will
continue to
be. One of the many reasons that people die in combat is that the
leaders, planners, and participants NEVER have all the
information that they need before committing to combat. That
will also always be true.
Usually, at least in the recent past, the CIC has taken
responsibilty. Not
so any more, apparently.
I'm not disputing that yet - but when?
"It has not always been so. Historically, great and not-so-great
presidents have taken responsibility for military operations and
setbacks, even when presidential responsibility was more attenuated than
in this case. Shortly after taking office in 1961, President John
Kennedy ordered the disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion; he publicly
accepted responsibility for that operation on national television.
When the 1980 Desert One mission to rescue hostages in Iran failed
spectacularly, President Jimmy Carter similarly went on national
television to accept responsibility, saying, "It was my decision to
attempt the rescue operation. It was my decision to cancel it when
problems developed in the placement of our rescue team for a future
rescue operation. The responsibility is fully my own."
In 1983, when Hezbollah militants demolished a Marine barracks in Beirut
and killed 241 US service members, President Ronald Reagan held a
news conference the next day to answer questions about the bombing
and the Marines' mission. More recently, President Barack Obama
pointed the finger at himself after the deadly attack in Benghazi,
Libya, in 2012 that left four Americans dead. "I'm the president.
And I'm always responsible," he said at the time.
In each of these cases, there were a thousand errors at lower
echelons of command that contributed to the ultimate failure. Such
is the fog and
friction of war. However, each of these prior presidents understood
the dictum of Truman's sign: The buck stopped in the Oval Office,
with the president personally. Both the nation and the troops
expected no less."
http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/2/28/14766918/trump-blame-military-yemen-seal-botched-raid-pentagon-fox
Post by bill horne
And to quote a recent candidate, "What difference, at this point, does it make?".
It would let me see that the current president will take
responsibility for his own actions instead of shifting the blame to
others.
Like Obama tried to shift the blame for everything to Bush?
What's wrong with you? That's past history. You can't use that. Only
liberals can use the past. The rightwingnut buck stops here now - not
there yesterday.
And, as that idiot JohnGeorge would say, "Trump won!"
George Anthony
2017-03-07 04:40:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by K Miller
Post by bill horne
Post by George Anthony
Post by kmiller
Post by bill horne
Post by K Miller
Post by bill horne
Post by Bruce
Post by nothermark
On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 17:30:54 -0500, Hunter Hampton
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by kmiller
Post by Hank
Saw that interview. Matt Lauer asked him something like " Is
there anything you agreed with about Trumps Speech?" He said no.
I guess he
doesn't agree with the possibility of lower insurance, drugs, and
lower premiums for doctors malpractice insurance. Or " My
job isn't to
take care of the world, my job is to take care of America."
Sad man.
Hank
It's Obama's fault.
If only he wasn't lying and bullshitting.... and seriously,
exploiting the widow of the man he's responsible for
killing..... that was a low point.
What man is that?
I suspect she is referring to the Seal who died conducting an action
that was set up by 0bama and for which Trump's only involvement
is that he didn't say no after he took office -- three days
before the incident.
People die in combat. That has always been true, and will continue to
be. One of the many reasons that people die in combat is that the
leaders, planners, and participants NEVER have all the
information that they need before committing to combat. That
will also always be true.
Usually, at least in the recent past, the CIC has taken
responsibilty. Not
so any more, apparently.
I'm not disputing that yet - but when?
"It has not always been so. Historically, great and not-so-great
presidents have taken responsibility for military operations and
setbacks, even when presidential responsibility was more attenuated than
in this case. Shortly after taking office in 1961, President John
Kennedy ordered the disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion; he publicly
accepted responsibility for that operation on national television.
When the 1980 Desert One mission to rescue hostages in Iran failed
spectacularly, President Jimmy Carter similarly went on national
television to accept responsibility, saying, "It was my decision to
attempt the rescue operation. It was my decision to cancel it when
problems developed in the placement of our rescue team for a future
rescue operation. The responsibility is fully my own."
In 1983, when Hezbollah militants demolished a Marine barracks in Beirut
and killed 241 US service members, President Ronald Reagan held a
news conference the next day to answer questions about the bombing
and the Marines' mission. More recently, President Barack Obama
pointed the finger at himself after the deadly attack in Benghazi,
Libya, in 2012 that left four Americans dead. "I'm the president.
And I'm always responsible," he said at the time.
In each of these cases, there were a thousand errors at lower
echelons of command that contributed to the ultimate failure. Such
is the fog and
friction of war. However, each of these prior presidents understood
the dictum of Truman's sign: The buck stopped in the Oval Office,
with the president personally. Both the nation and the troops
expected no less."
http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/2/28/14766918/trump-blame-military-yemen-seal-botched-raid-pentagon-fox
Post by bill horne
And to quote a recent candidate, "What difference, at this point, does it make?".
It would let me see that the current president will take
responsibility for his own actions instead of shifting the blame to
others.
Like Obama tried to shift the blame for everything to Bush?
What's wrong with you? That's past history. You can't use that. Only
liberals can use the past. The rightwingnut buck stops here now - not
there yesterday.
And, as that idiot JohnGeorge would say, "Trump won!"
Hey, JohnMensa... TRUMP WON!!! Get over it. Elections have consequences.
One is that you pants on fire liberal snowflakes will have to suffer
through eight years just like we did. The difference is we are tougher than
you little whiney girly men. This is going to be much harder on you. Oh,
and in case you missed it... TRUMP WON!!!
vito
2017-03-07 07:32:31 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 7 Mar 2017 04:40:31 -0000 (UTC), George Anthony
Post by George Anthony
Hey, JohnMensa... TRUMP WON!!! Get over it. Elections have consequences.
One is that you pants on fire liberal snowflakes will have to suffer
through eight years just like we did. The difference is we are tougher than
you little whiney girly men. This is going to be much harder on you. Oh,
and in case you missed it... TRUMP WON!!!
And now they want to impeach him. Don't they realise that, on many
issues, Trump is a moderate? That they'd be replacing him with a
liberals' worst nightmare?
George Anthony
2017-03-07 16:48:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by vito
On Tue, 7 Mar 2017 04:40:31 -0000 (UTC), George Anthony
Post by George Anthony
Hey, JohnMensa... TRUMP WON!!! Get over it. Elections have consequences.
One is that you pants on fire liberal snowflakes will have to suffer
through eight years just like we did. The difference is we are tougher than
you little whiney girly men. This is going to be much harder on you. Oh,
and in case you missed it... TRUMP WON!!!
And now they want to impeach him. Don't they realise that, on many
issues, Trump is a moderate? That they'd be replacing him with a
liberals' worst nightmare?
Removing Trump is the first step toward getting rid of Pence. Otherwise,
sixteen years of republican presidents. Talk about a liberal nightmare!
Bruce
2017-03-07 17:46:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Anthony
Post by vito
On Tue, 7 Mar 2017 04:40:31 -0000 (UTC), George Anthony
Post by George Anthony
Hey, JohnMensa... TRUMP WON!!! Get over it. Elections have consequences.
One is that you pants on fire liberal snowflakes will have to suffer
through eight years just like we did. The difference is we are tougher than
you little whiney girly men. This is going to be much harder on you. Oh,
and in case you missed it... TRUMP WON!!!
And now they want to impeach him. Don't they realise that, on many
issues, Trump is a moderate? That they'd be replacing him with a
liberals' worst nightmare?
Removing Trump is the first step toward getting rid of Pence. Otherwise,
sixteen years of republican presidents. Talk about a liberal nightmare!
Even if they succeeded in removing Trump, and then tried to remove
Pence, that wouldn't change a thing. As soon as Trump would be removed,
Pence would appoint a new Vice President -- another Republican. All the
Dems can hope to do is set up a revolving door for new Republican
Presidents every few months for the foreseeable future.
--
Bruce

"It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from it's
government." -- Thomas Paine
f***@gmail.com
2017-03-07 19:27:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Anthony
Post by vito
On Tue, 7 Mar 2017 04:40:31 -0000 (UTC), George Anthony
Post by George Anthony
Hey, JohnMensa... TRUMP WON!!! Get over it. Elections have consequences.
One is that you pants on fire liberal snowflakes will have to suffer
through eight years just like we did. The difference is we are tougher than
you little whiney girly men. This is going to be much harder on you. Oh,
and in case you missed it... TRUMP WON!!!
And now they want to impeach him. Don't they realise that, on many
issues, Trump is a moderate? That they'd be replacing him with a
liberals' worst nightmare?
Removing Trump is the first step toward getting rid of Pence. Otherwise,
sixteen years of republican presidents. Talk about a liberal nightmare!
So, you're already planning on 16 years of voters electing Republicans? Don't you think that's sort of a wee bit optimistic?

Iceberg Slim
George Anthony
2017-03-07 20:38:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by f***@gmail.com
Post by George Anthony
Post by vito
On Tue, 7 Mar 2017 04:40:31 -0000 (UTC), George Anthony
Post by George Anthony
Hey, JohnMensa... TRUMP WON!!! Get over it. Elections have consequences.
One is that you pants on fire liberal snowflakes will have to suffer
through eight years just like we did. The difference is we are tougher than
you little whiney girly men. This is going to be much harder on you. Oh,
and in case you missed it... TRUMP WON!!!
And now they want to impeach him. Don't they realise that, on many
issues, Trump is a moderate? That they'd be replacing him with a
liberals' worst nightmare?
Removing Trump is the first step toward getting rid of Pence. Otherwise,
sixteen years of republican presidents. Talk about a liberal nightmare!
So, you're already planning on 16 years of voters electing Republicans? Don't you think that's sort of a wee bit optimistic?
Iceberg Slim
At the rate you idiot liberals are behaving, it could be 32 years.
vito
2017-03-08 00:35:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by f***@gmail.com
So, you're already planning on 16 years of voters electing Republicans? Don't you think that's sort of a wee bit optimistic?
Iceberg Slim
Perhaps a wee bit but hardly unlikely. The GOP now controls both
houses of Congress and the vast majority of governorships and state
houses, providing them a pool of very good candidates. By comparison
the Democrat party has Pelosi, Schumer ....
Bruce
2017-03-08 02:48:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by f***@gmail.com
Post by George Anthony
Post by vito
On Tue, 7 Mar 2017 04:40:31 -0000 (UTC), George Anthony
Post by George Anthony
Hey, JohnMensa... TRUMP WON!!! Get over it. Elections have consequences.
One is that you pants on fire liberal snowflakes will have to suffer
through eight years just like we did. The difference is we are tougher than
you little whiney girly men. This is going to be much harder on you. Oh,
and in case you missed it... TRUMP WON!!!
And now they want to impeach him. Don't they realise that, on many
issues, Trump is a moderate? That they'd be replacing him with a
liberals' worst nightmare?
Removing Trump is the first step toward getting rid of Pence. Otherwise,
sixteen years of republican presidents. Talk about a liberal nightmare!
So, you're already planning on 16 years of voters electing Republicans? Don't you think that's sort of a wee bit optimistic?
Iceberg Slim
It's not completely unprecedented, from Lincoln's election (in 1860)
until Woodrow Wilson (in 1916) the only Democrat elected as president
was Grover Cleveland.
--
Bruce

"It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from it's
government." -- Thomas Paine
Bruce
2017-03-07 17:44:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by vito
On Tue, 7 Mar 2017 04:40:31 -0000 (UTC), George Anthony
Post by George Anthony
Hey, JohnMensa... TRUMP WON!!! Get over it. Elections have consequences.
One is that you pants on fire liberal snowflakes will have to suffer
through eight years just like we did. The difference is we are tougher than
you little whiney girly men. This is going to be much harder on you. Oh,
and in case you missed it... TRUMP WON!!!
And now they want to impeach him. Don't they realise that, on many
issues, Trump is a moderate? That they'd be replacing him with a
liberals' worst nightmare?
Liberals are so stupid that they believe that impeaching Trump would
interrupt Republican control of the country. They aren't smart enough
to figure out that Mike Pence is a Republican too.

They also aren't smart enough to figure out that Republicans control
both the House and the Senate -- they will not vote to impeach their
own, and they would not vote to convict even if their was an impeachment.

In other words, they would do exactly what the Democrats did for Clinton.
--
Bruce

"It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from it's
government." -- Thomas Paine
nothermark
2017-03-07 18:38:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by vito
On Tue, 7 Mar 2017 04:40:31 -0000 (UTC), George Anthony
Post by George Anthony
Hey, JohnMensa... TRUMP WON!!! Get over it. Elections have consequences.
One is that you pants on fire liberal snowflakes will have to suffer
through eight years just like we did. The difference is we are tougher than
you little whiney girly men. This is going to be much harder on you. Oh,
and in case you missed it... TRUMP WON!!!
And now they want to impeach him. Don't they realise that, on many
issues, Trump is a moderate? That they'd be replacing him with a
liberals' worst nightmare?
That's what gets me about the Trump bashers. He is Liberal on most
social issues so there will not be any major changes in that arena. He
might improve the lot of the working man if left alone or helped a
bit. Ditto government efficiency. A lot of folks who voted for him
will not vote for Pence so there is probably no progression unless the
Democrats pick the biggest loser they can find. There only problem is
that he beat their candidate.
Bruce
2017-03-06 23:41:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Anthony
Post by kmiller
Post by bill horne
Post by K Miller
Post by bill horne
Post by Bruce
Post by nothermark
On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 17:30:54 -0500, Hunter Hampton
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by kmiller
Post by Hank
Saw that interview. Matt Lauer asked him something like " Is
there anything you agreed with about Trumps Speech?" He said no.
I guess he
doesn't agree with the possibility of lower insurance, drugs, and
lower premiums for doctors malpractice insurance. Or " My job isn't to
take care of the world, my job is to take care of America."
Sad man.
Hank
It's Obama's fault.
If only he wasn't lying and bullshitting.... and seriously,
exploiting the widow of the man he's responsible for killing.....
that was a low point.
What man is that?
I suspect she is referring to the Seal who died conducting an action
that was set up by 0bama and for which Trump's only involvement is
that he didn't say no after he took office -- three days before the
incident.
People die in combat. That has always been true, and will continue to
be. One of the many reasons that people die in combat is that the
leaders, planners, and participants NEVER have all the information
that they need before committing to combat. That will also always be true.
Usually, at least in the recent past, the CIC has taken
responsibilty. Not
so any more, apparently.
I'm not disputing that yet - but when?
"It has not always been so. Historically, great and not-so-great
presidents have taken responsibility for military operations and
setbacks, even when presidential responsibility was more attenuated than
in this case. Shortly after taking office in 1961, President John
Kennedy ordered the disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion; he publicly
accepted responsibility for that operation on national television. When
the 1980 Desert One mission to rescue hostages in Iran failed
spectacularly, President Jimmy Carter similarly went on national
television to accept responsibility, saying, “It was my decision to
attempt the rescue operation. It was my decision to cancel it when
problems developed in the placement of our rescue team for a future
rescue operation. The responsibility is fully my own.”
In 1983, when Hezbollah militants demolished a Marine barracks in Beirut
and killed 241 US service members, President Ronald Reagan held a news
conference the next day to answer questions about the bombing and the
Marines’ mission. More recently, President Barack Obama pointed the
finger at himself after the deadly attack in Benghazi, Libya, in 2012
that left four Americans dead. “I’m the president. And I’m always
responsible,” he said at the time.
In each of these cases, there were a thousand errors at lower echelons
of command that contributed to the ultimate failure. Such is the fog and
friction of war. However, each of these prior presidents understood the
dictum of Truman’s sign: The buck stopped in the Oval Office, with the
president personally. Both the nation and the troops expected no less."
http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/2/28/14766918/trump-blame-military-yemen-seal-botched-raid-pentagon-fox
Post by bill horne
And to quote a recent candidate, "What difference, at this point, does it make?".
It would let me see that the current president will take responsibility
for his own actions instead of shifting the blame to others.
Like Obama tried to shift the blame for everything to Bush?
That's not fair, Kevin is a liberal, so taking responsibility never
mattered in the past. It is only now -- since Trump took office -- that
taking responsibility matters.
--
Bruce

"It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from it's
government." -- Thomas Paine
vito
2017-03-07 07:20:27 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 6 Mar 2017 08:45:48 -0800, kmiller
Post by kmiller
Post by bill horne
Post by K Miller
Post by bill horne
Post by Bruce
Post by nothermark
On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 17:30:54 -0500, Hunter Hampton
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by kmiller
Post by Hank
Saw that interview. Matt Lauer asked him something like " Is
there anything you agreed with about Trumps Speech?" He said no.
I guess he
doesn't agree with the possibility of lower insurance, drugs, and
lower premiums for doctors malpractice insurance. Or " My job isn't to
take care of the world, my job is to take care of America."
Sad man.
Hank
It's Obama's fault.
If only he wasn't lying and bullshitting.... and seriously,
exploiting the widow of the man he's responsible for killing.....
that was a low point.
What man is that?
I suspect she is referring to the Seal who died conducting an action
that was set up by 0bama and for which Trump's only involvement is
that he didn't say no after he took office -- three days before the
incident.
People die in combat. That has always been true, and will continue to
be. One of the many reasons that people die in combat is that the
leaders, planners, and participants NEVER have all the information
that they need before committing to combat. That will also always be true.
Usually, at least in the recent past, the CIC has taken responsibilty. Not
so any more, apparently.
I'm not disputing that yet - but when?
"It has not always been so. Historically, great and not-so-great presidents have taken responsibility for military operations and setbacks, even when
presidential responsibility was more attenuated than in this case. Shortly after taking office in 1961, President John Kennedy ordered the disastrous
Bay of Pigs invasion; he publicly accepted responsibility for that operation on national television. When the 1980 Desert One mission to rescue
hostages in Iran failed spectacularly, President Jimmy Carter similarly went on national television to accept responsibility, saying, “It was my
decision to attempt the rescue operation. It was my decision to cancel it when problems developed in the placement of our rescue team for a future
rescue operation. The responsibility is fully my own.”
In 1983, when Hezbollah militants demolished a Marine barracks in Beirut and killed 241 US service members, President Ronald Reagan held a news
conference the next day to answer questions about the bombing and the Marines’ mission. More recently, President Barack Obama pointed the finger at
himself after the deadly attack in Benghazi, Libya, in 2012 that left four Americans dead. “I’m the president. And I’m always responsible,” he said at
the time.
In each of these cases, there were a thousand errors at lower echelons of command that contributed to the ultimate failure. Such is the fog and
friction of war. However, each of these prior presidents understood the dictum of Truman’s sign: The buck stopped in the Oval Office, with the
president personally. Both the nation and the troops expected no less."
http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/2/28/14766918/trump-blame-military-yemen-seal-botched-raid-pentagon-fox
Post by bill horne
And to quote a recent candidate, "What difference, at this point, does it make?".
It would let me see that the current president will take responsibility for his own actions instead of shifting the blame to others.
There are material differences between your examples and the Trump
affair. A US carrier was supposed to provide air superioriy over the
beach - an essential part of any landing. JFK cancelled it,
predictably trurning th landing into a disaster. Desert One was
planned on Jimmy's watch. Ditto the Ben Gazi BJ. OTOH it is unlikely
that Trump was even fully aware of the raid.

It has become popular to say "I take responsibility" ... so long as no
penalties are involved.
vito
2017-03-06 07:49:28 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 5 Mar 2017 07:28:15 -0800, "K Miller"
Post by K Miller
Post by bill horne
Post by Bruce
Post by nothermark
On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 17:30:54 -0500, Hunter Hampton
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by kmiller
Post by Hank
Saw that interview. Matt Lauer asked him something like " Is
there anything you agreed with about Trumps Speech?" He said no.
I guess he
doesn't agree with the possibility of lower insurance, drugs, and
lower premiums for doctors malpractice insurance. Or " My job isn't to
take care of the world, my job is to take care of America."
Sad man.
Hank
It's Obama's fault.
If only he wasn't lying and bullshitting.... and seriously,
exploiting the widow of the man he's responsible for killing.....
that was a low point.
What man is that?
I suspect she is referring to the Seal who died conducting an action
that was set up by 0bama and for which Trump's only involvement is
that he didn't say no after he took office -- three days before the
incident.
People die in combat. That has always been true, and will continue to
be. One of the many reasons that people die in combat is that the
leaders, planners, and participants NEVER have all the information
that they need before committing to combat. That will also always be true.
Usually, at least in the recent past, the CIC has taken responsibilty. Not
so any more, apparently.
Really? I don't remember Obama taking responsibility for the Ben Gazi
BJ, or the Shrub taking responsibility for my young friend killed in
Iraq or JFK/LBJ admitting to the 'nam blunder, or, or .....
Albert
2017-03-06 13:14:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by vito
On Sun, 5 Mar 2017 07:28:15 -0800, "K Miller"
Post by K Miller
Post by bill horne
Post by Bruce
Post by nothermark
On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 17:30:54 -0500, Hunter Hampton
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by kmiller
Post by Hank
Saw that interview. Matt Lauer asked him something like " Is
there anything you agreed with about Trumps Speech?" He said no.
I guess he
doesn't agree with the possibility of lower insurance, drugs, and
lower premiums for doctors malpractice insurance. Or " My job isn't to
take care of the world, my job is to take care of America."
Sad man.
Hank
It's Obama's fault.
If only he wasn't lying and bullshitting.... and seriously,
exploiting the widow of the man he's responsible for killing.....
that was a low point.
What man is that?
I suspect she is referring to the Seal who died conducting an action
that was set up by 0bama and for which Trump's only involvement is
that he didn't say no after he took office -- three days before the
incident.
People die in combat. That has always been true, and will continue to
be. One of the many reasons that people die in combat is that the
leaders, planners, and participants NEVER have all the information
that they need before committing to combat. That will also always be true.
Usually, at least in the recent past, the CIC has taken responsibilty. Not
so any more, apparently.
Really? I don't remember Obama taking responsibility for the Ben Gazi
BJ, or the Shrub taking responsibility for my young friend killed in
Iraq or JFK/LBJ admitting to the 'nam blunder, or, or .....
But but but didn't McNamara admit that it was his mistake. I for one
was in 'nam under Eisenhower long before Kennedy, Johnson or Nixon.
Although John Foster Dallas (Eisenhower's Secretary of Defense) was
was the architect of the Vietnam fiasco. McNamara was the architect of
the escalation (boots on the ground).

We were there supposedly to shuttle refugees from Haiphong to Saigon.
If I remember correctly there was three or four ships in our squadron
all of which offloaded military hardware in Saigon. It was called
"Operation Passage to Freedom".

When we got back to the states, before we could leave the ship the
crew had to sign a document saying that we would not divulge the
ship's movement outside of the continental limits of the United
States.

Bottom line, the whole Vietnam fiasco was a bipartisan effort.
nothermark
2017-03-06 14:21:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Albert
Post by vito
On Sun, 5 Mar 2017 07:28:15 -0800, "K Miller"
Post by K Miller
Post by bill horne
Post by Bruce
Post by nothermark
On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 17:30:54 -0500, Hunter Hampton
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by kmiller
Post by Hank
Saw that interview. Matt Lauer asked him something like " Is
there anything you agreed with about Trumps Speech?" He said no.
I guess he
doesn't agree with the possibility of lower insurance, drugs, and
lower premiums for doctors malpractice insurance. Or " My job isn't to
take care of the world, my job is to take care of America."
Sad man.
Hank
It's Obama's fault.
If only he wasn't lying and bullshitting.... and seriously,
exploiting the widow of the man he's responsible for killing.....
that was a low point.
What man is that?
I suspect she is referring to the Seal who died conducting an action
that was set up by 0bama and for which Trump's only involvement is
that he didn't say no after he took office -- three days before the
incident.
People die in combat. That has always been true, and will continue to
be. One of the many reasons that people die in combat is that the
leaders, planners, and participants NEVER have all the information
that they need before committing to combat. That will also always be true.
Usually, at least in the recent past, the CIC has taken responsibilty. Not
so any more, apparently.
Really? I don't remember Obama taking responsibility for the Ben Gazi
BJ, or the Shrub taking responsibility for my young friend killed in
Iraq or JFK/LBJ admitting to the 'nam blunder, or, or .....
But but but didn't McNamara admit that it was his mistake. I for one
was in 'nam under Eisenhower long before Kennedy, Johnson or Nixon.
Although John Foster Dallas (Eisenhower's Secretary of Defense) was
was the architect of the Vietnam fiasco. McNamara was the architect of
the escalation (boots on the ground).
We were there supposedly to shuttle refugees from Haiphong to Saigon.
If I remember correctly there was three or four ships in our squadron
all of which offloaded military hardware in Saigon. It was called
"Operation Passage to Freedom".
When we got back to the states, before we could leave the ship the
crew had to sign a document saying that we would not divulge the
ship's movement outside of the continental limits of the United
States.
Bottom line, the whole Vietnam fiasco was a bipartisan effort.
But they expect us to trust our government...
Bruce
2017-03-06 17:14:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by nothermark
Post by Albert
Post by vito
On Sun, 5 Mar 2017 07:28:15 -0800, "K Miller"
Post by K Miller
Post by bill horne
Post by Bruce
Post by nothermark
On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 17:30:54 -0500, Hunter Hampton
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by kmiller
Post by Hank
Saw that interview. Matt Lauer asked him something like " Is
there anything you agreed with about Trumps Speech?" He said no.
I guess he
doesn't agree with the possibility of lower insurance, drugs, and
lower premiums for doctors malpractice insurance. Or " My job isn't to
take care of the world, my job is to take care of America."
Sad man.
Hank
It's Obama's fault.
If only he wasn't lying and bullshitting.... and seriously,
exploiting the widow of the man he's responsible for killing.....
that was a low point.
What man is that?
I suspect she is referring to the Seal who died conducting an action
that was set up by 0bama and for which Trump's only involvement is
that he didn't say no after he took office -- three days before the
incident.
People die in combat. That has always been true, and will continue to
be. One of the many reasons that people die in combat is that the
leaders, planners, and participants NEVER have all the information
that they need before committing to combat. That will also always be true.
Usually, at least in the recent past, the CIC has taken responsibilty. Not
so any more, apparently.
Really? I don't remember Obama taking responsibility for the Ben Gazi
BJ, or the Shrub taking responsibility for my young friend killed in
Iraq or JFK/LBJ admitting to the 'nam blunder, or, or .....
But but but didn't McNamara admit that it was his mistake. I for one
was in 'nam under Eisenhower long before Kennedy, Johnson or Nixon.
Although John Foster Dallas (Eisenhower's Secretary of Defense) was
was the architect of the Vietnam fiasco. McNamara was the architect of
the escalation (boots on the ground).
We were there supposedly to shuttle refugees from Haiphong to Saigon.
If I remember correctly there was three or four ships in our squadron
all of which offloaded military hardware in Saigon. It was called
"Operation Passage to Freedom".
When we got back to the states, before we could leave the ship the
crew had to sign a document saying that we would not divulge the
ship's movement outside of the continental limits of the United
States.
Bottom line, the whole Vietnam fiasco was a bipartisan effort.
But they expect us to trust our government...
Every military action the US has been engaged in in the last century was
the result of political lies. And every time our military gets
involved, the world is made worse in the end.
--
Bruce

"It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from it's
government." -- Thomas Paine
vito
2017-03-06 14:27:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Albert
Post by vito
On Sun, 5 Mar 2017 07:28:15 -0800, "K Miller"
Post by K Miller
Post by bill horne
Post by Bruce
Post by nothermark
On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 17:30:54 -0500, Hunter Hampton
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by kmiller
Post by Hank
Saw that interview. Matt Lauer asked him something like " Is
there anything you agreed with about Trumps Speech?" He said no.
I guess he
doesn't agree with the possibility of lower insurance, drugs, and
lower premiums for doctors malpractice insurance. Or " My job isn't to
take care of the world, my job is to take care of America."
Sad man.
Hank
It's Obama's fault.
If only he wasn't lying and bullshitting.... and seriously,
exploiting the widow of the man he's responsible for killing.....
that was a low point.
What man is that?
I suspect she is referring to the Seal who died conducting an action
that was set up by 0bama and for which Trump's only involvement is
that he didn't say no after he took office -- three days before the
incident.
People die in combat. That has always been true, and will continue to
be. One of the many reasons that people die in combat is that the
leaders, planners, and participants NEVER have all the information
that they need before committing to combat. That will also always be true.
Usually, at least in the recent past, the CIC has taken responsibilty. Not
so any more, apparently.
Really? I don't remember Obama taking responsibility for the Ben Gazi
BJ, or the Shrub taking responsibility for my young friend killed in
Iraq or JFK/LBJ admitting to the 'nam blunder, or, or .....
But but but didn't McNamara admit that it was his mistake. I for one
was in 'nam under Eisenhower long before Kennedy, Johnson or Nixon.
Although John Foster Dallas (Eisenhower's Secretary of Defense) was
was the architect of the Vietnam fiasco. McNamara was the architect of
the escalation (boots on the ground).
We were there supposedly to shuttle refugees from Haiphong to Saigon.
If I remember correctly there was three or four ships in our squadron
all of which offloaded military hardware in Saigon. It was called
"Operation Passage to Freedom".
When we got back to the states, before we could leave the ship the
crew had to sign a document saying that we would not divulge the
ship's movement outside of the continental limits of the United
States.
Bottom line, the whole Vietnam fiasco was a bipartisan effort.
No doubt. From what I've read & been told it began when France pulled
out. The US had backed insurgents fighting Japan, including Ho. Ho
wanted what was best for his country. He was a communist but could
see that people in western democracies lived far better than in
communist countries. So it was agreed to split the country north
(communist) and south (capitalist) for a trial period. Thus the op's
you took part in. Ike planned to do an east/west Germany job to
assure a capitalist win but the Diems channeled the aid into their own
accounts and JFK dithered too long to whack Diem so, as elections
neared, polls showed connunists by a landslide. Then JFK went to
Dallas. We should have accepted that but JFKs 'whizz kids' tried to
save the situation by delaying the election. With McNamara as Sec of
Def and (it'll come to me) as CIA station chief in Nam they pulled the
wool on LBJ. SEAL 1 was given Swift Boats and began kidnapping
northern villages. Ho appealed to the USSR and got a PT boat base to
counter the raids. Maddox and Turner Joy were dispatched to watch it.
SEAL 1 then hit the base. The PT boats came swarming out like hornets
and ran smack into the cans - thus the Gulf of Tonkin incident and
eventually the war. Anybody else have added/conflicting info I'd be
glad to hear it. How does it fit with your observations Albert?
Albert
2017-03-06 17:10:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by vito
Post by Albert
Post by vito
On Sun, 5 Mar 2017 07:28:15 -0800, "K Miller"
Post by K Miller
Post by bill horne
Post by Bruce
Post by nothermark
On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 17:30:54 -0500, Hunter Hampton
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by kmiller
Post by Hank
Saw that interview. Matt Lauer asked him something like " Is
there anything you agreed with about Trumps Speech?" He said no.
I guess he
doesn't agree with the possibility of lower insurance, drugs, and
lower premiums for doctors malpractice insurance. Or " My job isn't to
take care of the world, my job is to take care of America."
Sad man.
Hank
It's Obama's fault.
If only he wasn't lying and bullshitting.... and seriously,
exploiting the widow of the man he's responsible for killing.....
that was a low point.
What man is that?
I suspect she is referring to the Seal who died conducting an action
that was set up by 0bama and for which Trump's only involvement is
that he didn't say no after he took office -- three days before the
incident.
People die in combat. That has always been true, and will continue to
be. One of the many reasons that people die in combat is that the
leaders, planners, and participants NEVER have all the information
that they need before committing to combat. That will also always be true.
Usually, at least in the recent past, the CIC has taken responsibilty. Not
so any more, apparently.
Really? I don't remember Obama taking responsibility for the Ben Gazi
BJ, or the Shrub taking responsibility for my young friend killed in
Iraq or JFK/LBJ admitting to the 'nam blunder, or, or .....
But but but didn't McNamara admit that it was his mistake. I for one
was in 'nam under Eisenhower long before Kennedy, Johnson or Nixon.
Although John Foster Dallas (Eisenhower's Secretary of Defense) was
was the architect of the Vietnam fiasco. McNamara was the architect of
the escalation (boots on the ground).
We were there supposedly to shuttle refugees from Haiphong to Saigon.
If I remember correctly there was three or four ships in our squadron
all of which offloaded military hardware in Saigon. It was called
"Operation Passage to Freedom".
When we got back to the states, before we could leave the ship the
crew had to sign a document saying that we would not divulge the
ship's movement outside of the continental limits of the United
States.
Bottom line, the whole Vietnam fiasco was a bipartisan effort.
No doubt. From what I've read & been told it began when France pulled
out. The US had backed insurgents fighting Japan, including Ho. Ho
wanted what was best for his country. He was a communist but could
see that people in western democracies lived far better than in
communist countries. So it was agreed to split the country north
(communist) and south (capitalist) for a trial period. Thus the op's
you took part in. Ike planned to do an east/west Germany job to
assure a capitalist win but the Diems channeled the aid into their own
accounts and JFK dithered too long to whack Diem so, as elections
neared, polls showed connunists by a landslide. Then JFK went to
Dallas. We should have accepted that but JFKs 'whizz kids' tried to
save the situation by delaying the election. With McNamara as Sec of
Def and (it'll come to me) as CIA station chief in Nam they pulled the
wool on LBJ. SEAL 1 was given Swift Boats and began kidnapping
northern villages. Ho appealed to the USSR and got a PT boat base to
counter the raids. Maddox and Turner Joy were dispatched to watch it.
SEAL 1 then hit the base. The PT boats came swarming out like hornets
and ran smack into the cans - thus the Gulf of Tonkin incident and
eventually the war. Anybody else have added/conflicting info I'd be
glad to hear it. How does it fit with your observations Albert?
I like to qualify this in that names dates and places may not be
correct of an 82-year-old ;-).

According to the Geneva Accords Indochina (Vietnam) was to be split at
the 17th parallel with Ho Chi Minh presiding over the North and Ngo
Dinh Diem that we installed (a whole other story) over the South.

Although the United States was not a signator of the Geneva Accords we
publicly acknowledge them and said we will abide by them.

Under the Accords there was to be a unification of both North and
South by elections (not sure of date) which Diem refused to take part
of declaring the South a separate nation. (At our behest no doubt)

Now, jump ahead to the falling of Saigon when we cut and ran.
Unbeknownst to the general public there was a deal made with Ho Chi
Minh that we would pull out if we (the US) would have access to the
offshore oil deposits in the Gulf of Tonkin. Which I personally
believe was the the actual reason for the US becoming involved over
there in the first place. We had several employees it our company who
signed on to go over there before Saigon fell. OIL OIL OIL
Albert
2017-03-06 17:11:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by vito
Post by Albert
Post by vito
On Sun, 5 Mar 2017 07:28:15 -0800, "K Miller"
Post by K Miller
Post by bill horne
Post by Bruce
Post by nothermark
On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 17:30:54 -0500, Hunter Hampton
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by kmiller
Post by Hank
Saw that interview. Matt Lauer asked him something like " Is
there anything you agreed with about Trumps Speech?" He said no.
I guess he
doesn't agree with the possibility of lower insurance, drugs, and
lower premiums for doctors malpractice insurance. Or " My job isn't to
take care of the world, my job is to take care of America."
Sad man.
Hank
It's Obama's fault.
If only he wasn't lying and bullshitting.... and seriously,
exploiting the widow of the man he's responsible for killing.....
that was a low point.
What man is that?
I suspect she is referring to the Seal who died conducting an action
that was set up by 0bama and for which Trump's only involvement is
that he didn't say no after he took office -- three days before the
incident.
People die in combat. That has always been true, and will continue to
be. One of the many reasons that people die in combat is that the
leaders, planners, and participants NEVER have all the information
that they need before committing to combat. That will also always be true.
Usually, at least in the recent past, the CIC has taken responsibilty. Not
so any more, apparently.
Really? I don't remember Obama taking responsibility for the Ben Gazi
BJ, or the Shrub taking responsibility for my young friend killed in
Iraq or JFK/LBJ admitting to the 'nam blunder, or, or .....
But but but didn't McNamara admit that it was his mistake. I for one
was in 'nam under Eisenhower long before Kennedy, Johnson or Nixon.
Although John Foster Dallas (Eisenhower's Secretary of Defense) was
was the architect of the Vietnam fiasco. McNamara was the architect of
the escalation (boots on the ground).
We were there supposedly to shuttle refugees from Haiphong to Saigon.
If I remember correctly there was three or four ships in our squadron
all of which offloaded military hardware in Saigon. It was called
"Operation Passage to Freedom".
When we got back to the states, before we could leave the ship the
crew had to sign a document saying that we would not divulge the
ship's movement outside of the continental limits of the United
States.
Bottom line, the whole Vietnam fiasco was a bipartisan effort.
No doubt. From what I've read & been told it began when France pulled
out. The US had backed insurgents fighting Japan, including Ho. Ho
wanted what was best for his country. He was a communist but could
see that people in western democracies lived far better than in
communist countries. So it was agreed to split the country north
(communist) and south (capitalist) for a trial period. Thus the op's
you took part in. Ike planned to do an east/west Germany job to
assure a capitalist win but the Diems channeled the aid into their own
accounts and JFK dithered too long to whack Diem so, as elections
neared, polls showed connunists by a landslide. Then JFK went to
Dallas. We should have accepted that but JFKs 'whizz kids' tried to
save the situation by delaying the election. With McNamara as Sec of
Def and (it'll come to me) as CIA station chief in Nam they pulled the
wool on LBJ. SEAL 1 was given Swift Boats and began kidnapping
northern villages. Ho appealed to the USSR and got a PT boat base to
counter the raids. Maddox and Turner Joy were dispatched to watch it.
SEAL 1 then hit the base. The PT boats came swarming out like hornets
and ran smack into the cans - thus the Gulf of Tonkin incident and
eventually the war. Anybody else have added/conflicting info I'd be
glad to hear it. How does it fit with your observations Albert?
Frank Howell
2017-03-06 21:12:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Albert
Post by vito
On Sun, 5 Mar 2017 07:28:15 -0800, "K Miller"
Post by K Miller
Post by bill horne
Post by Bruce
Post by nothermark
On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 17:30:54 -0500, Hunter Hampton
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by kmiller
Post by Hank
Saw that interview. Matt Lauer asked him something like " Is
there anything you agreed with about Trumps Speech?" He said no.
I guess he
doesn't agree with the possibility of lower insurance, drugs, and
lower premiums for doctors malpractice insurance. Or " My job isn't to
take care of the world, my job is to take care of America."
Sad man.
Hank
It's Obama's fault.
If only he wasn't lying and bullshitting.... and seriously,
exploiting the widow of the man he's responsible for killing.....
that was a low point.
What man is that?
I suspect she is referring to the Seal who died conducting an action
that was set up by 0bama and for which Trump's only involvement is
that he didn't say no after he took office -- three days before the
incident.
People die in combat. That has always been true, and will continue to
be. One of the many reasons that people die in combat is that the
leaders, planners, and participants NEVER have all the information
that they need before committing to combat. That will also always be true.
Usually, at least in the recent past, the CIC has taken responsibilty. Not
so any more, apparently.
Really? I don't remember Obama taking responsibility for the Ben Gazi
BJ, or the Shrub taking responsibility for my young friend killed in
Iraq or JFK/LBJ admitting to the 'nam blunder, or, or .....
But but but didn't McNamara admit that it was his mistake. I for one
was in 'nam under Eisenhower long before Kennedy, Johnson or Nixon.
Although John Foster Dallas (Eisenhower's Secretary of Defense) was
was the architect of the Vietnam fiasco. McNamara was the architect of
the escalation (boots on the ground).
We were there supposedly to shuttle refugees from Haiphong to Saigon.
If I remember correctly there was three or four ships in our squadron
all of which offloaded military hardware in Saigon. It was called
"Operation Passage to Freedom".
When we got back to the states, before we could leave the ship the
crew had to sign a document saying that we would not divulge the
ship's movement outside of the continental limits of the United
States.
Bottom line, the whole Vietnam fiasco was a bipartisan effort.
Couldn't agree more, just like the Iraq war.
--
Frank Howell
Ralph
2017-03-02 01:28:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by kmiller
Post by Hank
Saw that interview. Matt Lauer asked him something like " Is there
anything you agreed with about Trumps Speech?" He said no. I guess he
doesn't agree with the possibility of lower insurance, drugs, and
lower premiums for doctors malpractice insurance. Or " My job isn't to
take care of the world, my job is to take care of America."
Sad man.
Hank
It's Obama's fault.
If only he wasn't lying and bullshitting.... and seriously, exploiting
the widow of the man he's responsible for killing..... that was a low point.
Dream on, snowflake. The raid was planned and underway before Trump took
office. The was Obama's raid. Obama killed the SEAL.
Hunter Hampton
2017-03-02 04:28:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ralph
Dream on, snowflake. The raid was planned and underway before Trump took
office. The was Obama's raid. Obama killed the SEAL.
LOL, Obama didn't do the raid.....
K Miller
2017-03-02 04:39:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by Ralph
Dream on, snowflake. The raid was planned and underway before Trump
took office. The was Obama's raid. Obama killed the SEAL.
LOL, Obama didn't do the raid.....
The raid was approved President Tweetsalot. Be nice if he would simply man
up and take responsiblity as so many presidents have done. Not likely to
happen by someone more concerned about how he looks than what he does.

http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/2/28/14766918/trump-blame-military-yemen-seal-botched-raid-pentagon-fox
vito
2017-03-02 05:58:38 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 20:39:31 -0800, "K Miller"
Post by K Miller
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by Ralph
Dream on, snowflake. The raid was planned and underway before Trump
took office. The was Obama's raid. Obama killed the SEAL.
LOL, Obama didn't do the raid.....
The raid was approved President Tweetsalot. Be nice if he would simply man
up and take responsiblity as so many presidents have done. Not likely to
happen by someone more concerned about how he looks than what he does.
http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/2/28/14766918/trump-blame-military-yemen-seal-botched-raid-pentagon-fox
The above claims that Trump PERSONALLY approved and ordered the raid.
I'd love to see some proof of that.
Hunter Hampton
2017-03-02 17:00:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by vito
The above claims that Trump PERSONALLY approved and ordered the raid.
I'd love to see some proof of that.
You truly do live in a state denial don't you.
kmiller
2017-03-02 17:33:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by vito
The above claims that Trump PERSONALLY approved and ordered the raid.
I'd love to see some proof of that.
You truly do live in a state denial don't you.
http://www.politicususa.com/2017/02/02/donald-trump-orders-raid.html
vito
2017-03-03 05:04:23 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 2 Mar 2017 09:33:33 -0800, kmiller
Post by kmiller
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by vito
The above claims that Trump PERSONALLY approved and ordered the raid.
I'd love to see some proof of that.
You truly do live in a state denial don't you.
http://www.politicususa.com/2017/02/02/donald-trump-orders-raid.html
Hardly a reliable source
nothermark
2017-03-02 17:40:40 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 2 Mar 2017 12:00:49 -0500, Hunter Hampton
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by vito
The above claims that Trump PERSONALLY approved and ordered the raid.
I'd love to see some proof of that.
You truly do live in a state denial don't you.
More like you do. Raids like that are not planned and prepared for in
3 days.

If I was really paranoid I'd suggest it was a booby trap set up by
Obama. That would say things about the military side that I don't
want to say. I will say neither Obama nor Trump should be involved in
the details the Monday Morning Quarterbacks are complaining about.
vito
2017-03-03 04:58:22 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 2 Mar 2017 12:00:49 -0500, Hunter Hampton
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by vito
The above claims that Trump PERSONALLY approved and ordered the raid.
I'd love to see some proof of that.
You truly do live in a state denial don't you.
So I ask a simple reply and you resort to ad hominum attack.
Is that because there is no evidence that Trump even knew about the
raid??
Bruce
2017-03-03 03:31:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by vito
On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 20:39:31 -0800, "K Miller"
Post by K Miller
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by Ralph
Dream on, snowflake. The raid was planned and underway before Trump
took office. The was Obama's raid. Obama killed the SEAL.
LOL, Obama didn't do the raid.....
The raid was approved President Tweetsalot. Be nice if he would simply man
up and take responsiblity as so many presidents have done. Not likely to
happen by someone more concerned about how he looks than what he does.
http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/2/28/14766918/trump-blame-military-yemen-seal-botched-raid-pentagon-fox
The above claims that Trump PERSONALLY approved and ordered the raid.
I'd love to see some proof of that.
It's from VOX -- the story has absolutely no credibility.
--
Bruce

"It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from it's
government." -- Thomas Paine
nothermark
2017-03-02 15:27:28 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 20:39:31 -0800, "K Miller"
Post by K Miller
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by Ralph
Dream on, snowflake. The raid was planned and underway before Trump
took office. The was Obama's raid. Obama killed the SEAL.
LOL, Obama didn't do the raid.....
The raid was approved President Tweetsalot. Be nice if he would simply man
up and take responsiblity as so many presidents have done. Not likely to
happen by someone more concerned about how he looks than what he does.
http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/2/28/14766918/trump-blame-military-yemen-seal-botched-raid-pentagon-fox
Man up to what exactly?

Given how the military operates the raid had to be in the pipeline for
more than the 3 days Trump was in office. Probably several months.
All he did was accept their advice and grant their request. Translate
that to it probably would have happened no matter who won the
election. Be glad H lost or it would have added to her litany of
apologies.

I don't know about you but I am getting really tired of the trend for
somebody at the top to accept responsibility for an underling's screw
up then expect to blithely move on.
Major Oz
2017-03-02 01:36:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Hunter Hampton
Post by kmiller
Post by Hank
Saw that interview. Matt Lauer asked him something like " Is there
anything you agreed with about Trumps Speech?" He said no. I guess he
doesn't agree with the possibility of lower insurance, drugs, and
lower premiums for doctors malpractice insurance. Or " My job isn't to
take care of the world, my job is to take care of America."
Sad man.
Hank
It's Obama's fault.
If only he wasn't lying and bullshitting.... and seriously, exploiting
the widow of the man he's responsible for killing..... that was a low point.
Apparently, you learned nothing from your father about how the military works.
Hank
2017-03-01 22:45:09 UTC
Permalink
Probably. 😀

Hank
George Anthony
2017-03-01 23:38:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by kmiller
Post by Hank
Post by nothermark
On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 15:22:21 -0000 (UTC), George Anthony
Post by George Anthony
I watched Trump's speech last night. Who's idea was it to make all those
democrats show up on the same day all of their dogs died. What a bunch of
sour, defeated faces.
TRUMP WON... and he continues to WIN!!
Watched Chucky this morning on the Today show. He can't say anything
good about a Republican. Glad I never voted for the scumbag.
Saw that interview. Matt Lauer asked him something like " Is there
anything you agreed with about Trumps Speech?" He said no. I guess he
doesn't agree with the possibility of lower insurance, drugs, and
lower premiums for doctors malpractice insurance. Or " My job isn't to
take care of the world, my job is to take care of America."
Sad man.
Hank
It's Obama's fault.
Every once in a while you get something right.
vito
2017-03-02 00:22:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by nothermark
On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 15:22:21 -0000 (UTC), George Anthony
Post by George Anthony
I watched Trump's speech last night. Who's idea was it to make all those
democrats show up on the same day all of their dogs died. What a bunch of
sour, defeated faces.
TRUMP WON... and he continues to WIN!!
Watched Chucky this morning on the Today show. He can't say anything
good about a Republican. Glad I never voted for the scumbag.
I'll not forget his bringing an AK-47 to the Waco hearings to prove
that he massacre was justified.
Bob
2017-03-03 02:39:05 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@4ax.com>, ***@not.here
says...
Post by nothermark
On Wed, 1 Mar 2017 15:22:21 -0000 (UTC), George Anthony
Post by George Anthony
I watched Trump's speech last night. Who's idea was it to make all those
democrats show up on the same day all of their dogs died. What a bunch of
sour, defeated faces.
TRUMP WON... and he continues to WIN!!
Watched Chucky this morning on the Today show. He can't say anything
good about a Republican. Glad I never voted for the scumbag.
Ah yes, Chuckie the Cereal killer. So out of touch with reality that he didn't
know you could buy generic store brand cereal.

Bob
D-R
2017-03-03 15:25:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob
Ah yes, Chuckie the Cereal killer. So out of touch with reality that he didn't
know you could buy generic store brand cereal.
To Slimmer any publicity is good... he has a history of talking
about things that don't exist or are not what he claims.. Years ago he
went on a rant about "cop killer bullets" - they did not exist.. just
a concept idea for military round. Got a lot of publicity and was never
called on the lie.
--
AJ - Enjoying Arizona
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...