The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Pat Buchanan ArchiveBlogview
Is Trump Entering a Kill Box?
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
shutterstock_651612043
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments

Given the bravery he showed in stepping out front as the first senator to endorse Donald Trump, Jeff Sessions deserves better from his boss than the Twitter-trashing he has lately received.

The attorney general has not only been loyal to Trump and his agenda, he has the respect and affection of ex-colleagues in Congress and, more broadly, of populists and conservatives nationally.

Trump’s tweets about Sessions are only demoralizing his base.

Yet the president is not wrong to be exasperated and enraged.

A yearlong FBI investigation into Russian hacking has failed to produce a single indictment. Yet the president watches impotently as a special counsel pulls together a lethal force, inside his own administration, whose undeclared ambition is to bring him down.

Trump’s behavior suggests that he sees the Mueller threat as potentially mortal.

How did we get to this peril point when there is no evidence that Trump or any senior aide colluded in the hacking? As for the June 2016 meeting with the Russians, called by Donald Trump Jr. when told by a friend that Moscow had dirt on Hillary Clinton, even that was no crime.

Foolish, yes; criminal, no. So, again, how did we get to where talk of impeachment and presidential pardons fills the air?

First, Attorney General Sessions, as a campaign adviser and surrogate for Trump who had met with the Russian ambassador, had to recuse himself from the investigation. Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein then assumed oversight authority.

Trump then fired FBI Director James Comey and boasted to Russia’s foreign minister about having gotten the “crazy nut job” off his case. His Oval Office comments leaked. Comey then leaked notes of his meeting with Trump. Rosenstein then washed his hands of the mess by naming a special counsel.

And he chose a bulldog, ex-FBI Director Robert Mueller.

Hence, where are we? Despite zero evidence of Trump or his aides colluding in the hacking, a counterintelligence investigation is evolving into a criminal investigation. Mueller is now hiring veteran investigators and prosecutors specializing in white-collar crime.

This is not a witch hunt. It is an Easter egg hunt on the White House lawn, where the most colorful eggs are likely to be the tax returns and the financial records of Trump, who built a real estate empire in a town where winners brag about how they gutted the losers.

Every enemy of Trump is going to be dropping the dime on him to Mueller. Moreover, there is no history of special counsels being appointed and applauded by the press, who went home without taking scalps.

Trump understands this. Reports of his frustration and rage suggest that he knows he has been maneuvered, partly by his own mistakes, into a kill box from which there may be no bloodless exit.

What Trump needs is a leader at Justice who will confine the Mueller investigation to the Russian hacking, and keep Mueller’s men from roaming until they hit prosecutorial pay dirt.

Consider now Trump’s narrowing options.

He can fire Jeff Sessions. But that will enrage Trump’s base to whom the senator is a loyal soldier. And anyone Trump nominates as AG would not be confirmed unless he or she pledged not to interfere with Mueller.

He could direct Rosenstein to fire Mueller. But Rosenstein would assume the Elliot Richardson role in the Saturday Night Massacre, when that AG refused to fire Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox, resigned, and was canonized as a martyr by the Never-Nixon media.

ORDER IT NOW

Even if Trump finds a Justice Department loyalist to play the role of Solicitor General Robert Bork, who carried out Nixon’s orders and fired Cox, this would only mean Mueller’s departure. Mueller’s staff of prosecutors and investigators would still be there, beavering away.

When Archibald Cox was fired, Nixon ordered his entire office shut down. Yet, within days of the firestorm, it was up and running again with a new special prosecutor. And impeachment resolutions were blossoming in the House.

Another Trump option would be to leave Mueller alone and hope for a benign outcome. But from reports of his rage at the recusal of Sessions and unwillingness of Rosenstein to restrict Mueller to the Russian hacking scandal, Trump seems to sense that an unrestricted investigation represents a mortal threat to his presidency.

And all the talk of impeachment and pardons suggests that this city can also see what lies over the next hill. After all, we have been here before.

From his history, Mueller is not a man to be intimidated by charges of bias. These will only steel his resolve to pursue with his subpoena power every document he wants, including tax returns, until he has satisfied himself.

The president is unlikely to view this process with indulgence, and patience does not appear to rank high among his virtues.

We are headed for a collision between President Trump and Director Mueller.

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of a new book, “Nixon’s White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever.”

Copyright 2017 Creators.com.

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: American Media, Donald Trump, Russia 
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
    []
  1. My conclusion is that the Deep State is winning. Even I’ve getting numb and increasingly less interested in the twists and turns of who’s investigating whom and why and what are the likely consequences. I’m reminded of the quote attribute to Lavrentiy Beria: “Show me the man and I will find you the crime.”

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "My conclusion is that the Deep State is winning."

    Yes, it's all the doing of the Deep State. They, like the Jews, are the sources of all of our problems. Both only care about saving their necks and destroying careers and reputations. Politics is war. Sides win and sides lose.

    Now that we have that out of the way, let's focus on two of Mr. Buchanan's quotes.

    "A yearlong FBI investigation into Russian hacking has failed to produce a single indictment. Yet the president watches impotently as a special counsel pulls together a lethal force, inside his own administration, whose undeclared ambition is to bring him down."

    First, as he ought to know, these investigations are complicated. Indictments take time. There seems to be this conception that charges must be brought within a certain timeline and that overwhelming evidence ought to be forthcoming to the public; otherwise, the investigation is a "witch hunt". Second, it would appear, although it is not certain, that it is TRUMP and his own team's ambition is to bring themselves down if the accusations are shown to have legal merit to the point that people are arrested. Third, Buchanan has a blind spot here as he was part of the Nixon Administration who engaged in clear illegal activity.

    "How did we get to this peril point when there is no evidence that Trump or any senior aide colluded in the hacking? As for the June 2016 meeting with the Russians, called by Donald Trump Jr. when told by a friend that Moscow had dirt on Hillary Clinton, even that was no crime."

    There is evidence. Does it meet the legal definition of collusion? We don't know. Are there other investigations taking place? Yes. What will be the result? We have to wait to find out.
    , @Joe Wong
    It took 9 months from "deep throat" to bring down Nixon, it is only half way there to bring down Trump with fabricated allegations and manufactured consent.
    , @DannyMarcus
    The likeliest and most obvious choice for Trump on how to escape the Mueller trap seems to have eluded Pat Buchanan: starting a war in the Middle East to overshadow or bury all investigations into the president's wrongdoings. Engineering a war with Iran would fit the bill perfectly.
    With Trump quite clearly only concerned with his own well-being, the diversion of a patriotic war is the prime choice in times of trouble. The only question that remains is how will his generals will look at the option of getting involved in yet another ruinous war. A war that could have very dangerous implications and unpredictable outcomes.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    /pbuchanan/is-trump-entering-a-kill-box/#comment-1948516
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. Bozo says:

    All this would mean a lot more to us if Trump really had true conservative convictions.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Brooklyn Dave
    Where did true conservative convictions get us in the last 20 years or so? You're average conservative has been focused mainly on social issues and ignoring a whole lot of other stuff --like the useless wars we've been in, an economic system that's built and based on bupkes, a make Israel great instead of Make America great etc etc. Sessions is a good man, but he is trying to be too much the Southern gentleman. It is not going to work. You need an animal in there because you are dealing with animals.
  3. Sessions lost me when the order did not go out to ignore the Hawaiian judge and Ninth Citcuit rulings on the Travel Bans, for the rulings were clearly ultra vires. If Sessions was the scrappy fighter Trump had hired, he would’ have slimmed away, tail between his legs saying “Aw shucks, you got us there, but we’ll get you in the Supreme Court” which, of course, he didn’t. The Russian matter is a distraction, but fortunately for the Left, the Donald is easily distracted.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Alarmist
    ... wouldn't have slinked away ...

    Bloody spell-check compounded by editor failure.
    , @KenH
    Trump can and should be the one to defy the little Asian judge who thinks he has the power to usurp executive branch functions over refugee policy and issuance of visas. This is an executive branch function after all and not a judicial one.

    Both Trump and Sessions bungled this badly by their inaction, acquiescence and "let it work its way through the courts mentality". In effect, they have ceded executive branch functions to the federal judiciary, most of whom are far leftists.

    Personally, I think Sessions worships the American court system since he was a part of it for so long and has a misplaced and blind faith in it. And Trump doesn't seem to know the difference between actual fighting and tweeting.

    , @Van Doren
    Not his department. Tillerson and Kelly are mostly responsible in the area.
  4. @The Alarmist
    Sessions lost me when the order did not go out to ignore the Hawaiian judge and Ninth Citcuit rulings on the Travel Bans, for the rulings were clearly ultra vires. If Sessions was the scrappy fighter Trump had hired, he would' have slimmed away, tail between his legs saying "Aw shucks, you got us there, but we'll get you in the Supreme Court" which, of course, he didn't. The Russian matter is a distraction, but fortunately for the Left, the Donald is easily distracted.

    … wouldn’t have slinked away …

    Bloody spell-check compounded by editor failure.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous

    … wouldn’t have slinked away …

    Bloody spell-check compounded by editor failure.

     

    And proper past-participle failure.
  5. Reports of his frustration and rage suggest that he knows he has been maneuvered, partly by his own mistakes, into a kill box from which there may be no bloodless exit.

    He asked for it so he could play tough guy on the world stage. Only a fool, (especially at his age), would actually want the job, so I hope he doesn’t expect any sort of pity party.

    Drain the swamp? We should’ve flushed the bif.

    Read More
  6. When dealing with the left, you can never apologize and never back down. Double down and punch back twice as hard. Anyone on the alt right could have told Trump this.

    Unfortunately for all his bluster about being a fighter, Trump did none of this.

    Five minutes after he became president he should have been going after Obama and the Clintons and burying the Russian hacking nonsense before it had time to grow wings. He didn’t and now he’s paying the price.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jeff Davis

    Five minutes after he became president he should have been going after Obama and the Clintons and burying the Russian hacking nonsense before it had time to grow wings. He didn’t and now he’s paying the price.
     
    Be patient.

    If you're going to a gunfight you'd best show up with more than your dick in your hands. Trump has been getting his gang together against the comprehensive opposition of ***EVERYONE***: Repubs, Dems. Neocons, Deep State, Intel Community, media and all the lesser demons. It's been slow going, they've been beating up on him relentlessly; meanwhile, he's been trying to make nice with them (everyone except the media). He's given the DC criminal crowd every chance to turn away from the path of evil and get on board, to no avail. He's been incredibly patient, particularly in light of his supposed take-no-prisoners bad-boy reputation. But maybe, just maybe, it's not that he's a wuss, but that the first offer should be the olive branch, the peaceful way -- "We can do this the easy way" -- and then, and only then, when your adversaries reject the "easy" way (and particularly if you weren't initially prepared for battle), you up-armor, lock and load, and go full warrior mode on them. So watch what comes next.

    First, the "score sheet":

    (1) re vulnerability:

    "The Swamp" has nothing actionable on Trump (the Nixon/Watergate analogy is junk);

    By comparison, Trump has matter-of-public-record immediately indictable offenses on virtually all his adversaries: war crimes for Congress; torture/war crimes for the Intel Community; conspiracy to commit war crimes for the Neocons; war crimes for Bush/Obama and their respective crews.

    (2) weapons at hand for political warfare:

    For Trump: the executive resources of the Presidency: (1) the power to make recess appointments, which will enable him to take near dictatorial control of the DoJ, from whence a Trump-loyal AG (after Trump shit-cans Sessions) can issue indictments; (2) a staff of US marshals to serve those indictments, slap the cuffs on, and haul them off in orange jumpsuits to a detention facility at an undisclosed location in the desert Southwest; (3) the Presidential pardon (the carrot for those who agree to submit).

    For the anti-Trump forces: (1) impeachment, if Congress can move faster than Trump (you make that call); (2) assassination, by the Deep State/CIA.

    Who has the advantage?

    Priebus, the old guard GOP mole is gone; Sacaramucci the Killer is in place.
    Are the gloves about to come off? Is Trump going on the offensive?

    Watch for recess appointments to the DoJ, then ask yourself, "Who exactly is it that's in Buchanan's "Kill Box"?"

    , @MaximusPrime
    This is absolutely correct. Or put another way, the best defense is a good offense.

    Which is where Buchanan misses a crucial option left open for Trump.

    Sessions is impotent on Russia, but he is still fully empowered to begin taking scalps of all the democrats of the last 8 years.

    By my count at least 9 more special counsels could be authorized by Sessions on Monday morning

    Eric Holder FastnFurious
    Lois Lerner IRS scandal
    Loretta Lynch FBI obstruction
    Donna Brazile DNC primary fixing
    Debbie Wasserman Schulz Whatever this latest scandal is
    California illegal voting
    Hillary Clinton Clinton Foundation corruption
    Hillary Clinton Benghazi-Libya-Syria arms smuggling
    Hillary Clinton email obstruction of justice

    So you wanna play rough? Shay hello to my lil friends

  7. Ximenes says:

    “….unless he or she pledged…”

    C’mon Pat. The correct usage is just he. The meaning is exactly the same with less words.

    Read More
  8. KA says:

    “A yearlong FBI investigation into Russian hacking has failed to produce a single indictment. Yet the president watches impotently as a special counsel pulls together a lethal force, inside his own administration, whose undeclared ambition is to bring him down.”

    This cookbook has been in circulation for years. It has effectively been used against foreign countries for decades. Iraq,Iran,and Venezuela are among its latests victims.

    America is doing to itself what it has done to other .

    Read More
    • Agree: jacques sheete
    • Replies: @SolontoCroesus
    Why does nobody point the finger at Schumer, who "warned" Trump not to mess with intelligence agencies?

    Schumer's measured, calm, oh-so-controlled demeanor is, in my books, a dead give-away that he is the architect of the kill box.
  9. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @The Alarmist
    ... wouldn't have slinked away ...

    Bloody spell-check compounded by editor failure.

    … wouldn’t have slinked away …

    Bloody spell-check compounded by editor failure.

    And proper past-participle failure.

    Read More
  10. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive.

    Or we practice hyperbolic ego-puffing, flagrant deception, and outright ignorant stupidity.

    Either way, sayonara Donnie Trump. He won’t last another nine months.

    What a horrible, horrible mistake to bring in that New Yawk Siddee jackass, Scara the Mooch. There isn’t a toe left on either of Donnie’s feet.

    Stick the fork in. He’s done like dinner.

    I’m ready for Pence — three years of total inaction coming right up!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jeff Davis
    You never understood him, and he beat you badly. You still don't understand him, so you tell yourself these silly fantasies, as he prepares to do you again. Personally, I love it. Keep it up. Interesting data on how many times cluelessness has to get resoundingly trounced before it steps back from the pain.
  11. wow says:

    So Trump “loses” to Mueller? Then what Pat? Are 60 million Trump voters going to accept that outcome?

    If Trump goes down, civil war will erupt….a lot of Lefties are gonna die. The USA will be officially done.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous

    So Trump “loses” to Mueller? Then what Pat? Are 60 million Trump voters going to accept that outcome?

    If Trump goes down, civil war will erupt….a lot of Lefties are gonna die. The USA will be officially done.
     
    Not a chance. There may rebellious elements in the population over age 55, but they cannot rebel. Most of those who might want to are sick and dying from bodies broken by decades of work, dietary poisons, diabetes or terminal gross obesity. And the Millennials are too f*cking stupid and lazy to rebel.

    I voted for Trump, just as a matter of slowing the collapse long enough to get a few years of retirement. Had Hillary been elected, economic collapse would be 3 years away, along with regional takeovers by illegal alien hordes.

    Pence will suffice as a do-nothing for three years. It is very much evident that Trump's intention all along was a do-nothing/get-richer/strengthen-Israel plan. Be glad the worthless Twitter-Mouth and his foul "hand-picked" scumbag ScaryMoochie will be kicked to the curb.
    , @uslabor
    "...a lot of lefties are gonna die."?

    So are YOU gonna go out and kill lefties? Do you have a plan? Do you know where they live, where their children go to school?

    Come on, tough guy, you gonna children, infants, white or black? You should shut your pie hole, saying such shit. I dare say some Lefties embrace The Second Amendment.

    Come on killer, tell us all about it.

    , @Stan d Mute

    So Trump “loses” to Mueller? Then what Pat? Are 60 million Trump voters going to accept that outcome?

    If Trump goes down, civil war will erupt….a lot of Lefties are gonna die. The USA will be officially done.
     
    I don't agree with your premise, not so long as GoT and Strolling Zombies are on TV. But you'd have been much more ominous (and no less true) if you'd pointed out these are the 60,000,000 best armed civilians (and families) in America.
    , @dfordoom

    Are 60 million Trump voters going to accept that outcome?

    If Trump goes down, civil war will erupt….a lot of Lefties are gonna die.
     
    You're delusional. A civil war would be all over within 24 hours. The Deep State has the power of the entire government behind it - the police, the military, the intelligence agencies. With horrifyingly sophisticated technology.

    The deep state would be delighted if it happened. Finally their chance to crush every manifestation of dissent. The GULAGs would be filled with dissidents, including every single person with even the most tenuous connection to the alt-right. You're day-dreaming about a war we could never win.

    In any case there is absolutely no chance that any more than a tiny handful of white people would ever offer any actual resistance.

    And the Christians will take the side of the Deep State, so forget any idea that they'll be any help.
  12. Corvinus says:
    @Diversity Heretic
    My conclusion is that the Deep State is winning. Even I've getting numb and increasingly less interested in the twists and turns of who's investigating whom and why and what are the likely consequences. I'm reminded of the quote attribute to Lavrentiy Beria: "Show me the man and I will find you the crime."

    “My conclusion is that the Deep State is winning.”

    Yes, it’s all the doing of the Deep State. They, like the Jews, are the sources of all of our problems. Both only care about saving their necks and destroying careers and reputations. Politics is war. Sides win and sides lose.

    Now that we have that out of the way, let’s focus on two of Mr. Buchanan’s quotes.

    “A yearlong FBI investigation into Russian hacking has failed to produce a single indictment. Yet the president watches impotently as a special counsel pulls together a lethal force, inside his own administration, whose undeclared ambition is to bring him down.”

    First, as he ought to know, these investigations are complicated. Indictments take time. There seems to be this conception that charges must be brought within a certain timeline and that overwhelming evidence ought to be forthcoming to the public; otherwise, the investigation is a “witch hunt”. Second, it would appear, although it is not certain, that it is TRUMP and his own team’s ambition is to bring themselves down if the accusations are shown to have legal merit to the point that people are arrested. Third, Buchanan has a blind spot here as he was part of the Nixon Administration who engaged in clear illegal activity.

    “How did we get to this peril point when there is no evidence that Trump or any senior aide colluded in the hacking? As for the June 2016 meeting with the Russians, called by Donald Trump Jr. when told by a friend that Moscow had dirt on Hillary Clinton, even that was no crime.”

    There is evidence. Does it meet the legal definition of collusion? We don’t know. Are there other investigations taking place? Yes. What will be the result? We have to wait to find out.

    Read More
    • Replies: @yeah
    It needs to be kept in mind that Presidents have the right - and the NEED - to have secret talks with other world leaders, including adversaries. Remember Kennedy - Khrushchev secret communications and deals that saved the world the horror of world war 3? Had that matter been left to the Pentagon and CIA we all would not be here debating and sparring.

    That said, there is no proof that Trump had any dealings or communications with the Russians that were wrong or harmful to the US. Harmful to Clinton perhaps, harmful to the US state and nation most definitely not. And what exactly is the main accusation? That the Russians "hacked" into DNC computers. Now, as any computer literate ought to know, the fingerprints of hacking are not evidence because forgery is very simple and it is easy to point the finger to any other direction. And are we talking here of leaks or hacking? If people within DNC or the US Govt choose to leak sensitive information, whose fault is it?

    As for contacts of Russians with team Trump. Get real. It is no crime to meet with foreign citizens. Unless the intention is to break off diplomatic relations entirely with Russia. Yes, force them to pack up and leave, but remember the US will also then have to pack up and leave, its CIA agents included.

    Hatred of Trump and his anti-globalist world view is driving the deep-state crazies and their loony left friends to irreparably damage the office of the US President, international law, and rules of political conduct. Regardless of whether Trump was in fact guilty or innocent, his impeachment will damage the American form of Government forever.
    , @NoseytheDuke
    Thanks. You comment brought to mind the one about the little boy digging through a mountain of shit because he believed there had to be a pony in there only here instead we have you shifting through a mountain of donkey's asses looking for a bit of shit.
    , @animalogic
    What evidence of a hack ? If there is any evidence it's of a LEAK at the dnc.
    The whole "Russia gate" nonsense stinks to high heaven.
    , @jacques sheete

    We have to wait to find out.
     
    Nah, a brief study of world history tells us there ain't nuttin new under the sun. We don't have to wait because we know it's all BS.
    , @DaveE
    We have to wait to find out? No, we have to wait for Mossad-CIA to fabricate more evidence, line up phony "witnesses", falsify phone records, get some bogus "recordings" of calls from the NSA, maybe a few bogus flight manifestos from Trump Airlines, pay-off enough congresscritters, murder some REAL non-witnesses, stuff like that.

    It's not easy being pathological liars, you know. It took the usual suspects at least 23 years to plan 9/11, I was tipped off personally in 1978.

    , @Bill

    There is evidence.
     
    No.
  13. anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Another Buchanan column that unquestioningly assumes “Russian hacking.”

    This isn’t journalism, but merely elegant, uninformative poli-talk worthy of the water cooler. Regrettably, it is functional disinformation, serving to airbrush out of an important discussion worthwhile, evidence-sourced articles, such as that recently put forth by the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (Binney, et al).

    Has Pat Buchanan even mentioned the alternative leak theory? It’s as though he consumes nothing but MSM, and then valiantly battles within a falsely constrained set of facts.

    Read More
    • Agree: Travis
    • Replies: @Bruce Marshall
    Yes, Buchanan and others needs to be briefed by VIPS, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity,
    Ray McGovern, leader of the group that includes former NSA says that the supposed "hack" was a leak

    https://consortiumnews.com/2017/07/24/intel-vets-challenge-russia-hack-evidence/

    With a companion by Scott Ritter

    http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/time_to_reassess_roles_of_guccifer_20_and_russia_in_dnc_hack_20170727

    First this breaks the narrative as concerns a hack, it could not have been it was a leak, but more importantly is the issues of a weaponizing of the Intelligence agencies to take actions to blame it on the Russians using as it is in the Vault 7 Wikileaks data about such cyberwarfare.....

    Operational in crimes that are treasonous and go back to the Obama Administration.

    https://larouchepac.com/20170727/every-tree-forest-will-fall
  14. Kill box?

    Perhaps Pat means a “kill zone”.

    Minor quibble, I’ll admit. But kill zones aren’t box-like. Indeed, they’re irregular and don’t resemble any conventional geometric shape

    Read More
    • Replies: @David
    I don't know, man. Looks like Kill Boxes are a thing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kill_box

    When I read it, I though he meant the little cells that are parts of ancient city gates which are supposedly for cornering interlopers in and killing them.
  15. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @wow
    So Trump "loses" to Mueller? Then what Pat? Are 60 million Trump voters going to accept that outcome?

    If Trump goes down, civil war will erupt....a lot of Lefties are gonna die. The USA will be officially done.

    So Trump “loses” to Mueller? Then what Pat? Are 60 million Trump voters going to accept that outcome?

    If Trump goes down, civil war will erupt….a lot of Lefties are gonna die. The USA will be officially done.

    Not a chance. There may rebellious elements in the population over age 55, but they cannot rebel. Most of those who might want to are sick and dying from bodies broken by decades of work, dietary poisons, diabetes or terminal gross obesity. And the Millennials are too f*cking stupid and lazy to rebel.

    I voted for Trump, just as a matter of slowing the collapse long enough to get a few years of retirement. Had Hillary been elected, economic collapse would be 3 years away, along with regional takeovers by illegal alien hordes.

    Pence will suffice as a do-nothing for three years. It is very much evident that Trump’s intention all along was a do-nothing/get-richer/strengthen-Israel plan. Be glad the worthless Twitter-Mouth and his foul “hand-picked” scumbag ScaryMoochie will be kicked to the curb.

    Read More
    • Replies: @uslabor
    " economic collapse would be 3 years away, along with regional takeovers by illegal alien hordes."

    Oh, the horde-manity!
  16. yeah says:
    @Corvinus
    "My conclusion is that the Deep State is winning."

    Yes, it's all the doing of the Deep State. They, like the Jews, are the sources of all of our problems. Both only care about saving their necks and destroying careers and reputations. Politics is war. Sides win and sides lose.

    Now that we have that out of the way, let's focus on two of Mr. Buchanan's quotes.

    "A yearlong FBI investigation into Russian hacking has failed to produce a single indictment. Yet the president watches impotently as a special counsel pulls together a lethal force, inside his own administration, whose undeclared ambition is to bring him down."

    First, as he ought to know, these investigations are complicated. Indictments take time. There seems to be this conception that charges must be brought within a certain timeline and that overwhelming evidence ought to be forthcoming to the public; otherwise, the investigation is a "witch hunt". Second, it would appear, although it is not certain, that it is TRUMP and his own team's ambition is to bring themselves down if the accusations are shown to have legal merit to the point that people are arrested. Third, Buchanan has a blind spot here as he was part of the Nixon Administration who engaged in clear illegal activity.

    "How did we get to this peril point when there is no evidence that Trump or any senior aide colluded in the hacking? As for the June 2016 meeting with the Russians, called by Donald Trump Jr. when told by a friend that Moscow had dirt on Hillary Clinton, even that was no crime."

    There is evidence. Does it meet the legal definition of collusion? We don't know. Are there other investigations taking place? Yes. What will be the result? We have to wait to find out.

    It needs to be kept in mind that Presidents have the right – and the NEED – to have secret talks with other world leaders, including adversaries. Remember Kennedy – Khrushchev secret communications and deals that saved the world the horror of world war 3? Had that matter been left to the Pentagon and CIA we all would not be here debating and sparring.

    That said, there is no proof that Trump had any dealings or communications with the Russians that were wrong or harmful to the US. Harmful to Clinton perhaps, harmful to the US state and nation most definitely not. And what exactly is the main accusation? That the Russians “hacked” into DNC computers. Now, as any computer literate ought to know, the fingerprints of hacking are not evidence because forgery is very simple and it is easy to point the finger to any other direction. And are we talking here of leaks or hacking? If people within DNC or the US Govt choose to leak sensitive information, whose fault is it?

    As for contacts of Russians with team Trump. Get real. It is no crime to meet with foreign citizens. Unless the intention is to break off diplomatic relations entirely with Russia. Yes, force them to pack up and leave, but remember the US will also then have to pack up and leave, its CIA agents included.

    Hatred of Trump and his anti-globalist world view is driving the deep-state crazies and their loony left friends to irreparably damage the office of the US President, international law, and rules of political conduct. Regardless of whether Trump was in fact guilty or innocent, his impeachment will damage the American form of Government forever.

    Read More
    • Agree: Anonym
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "It needs to be kept in mind that Presidents have the right – and the NEED – to have secret talks with other world leaders, including adversaries."

    Absolutely.

    "Remember Kennedy – Khrushchev secret communications and deals that saved the world the horror of world war 3?"

    In the end, it was Khrushchev who backed down. In their deal, the U.S. promised not to invade Cuba and to remove missiles from Turkey--which we were going to do anyways unbeknownst to the Russians.

    "Had that matter been left to the Pentagon and CIA we all would not be here debating and sparring."

    We do not know that for certain.

    "That said, there is no proof that Trump had any dealings or communications with the Russians that were wrong or harmful to the US. Harmful to Clinton perhaps, harmful to the US state and nation most definitely not."

    Again, we do not if there is "no proof". We know that there is evidence, some of which has yet to be provided to the public.

    "And what exactly is the main accusation? That the Russians “hacked” into DNC computers."

    That is one of several accusations.

    "Now, as any computer literate ought to know, the fingerprints of hacking are not evidence because forgery is very simple and it is easy to point the finger to any other direction."

    Unless one is able to trace that hacking to a particular group.

    "As for contacts of Russians with team Trump. Get real. It is no crime to meet with foreign citizens."

    But as far as what took place in that meeting, and what may have been promised, there may have been illegal acts that took place.

    "Hatred of Trump and his anti-globalist world view is driving the deep-state crazies and their loony left friends to irreparably damage the office of the US President, international law, and rules of political conduct. Regardless of whether Trump was in fact guilty or innocent, his impeachment will damage the American form of Government forever."

    Some believe that our presidency and government is already damaged, with others believing that Trump and his team have made their own contribution to that damage. We shall see.
    , @Numinous
    Trump wasn't president when he and his henchmen met with Russians. (If Kennedy had met Khruschev in 1959 trying to get dirt on Dick Nixon, there would have been holy hell to pay.) In fact, no one at that time gave Trump a prayer of winning (including himself and many in his team), so your comment that Trump was entitled to have such talks as befits a President is silly on its face.

    That said, whether or not whatever Trump did rises to the legal definition of misconduct, I believe this Russia issue has been a red herring from the start. The left and the media, even if they get many scalps this way, will likely come to regret the time and effort wasted on this. There's so much else to criticize Trump about. The guy is a empty suit, and a narcissistic as*****le, whose only "skill" is to throw his name and his ample funds (which he inherited from Daddy) around. He is both completely self-centered and has no ability to think about or analyze any issue, including the ones he ran on. The best description I have heard of him is "an evil Chauncey Gardner", as Sam Harris refers to him. He is a disgrace to your country and to your (alt-right) cause, and you all are chumps for sticking behind him.
  17. @KA
    "A yearlong FBI investigation into Russian hacking has failed to produce a single indictment. Yet the president watches impotently as a special counsel pulls together a lethal force, inside his own administration, whose undeclared ambition is to bring him down."

    This cookbook has been in circulation for years. It has effectively been used against foreign countries for decades. Iraq,Iran,and Venezuela are among its latests victims.





    America is doing to itself what it has done to other .

    Why does nobody point the finger at Schumer, who “warned” Trump not to mess with intelligence agencies?

    Schumer’s measured, calm, oh-so-controlled demeanor is, in my books, a dead give-away that he is the architect of the kill box.

    Read More
  18. David JW says:

    Yes, but what is Buchanan’s solution? What would he recommend him to do? I think Sessions unrecusing himself is the only good option. Do it over the summer recess when Congress it not in session, close down Mueller and his staff, and possibly close down the whole of the FBI, and launch an investigation into conspiracy between Comey, Mueller, McCabe etc to bring down the president – it must produce results before Congress reconvenes.

    Read More
  19. “The president is unlikely to view this process with indulgence, and patience does not appear to rank high among his virtues.”

    what virtues?

    Read More
  20. Corvinus says:
    @yeah
    It needs to be kept in mind that Presidents have the right - and the NEED - to have secret talks with other world leaders, including adversaries. Remember Kennedy - Khrushchev secret communications and deals that saved the world the horror of world war 3? Had that matter been left to the Pentagon and CIA we all would not be here debating and sparring.

    That said, there is no proof that Trump had any dealings or communications with the Russians that were wrong or harmful to the US. Harmful to Clinton perhaps, harmful to the US state and nation most definitely not. And what exactly is the main accusation? That the Russians "hacked" into DNC computers. Now, as any computer literate ought to know, the fingerprints of hacking are not evidence because forgery is very simple and it is easy to point the finger to any other direction. And are we talking here of leaks or hacking? If people within DNC or the US Govt choose to leak sensitive information, whose fault is it?

    As for contacts of Russians with team Trump. Get real. It is no crime to meet with foreign citizens. Unless the intention is to break off diplomatic relations entirely with Russia. Yes, force them to pack up and leave, but remember the US will also then have to pack up and leave, its CIA agents included.

    Hatred of Trump and his anti-globalist world view is driving the deep-state crazies and their loony left friends to irreparably damage the office of the US President, international law, and rules of political conduct. Regardless of whether Trump was in fact guilty or innocent, his impeachment will damage the American form of Government forever.

    “It needs to be kept in mind that Presidents have the right – and the NEED – to have secret talks with other world leaders, including adversaries.”

    Absolutely.

    “Remember Kennedy – Khrushchev secret communications and deals that saved the world the horror of world war 3?”

    In the end, it was Khrushchev who backed down. In their deal, the U.S. promised not to invade Cuba and to remove missiles from Turkey–which we were going to do anyways unbeknownst to the Russians.

    “Had that matter been left to the Pentagon and CIA we all would not be here debating and sparring.”

    We do not know that for certain.

    “That said, there is no proof that Trump had any dealings or communications with the Russians that were wrong or harmful to the US. Harmful to Clinton perhaps, harmful to the US state and nation most definitely not.”

    Again, we do not if there is “no proof”. We know that there is evidence, some of which has yet to be provided to the public.

    “And what exactly is the main accusation? That the Russians “hacked” into DNC computers.”

    That is one of several accusations.

    “Now, as any computer literate ought to know, the fingerprints of hacking are not evidence because forgery is very simple and it is easy to point the finger to any other direction.”

    Unless one is able to trace that hacking to a particular group.

    “As for contacts of Russians with team Trump. Get real. It is no crime to meet with foreign citizens.”

    But as far as what took place in that meeting, and what may have been promised, there may have been illegal acts that took place.

    “Hatred of Trump and his anti-globalist world view is driving the deep-state crazies and their loony left friends to irreparably damage the office of the US President, international law, and rules of political conduct. Regardless of whether Trump was in fact guilty or innocent, his impeachment will damage the American form of Government forever.”

    Some believe that our presidency and government is already damaged, with others believing that Trump and his team have made their own contribution to that damage. We shall see.

    Read More
    • Replies: @yeah
    Your reply indicates partial agreement with some of my points and rebuttal of some others. In any case, thanks for your well-reasoned post.

    I don't mean to be pedantic but tracing hacks to identifiable groups is the real problem. It is not possible at a level of reasonable certainty because of the technical ease of several types of forgery and redirection of IP addresses. I am no technical expert on hacking but believe that, had compelling evidence of hacking existed, it would have ben produced ages ago. Note also that the anti-Trump media refers to the sins of hacking and leaks interchangeably, which is an affront to common sense akin to equating a bank robber to the teller who dips into cash: different crimes, different perpetrators.

    The real issue is this whole "there MAY have been illegal acts..." assertion. The big problem is that if the Chief Executive of a country can be spied upon and investigated by any minion who feels that illegal acts may have committed, then no stable and secure government is possible. Think about it, please. There is simply no choice but to vest high trust and strong power (not absolute power, simply strong enough power) in the Chief Executive. Do Chief Executives sometimes betray this trust. Of course they do, hey this is the real world. Are Chief Executives accused out of malevolent and selfish motives? Of course they are, happens a lot of times, perhaps 99.9% times.

    In the real world we need a delicate balance between obedience and dissent, hierarchy and free-for-all, and between absolute power and constrained power. There is no single clear-cut answer that can be claimed to be the only logically valid answer. Only a narrow range of solutions - narrower than what may be supposed at first sight - is possible and societies keep making fine adjustments. When narrow adjustments cannot be agreed upon, history shows that governmental breakdown, civil chaos and civil strife and wars inevitably follow. America should not go in that disastrous direction, regardless of our personal likes and dislikes. Remember, all people need do is to endure what some of them don't like for but four years then throw him out. There is no other low-risk solution.
  21. Trump is not going to change. His business persona has influenced in some way most of the developed world for decades and he got himself elected president by simply being the Donald. How did anyone think his time in the Oval Office would be any different? Come on, folks, get real. Everybody projects his personal agenda on a man who refuses to be a mirror for them. He is that unique and therefore terrifies friend and foe alike. If all the media went dark for a month, just shut up, it would be a different country come September.

    http://robertmagill.wordpress.com

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous

    Come on, folks, get real. Everybody projects his personal agenda on a man who refuses to be a mirror for them. He is that unique and therefore terrifies friend and foe alike. If all the media went dark for a month, just shut up
     
    How about you get real? Me shut up? No. Trump cannot behave as a responsible adult, and he must go. As for your Wordpress ... no thanks.
  22. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Robert Magill
    Trump is not going to change. His business persona has influenced in some way most of the developed world for decades and he got himself elected president by simply being the Donald. How did anyone think his time in the Oval Office would be any different? Come on, folks, get real. Everybody projects his personal agenda on a man who refuses to be a mirror for them. He is that unique and therefore terrifies friend and foe alike. If all the media went dark for a month, just shut up, it would be a different country come September.


    http://robertmagill.wordpress.com

    Come on, folks, get real. Everybody projects his personal agenda on a man who refuses to be a mirror for them. He is that unique and therefore terrifies friend and foe alike. If all the media went dark for a month, just shut up

    How about you get real? Me shut up? No. Trump cannot behave as a responsible adult, and he must go. As for your WordPress … no thanks.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jacques sheete

    Trump cannot behave as a responsible adult...
     
    Bingo! That is a huge part of the problem and he's not the only one.

    Yannis Varoufakis, the former Greek finance minister, just published a superb book, "Adults in the Room," pointing out that a huge source of a lot of our political and financial problems is that there are almost no adults in positions of power.

    , @jacques sheete

    He is that unique...
     
    I think you meant "eunuch."

    Anyway, The USA is full of prominent, showtime loudmouths so nothing unique there.
  23. KenH says:
    @The Alarmist
    Sessions lost me when the order did not go out to ignore the Hawaiian judge and Ninth Citcuit rulings on the Travel Bans, for the rulings were clearly ultra vires. If Sessions was the scrappy fighter Trump had hired, he would' have slimmed away, tail between his legs saying "Aw shucks, you got us there, but we'll get you in the Supreme Court" which, of course, he didn't. The Russian matter is a distraction, but fortunately for the Left, the Donald is easily distracted.

    Trump can and should be the one to defy the little Asian judge who thinks he has the power to usurp executive branch functions over refugee policy and issuance of visas. This is an executive branch function after all and not a judicial one.

    Both Trump and Sessions bungled this badly by their inaction, acquiescence and “let it work its way through the courts mentality”. In effect, they have ceded executive branch functions to the federal judiciary, most of whom are far leftists.

    Personally, I think Sessions worships the American court system since he was a part of it for so long and has a misplaced and blind faith in it. And Trump doesn’t seem to know the difference between actual fighting and tweeting.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Diversity Heretic
    Agreed. Over on the Chateau Heartiste blog, CH recommended that Trump "crush the judiciary" back in January when it blocked his executive order on visa issuance. Trump didn't realize then, and appears still not to realize, that the judiciary is overwhelmingly part of the opposition. Sessions, being a long-time lawyer is probably too intimidated by judges (Mark Steyn, a Canadian, has noted the excessive deference Americans give to judges) but I'm surprised and disappointed that Trump didn't move to defy the courts from the outset.
    , @Corvinus
    "Trump can and should be the one to defy the little Asian judge who thinks he has the power to usurp executive branch functions over refugee policy and issuance of visas. This is an executive branch function after all and not a judicial one."

    He could, but won't. His action would be unconstitutional.

    "In effect, they have ceded executive branch functions to the federal judiciary, most of whom are far leftists."

    Fake News Story. The court within the past 30 years has been divided along ideological lines, with Anthony Kennedy serving as a "cuck", I mean moderate.
    , @Alden
    President Madison ceded supremacy to the judiciary in 1804. Separation of powers disappeared in that year.

    The judiciary makes up the laws they want and overthrows laws they don't want.
  24. yeah says:
    @Corvinus
    "It needs to be kept in mind that Presidents have the right – and the NEED – to have secret talks with other world leaders, including adversaries."

    Absolutely.

    "Remember Kennedy – Khrushchev secret communications and deals that saved the world the horror of world war 3?"

    In the end, it was Khrushchev who backed down. In their deal, the U.S. promised not to invade Cuba and to remove missiles from Turkey--which we were going to do anyways unbeknownst to the Russians.

    "Had that matter been left to the Pentagon and CIA we all would not be here debating and sparring."

    We do not know that for certain.

    "That said, there is no proof that Trump had any dealings or communications with the Russians that were wrong or harmful to the US. Harmful to Clinton perhaps, harmful to the US state and nation most definitely not."

    Again, we do not if there is "no proof". We know that there is evidence, some of which has yet to be provided to the public.

    "And what exactly is the main accusation? That the Russians “hacked” into DNC computers."

    That is one of several accusations.

    "Now, as any computer literate ought to know, the fingerprints of hacking are not evidence because forgery is very simple and it is easy to point the finger to any other direction."

    Unless one is able to trace that hacking to a particular group.

    "As for contacts of Russians with team Trump. Get real. It is no crime to meet with foreign citizens."

    But as far as what took place in that meeting, and what may have been promised, there may have been illegal acts that took place.

    "Hatred of Trump and his anti-globalist world view is driving the deep-state crazies and their loony left friends to irreparably damage the office of the US President, international law, and rules of political conduct. Regardless of whether Trump was in fact guilty or innocent, his impeachment will damage the American form of Government forever."

    Some believe that our presidency and government is already damaged, with others believing that Trump and his team have made their own contribution to that damage. We shall see.

    Your reply indicates partial agreement with some of my points and rebuttal of some others. In any case, thanks for your well-reasoned post.

    I don’t mean to be pedantic but tracing hacks to identifiable groups is the real problem. It is not possible at a level of reasonable certainty because of the technical ease of several types of forgery and redirection of IP addresses. I am no technical expert on hacking but believe that, had compelling evidence of hacking existed, it would have ben produced ages ago. Note also that the anti-Trump media refers to the sins of hacking and leaks interchangeably, which is an affront to common sense akin to equating a bank robber to the teller who dips into cash: different crimes, different perpetrators.

    The real issue is this whole “there MAY have been illegal acts…” assertion. The big problem is that if the Chief Executive of a country can be spied upon and investigated by any minion who feels that illegal acts may have committed, then no stable and secure government is possible. Think about it, please. There is simply no choice but to vest high trust and strong power (not absolute power, simply strong enough power) in the Chief Executive. Do Chief Executives sometimes betray this trust. Of course they do, hey this is the real world. Are Chief Executives accused out of malevolent and selfish motives? Of course they are, happens a lot of times, perhaps 99.9% times.

    In the real world we need a delicate balance between obedience and dissent, hierarchy and free-for-all, and between absolute power and constrained power. There is no single clear-cut answer that can be claimed to be the only logically valid answer. Only a narrow range of solutions – narrower than what may be supposed at first sight – is possible and societies keep making fine adjustments. When narrow adjustments cannot be agreed upon, history shows that governmental breakdown, civil chaos and civil strife and wars inevitably follow. America should not go in that disastrous direction, regardless of our personal likes and dislikes. Remember, all people need do is to endure what some of them don’t like for but four years then throw him out. There is no other low-risk solution.

    Read More
    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
    "thanks for your well-reasoned post"

    The commenter to whom you refer likes to leaven intellectual dishonesty with a sprinkling of reason, but never debates in good faith. Avoid/ignore.
    , @Anonymous
    Yes, Just what YetAnotheAnon said, Corvinus is scum. Don't get suckered into his game. He is an exceptional troll, but a troll nonetheless.
    , @Corvinus
    "I am no technical expert on hacking but believe that, had compelling evidence of hacking existed, it would have ben produced ages ago."

    Not necessarily. If there was a conspiracy with multiple players involved, each person may have one part of the story that requires all to be properly vetted so the full picture can be revealed.

    "Note also that the anti-Trump media refers to the sins of hacking and leaks interchangeably, which is an affront to common sense akin to equating a bank robber to the teller who dips into cash: different crimes, different perpetrators."

    Perhaps.

    "The big problem is that if the Chief Executive of a country can be spied upon and investigated by any minion who feels that illegal acts may have committed, then no stable and secure government is possible."

    No, there must be reasonable cause that the acts committed are illegal. Moreover, in a number of cases, it was Trump's associates who had been under investigation by the FBI prior to his election.
  25. An extremely important article appeared this week written by a group of retired intelligence officers, which our corporate media ignored:

    Executive Summary

    Forensic studies of “Russian hacking” into Democratic National Committee computers last year reveal that on July 5, 2016, data was leaked (not hacked) by a person with physical access to DNC computers, and then doctored to incriminate Russia.

    After examining metadata from the “Guccifer 2.0” July 5, 2016, intrusion into the DNC server, independent cyber investigators have concluded that an insider copied DNC data onto an external storage device, and that “telltale signs” implicating Russia were then inserted.

    Key among the findings of the independent forensic investigations is the conclusion that the DNC data was copied onto a storage device at a speed that far exceeds an Internet capability for a remote hack. Of equal importance, the forensics show that the copying and doctoring were performed on the East Coast of the U.S. Thus far, mainstream media have ignored the findings of these independent studies.

    http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/was_the_russian_hack_an_inside_job_20170724

    The Trump team needs to start referring to this article, daily, and remind everyone that Clinton’s favorite computer “Crowdstrike” company is owned by a Russian immigrant.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous
    "The Trump team needs to start referring to this article...."

    Or, for starters, how about Pat Buchanan? See #13.
  26. Anonym says:

    Your having been involved in the thick of politics, it is in articles like this where you really shine, Pat. You speak from experience. It is great to read your perspective.

    Read More
  27. @Corvinus
    "My conclusion is that the Deep State is winning."

    Yes, it's all the doing of the Deep State. They, like the Jews, are the sources of all of our problems. Both only care about saving their necks and destroying careers and reputations. Politics is war. Sides win and sides lose.

    Now that we have that out of the way, let's focus on two of Mr. Buchanan's quotes.

    "A yearlong FBI investigation into Russian hacking has failed to produce a single indictment. Yet the president watches impotently as a special counsel pulls together a lethal force, inside his own administration, whose undeclared ambition is to bring him down."

    First, as he ought to know, these investigations are complicated. Indictments take time. There seems to be this conception that charges must be brought within a certain timeline and that overwhelming evidence ought to be forthcoming to the public; otherwise, the investigation is a "witch hunt". Second, it would appear, although it is not certain, that it is TRUMP and his own team's ambition is to bring themselves down if the accusations are shown to have legal merit to the point that people are arrested. Third, Buchanan has a blind spot here as he was part of the Nixon Administration who engaged in clear illegal activity.

    "How did we get to this peril point when there is no evidence that Trump or any senior aide colluded in the hacking? As for the June 2016 meeting with the Russians, called by Donald Trump Jr. when told by a friend that Moscow had dirt on Hillary Clinton, even that was no crime."

    There is evidence. Does it meet the legal definition of collusion? We don't know. Are there other investigations taking place? Yes. What will be the result? We have to wait to find out.

    Thanks. You comment brought to mind the one about the little boy digging through a mountain of shit because he believed there had to be a pony in there only here instead we have you shifting through a mountain of donkey’s asses looking for a bit of shit.

    Read More
  28. anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Carlton Meyer
    An extremely important article appeared this week written by a group of retired intelligence officers, which our corporate media ignored:

    Executive Summary

    Forensic studies of “Russian hacking” into Democratic National Committee computers last year reveal that on July 5, 2016, data was leaked (not hacked) by a person with physical access to DNC computers, and then doctored to incriminate Russia.

    After examining metadata from the “Guccifer 2.0” July 5, 2016, intrusion into the DNC server, independent cyber investigators have concluded that an insider copied DNC data onto an external storage device, and that “telltale signs” implicating Russia were then inserted.

    Key among the findings of the independent forensic investigations is the conclusion that the DNC data was copied onto a storage device at a speed that far exceeds an Internet capability for a remote hack. Of equal importance, the forensics show that the copying and doctoring were performed on the East Coast of the U.S. Thus far, mainstream media have ignored the findings of these independent studies.

    http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/was_the_russian_hack_an_inside_job_20170724

    The Trump team needs to start referring to this article, daily, and remind everyone that Clinton's favorite computer "Crowdstrike" company is owned by a Russian immigrant.

    “The Trump team needs to start referring to this article….”

    Or, for starters, how about Pat Buchanan? See #13.

    Read More
  29. uslabor says:
    @wow
    So Trump "loses" to Mueller? Then what Pat? Are 60 million Trump voters going to accept that outcome?

    If Trump goes down, civil war will erupt....a lot of Lefties are gonna die. The USA will be officially done.

    “…a lot of lefties are gonna die.”?

    So are YOU gonna go out and kill lefties? Do you have a plan? Do you know where they live, where their children go to school?

    Come on, tough guy, you gonna children, infants, white or black? You should shut your pie hole, saying such shit. I dare say some Lefties embrace The Second Amendment.

    Come on killer, tell us all about it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Stonehands
    Face the facts: you lefties have been itching for a fight- and we ARE going to scratch that itch. These will be the new heroes not some dumb jock or moronic rapper.
    Our Western culture, art, philosophy, science and religion; our women; our families- are worth dying for. Societed must be righted, obviously we have had enough of Sodom.
    , @TTSSYF
    If Trump goes down for anything other than legitimate, legal reasons associated with the 2016 election, I will never willingly or knowingly have anything to do with anyone who applauds it, regardless of their political leanings. Rather than bloodshed, what you may see is up to 60 million people going full John Galt without a word of explanation.
    , @AndrewR
    I didn't read wow's comment as a "tough guy" comment. Just a sober analysis of reality as he sees it. Wow might even be a leftie who is dreading what he sees as a predictable future

    Stonehands OTOH is a major Tough Guy. Lol

    I do concur with them in that the left has been provoking violence for which the left is woefully unprepared. The main question is whether the right will give the left the civil war the left wants. Although we should see some interesting twists when other nations, subnational organizations and international organizations fund, arm, aid and assist this faction or that one. Hold om to your hats.
  30. uslabor says:
    @Anonymous

    So Trump “loses” to Mueller? Then what Pat? Are 60 million Trump voters going to accept that outcome?

    If Trump goes down, civil war will erupt….a lot of Lefties are gonna die. The USA will be officially done.
     
    Not a chance. There may rebellious elements in the population over age 55, but they cannot rebel. Most of those who might want to are sick and dying from bodies broken by decades of work, dietary poisons, diabetes or terminal gross obesity. And the Millennials are too f*cking stupid and lazy to rebel.

    I voted for Trump, just as a matter of slowing the collapse long enough to get a few years of retirement. Had Hillary been elected, economic collapse would be 3 years away, along with regional takeovers by illegal alien hordes.

    Pence will suffice as a do-nothing for three years. It is very much evident that Trump's intention all along was a do-nothing/get-richer/strengthen-Israel plan. Be glad the worthless Twitter-Mouth and his foul "hand-picked" scumbag ScaryMoochie will be kicked to the curb.

    ” economic collapse would be 3 years away, along with regional takeovers by illegal alien hordes.”

    Oh, the horde-manity!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous

    Oh, the horde-manity!
     
    Did you get off just with that, or did you need a bit of manual dexterity by the non-typing hand? Did you giggle? Chortle? Gasp with delight at your own oh-so-inventive drollery?
  31. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @uslabor
    " economic collapse would be 3 years away, along with regional takeovers by illegal alien hordes."

    Oh, the horde-manity!

    Oh, the horde-manity!

    Did you get off just with that, or did you need a bit of manual dexterity by the non-typing hand? Did you giggle? Chortle? Gasp with delight at your own oh-so-inventive drollery?

    Read More
  32. He can fire Jeff Sessions. But that will enrage Trump’s base to whom the senator is a loyal soldier.

    I’m sorry, Pat. I love you man, but I have to disagree here. I’m part of Trump’s base and I would be overjoyed to be rid of Jeff “Matlock” Sessions and his knee-jerk cuckery.

    Jeff Sessions is a serious douche. Not only did he recuse himself from investigating the Clinton campaign, which was one of the dumbest political moves I’ve ever seen in my lifetime, but he also has just radically expanded that institutional racket known as civil asset forfeiture. He needs to be gone like yesterday, and I think most of the base would approve.

    Read More
    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
    Yesirree! If anything proves that the average American is targeted the civil asset forfeiture laws should prove it beyond any doubt, to even the thickest of the sheeple.
  33. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    Maybe what the Republican establishment wanted all along was to use Trump’s momentum to win the elections (WH and local) and then hamstring him. The GOP can play the populist card with aplomb, but they don’t really like deplorables, to put it mildly.

    Read More
  34. why does trump want to kill the investigations so much? got something to hide?

    if he is so honorable like pat makes him out to be, shouldn’t the orange hair welcome any and all investigations? or does he got something to hide?

    Read More
  35. @KenH
    Trump can and should be the one to defy the little Asian judge who thinks he has the power to usurp executive branch functions over refugee policy and issuance of visas. This is an executive branch function after all and not a judicial one.

    Both Trump and Sessions bungled this badly by their inaction, acquiescence and "let it work its way through the courts mentality". In effect, they have ceded executive branch functions to the federal judiciary, most of whom are far leftists.

    Personally, I think Sessions worships the American court system since he was a part of it for so long and has a misplaced and blind faith in it. And Trump doesn't seem to know the difference between actual fighting and tweeting.

    Agreed. Over on the Chateau Heartiste blog, CH recommended that Trump “crush the judiciary” back in January when it blocked his executive order on visa issuance. Trump didn’t realize then, and appears still not to realize, that the judiciary is overwhelmingly part of the opposition. Sessions, being a long-time lawyer is probably too intimidated by judges (Mark Steyn, a Canadian, has noted the excessive deference Americans give to judges) but I’m surprised and disappointed that Trump didn’t move to defy the courts from the outset.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "Over on the Chateau Heartiste blog, CH recommended that Trump “crush the judiciary” back in January when it blocked his executive order on visa issuance."

    Which would have been unconstitutional. Ever since CH went Alt Right, his "advice" on p-grabbing has suffered immensely.

    "Trump didn’t realize then, and appears still not to realize, that the judiciary is overwhelmingly part of the opposition."

    No, it is part of our checks and balances system.

    "Sessions, being a long-time lawyer is probably too intimidated by judges (Mark Steyn, a Canadian, has noted the excessive deference Americans give to judges) but I’m surprised and disappointed that Trump didn’t move to defy the courts from the outset."

    That move would have been political suicide. It's not 1832-1833.
  36. PapayaSF says:

    Mmmm, maybe. A few points:

    1) As stated by other commenters above, the “Russian hacking” story looks like DNC disinformation.

    2) If one is to believe some anon commenters on 4chan, Reddit, etc., this is all a big and intentional distraction by Trump to get Democrats to defend Sessions, and that Mueller is actually going to go after Hillary/DNC connections with Russia, Ukraine, corruption, etc. This theory is eagerly lapped up by the “everything Trump does is 4D chess” crowd, but that doesn’t necessarily make it wrong.

    3) If Trump had some huge legal vulnerability, or a lot of enemies eager to “drop a dime” on him, why has that not happened before now? Why not before the election? It could be there’s nothing there. I have to believe that Obama’s corruptly partisan IRS, which has been auditing Trump for years, would have made a fuss or at least leaked, if they had found anything at all they thought might hurt him.

    4) In any case, I think Trump should go on offense. Appoint a special prosecutor for Hillary and the Clinton Foundation. There’s enough in the book Clinton Cash to get them going. And sic the Justice Department on the Awan brothers IT scandal as a national security issue of the highest magnitude. The MSM is being as quiet as they can on this, but it’s explosive: the DNC and a bunch of Congressional Democrats working with shady crooks with connections to Pakistan, Hezbollah, and the Muslim Brotherhood.

    Read More
    • Replies: @LauraMR
    Interesting points (2 & 3)... and hopefully true.

    Popcorn.
  37. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer

    I don’t fully grasp why Trump is so worked up about the actual Mueller investigation. Of course, the MSM pursuit of the “Russia” angle has been distracting and harmful, but, so far as I can tell, and no matter what Russia actually did, there seems very little sign that any Trump associates did anything seriously out of line in dealing with Russia. (And I fully grant that some of them are somewhat mercenary, and have not always been concerned primarily with the US. But that is par for the course.) Yes, the very fact that Mueller, or anyone, was appointed to this job was a strike against Trump. But it seems he ought to just accept it and work with it. The better strategy for Trump seems to be to actively interpret Mueller as engaged in a broader investigation of electoral shenanigans, so that if it turns out that it wasn’t precisely the “Russians” who did bad stuff, it is still within Mueller’s purview to investigate. I recall that Kim Dotcom made an offer directly to Mueller to come to the US and provide testimony, if he were given a deal that meets his needs, and I suspect Julian Assange would also be quite willing to make a deal. Why doesn’t Trump put out some tweets urging this? Seriously. If someone in the White House is reading this, or if someone knows someone (maybe Pat B knows someone) why not have Trump insinuate that he is perfectly fine with Kim Dotcom and Julian Assange being granted safe passage to give Congressional testimony, under Mueller’s aegis.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    No, No, NO a thousand times NO. If you are innocent of a crime, the second to the last thing you want is the police investigating you thinking you are the perp. The very last thing you want is to be put on trial.

    Both of these events are crap-shoots with you against the house odds.

    trump could be put in a perjury trap where they ask him some innocuous question and come back later claiming he lied under oath. The investigation does have to end at the Russia BS the way it is being run right now.
  38. utu says:

    Soon there will be only Trump and Mooch left in WH.

    It’s total self destruct trajectory.

    Read More
  39. Dave Pinsen says: • Website

    One thing in Trump’s favor: if he had done anything criminal in the past, chances are, the press/Democrats would have outed it during the campaign. Trump lived very publicly, in the media capital of the country, for nearly 40 years. It’s hard to imagine Mueller finding anything new about Trump.

    Might he find that Flynn or some other underling forgot to dot an “i” or cross a “t”? Maybe. Trump can always pardon him.

    There’s also the possibility that this investigation snags prominent Democrats and Never Trumpers.

    Read More
  40. The collision in my opinion is between money and democracy.
    Democrats present themselves as progressive, but from the other side of the Atlantic the difference between democrats and republicans is difficult to understand.
    But a USA correspondent explained it: democrats is new money, republicans old money.
    With Trump we now have a president who is neither a democrat nor a republican.
    Republicans grudgingly had to accept him as a republican, contrary to countries with real political parties there is no formal membership.
    Rich democrats were used to controlling USA politics, especially foreign politics.
    I still suppose that Amsterdam’s professor Laslo Maracs’ analysis is correct, rich Trump and his rich friends understand that continuing to try to control the world will ruin the USA, and themelves.
    What we now see is how the old order, Deep State, tries to unseat Trump one way or another, in order to continue the effort for world domination.
    Luckily for Trump the days of president riding in an open car are over, the present presidential car is a tank disguised as a car.
    Sabotaging Air Force One also does not seem easy.

    Read More
  41. @yeah
    Your reply indicates partial agreement with some of my points and rebuttal of some others. In any case, thanks for your well-reasoned post.

    I don't mean to be pedantic but tracing hacks to identifiable groups is the real problem. It is not possible at a level of reasonable certainty because of the technical ease of several types of forgery and redirection of IP addresses. I am no technical expert on hacking but believe that, had compelling evidence of hacking existed, it would have ben produced ages ago. Note also that the anti-Trump media refers to the sins of hacking and leaks interchangeably, which is an affront to common sense akin to equating a bank robber to the teller who dips into cash: different crimes, different perpetrators.

    The real issue is this whole "there MAY have been illegal acts..." assertion. The big problem is that if the Chief Executive of a country can be spied upon and investigated by any minion who feels that illegal acts may have committed, then no stable and secure government is possible. Think about it, please. There is simply no choice but to vest high trust and strong power (not absolute power, simply strong enough power) in the Chief Executive. Do Chief Executives sometimes betray this trust. Of course they do, hey this is the real world. Are Chief Executives accused out of malevolent and selfish motives? Of course they are, happens a lot of times, perhaps 99.9% times.

    In the real world we need a delicate balance between obedience and dissent, hierarchy and free-for-all, and between absolute power and constrained power. There is no single clear-cut answer that can be claimed to be the only logically valid answer. Only a narrow range of solutions - narrower than what may be supposed at first sight - is possible and societies keep making fine adjustments. When narrow adjustments cannot be agreed upon, history shows that governmental breakdown, civil chaos and civil strife and wars inevitably follow. America should not go in that disastrous direction, regardless of our personal likes and dislikes. Remember, all people need do is to endure what some of them don't like for but four years then throw him out. There is no other low-risk solution.

    “thanks for your well-reasoned post”

    The commenter to whom you refer likes to leaven intellectual dishonesty with a sprinkling of reason, but never debates in good faith. Avoid/ignore.

    Read More
  42. @Corvinus
    "My conclusion is that the Deep State is winning."

    Yes, it's all the doing of the Deep State. They, like the Jews, are the sources of all of our problems. Both only care about saving their necks and destroying careers and reputations. Politics is war. Sides win and sides lose.

    Now that we have that out of the way, let's focus on two of Mr. Buchanan's quotes.

    "A yearlong FBI investigation into Russian hacking has failed to produce a single indictment. Yet the president watches impotently as a special counsel pulls together a lethal force, inside his own administration, whose undeclared ambition is to bring him down."

    First, as he ought to know, these investigations are complicated. Indictments take time. There seems to be this conception that charges must be brought within a certain timeline and that overwhelming evidence ought to be forthcoming to the public; otherwise, the investigation is a "witch hunt". Second, it would appear, although it is not certain, that it is TRUMP and his own team's ambition is to bring themselves down if the accusations are shown to have legal merit to the point that people are arrested. Third, Buchanan has a blind spot here as he was part of the Nixon Administration who engaged in clear illegal activity.

    "How did we get to this peril point when there is no evidence that Trump or any senior aide colluded in the hacking? As for the June 2016 meeting with the Russians, called by Donald Trump Jr. when told by a friend that Moscow had dirt on Hillary Clinton, even that was no crime."

    There is evidence. Does it meet the legal definition of collusion? We don't know. Are there other investigations taking place? Yes. What will be the result? We have to wait to find out.

    What evidence of a hack ? If there is any evidence it’s of a LEAK at the dnc.
    The whole “Russia gate” nonsense stinks to high heaven.

    Read More
  43. @uslabor
    "...a lot of lefties are gonna die."?

    So are YOU gonna go out and kill lefties? Do you have a plan? Do you know where they live, where their children go to school?

    Come on, tough guy, you gonna children, infants, white or black? You should shut your pie hole, saying such shit. I dare say some Lefties embrace The Second Amendment.

    Come on killer, tell us all about it.

    Face the facts: you lefties have been itching for a fight- and we ARE going to scratch that itch. These will be the new heroes not some dumb jock or moronic rapper.
    Our Western culture, art, philosophy, science and religion; our women; our families- are worth dying for. Societed must be righted, obviously we have had enough of Sodom.

    Read More
    • Replies: @uslabor
    First of all, you don't know what stripe I'm wearing. Second, t's easy for a moron of either stripe to brag about scratching an itch.

    Your wives, your families are worth dying for? I guess armed folks on both sides of the spectrum feel the same way.

    It isn't Left vs Right, it IS the system VS you. You idiot.
    , @dfordoom

    Societed must be righted, obviously we have had enough of Sodom.
     
    Agreed, but there is no evidence that any significant number of ordinary people realise what has gone wrong or that it needs to be fixed. They still have their super-hero movies and their disgusting pop music and their internet porn and their shiny iPhones. They don't care.

    They have a vague understanding that something has gone wrong but they are totally unable to comprehend that fixing the problem requires the utter destruction of feminism and the crushing of the evil homosexual agenda. They don't understand that legal immigration is a bigger threat then illegal immigration. They don't understand the menace of crony capitalism and they don't even know that the military-industrial complex exists. They don't know that the institutions that they revere - the military, the police, the courts, the churches - are all in enemy hands. They don't understand the endgame of the homosexual lobby.
  44. Numinous says:
    @yeah
    It needs to be kept in mind that Presidents have the right - and the NEED - to have secret talks with other world leaders, including adversaries. Remember Kennedy - Khrushchev secret communications and deals that saved the world the horror of world war 3? Had that matter been left to the Pentagon and CIA we all would not be here debating and sparring.

    That said, there is no proof that Trump had any dealings or communications with the Russians that were wrong or harmful to the US. Harmful to Clinton perhaps, harmful to the US state and nation most definitely not. And what exactly is the main accusation? That the Russians "hacked" into DNC computers. Now, as any computer literate ought to know, the fingerprints of hacking are not evidence because forgery is very simple and it is easy to point the finger to any other direction. And are we talking here of leaks or hacking? If people within DNC or the US Govt choose to leak sensitive information, whose fault is it?

    As for contacts of Russians with team Trump. Get real. It is no crime to meet with foreign citizens. Unless the intention is to break off diplomatic relations entirely with Russia. Yes, force them to pack up and leave, but remember the US will also then have to pack up and leave, its CIA agents included.

    Hatred of Trump and his anti-globalist world view is driving the deep-state crazies and their loony left friends to irreparably damage the office of the US President, international law, and rules of political conduct. Regardless of whether Trump was in fact guilty or innocent, his impeachment will damage the American form of Government forever.

    Trump wasn’t president when he and his henchmen met with Russians. (If Kennedy had met Khruschev in 1959 trying to get dirt on Dick Nixon, there would have been holy hell to pay.) In fact, no one at that time gave Trump a prayer of winning (including himself and many in his team), so your comment that Trump was entitled to have such talks as befits a President is silly on its face.

    That said, whether or not whatever Trump did rises to the legal definition of misconduct, I believe this Russia issue has been a red herring from the start. The left and the media, even if they get many scalps this way, will likely come to regret the time and effort wasted on this. There’s so much else to criticize Trump about. The guy is a empty suit, and a narcissistic as*****le, whose only “skill” is to throw his name and his ample funds (which he inherited from Daddy) around. He is both completely self-centered and has no ability to think about or analyze any issue, including the ones he ran on. The best description I have heard of him is “an evil Chauncey Gardner”, as Sam Harris refers to him. He is a disgrace to your country and to your (alt-right) cause, and you all are chumps for sticking behind him.

    Read More
    • Replies: @map
    Again, this is not the Cold War.

    Kennedy talking to Khrushchev would have been a problem because of the Cold War. The Cold War is over. It is not illegal or improper for American citizens to speak to Russians.

    Moreover, the basis of Watergate was an actual crime: a burglary at Democrat Party headquarters. What's the crime here?
    , @MarkinLA
    Neil Gorsuch, nuff said.
    , @dfordoom

    The left and the media, even if they get many scalps this way, will likely come to regret the time and effort wasted on this.

     

    It's not wasted from their point of view. Trump himself is an irrelevance. He isn't going to achieve anything and he was never going to be allowed to achieve anything. But he is a symbol. A symbol of opposition to the elites. He must be destroyed in order to teach the Deplorables a lesson - that they must never again presume to vote for anyone other than an approved candidate. They can vote Republican, so long as they vote for a safe Republican cuck who knows how to obey orders.

    Any amount of effort is justified to achieve this aim.
  45. @Corvinus
    "My conclusion is that the Deep State is winning."

    Yes, it's all the doing of the Deep State. They, like the Jews, are the sources of all of our problems. Both only care about saving their necks and destroying careers and reputations. Politics is war. Sides win and sides lose.

    Now that we have that out of the way, let's focus on two of Mr. Buchanan's quotes.

    "A yearlong FBI investigation into Russian hacking has failed to produce a single indictment. Yet the president watches impotently as a special counsel pulls together a lethal force, inside his own administration, whose undeclared ambition is to bring him down."

    First, as he ought to know, these investigations are complicated. Indictments take time. There seems to be this conception that charges must be brought within a certain timeline and that overwhelming evidence ought to be forthcoming to the public; otherwise, the investigation is a "witch hunt". Second, it would appear, although it is not certain, that it is TRUMP and his own team's ambition is to bring themselves down if the accusations are shown to have legal merit to the point that people are arrested. Third, Buchanan has a blind spot here as he was part of the Nixon Administration who engaged in clear illegal activity.

    "How did we get to this peril point when there is no evidence that Trump or any senior aide colluded in the hacking? As for the June 2016 meeting with the Russians, called by Donald Trump Jr. when told by a friend that Moscow had dirt on Hillary Clinton, even that was no crime."

    There is evidence. Does it meet the legal definition of collusion? We don't know. Are there other investigations taking place? Yes. What will be the result? We have to wait to find out.

    We have to wait to find out.

    Nah, a brief study of world history tells us there ain’t nuttin new under the sun. We don’t have to wait because we know it’s all BS.

    Read More
  46. @Anonymous

    Come on, folks, get real. Everybody projects his personal agenda on a man who refuses to be a mirror for them. He is that unique and therefore terrifies friend and foe alike. If all the media went dark for a month, just shut up
     
    How about you get real? Me shut up? No. Trump cannot behave as a responsible adult, and he must go. As for your Wordpress ... no thanks.

    Trump cannot behave as a responsible adult…

    Bingo! That is a huge part of the problem and he’s not the only one.

    Yannis Varoufakis, the former Greek finance minister, just published a superb book, “Adults in the Room,” pointing out that a huge source of a lot of our political and financial problems is that there are almost no adults in positions of power.

    Read More
  47. @Anonymous

    Come on, folks, get real. Everybody projects his personal agenda on a man who refuses to be a mirror for them. He is that unique and therefore terrifies friend and foe alike. If all the media went dark for a month, just shut up
     
    How about you get real? Me shut up? No. Trump cannot behave as a responsible adult, and he must go. As for your Wordpress ... no thanks.

    He is that unique…

    I think you meant “eunuch.”

    Anyway, The USA is full of prominent, showtime loudmouths so nothing unique there.

    Read More
  48. anonHUN says:

    A boisterous amateur entered politics, imagining that he can change it and now he is killed slowly by the venomous vipers. He has to realize now, that it is not like the business world he is used to.
    But probably it’s still better than having Hillary in the Oval Office.

    Read More
  49. David says:
    @Longfisher
    Kill box?

    Perhaps Pat means a "kill zone".

    Minor quibble, I'll admit. But kill zones aren't box-like. Indeed, they're irregular and don't resemble any conventional geometric shape

    I don’t know, man. Looks like Kill Boxes are a thing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kill_box

    When I read it, I though he meant the little cells that are parts of ancient city gates which are supposedly for cornering interlopers in and killing them.

    Read More
  50. TTSSYF says:
    @uslabor
    "...a lot of lefties are gonna die."?

    So are YOU gonna go out and kill lefties? Do you have a plan? Do you know where they live, where their children go to school?

    Come on, tough guy, you gonna children, infants, white or black? You should shut your pie hole, saying such shit. I dare say some Lefties embrace The Second Amendment.

    Come on killer, tell us all about it.

    If Trump goes down for anything other than legitimate, legal reasons associated with the 2016 election, I will never willingly or knowingly have anything to do with anyone who applauds it, regardless of their political leanings. Rather than bloodshed, what you may see is up to 60 million people going full John Galt without a word of explanation.

    Read More
  51. Joe Hide says:

    It would seem that President Trump is seeking more assertive administrative appointments from the military. Jeff Sessions was an apparently good guy who didn’t have the aggressive nature of his insane and nefarious opponents in the deep state. These psychopaths, hidden in plain sight, are obsessive compulsives who must be overcome by extremely focused and aggressive trained warriors loyal first to the citizens of the United States of America.

    Read More
  52. Van Doren says:
    @The Alarmist
    Sessions lost me when the order did not go out to ignore the Hawaiian judge and Ninth Citcuit rulings on the Travel Bans, for the rulings were clearly ultra vires. If Sessions was the scrappy fighter Trump had hired, he would' have slimmed away, tail between his legs saying "Aw shucks, you got us there, but we'll get you in the Supreme Court" which, of course, he didn't. The Russian matter is a distraction, but fortunately for the Left, the Donald is easily distracted.

    Not his department. Tillerson and Kelly are mostly responsible in the area.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Alarmist
    Immigration enforcement is a legal matter, and AG is the priciple officer competent to enforce the laws. others can contribute as a matter of national security policy making, less so citizenship and naturalization policy.
  53. AndrewR says:
    @uslabor
    "...a lot of lefties are gonna die."?

    So are YOU gonna go out and kill lefties? Do you have a plan? Do you know where they live, where their children go to school?

    Come on, tough guy, you gonna children, infants, white or black? You should shut your pie hole, saying such shit. I dare say some Lefties embrace The Second Amendment.

    Come on killer, tell us all about it.

    I didn’t read wow’s comment as a “tough guy” comment. Just a sober analysis of reality as he sees it. Wow might even be a leftie who is dreading what he sees as a predictable future

    Stonehands OTOH is a major Tough Guy. Lol

    I do concur with them in that the left has been provoking violence for which the left is woefully unprepared. The main question is whether the right will give the left the civil war the left wants. Although we should see some interesting twists when other nations, subnational organizations and international organizations fund, arm, aid and assist this faction or that one. Hold om to your hats.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hapalong Cassidy
    "I do concur with them in that the left has been provoking violence for which the left is woefully unprepared."

    One has only to look at the shooting of Steve Scalise to see how unprepared they are. The guy got off, what, something close to 100 rounds and only wounded 4 people? If this is the best they can do (and it probably is), maybe it would be a good idea to think twice on how far they want to push things.
    , @Stonehands
    A tempest is now gathering on the horizon. Do you not hear the wind whining through the rigging?

    Presently the fury of the storm will break upon us. And that will be the end for awhile of our Machines, and our science, and all this facility of communication and transportation that have brought people far tooclose together, far too long ahead of their readiness to have much to do with one another.

    We will once more have a chance to learn the elemental lessons of life under primitive conditions. We shall be stripped of the grown- ups' clothes in which we have decked ourselves out for a day and fancied ourselves Men. We shall be thrown back where we belong and an ABC primer thrust before our eyes and held there till we master it's lessons.

    That, as l see it, is what is going to happen to us, what is going to happen to the world, especially to our part of the world.
    , @uslabor
    The Left hasn't been provoking violence any more than the Right has. Any of you remember the Federal Building in OK city some years ago?

    McVey was not a leftist.

    This is divide and conquer in use by the powers that be against us on both right and left. The system is coming for all of us.

    It's a class issue.
    , @uslabor
    "Stonehands OTOH is a major Tough Guy. Lol"

    Yeah, a lot of tough guys posting from the comfort of their comfy chairs.
  54. @wow
    So Trump "loses" to Mueller? Then what Pat? Are 60 million Trump voters going to accept that outcome?

    If Trump goes down, civil war will erupt....a lot of Lefties are gonna die. The USA will be officially done.

    So Trump “loses” to Mueller? Then what Pat? Are 60 million Trump voters going to accept that outcome?

    If Trump goes down, civil war will erupt….a lot of Lefties are gonna die. The USA will be officially done.

    I don’t agree with your premise, not so long as GoT and Strolling Zombies are on TV. But you’d have been much more ominous (and no less true) if you’d pointed out these are the 60,000,000 best armed civilians (and families) in America.

    Read More
  55. nsa says:

    Social democracy has now reached its farcical stage…….a sham battle to the death between the consummate jooie tool, Trumpstein, and a mythical deep state populated by hideous swamp creatures.

    Read More
  56. KA says:

    “Personally, I have great respect for my people,” Trump said, “but if it was up to me, I would have had them noncompliant 180 days ago . . . We’ll talk about the subject in 90 days but I would be surprised if they were in compliance.”http://nationalinterest.org/feature/trump-determined-blow-the-iran-deal-21694

    He will be in a bigger hole in 90 days.President doesn’t now A from B when it comes to Atomic weapons or what inspection is supposed to look into. He is planning to use the snap access to build a pretext for withdrawal .It sure will be denied by Iran given the history of spying and assassination of the scientists .

    But the he doesn’t understand that those very people who want to derail the agreements ( FDD – another showcased product of anti Iran cottage industry and other ) will rip him apart once the well publicized negative consequences of the abrogation comes to bite USA diplomatically and politically . They are known for this kind role reversal . They blamed Bush jr for failures after goading him to the sure path of chaos and cauldron ( Read Iraq )

    A few days earlier , NPR was showcasing the FDD. NPR asked if the agreements would end the way 1994 agreements between US and NK ended with NK building more nukes and missiles . Obviously both patted each other on the back to sound more informed and savvy then channeled each other perversions and disrespect of truth which was that NK ddi not come unglued until Bush jr promoted by the earlier incarnations of gteh neocons dismantled the agreements.

    Read More
  57. OT:

    It looks like Trump is going to sign the new sanctions bill against Russia: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jul/28/trump-will-sign-bill-imposing-new-sanctions-on-russia-white-house

    It passed with veto-proof margins through both houses, so there’s not much he can do about it anyway. The good news here is that these new sanctions — which target EU concerns that do business with Gazprom — will drive a massive wedge in between Washington and Berlin, as Europe needs Russian oil and gas in order to survive.

    We could be looking at the downfall of NATO right here.

    Read More
    • Replies: @geokat62

    It passed with veto-proof margins through both houses,...
     
    Ever ponder why it is certain bills pass almost unanimously and others pass/fail with razor thin margins?

    The best two examples are 1) health care and 2) sanctions on Russia, Iran and NK:

    1. Senate Votes 51-50 to Proceed With Health-Care Debate
    Vice President Mike Pence just broke the 50-50 tie.


    US Senate attempt to repeal Obamacare fails, representing blow to President Trump

    The repeal failed by a narrow margin of 59-49. At least three Republicans voted "no," including John McCain, Susan Collins, and Lisa Murkowski. It was GOP Senator John McCain who cast the decisive vote, killing the repeal.


    2. Senate Passes Russia/Iran/Korea Sanctions 98-2, Spurring Showdown With Trump

    The Senate approved new sanctions on Russia, Iran and North Korea by a vote of 98-2 on Thursday evening, rebuking President Trump’s overtures to Moscow and forcing him to make a difficult choice — sign the bill and anger Russian President Vladimir Putin, or veto it and rebuke not only his fellow Republicans but also many pro-Israel groups who favor a tougher line on Iran.

    The bill, which was approved 419-3* in the House of Representatives on Tuesday, places new sanctions on Iran due to its ballistic missile program and support for terrorism. The bill has been praised by the pro-Israel AIPAC, which said in a press release shortly after the Senate vote that it “urges the president to sign it into law.”

    It also places new sanctions on Russian officials and entities due to the Kremlin’s machinations during the 2016 presidential election — which Trump continues to deny took place. It also allows Congress to block Trump from easing or ending sanctions on Russia...

    The only two senators to vote against the bill were Bernie Sanders and Rand Paul.

    http://forward.com/fast-forward/378289/senate-passes-russia-iran-korea-sanctions-98-2-spurring-showdown-with-trump/

    * Only three libertarian-leaning Republicans – Justin Amash of Michigan, Tom Massie of Kentucky and Jimmy Duncan of Tennessee – voted against the bill in the House.
     
    I wonder what the driving force is behind the almost unanimous vote (hint: see bolded terms)? Also, you can literally count on one hand the number of Congressman who are willing to defy The Lobby... the best government money can buy!
    , @MarkinLA
    Given Trump's position and the veto-proof majority, it would have been better for Trump (IMHO) to announce that sanctions don't work and he is sick of the US imposing them and twisting the arms of allies trying to make them go along while vetoing the bill. Then he can look like the Alt-Right guy he campaigned as and still be a cuck.
  58. Travis says:

    Trump will not fire Sessions…he is sending a message to Sessions to get more aggressive with his agenda. Although with the recent opening at the Department of Homeland Security it is possible he moves Sessions to run Homeland Security and appoints a more effective Attorney General.

    Read More
  59. @Bozo
    All this would mean a lot more to us if Trump really had true conservative convictions.

    Where did true conservative convictions get us in the last 20 years or so? You’re average conservative has been focused mainly on social issues and ignoring a whole lot of other stuff –like the useless wars we’ve been in, an economic system that’s built and based on bupkes, a make Israel great instead of Make America great etc etc. Sessions is a good man, but he is trying to be too much the Southern gentleman. It is not going to work. You need an animal in there because you are dealing with animals.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Z-man
    I agree with your post except the end, Sessions is indispensable to Trump because of his base and a southern gentleman is ok by me, in Sessions' case.
  60. Joe Wong says:
    @Diversity Heretic
    My conclusion is that the Deep State is winning. Even I've getting numb and increasingly less interested in the twists and turns of who's investigating whom and why and what are the likely consequences. I'm reminded of the quote attribute to Lavrentiy Beria: "Show me the man and I will find you the crime."

    It took 9 months from “deep throat” to bring down Nixon, it is only half way there to bring down Trump with fabricated allegations and manufactured consent.

    Read More
    • Replies: @prole
    But after 12 months of investigations by a Democratic Justice depertment they found nothing linking Trump to a Russian conspiracy...Another 12 months will lead to nothing...
    , @Alden
    Nixon was forced to resign by Senators of his own Republican Party. They found that a lot of Republican senators and congress critters would not vote against impeachment. So the democrats would have the majority in an impeachment vote.

    You are so right, from a landslide re election in 1972 to disgrace and resignation 2 years later. Still, Clinton survived perjury, so who knows what will happen. There are rumors Pence is meeting with major donors.

    Normally, it's unthinkable that impeachment proceedings would begin for a president who has such a majority of his own party in congress. But the Republicans seem to be very anti Trumo.

    But remember, impeachment can only be for what a president does after he becomes president January 20th, not for what he did before inauguration.
  61. prole says:
    @Joe Wong
    It took 9 months from "deep throat" to bring down Nixon, it is only half way there to bring down Trump with fabricated allegations and manufactured consent.

    But after 12 months of investigations by a Democratic Justice depertment they found nothing linking Trump to a Russian conspiracy…Another 12 months will lead to nothing…

    Read More
    • Replies: @annamaria
    'But after 12 months of investigations by a Democratic Justice department, they found nothing linking Trump to a Russian conspiracy..."
    Compare the wasted money and efforts on the interesting case of DNC emails and on a case of certain Pakistani family working for the DNC: "IT Aid to Congresswoman, Wasserman Schultz, Arrested at Airport After Transferring $283K to Pakistan" https://needtoknow.news/2017/07/aid-congresswoman-wasserman-schultz-arrested-airport-transferring-283k-pakistan/
    However, "Democratic members of Congress, including Rep. Gregory Meeks of New York, have suggested that police had framed the Pakistani-born Awan brothers out of Islamophobia. Yet his own stepmother, a devout Muslim, filed court documents accusing him of using high-tech devices to wiretap her and extorting her (see p. 23 of court documents in that case). A dozen people who have dealt with Imran painted a picture in interviews with TheDCNF of a charming, “cunning” extrovert who bragged about his power among Democratic officials and who seemed to have an unquenchable thirst for cash."
    Nice. The MSM does not want to talk about the real criminals that were caught red-handed because when the criminals are DNC-related, the police work must be "framing" and "Islamophobia."
    Very interesting what exactly the Awan brothers have on the Congressional Dems. The unceremonious refusal to let the FBI investigate the DNC computers (re allegedly "hacked" emails) and the loud voices of defense coming from Democratic members of Congress suggest that the brothers have acquired important morsels of information for blackmailing the Dems.
    "Wasserman Schultz has refused to fire Imran [Awan] despite being a known criminal suspect in a cybersecurity probe for months and has blocked Capitol Police from searching a laptop they confiscated because it was tied to him."
    Let them sing.
  62. Corvinus says:
    @Diversity Heretic
    Agreed. Over on the Chateau Heartiste blog, CH recommended that Trump "crush the judiciary" back in January when it blocked his executive order on visa issuance. Trump didn't realize then, and appears still not to realize, that the judiciary is overwhelmingly part of the opposition. Sessions, being a long-time lawyer is probably too intimidated by judges (Mark Steyn, a Canadian, has noted the excessive deference Americans give to judges) but I'm surprised and disappointed that Trump didn't move to defy the courts from the outset.

    “Over on the Chateau Heartiste blog, CH recommended that Trump “crush the judiciary” back in January when it blocked his executive order on visa issuance.”

    Which would have been unconstitutional. Ever since CH went Alt Right, his “advice” on p-grabbing has suffered immensely.

    “Trump didn’t realize then, and appears still not to realize, that the judiciary is overwhelmingly part of the opposition.”

    No, it is part of our checks and balances system.

    “Sessions, being a long-time lawyer is probably too intimidated by judges (Mark Steyn, a Canadian, has noted the excessive deference Americans give to judges) but I’m surprised and disappointed that Trump didn’t move to defy the courts from the outset.”

    That move would have been political suicide. It’s not 1832-1833.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Alarmist
    The rulings were ultra vires, and the courts have no hard power to enforce them if the Executive has the cajones to simply state the law and continue to enforce it as it sees fit, at least until the chief executive is impeached and removed, or, more likely, voted out in three and a half years time.
  63. Corvinus says:
    @KenH
    Trump can and should be the one to defy the little Asian judge who thinks he has the power to usurp executive branch functions over refugee policy and issuance of visas. This is an executive branch function after all and not a judicial one.

    Both Trump and Sessions bungled this badly by their inaction, acquiescence and "let it work its way through the courts mentality". In effect, they have ceded executive branch functions to the federal judiciary, most of whom are far leftists.

    Personally, I think Sessions worships the American court system since he was a part of it for so long and has a misplaced and blind faith in it. And Trump doesn't seem to know the difference between actual fighting and tweeting.

    “Trump can and should be the one to defy the little Asian judge who thinks he has the power to usurp executive branch functions over refugee policy and issuance of visas. This is an executive branch function after all and not a judicial one.”

    He could, but won’t. His action would be unconstitutional.

    “In effect, they have ceded executive branch functions to the federal judiciary, most of whom are far leftists.”

    Fake News Story. The court within the past 30 years has been divided along ideological lines, with Anthony Kennedy serving as a “cuck”, I mean moderate.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Alden
    Actually, it would not be unconstitutional for a president to defy a lower federal court or even the Supreme Court.

    There 2 precedents, Jackson and Lincoln both successfully defied the courts.
    It just has to be done. It should be done.
  64. annamaria says:

    Curioisier and curiosier…
    “The dots between Imran Awan, Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Seth Rich begin to connect” http://theduran.com/the-dots-between-imran-awan-debbie-wasserman-schultz-and-seth-rich-begin-connecting/
    “Awan’s arrest came just one day after reports emerged that the FBI had seized numerous “smashed hard drives” and other computer equipment from Awan’s previous residence. The former House IT staffer is suspected of stealing sensitive information from the office computers of numerous Democratic Party lawmakers and sending that data to a secret server. Awan and his family members, all of whom worked as IT professionals for members of Congress, were banned from the House network Feb. 2, 2017, by the House Sergeant at Arms. Despite the rapidly escalating scandal that potentially involves multiple federal crimes, Awan had been kept on the payroll of former DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, who circumvented the ban by having him “advise” her office.
    The FBI requested access to the DNC’s server to determine who was responsible for the breach. According to former FBI Director James Comey, the DNC refused to grant access to its server. Awan reportedly possessed the password to the iPad Wasserman Schultz used when the DNC emails were provided to WikiLeaks.”

    From comment section:
    “Seth Rich was not “brutally murdered on July 10, 2016, on a street near his Washington home”. He was either drugged, or beaten and shot there. He was alive when taken to the hospital. He was murdered in the hospital. That’s why they won’t even release the name of the hospital.”

    “Why wouldn’t the DNC allow the FBI to check their servers and computers? However, they had no problem with giving the brothers from Pakistan and also Crowd Strike, with links to Ukraine, full access. Now what did they want to hide from the American Intelligence Services, but, had no problem with sharing with aliens?”

    Read More
  65. Alden says:
    @KenH
    Trump can and should be the one to defy the little Asian judge who thinks he has the power to usurp executive branch functions over refugee policy and issuance of visas. This is an executive branch function after all and not a judicial one.

    Both Trump and Sessions bungled this badly by their inaction, acquiescence and "let it work its way through the courts mentality". In effect, they have ceded executive branch functions to the federal judiciary, most of whom are far leftists.

    Personally, I think Sessions worships the American court system since he was a part of it for so long and has a misplaced and blind faith in it. And Trump doesn't seem to know the difference between actual fighting and tweeting.

    President Madison ceded supremacy to the judiciary in 1804. Separation of powers disappeared in that year.

    The judiciary makes up the laws they want and overthrows laws they don’t want.

    Read More
    • Replies: @KenH
    Andrew Jackson and Lincoln defied the SCOTUS as I think you already noted so there is precedent. Since Trump claims to revere the former he should start emulating him when it comes to ideological rulings and judicial overreach that usurp executive branch authority.

    The radical left's strategy of judicial activism to overcome electoral losses and legislative failures has worked nearly to perfection and the cucked right has no answer other than to bemoan the situation in their journals of opinion and on talk radio.

  66. Alden says:
    @Corvinus
    "Trump can and should be the one to defy the little Asian judge who thinks he has the power to usurp executive branch functions over refugee policy and issuance of visas. This is an executive branch function after all and not a judicial one."

    He could, but won't. His action would be unconstitutional.

    "In effect, they have ceded executive branch functions to the federal judiciary, most of whom are far leftists."

    Fake News Story. The court within the past 30 years has been divided along ideological lines, with Anthony Kennedy serving as a "cuck", I mean moderate.

    Actually, it would not be unconstitutional for a president to defy a lower federal court or even the Supreme Court.

    There 2 precedents, Jackson and Lincoln both successfully defied the courts.
    It just has to be done. It should be done.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "There 2 precedents, Jackson and Lincoln both successfully defied the courts."

    Please follow along. I did not say that presidents had unsuccessfully defied the courts, I am saying that their actions are unconstitutional. In Jackson's case, a majority of Americans preferred that tribes be removed by force from their lands. In Lincoln's case, there was a Civil War taking place, and there was division even among his allies regarding the legality of suspending habeas corpus.
  67. Alden says:
    @Joe Wong
    It took 9 months from "deep throat" to bring down Nixon, it is only half way there to bring down Trump with fabricated allegations and manufactured consent.

    Nixon was forced to resign by Senators of his own Republican Party. They found that a lot of Republican senators and congress critters would not vote against impeachment. So the democrats would have the majority in an impeachment vote.

    You are so right, from a landslide re election in 1972 to disgrace and resignation 2 years later. Still, Clinton survived perjury, so who knows what will happen. There are rumors Pence is meeting with major donors.

    Normally, it’s unthinkable that impeachment proceedings would begin for a president who has such a majority of his own party in congress. But the Republicans seem to be very anti Trumo.

    But remember, impeachment can only be for what a president does after he becomes president January 20th, not for what he did before inauguration.

    Read More
  68. bjondo says:

    Mueller, Comey, Brennan, Clapper, Blather, Blimey, Spittle, and psycho clowns Moishe, Saul, and Shlomo will hit the pavement not running but with a thud.

    Trump is winning

    and

    the deep state, bribed state, whore state, lying state, will all end up in the toilet or the Potomac or Guantanamo or Bermuda Triangle.

    All are traitors. Weasel traitors.

    Read More
  69. geokat62 says:
    @Seamus Padraig
    OT:

    It looks like Trump is going to sign the new sanctions bill against Russia: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jul/28/trump-will-sign-bill-imposing-new-sanctions-on-russia-white-house

    It passed with veto-proof margins through both houses, so there's not much he can do about it anyway. The good news here is that these new sanctions -- which target EU concerns that do business with Gazprom -- will drive a massive wedge in between Washington and Berlin, as Europe needs Russian oil and gas in order to survive.

    We could be looking at the downfall of NATO right here.

    It passed with veto-proof margins through both houses,…

    Ever ponder why it is certain bills pass almost unanimously and others pass/fail with razor thin margins?

    The best two examples are 1) health care and 2) sanctions on Russia, Iran and NK:

    1. Senate Votes 51-50 to Proceed With Health-Care Debate
    Vice President Mike Pence just broke the 50-50 tie.

    US Senate attempt to repeal Obamacare fails, representing blow to President Trump

    The repeal failed by a narrow margin of 59-49. At least three Republicans voted “no,” including John McCain, Susan Collins, and Lisa Murkowski. It was GOP Senator John McCain who cast the decisive vote, killing the repeal.

    2. Senate Passes Russia/Iran/Korea Sanctions 98-2, Spurring Showdown With Trump

    The Senate approved new sanctions on Russia, Iran and North Korea by a vote of 98-2 on Thursday evening, rebuking President Trump’s overtures to Moscow and forcing him to make a difficult choice — sign the bill and anger Russian President Vladimir Putin, or veto it and rebuke not only his fellow Republicans but also many pro-Israel groups who favor a tougher line on Iran.

    The bill, which was approved 419-3* in the House of Representatives on Tuesday, places new sanctions on Iran due to its ballistic missile program and support for terrorism. The bill has been praised by the pro-Israel AIPAC, which said in a press release shortly after the Senate vote that it “urges the president to sign it into law.”

    It also places new sanctions on Russian officials and entities due to the Kremlin’s machinations during the 2016 presidential election — which Trump continues to deny took place. It also allows Congress to block Trump from easing or ending sanctions on Russia…

    The only two senators to vote against the bill were Bernie Sanders and Rand Paul.

    http://forward.com/fast-forward/378289/senate-passes-russia-iran-korea-sanctions-98-2-spurring-showdown-with-trump/

    * Only three libertarian-leaning Republicans – Justin Amash of Michigan, Tom Massie of Kentucky and Jimmy Duncan of Tennessee – voted against the bill in the House.

    I wonder what the driving force is behind the almost unanimous vote (hint: see bolded terms)? Also, you can literally count on one hand the number of Congressman who are willing to defy The Lobby… the best government money can buy!

    Read More
  70. Z-man says:
    @Brooklyn Dave
    Where did true conservative convictions get us in the last 20 years or so? You're average conservative has been focused mainly on social issues and ignoring a whole lot of other stuff --like the useless wars we've been in, an economic system that's built and based on bupkes, a make Israel great instead of Make America great etc etc. Sessions is a good man, but he is trying to be too much the Southern gentleman. It is not going to work. You need an animal in there because you are dealing with animals.

    I agree with your post except the end, Sessions is indispensable to Trump because of his base and a southern gentleman is ok by me, in Sessions’ case.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    Except it is true that Sessions, probably because he has been in government so long, thought that recusing himself was proper. He likely thought that the people there had such high character that they would not continue this farce without any evidence. He does not see that the people in DC are scum and cannot be trusted under any circumstance. Sessions should have seen that from a mile away. I can see it from LA.
  71. annamaria says:
    @prole
    But after 12 months of investigations by a Democratic Justice depertment they found nothing linking Trump to a Russian conspiracy...Another 12 months will lead to nothing...

    ‘But after 12 months of investigations by a Democratic Justice department, they found nothing linking Trump to a Russian conspiracy…”
    Compare the wasted money and efforts on the interesting case of DNC emails and on a case of certain Pakistani family working for the DNC: “IT Aid to Congresswoman, Wasserman Schultz, Arrested at Airport After Transferring $283K to Pakistan” https://needtoknow.news/2017/07/aid-congresswoman-wasserman-schultz-arrested-airport-transferring-283k-pakistan/
    However, “Democratic members of Congress, including Rep. Gregory Meeks of New York, have suggested that police had framed the Pakistani-born Awan brothers out of Islamophobia. Yet his own stepmother, a devout Muslim, filed court documents accusing him of using high-tech devices to wiretap her and extorting her (see p. 23 of court documents in that case). A dozen people who have dealt with Imran painted a picture in interviews with TheDCNF of a charming, “cunning” extrovert who bragged about his power among Democratic officials and who seemed to have an unquenchable thirst for cash.”
    Nice. The MSM does not want to talk about the real criminals that were caught red-handed because when the criminals are DNC-related, the police work must be “framing” and “Islamophobia.”
    Very interesting what exactly the Awan brothers have on the Congressional Dems. The unceremonious refusal to let the FBI investigate the DNC computers (re allegedly “hacked” emails) and the loud voices of defense coming from Democratic members of Congress suggest that the brothers have acquired important morsels of information for blackmailing the Dems.
    “Wasserman Schultz has refused to fire Imran [Awan] despite being a known criminal suspect in a cybersecurity probe for months and has blocked Capitol Police from searching a laptop they confiscated because it was tied to him.”
    Let them sing.

    Read More
  72. You have to put this whole thing into proper perspective.
    Trump knows in his heart and in soul he did nothing wrong and that this a total farce. We all know that someone as boneheaded as him is unlikely to just roll over and step aside; look at the relentless attacks he endured in the primaries and the general but he still persevered through it.
    Plus let’s look at this “impeachment” thing realistically.
    The Repubs control Congress and unless some yet-to-be-seen evidence emerges that Trump committed some indisputably serious crime, there’s no way you’d ever get two-thirds in the Senate for impeachment- even if you throw in McCain, Miss Lindsey and the gals from ME and AK with every single Dem.

    Read More
  73. DaveE says:
    @Corvinus
    "My conclusion is that the Deep State is winning."

    Yes, it's all the doing of the Deep State. They, like the Jews, are the sources of all of our problems. Both only care about saving their necks and destroying careers and reputations. Politics is war. Sides win and sides lose.

    Now that we have that out of the way, let's focus on two of Mr. Buchanan's quotes.

    "A yearlong FBI investigation into Russian hacking has failed to produce a single indictment. Yet the president watches impotently as a special counsel pulls together a lethal force, inside his own administration, whose undeclared ambition is to bring him down."

    First, as he ought to know, these investigations are complicated. Indictments take time. There seems to be this conception that charges must be brought within a certain timeline and that overwhelming evidence ought to be forthcoming to the public; otherwise, the investigation is a "witch hunt". Second, it would appear, although it is not certain, that it is TRUMP and his own team's ambition is to bring themselves down if the accusations are shown to have legal merit to the point that people are arrested. Third, Buchanan has a blind spot here as he was part of the Nixon Administration who engaged in clear illegal activity.

    "How did we get to this peril point when there is no evidence that Trump or any senior aide colluded in the hacking? As for the June 2016 meeting with the Russians, called by Donald Trump Jr. when told by a friend that Moscow had dirt on Hillary Clinton, even that was no crime."

    There is evidence. Does it meet the legal definition of collusion? We don't know. Are there other investigations taking place? Yes. What will be the result? We have to wait to find out.

    We have to wait to find out? No, we have to wait for Mossad-CIA to fabricate more evidence, line up phony “witnesses”, falsify phone records, get some bogus “recordings” of calls from the NSA, maybe a few bogus flight manifestos from Trump Airlines, pay-off enough congresscritters, murder some REAL non-witnesses, stuff like that.

    It’s not easy being pathological liars, you know. It took the usual suspects at least 23 years to plan 9/11, I was tipped off personally in 1978.

    Read More
  74. Art says:

    Trump should FIGHT!

    In explicit terms Trump should call out the Deep State – he should use the words “Deep State.”

    Mueller is Deep Sate – he is an elite – if he comes up with things that have nothing to do with Russia and the election – Trump should pardon whoever – case closed.

    Trump should say that right now – put the onus on Mueller to do the right thing and not take down the election over small nothings.

    Peace — Art

    p.s. Clearly the Jew Matrix Deep State wants Trump taken down. Look at all the Jews on Fox trashing Trump’s positions.

    p.s. He should also get Sessions to start a second special counsel investigation of the Democrats and their lack of security and domestic Deep State spying. Fight fire with fire.

    p.s. For sure the Dems are guilty.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RobinG
    RIGHT !! GO ON THE OFFENSIVE !!!!

    Murmurs have started about a 2nd Special Prosecuter - to investigate the DNC. At the moment, the talk is about DNC scuttling Bernie. But if it gets going, how long before they get to DNC/Crowdstrike/Ukraine....? [And then there's DWS and the Awan bros.]

    Lee Stranahan names names...[Clinton, McCain, CIA, the Media, Soros....]
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L4q-sHJCGCk
    LEE STRANAHAN: ALEX JONES INFOWARS
  75. Michelle says:

    What is going on is the same as in The Palestinian Territories, the leaders of whom use the Israeli’s to blame for all of their failures.

    The “Investigations” of Trump/Russian collusion distract/detract from the business at hand. If you can blame “The Enemy” for your failure to effect positive change, so much the better.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Art
    What is going on is the same as in The Palestinian Territories, the leaders of whom use the Israeli’s to blame for all of their failures.

    Good god --- this has to be Jew Matrix - what garbage. No self respecting Gentile would say that.

    The list of offenses by the world's Jew against the Palestinians is long and ugly.

    Apartheid walls, summery killing, torture, jailing without trial, shooting children who throw stones. 1.5 million prison (Gaza), stealing and squatting, and a million mean offences done each day.

    Get a life - your 15,000,000 strong Hasbara Matric is losing.

    Peace --- Art

    p.s. Jew, get ready to pay-up for the pain and suffering of the Palestinian people.
    , @bjondo
    Yes,
    never blame Jew for Jew crimes.
    Blame Christians, Palestinians, Muslims.
    Blame anybody but the criminal Israeli aka Jew.
  76. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @yeah
    Your reply indicates partial agreement with some of my points and rebuttal of some others. In any case, thanks for your well-reasoned post.

    I don't mean to be pedantic but tracing hacks to identifiable groups is the real problem. It is not possible at a level of reasonable certainty because of the technical ease of several types of forgery and redirection of IP addresses. I am no technical expert on hacking but believe that, had compelling evidence of hacking existed, it would have ben produced ages ago. Note also that the anti-Trump media refers to the sins of hacking and leaks interchangeably, which is an affront to common sense akin to equating a bank robber to the teller who dips into cash: different crimes, different perpetrators.

    The real issue is this whole "there MAY have been illegal acts..." assertion. The big problem is that if the Chief Executive of a country can be spied upon and investigated by any minion who feels that illegal acts may have committed, then no stable and secure government is possible. Think about it, please. There is simply no choice but to vest high trust and strong power (not absolute power, simply strong enough power) in the Chief Executive. Do Chief Executives sometimes betray this trust. Of course they do, hey this is the real world. Are Chief Executives accused out of malevolent and selfish motives? Of course they are, happens a lot of times, perhaps 99.9% times.

    In the real world we need a delicate balance between obedience and dissent, hierarchy and free-for-all, and between absolute power and constrained power. There is no single clear-cut answer that can be claimed to be the only logically valid answer. Only a narrow range of solutions - narrower than what may be supposed at first sight - is possible and societies keep making fine adjustments. When narrow adjustments cannot be agreed upon, history shows that governmental breakdown, civil chaos and civil strife and wars inevitably follow. America should not go in that disastrous direction, regardless of our personal likes and dislikes. Remember, all people need do is to endure what some of them don't like for but four years then throw him out. There is no other low-risk solution.

    Yes, Just what YetAnotheAnon said, Corvinus is scum. Don’t get suckered into his game. He is an exceptional troll, but a troll nonetheless.

    Read More
  77. @Johnny Smoggins
    When dealing with the left, you can never apologize and never back down. Double down and punch back twice as hard. Anyone on the alt right could have told Trump this.

    Unfortunately for all his bluster about being a fighter, Trump did none of this.

    Five minutes after he became president he should have been going after Obama and the Clintons and burying the Russian hacking nonsense before it had time to grow wings. He didn't and now he's paying the price.

    Five minutes after he became president he should have been going after Obama and the Clintons and burying the Russian hacking nonsense before it had time to grow wings. He didn’t and now he’s paying the price.

    Be patient.

    If you’re going to a gunfight you’d best show up with more than your dick in your hands. Trump has been getting his gang together against the comprehensive opposition of ***EVERYONE***: Repubs, Dems. Neocons, Deep State, Intel Community, media and all the lesser demons. It’s been slow going, they’ve been beating up on him relentlessly; meanwhile, he’s been trying to make nice with them (everyone except the media). He’s given the DC criminal crowd every chance to turn away from the path of evil and get on board, to no avail. He’s been incredibly patient, particularly in light of his supposed take-no-prisoners bad-boy reputation. But maybe, just maybe, it’s not that he’s a wuss, but that the first offer should be the olive branch, the peaceful way — “We can do this the easy way” — and then, and only then, when your adversaries reject the “easy” way (and particularly if you weren’t initially prepared for battle), you up-armor, lock and load, and go full warrior mode on them. So watch what comes next.

    First, the “score sheet”:

    (1) re vulnerability:

    “The Swamp” has nothing actionable on Trump (the Nixon/Watergate analogy is junk);

    By comparison, Trump has matter-of-public-record immediately indictable offenses on virtually all his adversaries: war crimes for Congress; torture/war crimes for the Intel Community; conspiracy to commit war crimes for the Neocons; war crimes for Bush/Obama and their respective crews.

    (2) weapons at hand for political warfare:

    For Trump: the executive resources of the Presidency: (1) the power to make recess appointments, which will enable him to take near dictatorial control of the DoJ, from whence a Trump-loyal AG (after Trump shit-cans Sessions) can issue indictments; (2) a staff of US marshals to serve those indictments, slap the cuffs on, and haul them off in orange jumpsuits to a detention facility at an undisclosed location in the desert Southwest; (3) the Presidential pardon (the carrot for those who agree to submit).

    For the anti-Trump forces: (1) impeachment, if Congress can move faster than Trump (you make that call); (2) assassination, by the Deep State/CIA.

    Who has the advantage?

    Priebus, the old guard GOP mole is gone; Sacaramucci the Killer is in place.
    Are the gloves about to come off? Is Trump going on the offensive?

    Watch for recess appointments to the DoJ, then ask yourself, “Who exactly is it that’s in Buchanan’s “Kill Box”?”

    Read More
  78. @Anonymous
    Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive.

    Or we practice hyperbolic ego-puffing, flagrant deception, and outright ignorant stupidity.

    Either way, sayonara Donnie Trump. He won't last another nine months.

    What a horrible, horrible mistake to bring in that New Yawk Siddee jackass, Scara the Mooch. There isn't a toe left on either of Donnie's feet.

    Stick the fork in. He's done like dinner.

    I'm ready for Pence -- three years of total inaction coming right up!

    You never understood him, and he beat you badly. You still don’t understand him, so you tell yourself these silly fantasies, as he prepares to do you again. Personally, I love it. Keep it up. Interesting data on how many times cluelessness has to get resoundingly trounced before it steps back from the pain.

    Read More
  79. LauraMR says:
    @PapayaSF
    Mmmm, maybe. A few points:

    1) As stated by other commenters above, the "Russian hacking" story looks like DNC disinformation.

    2) If one is to believe some anon commenters on 4chan, Reddit, etc., this is all a big and intentional distraction by Trump to get Democrats to defend Sessions, and that Mueller is actually going to go after Hillary/DNC connections with Russia, Ukraine, corruption, etc. This theory is eagerly lapped up by the "everything Trump does is 4D chess" crowd, but that doesn't necessarily make it wrong.

    3) If Trump had some huge legal vulnerability, or a lot of enemies eager to "drop a dime" on him, why has that not happened before now? Why not before the election? It could be there's nothing there. I have to believe that Obama's corruptly partisan IRS, which has been auditing Trump for years, would have made a fuss or at least leaked, if they had found anything at all they thought might hurt him.

    4) In any case, I think Trump should go on offense. Appoint a special prosecutor for Hillary and the Clinton Foundation. There's enough in the book Clinton Cash to get them going. And sic the Justice Department on the Awan brothers IT scandal as a national security issue of the highest magnitude. The MSM is being as quiet as they can on this, but it's explosive: the DNC and a bunch of Congressional Democrats working with shady crooks with connections to Pakistan, Hezbollah, and the Muslim Brotherhood.

    Interesting points (2 & 3)… and hopefully true.

    Popcorn.

    Read More
  80. @AndrewR
    I didn't read wow's comment as a "tough guy" comment. Just a sober analysis of reality as he sees it. Wow might even be a leftie who is dreading what he sees as a predictable future

    Stonehands OTOH is a major Tough Guy. Lol

    I do concur with them in that the left has been provoking violence for which the left is woefully unprepared. The main question is whether the right will give the left the civil war the left wants. Although we should see some interesting twists when other nations, subnational organizations and international organizations fund, arm, aid and assist this faction or that one. Hold om to your hats.

    “I do concur with them in that the left has been provoking violence for which the left is woefully unprepared.”

    One has only to look at the shooting of Steve Scalise to see how unprepared they are. The guy got off, what, something close to 100 rounds and only wounded 4 people? If this is the best they can do (and it probably is), maybe it would be a good idea to think twice on how far they want to push things.

    Read More
  81. Art says:
    @Michelle
    What is going on is the same as in The Palestinian Territories, the leaders of whom use the Israeli's to blame for all of their failures.

    The "Investigations" of Trump/Russian collusion distract/detract from the business at hand. If you can blame "The Enemy" for your failure to effect positive change, so much the better.

    What is going on is the same as in The Palestinian Territories, the leaders of whom use the Israeli’s to blame for all of their failures.

    Good god — this has to be Jew Matrix – what garbage. No self respecting Gentile would say that.

    The list of offenses by the world’s Jew against the Palestinians is long and ugly.

    Apartheid walls, summery killing, torture, jailing without trial, shooting children who throw stones. 1.5 million prison (Gaza), stealing and squatting, and a million mean offences done each day.

    Get a life – your 15,000,000 strong Hasbara Matric is losing.

    Peace — Art

    p.s. Jew, get ready to pay-up for the pain and suffering of the Palestinian people.

    Read More
  82. @AndrewR
    I didn't read wow's comment as a "tough guy" comment. Just a sober analysis of reality as he sees it. Wow might even be a leftie who is dreading what he sees as a predictable future

    Stonehands OTOH is a major Tough Guy. Lol

    I do concur with them in that the left has been provoking violence for which the left is woefully unprepared. The main question is whether the right will give the left the civil war the left wants. Although we should see some interesting twists when other nations, subnational organizations and international organizations fund, arm, aid and assist this faction or that one. Hold om to your hats.

    A tempest is now gathering on the horizon. Do you not hear the wind whining through the rigging?

    Presently the fury of the storm will break upon us. And that will be the end for awhile of our Machines, and our science, and all this facility of communication and transportation that have brought people far tooclose together, far too long ahead of their readiness to have much to do with one another.

    We will once more have a chance to learn the elemental lessons of life under primitive conditions. We shall be stripped of the grown- ups’ clothes in which we have decked ourselves out for a day and fancied ourselves Men. We shall be thrown back where we belong and an ABC primer thrust before our eyes and held there till we master it’s lessons.

    That, as l see it, is what is going to happen to us, what is going to happen to the world, especially to our part of the world.

    Read More
  83. bjondo says:
    @Michelle
    What is going on is the same as in The Palestinian Territories, the leaders of whom use the Israeli's to blame for all of their failures.

    The "Investigations" of Trump/Russian collusion distract/detract from the business at hand. If you can blame "The Enemy" for your failure to effect positive change, so much the better.

    Yes,
    never blame Jew for Jew crimes.
    Blame Christians, Palestinians, Muslims.
    Blame anybody but the criminal Israeli aka Jew.

    Read More
  84. @Intelligent Dasein

    He can fire Jeff Sessions. But that will enrage Trump’s base to whom the senator is a loyal soldier.
     
    I'm sorry, Pat. I love you man, but I have to disagree here. I'm part of Trump's base and I would be overjoyed to be rid of Jeff "Matlock" Sessions and his knee-jerk cuckery.

    Jeff Sessions is a serious douche. Not only did he recuse himself from investigating the Clinton campaign, which was one of the dumbest political moves I've ever seen in my lifetime, but he also has just radically expanded that institutional racket known as civil asset forfeiture. He needs to be gone like yesterday, and I think most of the base would approve.

    Yesirree! If anything proves that the average American is targeted the civil asset forfeiture laws should prove it beyond any doubt, to even the thickest of the sheeple.

    Read More
  85. @anonymous
    Another Buchanan column that unquestioningly assumes "Russian hacking."

    This isn't journalism, but merely elegant, uninformative poli-talk worthy of the water cooler. Regrettably, it is functional disinformation, serving to airbrush out of an important discussion worthwhile, evidence-sourced articles, such as that recently put forth by the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (Binney, et al).

    Has Pat Buchanan even mentioned the alternative leak theory? It's as though he consumes nothing but MSM, and then valiantly battles within a falsely constrained set of facts.

    Yes, Buchanan and others needs to be briefed by VIPS, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity,
    Ray McGovern, leader of the group that includes former NSA says that the supposed “hack” was a leak

    https://consortiumnews.com/2017/07/24/intel-vets-challenge-russia-hack-evidence/

    With a companion by Scott Ritter

    http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/time_to_reassess_roles_of_guccifer_20_and_russia_in_dnc_hack_20170727

    First this breaks the narrative as concerns a hack, it could not have been it was a leak, but more importantly is the issues of a weaponizing of the Intelligence agencies to take actions to blame it on the Russians using as it is in the Vault 7 Wikileaks data about such cyberwarfare…..

    Operational in crimes that are treasonous and go back to the Obama Administration.

    https://larouchepac.com/20170727/every-tree-forest-will-fall

    Read More
  86. Corvinus says:
    @Alden
    Actually, it would not be unconstitutional for a president to defy a lower federal court or even the Supreme Court.

    There 2 precedents, Jackson and Lincoln both successfully defied the courts.
    It just has to be done. It should be done.

    “There 2 precedents, Jackson and Lincoln both successfully defied the courts.”

    Please follow along. I did not say that presidents had unsuccessfully defied the courts, I am saying that their actions are unconstitutional. In Jackson’s case, a majority of Americans preferred that tribes be removed by force from their lands. In Lincoln’s case, there was a Civil War taking place, and there was division even among his allies regarding the legality of suspending habeas corpus.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Alden
    There is no criteria whatsoever for what is constitutional or unconstitutional. Our constitution and laws are whatever a state or federal judge says they are.

    That's all. Our constitution claims separation and balance of powers. In reality it is judicial supremacy over the executive and legislative branches. Just admit it. It is futile to even discuss it.

    The founders set it up that way. Madison didn't have to cave in to the supreme court in 1804 but he did. Which was exactly what he and the founders intended.
  87. map says:
    @Numinous
    Trump wasn't president when he and his henchmen met with Russians. (If Kennedy had met Khruschev in 1959 trying to get dirt on Dick Nixon, there would have been holy hell to pay.) In fact, no one at that time gave Trump a prayer of winning (including himself and many in his team), so your comment that Trump was entitled to have such talks as befits a President is silly on its face.

    That said, whether or not whatever Trump did rises to the legal definition of misconduct, I believe this Russia issue has been a red herring from the start. The left and the media, even if they get many scalps this way, will likely come to regret the time and effort wasted on this. There's so much else to criticize Trump about. The guy is a empty suit, and a narcissistic as*****le, whose only "skill" is to throw his name and his ample funds (which he inherited from Daddy) around. He is both completely self-centered and has no ability to think about or analyze any issue, including the ones he ran on. The best description I have heard of him is "an evil Chauncey Gardner", as Sam Harris refers to him. He is a disgrace to your country and to your (alt-right) cause, and you all are chumps for sticking behind him.

    Again, this is not the Cold War.

    Kennedy talking to Khrushchev would have been a problem because of the Cold War. The Cold War is over. It is not illegal or improper for American citizens to speak to Russians.

    Moreover, the basis of Watergate was an actual crime: a burglary at Democrat Party headquarters. What’s the crime here?

    Read More
  88. RobinG says:
    @Art
    Trump should FIGHT!

    In explicit terms Trump should call out the Deep State – he should use the words “Deep State.”

    Mueller is Deep Sate - he is an elite - if he comes up with things that have nothing to do with Russia and the election - Trump should pardon whoever - case closed.

    Trump should say that right now - put the onus on Mueller to do the right thing and not take down the election over small nothings.

    Peace --- Art

    p.s. Clearly the Jew Matrix Deep State wants Trump taken down. Look at all the Jews on Fox trashing Trump's positions.

    p.s. He should also get Sessions to start a second special counsel investigation of the Democrats and their lack of security and domestic Deep State spying. Fight fire with fire.

    p.s. For sure the Dems are guilty.

    RIGHT !! GO ON THE OFFENSIVE !!!!

    Murmurs have started about a 2nd Special Prosecuter – to investigate the DNC. At the moment, the talk is about DNC scuttling Bernie. But if it gets going, how long before they get to DNC/Crowdstrike/Ukraine….? [And then there's DWS and the Awan bros.]

    Lee Stranahan names names…[Clinton, McCain, CIA, the Media, Soros....]

    LEE STRANAHAN: ALEX JONES INFOWARS

    Read More
    • Replies: @annamaria
    Thank you for the link. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L4q-sHJCGCk
    The U.S. has been allocating $trillions for the War on Terror. How come that the only Congressperson, Tulsi Gabbard, had had enough courage to propose "Stop Arming Terrorists Act (H.R.608)"? The U.S. Congress does not want to hear such nonsense because Israel wants the Golan Heights by any means, including the Israelis' material and military support for ISIS/Al Qaeda to destroy Syria. The Israel-firsters have been successful at "arranging" the ruining of the former gem of North Africa -- Lybia.
    The "War on Terror" is a phony war that targets the US taxpayers pockets (and other nations' natural resources).
    , @Art
    Hi RobinG,

    Clearly it is time for Trump to go on the offense – the media Matrix will have to cover-up for the Dems. It will make them look even more unfair to the American people.

    The problem is that the truth is not on the Dems side.

    All a special consul has to do is turn one witness – and it is game set and match.


    Peace --- Art
  89. Everyone who has any hopes for Trump will be disappointed. He failed even to build a team to support his agenda and now he is basically all alone being drained. My only hope for his is being proverbial bull in china shop to ruin everything and expose USA for the whole world. Basically I would love him to be American Gorbo-Yeltsin and considering USA top is as rotten to the core as Soviet was I hope for similar results which would have been beneficial to the world. The most important that there is no war…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous

    Basically I would love him to be American Gorbo-Yeltsin and considering USA top is as rotten to the core as Soviet was I hope for similar results which would have been beneficial to the world.
     
    Ah, sweet dreams, Sergey. The notion that Trump could rise to the ethical level of a Gorbachev is quite the fantasy. It would, indeed, be a wonderful thing, but America doesn't work that way. Trump is a fraud, and will destroy America -- he will present it, lock, stock and barrel to Israel for the scavenging.
  90. annamaria says:

    More on the real scandal involving the DNC and IT blackmailer. The MSM is quiet on this:

    http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/07/26/7-fast-facts-imran-awan-wasserman-schultzs-jailed-vendor/

    “Imran Awan, the Pakistan-born IT vendor to several top House Democrats under investigation since February, was arrested allegedly trying to flee the United States Tuesday…. Luke Rosiak, who has been spearheading this story since February, reported in May about Wasserman Schultz’s appearing to threaten Capitol Police Chief Matthew Verderosa with “consequences” if he did not return a laptop Awan owned that his officers had seized. Other House Democrats had started dumping Awan around the same time, but Wasserman Schultz stuck with him, despite his reported banning from the House IT network over the investigation.”

    Read More
  91. @Diversity Heretic
    My conclusion is that the Deep State is winning. Even I've getting numb and increasingly less interested in the twists and turns of who's investigating whom and why and what are the likely consequences. I'm reminded of the quote attribute to Lavrentiy Beria: "Show me the man and I will find you the crime."

    The likeliest and most obvious choice for Trump on how to escape the Mueller trap seems to have eluded Pat Buchanan: starting a war in the Middle East to overshadow or bury all investigations into the president’s wrongdoings. Engineering a war with Iran would fit the bill perfectly.
    With Trump quite clearly only concerned with his own well-being, the diversion of a patriotic war is the prime choice in times of trouble. The only question that remains is how will his generals will look at the option of getting involved in yet another ruinous war. A war that could have very dangerous implications and unpredictable outcomes.

    Read More
  92. KenH says:
    @Alden
    President Madison ceded supremacy to the judiciary in 1804. Separation of powers disappeared in that year.

    The judiciary makes up the laws they want and overthrows laws they don't want.

    Andrew Jackson and Lincoln defied the SCOTUS as I think you already noted so there is precedent. Since Trump claims to revere the former he should start emulating him when it comes to ideological rulings and judicial overreach that usurp executive branch authority.

    The radical left’s strategy of judicial activism to overcome electoral losses and legislative failures has worked nearly to perfection and the cucked right has no answer other than to bemoan the situation in their journals of opinion and on talk radio.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "Andrew Jackson and Lincoln defied the SCOTUS as I think you already noted so there is precedent."

    Illegally defied SCOTUS.

    "Since Trump claims to revere the former he should start emulating him when it comes to ideological rulings and judicial overreach that usurp executive branch authority."

    You mean circumvent checks and balances.

    "The radical left’s strategy of judicial activism to overcome electoral losses and legislative failures has worked nearly to perfection and the cucked right has no answer other than to bemoan the situation in their journals of opinion and on talk radio."

    Thank you very much for your opinion on this matter.
    , @Avery
    There was no MSM nor a massive, instantaneous electronic brainwashing apparatus in the days of Andrew Jackson and Lincoln. There was paper press, of course, but because of the time lag, things could be done before opposition could be built up by the slow-mo press. Faits Accomplis

    In his day Lincoln could jail 'Irresponsible Newspaper Reporters and Editors'*.
    I would love to see the lying reptilians Jack Tappers, Don Lemons, Chris Cuomos,....in handcuffs for deliberately and maliciously spreading lies, and in effect being enablers of a well organized, ongoing attempted coup against the legally elected POTUS. But that is not possible today.

    The only realistic path I see is for Trump to hang in there as long as he can, and put in 2-3 more Gorsuches in SCOTUS. Although even that is no guarantee: some justices have flipped from what they were thought to be once in SCOTUS.

    {The radical left’s strategy of judicial activism to overcome electoral losses and legislative failures has worked nearly to perfection and the cucked right has no answer other than to bemoan the situation in their journals of opinion and on talk radio.}

    Right. Well said.

    ______
    *
    [Executive Order—Arrest and Imprisonment of Irresponsible Newspaper Reporters and Editors]
    http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=70018

  93. KenH says:

    The question is that as the walls close in and Trump feels the heat of this wholly manufactured crisis will he launch a wag the dog type war to keep the deep state wolves away and salvage his presidency? He could go full on neo-con retard on us if he’s convinced that will save his administration.

    If that comes to pass then I don’t see any easy options regarding war. If he thinks Iran is an easy mark for a “shock and awe” campaign it would likely draw in Russia. If they choose the hermit kingdom then Seoul could lie in ruins along with much of our military on the 38th parallel owing to N.Korea’s massive firepower.

    There are no cakewalk wars like Iraq was supposed to be.

    Read More
  94. Corvinus says:
    @KenH
    Andrew Jackson and Lincoln defied the SCOTUS as I think you already noted so there is precedent. Since Trump claims to revere the former he should start emulating him when it comes to ideological rulings and judicial overreach that usurp executive branch authority.

    The radical left's strategy of judicial activism to overcome electoral losses and legislative failures has worked nearly to perfection and the cucked right has no answer other than to bemoan the situation in their journals of opinion and on talk radio.

    “Andrew Jackson and Lincoln defied the SCOTUS as I think you already noted so there is precedent.”

    Illegally defied SCOTUS.

    “Since Trump claims to revere the former he should start emulating him when it comes to ideological rulings and judicial overreach that usurp executive branch authority.”

    You mean circumvent checks and balances.

    “The radical left’s strategy of judicial activism to overcome electoral losses and legislative failures has worked nearly to perfection and the cucked right has no answer other than to bemoan the situation in their journals of opinion and on talk radio.”

    Thank you very much for your opinion on this matter.

    Read More
    • Replies: @KenH

    Illegally defied SCOTUS.
     
    Defied SCOTUS, yes. You have a stronger case with Lincoln who suspended habeas corpus. Trump is within his rights to defy since he is legally exercising his authority over incoming immigrants and refugees with regard to national security and NOT suspending Constitutional rights of American citizens.

    You mean circumvent checks and balances.
     
    A president exercising powers he was granted by Congress is not circumventing checks and balances. Your left wing judges are doing that by usurping executive and legislative branch functions with their activist rulings.
  95. El Dato says:
    @Stonehands
    A tempest is now gathering on the horizon. Do you not hear the wind whining through the rigging?

    Presently the fury of the storm will break upon us. And that will be the end for awhile of our Machines, and our science, and all this facility of communication and transportation that have brought people far tooclose together, far too long ahead of their readiness to have much to do with one another.

    We will once more have a chance to learn the elemental lessons of life under primitive conditions. We shall be stripped of the grown- ups' clothes in which we have decked ourselves out for a day and fancied ourselves Men. We shall be thrown back where we belong and an ABC primer thrust before our eyes and held there till we master it's lessons.

    That, as l see it, is what is going to happen to us, what is going to happen to the world, especially to our part of the world.
    Read More
  96. Avery says:
    @KenH
    Andrew Jackson and Lincoln defied the SCOTUS as I think you already noted so there is precedent. Since Trump claims to revere the former he should start emulating him when it comes to ideological rulings and judicial overreach that usurp executive branch authority.

    The radical left's strategy of judicial activism to overcome electoral losses and legislative failures has worked nearly to perfection and the cucked right has no answer other than to bemoan the situation in their journals of opinion and on talk radio.

    There was no MSM nor a massive, instantaneous electronic brainwashing apparatus in the days of Andrew Jackson and Lincoln. There was paper press, of course, but because of the time lag, things could be done before opposition could be built up by the slow-mo press. Faits Accomplis

    In his day Lincoln could jail ‘Irresponsible Newspaper Reporters and Editors’*.
    I would love to see the lying reptilians Jack Tappers, Don Lemons, Chris Cuomos,….in handcuffs for deliberately and maliciously spreading lies, and in effect being enablers of a well organized, ongoing attempted coup against the legally elected POTUS. But that is not possible today.

    The only realistic path I see is for Trump to hang in there as long as he can, and put in 2-3 more Gorsuches in SCOTUS. Although even that is no guarantee: some justices have flipped from what they were thought to be once in SCOTUS.

    {The radical left’s strategy of judicial activism to overcome electoral losses and legislative failures has worked nearly to perfection and the cucked right has no answer other than to bemoan the situation in their journals of opinion and on talk radio.}

    Right. Well said.

    ______
    *
    [Executive Order—Arrest and Imprisonment of Irresponsible Newspaper Reporters and Editors]

    http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=70018

    Read More
    • Replies: @KenH
    Let's hope if Trump gets to appoint any more judges they are rightists who remain so and not rightists who become center leftists after a few years on the high court like O'Connor, Souter, Kennedy and Roberts.
  97. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Sergey Krieger
    Everyone who has any hopes for Trump will be disappointed. He failed even to build a team to support his agenda and now he is basically all alone being drained. My only hope for his is being proverbial bull in china shop to ruin everything and expose USA for the whole world. Basically I would love him to be American Gorbo-Yeltsin and considering USA top is as rotten to the core as Soviet was I hope for similar results which would have been beneficial to the world. The most important that there is no war...

    Basically I would love him to be American Gorbo-Yeltsin and considering USA top is as rotten to the core as Soviet was I hope for similar results which would have been beneficial to the world.

    Ah, sweet dreams, Sergey. The notion that Trump could rise to the ethical level of a Gorbachev is quite the fantasy. It would, indeed, be a wonderful thing, but America doesn’t work that way. Trump is a fraud, and will destroy America — he will present it, lock, stock and barrel to Israel for the scavenging.

    Read More
  98. RobinG says:

    AT LAST….

    HOUSE (20 MOC’s signed) CALL TO INVESTIGATE CLINTON & DNC

    US House Judiciary Committee requests DoJ appoint second Special Prosecutor (PDF) https://judiciary.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/072717_HJC-Letter-to-AG-DAG.pdf

    Read More
    • Replies: @annamaria
    The "Russian hacking" story continues to unraveling: "Awan Brothers Scandal Creates Fears About Scope Of Data Leak" http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-06-09/awan-brothers-scandal-creates-fears-about-scope-data-leak?page=2

    "Imran Awan was first employed in 2004 by former Democrat Rep. Robert Wexler (FL) as an “information technology director”, before he began working in Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s office in 2005.
    ... on March 22, 2016, eight democrat members of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence issued a letter, requesting that their staffers [Awan brothers] be granted access to Top Secret Sensitive Compartmented Information (TS/SCI). The brothers were also employed by members of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, such as: Jackie Speier (D-CA), Andre Carson (D-IN), Joaquín Castro (D-TX), Lois Frankel (D-FL), Robin Kelly (D-IL), and Ted Lieu (D-CA).
    According to one congressional staffer, the Awans set up a remote access so they could connect from wherever they are, and have full access to everything on the member’s system. Despite being ordered by Capitol police that he was no longer to come near House servers, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) has kept Imran, whom is the suspect in a major criminal investigation, on in an “advisory position” in order to get around police orders.
    According to a former CIA source, the Awan brothers may have ties to the Pakistani intelligence service, ISI. The Awan’s had reportedly received a $100,000 loan from Dr. Ali al-Attar, an Iraqi politician. Dr. Attar is currently wanted by the U.S."

  99. annamaria says:
    @RobinG
    RIGHT !! GO ON THE OFFENSIVE !!!!

    Murmurs have started about a 2nd Special Prosecuter - to investigate the DNC. At the moment, the talk is about DNC scuttling Bernie. But if it gets going, how long before they get to DNC/Crowdstrike/Ukraine....? [And then there's DWS and the Awan bros.]

    Lee Stranahan names names...[Clinton, McCain, CIA, the Media, Soros....]
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L4q-sHJCGCk
    LEE STRANAHAN: ALEX JONES INFOWARS

    Thank you for the link. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L4q-sHJCGCk
    The U.S. has been allocating $trillions for the War on Terror. How come that the only Congressperson, Tulsi Gabbard, had had enough courage to propose “Stop Arming Terrorists Act (H.R.608)”? The U.S. Congress does not want to hear such nonsense because Israel wants the Golan Heights by any means, including the Israelis’ material and military support for ISIS/Al Qaeda to destroy Syria. The Israel-firsters have been successful at “arranging” the ruining of the former gem of North Africa — Lybia.
    The “War on Terror” is a phony war that targets the US taxpayers pockets (and other nations’ natural resources).

    Read More
  100. @Corvinus
    "Over on the Chateau Heartiste blog, CH recommended that Trump “crush the judiciary” back in January when it blocked his executive order on visa issuance."

    Which would have been unconstitutional. Ever since CH went Alt Right, his "advice" on p-grabbing has suffered immensely.

    "Trump didn’t realize then, and appears still not to realize, that the judiciary is overwhelmingly part of the opposition."

    No, it is part of our checks and balances system.

    "Sessions, being a long-time lawyer is probably too intimidated by judges (Mark Steyn, a Canadian, has noted the excessive deference Americans give to judges) but I’m surprised and disappointed that Trump didn’t move to defy the courts from the outset."

    That move would have been political suicide. It's not 1832-1833.

    The rulings were ultra vires, and the courts have no hard power to enforce them if the Executive has the cajones to simply state the law and continue to enforce it as it sees fit, at least until the chief executive is impeached and removed, or, more likely, voted out in three and a half years time.

    Read More
  101. @Van Doren
    Not his department. Tillerson and Kelly are mostly responsible in the area.

    Immigration enforcement is a legal matter, and AG is the priciple officer competent to enforce the laws. others can contribute as a matter of national security policy making, less so citizenship and naturalization policy.

    Read More
  102. annamaria says:
    @RobinG
    AT LAST....

    HOUSE (20 MOC's signed) CALL TO INVESTIGATE CLINTON & DNC

    US House Judiciary Committee requests DoJ appoint second Special Prosecutor (PDF) https://judiciary.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/072717_HJC-Letter-to-AG-DAG.pdf …

    The “Russian hacking” story continues to unraveling: “Awan Brothers Scandal Creates Fears About Scope Of Data Leak” http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-06-09/awan-brothers-scandal-creates-fears-about-scope-data-leak?page=2

    “Imran Awan was first employed in 2004 by former Democrat Rep. Robert Wexler (FL) as an “information technology director”, before he began working in Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s office in 2005.
    … on March 22, 2016, eight democrat members of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence issued a letter, requesting that their staffers [Awan brothers] be granted access to Top Secret Sensitive Compartmented Information (TS/SCI). The brothers were also employed by members of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, such as: Jackie Speier (D-CA), Andre Carson (D-IN), Joaquín Castro (D-TX), Lois Frankel (D-FL), Robin Kelly (D-IL), and Ted Lieu (D-CA).
    According to one congressional staffer, the Awans set up a remote access so they could connect from wherever they are, and have full access to everything on the member’s system. Despite being ordered by Capitol police that he was no longer to come near House servers, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) has kept Imran, whom is the suspect in a major criminal investigation, on in an “advisory position” in order to get around police orders.
    According to a former CIA source, the Awan brothers may have ties to the Pakistani intelligence service, ISI. The Awan’s had reportedly received a $100,000 loan from Dr. Ali al-Attar, an Iraqi politician. Dr. Attar is currently wanted by the U.S.”

    Read More
  103. KenH says:
    @Corvinus
    "Andrew Jackson and Lincoln defied the SCOTUS as I think you already noted so there is precedent."

    Illegally defied SCOTUS.

    "Since Trump claims to revere the former he should start emulating him when it comes to ideological rulings and judicial overreach that usurp executive branch authority."

    You mean circumvent checks and balances.

    "The radical left’s strategy of judicial activism to overcome electoral losses and legislative failures has worked nearly to perfection and the cucked right has no answer other than to bemoan the situation in their journals of opinion and on talk radio."

    Thank you very much for your opinion on this matter.

    Illegally defied SCOTUS.

    Defied SCOTUS, yes. You have a stronger case with Lincoln who suspended habeas corpus. Trump is within his rights to defy since he is legally exercising his authority over incoming immigrants and refugees with regard to national security and NOT suspending Constitutional rights of American citizens.

    You mean circumvent checks and balances.

    A president exercising powers he was granted by Congress is not circumventing checks and balances. Your left wing judges are doing that by usurping executive and legislative branch functions with their activist rulings.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "Trump is within his rights to defy since he is legally exercising his authority over incoming immigrants and refugees with regard to national security..."

    When it comes to national security matters, there is precedence for citizens and non-citizens to legally challenge such actions via the Supreme Court. You can thank Bush the junior during the war on terror for setting such precedence.

    "A president exercising powers he was granted by Congress is not circumventing checks and balances."

    Recall that the Supreme Court ruled against Obama in 2015 when it came to an immigration matter (temporary relief from deportation and work permits to illegal immigrants) because it believed he superseded his authority (I happen to agree with that ruling FWIW). Thus, there is precedence for the Supreme Court to review presidential power involving immigration.

    The difference here is that Trump's tweets calling for a complete shutdown of Muslims to enter the nation put a monkey wrench for the courts to read immigration and constitutional law with significant deference to the executive branch's broad delegated powers from Congress and broad discretion in foreign affairs. The issue was NOT about immigration per se, but rather to what extent would a travel ban serve the interests of national security.
  104. KenH says:
    @Avery
    There was no MSM nor a massive, instantaneous electronic brainwashing apparatus in the days of Andrew Jackson and Lincoln. There was paper press, of course, but because of the time lag, things could be done before opposition could be built up by the slow-mo press. Faits Accomplis

    In his day Lincoln could jail 'Irresponsible Newspaper Reporters and Editors'*.
    I would love to see the lying reptilians Jack Tappers, Don Lemons, Chris Cuomos,....in handcuffs for deliberately and maliciously spreading lies, and in effect being enablers of a well organized, ongoing attempted coup against the legally elected POTUS. But that is not possible today.

    The only realistic path I see is for Trump to hang in there as long as he can, and put in 2-3 more Gorsuches in SCOTUS. Although even that is no guarantee: some justices have flipped from what they were thought to be once in SCOTUS.

    {The radical left’s strategy of judicial activism to overcome electoral losses and legislative failures has worked nearly to perfection and the cucked right has no answer other than to bemoan the situation in their journals of opinion and on talk radio.}

    Right. Well said.

    ______
    *
    [Executive Order—Arrest and Imprisonment of Irresponsible Newspaper Reporters and Editors]
    http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=70018

    Let’s hope if Trump gets to appoint any more judges they are rightists who remain so and not rightists who become center leftists after a few years on the high court like O’Connor, Souter, Kennedy and Roberts.

    Read More
  105. Art says:
    @RobinG
    RIGHT !! GO ON THE OFFENSIVE !!!!

    Murmurs have started about a 2nd Special Prosecuter - to investigate the DNC. At the moment, the talk is about DNC scuttling Bernie. But if it gets going, how long before they get to DNC/Crowdstrike/Ukraine....? [And then there's DWS and the Awan bros.]

    Lee Stranahan names names...[Clinton, McCain, CIA, the Media, Soros....]
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L4q-sHJCGCk
    LEE STRANAHAN: ALEX JONES INFOWARS

    Hi RobinG,

    Clearly it is time for Trump to go on the offense – the media Matrix will have to cover-up for the Dems. It will make them look even more unfair to the American people.

    The problem is that the truth is not on the Dems side.

    All a special consul has to do is turn one witness – and it is game set and match.

    Peace — Art

    Read More
  106. MarkinLA says:
    @Anonymous
    I don't fully grasp why Trump is so worked up about the actual Mueller investigation. Of course, the MSM pursuit of the "Russia" angle has been distracting and harmful, but, so far as I can tell, and no matter what Russia actually did, there seems very little sign that any Trump associates did anything seriously out of line in dealing with Russia. (And I fully grant that some of them are somewhat mercenary, and have not always been concerned primarily with the US. But that is par for the course.) Yes, the very fact that Mueller, or anyone, was appointed to this job was a strike against Trump. But it seems he ought to just accept it and work with it. The better strategy for Trump seems to be to actively interpret Mueller as engaged in a broader investigation of electoral shenanigans, so that if it turns out that it wasn't precisely the "Russians" who did bad stuff, it is still within Mueller's purview to investigate. I recall that Kim Dotcom made an offer directly to Mueller to come to the US and provide testimony, if he were given a deal that meets his needs, and I suspect Julian Assange would also be quite willing to make a deal. Why doesn't Trump put out some tweets urging this? Seriously. If someone in the White House is reading this, or if someone knows someone (maybe Pat B knows someone) why not have Trump insinuate that he is perfectly fine with Kim Dotcom and Julian Assange being granted safe passage to give Congressional testimony, under Mueller's aegis.

    No, No, NO a thousand times NO. If you are innocent of a crime, the second to the last thing you want is the police investigating you thinking you are the perp. The very last thing you want is to be put on trial.

    Both of these events are crap-shoots with you against the house odds.

    trump could be put in a perjury trap where they ask him some innocuous question and come back later claiming he lied under oath. The investigation does have to end at the Russia BS the way it is being run right now.

    Read More
  107. MarkinLA says:
    @Numinous
    Trump wasn't president when he and his henchmen met with Russians. (If Kennedy had met Khruschev in 1959 trying to get dirt on Dick Nixon, there would have been holy hell to pay.) In fact, no one at that time gave Trump a prayer of winning (including himself and many in his team), so your comment that Trump was entitled to have such talks as befits a President is silly on its face.

    That said, whether or not whatever Trump did rises to the legal definition of misconduct, I believe this Russia issue has been a red herring from the start. The left and the media, even if they get many scalps this way, will likely come to regret the time and effort wasted on this. There's so much else to criticize Trump about. The guy is a empty suit, and a narcissistic as*****le, whose only "skill" is to throw his name and his ample funds (which he inherited from Daddy) around. He is both completely self-centered and has no ability to think about or analyze any issue, including the ones he ran on. The best description I have heard of him is "an evil Chauncey Gardner", as Sam Harris refers to him. He is a disgrace to your country and to your (alt-right) cause, and you all are chumps for sticking behind him.

    Neil Gorsuch, nuff said.

    Read More
  108. MarkinLA says:
    @Seamus Padraig
    OT:

    It looks like Trump is going to sign the new sanctions bill against Russia: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jul/28/trump-will-sign-bill-imposing-new-sanctions-on-russia-white-house

    It passed with veto-proof margins through both houses, so there's not much he can do about it anyway. The good news here is that these new sanctions -- which target EU concerns that do business with Gazprom -- will drive a massive wedge in between Washington and Berlin, as Europe needs Russian oil and gas in order to survive.

    We could be looking at the downfall of NATO right here.

    Given Trump’s position and the veto-proof majority, it would have been better for Trump (IMHO) to announce that sanctions don’t work and he is sick of the US imposing them and twisting the arms of allies trying to make them go along while vetoing the bill. Then he can look like the Alt-Right guy he campaigned as and still be a cuck.

    Read More
  109. MarkinLA says:
    @Z-man
    I agree with your post except the end, Sessions is indispensable to Trump because of his base and a southern gentleman is ok by me, in Sessions' case.

    Except it is true that Sessions, probably because he has been in government so long, thought that recusing himself was proper. He likely thought that the people there had such high character that they would not continue this farce without any evidence. He does not see that the people in DC are scum and cannot be trusted under any circumstance. Sessions should have seen that from a mile away. I can see it from LA.

    Read More
  110. @Johnny Smoggins
    When dealing with the left, you can never apologize and never back down. Double down and punch back twice as hard. Anyone on the alt right could have told Trump this.

    Unfortunately for all his bluster about being a fighter, Trump did none of this.

    Five minutes after he became president he should have been going after Obama and the Clintons and burying the Russian hacking nonsense before it had time to grow wings. He didn't and now he's paying the price.

    This is absolutely correct. Or put another way, the best defense is a good offense.

    Which is where Buchanan misses a crucial option left open for Trump.

    Sessions is impotent on Russia, but he is still fully empowered to begin taking scalps of all the democrats of the last 8 years.

    By my count at least 9 more special counsels could be authorized by Sessions on Monday morning

    Eric Holder FastnFurious
    Lois Lerner IRS scandal
    Loretta Lynch FBI obstruction
    Donna Brazile DNC primary fixing
    Debbie Wasserman Schulz Whatever this latest scandal is
    California illegal voting
    Hillary Clinton Clinton Foundation corruption
    Hillary Clinton Benghazi-Libya-Syria arms smuggling
    Hillary Clinton email obstruction of justice

    So you wanna play rough? Shay hello to my lil friends

    Read More
  111. uslabor says:
    @Stonehands
    Face the facts: you lefties have been itching for a fight- and we ARE going to scratch that itch. These will be the new heroes not some dumb jock or moronic rapper.
    Our Western culture, art, philosophy, science and religion; our women; our families- are worth dying for. Societed must be righted, obviously we have had enough of Sodom.

    First of all, you don’t know what stripe I’m wearing. Second, t’s easy for a moron of either stripe to brag about scratching an itch.

    Your wives, your families are worth dying for? I guess armed folks on both sides of the spectrum feel the same way.

    It isn’t Left vs Right, it IS the system VS you. You idiot.

    Read More
    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
    "It isn’t Left vs Right, it IS the system VS you." 100% Correct!
  112. uslabor says:
    @Anonymous

    Oh, the horde-manity!
     
    Did you get off just with that, or did you need a bit of manual dexterity by the non-typing hand? Did you giggle? Chortle? Gasp with delight at your own oh-so-inventive drollery?

    Why spoil it for you, keep guessing, bitch.

    Read More
  113. uslabor says:
    @AndrewR
    I didn't read wow's comment as a "tough guy" comment. Just a sober analysis of reality as he sees it. Wow might even be a leftie who is dreading what he sees as a predictable future

    Stonehands OTOH is a major Tough Guy. Lol

    I do concur with them in that the left has been provoking violence for which the left is woefully unprepared. The main question is whether the right will give the left the civil war the left wants. Although we should see some interesting twists when other nations, subnational organizations and international organizations fund, arm, aid and assist this faction or that one. Hold om to your hats.

    The Left hasn’t been provoking violence any more than the Right has. Any of you remember the Federal Building in OK city some years ago?

    McVey was not a leftist.

    This is divide and conquer in use by the powers that be against us on both right and left. The system is coming for all of us.

    It’s a class issue.

    Read More
    • Agree: Stephen R. Diamond
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    The loss of the editing feature is really outrageous.

    Anyway, to the extent that it's a cpass issue it's the high-low coalition. Elite parasites (banks, corporations and government) riling up low-class parasites (welfare leeches and criminals) and upper middle class parasites (media, academics, affirmative action beneficiaries, lawyers and diversity kommisars) against the productive class which is very disproportionately white male goyim.
  114. uslabor says:
    @AndrewR
    I didn't read wow's comment as a "tough guy" comment. Just a sober analysis of reality as he sees it. Wow might even be a leftie who is dreading what he sees as a predictable future

    Stonehands OTOH is a major Tough Guy. Lol

    I do concur with them in that the left has been provoking violence for which the left is woefully unprepared. The main question is whether the right will give the left the civil war the left wants. Although we should see some interesting twists when other nations, subnational organizations and international organizations fund, arm, aid and assist this faction or that one. Hold om to your hats.

    “Stonehands OTOH is a major Tough Guy. Lol”

    Yeah, a lot of tough guys posting from the comfort of their comfy chairs.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Stonehands
    Buddy, l own an all night pizzeria in the heart of Philadelphia across the street from a major Federal building. I am uniquely qualified to assess my enemies by dint of the fact that all night protests take place 20 feet from my doorway...

    Next time, why don't you pause to reflect before vomiting out another inarticulate response which exposes your lack of ability to engage in abstract reasoning.
  115. Corvinus says:
    @KenH

    Illegally defied SCOTUS.
     
    Defied SCOTUS, yes. You have a stronger case with Lincoln who suspended habeas corpus. Trump is within his rights to defy since he is legally exercising his authority over incoming immigrants and refugees with regard to national security and NOT suspending Constitutional rights of American citizens.

    You mean circumvent checks and balances.
     
    A president exercising powers he was granted by Congress is not circumventing checks and balances. Your left wing judges are doing that by usurping executive and legislative branch functions with their activist rulings.

    “Trump is within his rights to defy since he is legally exercising his authority over incoming immigrants and refugees with regard to national security…”

    When it comes to national security matters, there is precedence for citizens and non-citizens to legally challenge such actions via the Supreme Court. You can thank Bush the junior during the war on terror for setting such precedence.

    “A president exercising powers he was granted by Congress is not circumventing checks and balances.”

    Recall that the Supreme Court ruled against Obama in 2015 when it came to an immigration matter (temporary relief from deportation and work permits to illegal immigrants) because it believed he superseded his authority (I happen to agree with that ruling FWIW). Thus, there is precedence for the Supreme Court to review presidential power involving immigration.

    The difference here is that Trump’s tweets calling for a complete shutdown of Muslims to enter the nation put a monkey wrench for the courts to read immigration and constitutional law with significant deference to the executive branch’s broad delegated powers from Congress and broad discretion in foreign affairs. The issue was NOT about immigration per se, but rather to what extent would a travel ban serve the interests of national security.

    Read More
    • Replies: @annamaria
    Well, let's talk about national security: http://beforeitsnews.com/opinion-conservative/2017/07/at-least-12-questions-for-democrats-behind-the-awan-scandal-3307592.html
    "Clarice Feldman has a list of questions for those involved with Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Imran Awan, the Democrat side of the House Intelligence Committee...:
    1. Who coordinated the hiring of the Awan brothers by dozens of the Democratic congressman?
    2. Why were they [Awan brothers] so grossly over-compensated (millions of dollars) for no work?
    3. Were they kicking back money to the Democrats, doing "dirty" work for them, or blackmailing them?
    4. Why did Wasserman-Schultz keep the Capitol police from searching her laptop they had confiscated from Imran Awan?
    5. Why did Wasserman-Schultz keep him [Imran Awan - the attempted fugitive] on her payroll after the Capitol police further barred him and his brothers from accessing Congressional computers?
    6. Why did the Iraqi fugitive and Hezbollah supporter Dr. Ali-Al Attar "lend" them $ 100,000?
    7. Who is paying Chris Gowan, a Clinton insider, to represent Imran Awan?
    8. Why did the Awan brothers continue to have security clearances when they had declared several bankruptcies and were engaged in financial misleading? "
    9. Why were the Awans broke when they were making so much money and living so modestly?
    10. Why did EIGHT members of the House Permanent Select Committee on INTELLIGENCE issue a letter demanding the Awans be granted access to top secret information?
    11.Were the Awans working for Pakistani intelligence and Moslem Brotherhood?
    12. To whom were the Awans sending data to on an offsite server?"

    Even the "Forbes" notices that "Awan allegedly stole hundreds of thousands of dollars in equipment from House offices and even allegedly funneled sensitive congressional data offsite in what some are calling a massive cyber-security breach."
    That there was a "massive cyber-security breach" was already clear in the early spring of this year, but the MSM was too busy with pummeling Trump and "deplorables" while protecting the Clintonistas. It was alternative media that led the exposure: Disastrous National Security Breach in U.S. Congress," http://www.shiftfrequency.com/awan-brothers-natl-sec-breach-congress/
    More from the same time: "PAKISTANI AWAN FAMILY UNDER INVESTIGATION FOR LARGEST BREACH OF U.S. NATIONAL SECURITY IN HISTORY"
    Again, the MSM was quiet.

    The story of Wasserman-Schultz & Awan brothers' illegal activities is more than about the largest breach of the U.S. security - it seems that the Congressional Democrats have been blackmailed and, to protect their skins, the Democrats have been protecting the blackmailers/criminals. https://californiajimmy.com/2017/05/22/muslim-awan-bros-may-blackmailing-dem-congress-members-may-22-2017/
    "For years, it was widely known that Awan, and eventually his 20-year-old brother Jamal, did the bulk of the work for various offices, while no-show employees were listed on members’ staffs in order to collect additional $165,000 salaries... This circumvented a rule that prevents any one staffer from making more than members of Congress. Members were fiercely protective of the business, despite objectively shoddy work and requests for computer help routinely ignored for weeks. An IT specialist who took over an Awan office said they did not keep an inventory of what hardware was there, and the office was paying for phone lines it hadn’t used in years. “The number of offices they had would definitely be suspicious. The loyalty [members] had [coupled with] customer service that wasn’t there...”

    , @KenH

    Recall that the Supreme Court ruled against Obama in 2015 when it came to an immigration matter (temporary relief from deportation and work permits to illegal immigrants) because it believed he superseded his authority (I happen to agree with that ruling FWIW). Thus, there is precedence for the Supreme Court to review presidential power involving immigration.
     
    But that's an apples and oranges comparison. A president does not have the authority to unilaterally bestow legal status on illegal aliens such as Obama did and the court was right to strike that down since he was exercising powers he does not have (since that's the purview of the legislative branch). Even you agree.

    However, a president absolutely can bar certain groups from entering America for national security reasons and courts cannot usurp this authority for reasons of ideology or just because they don't like the president elect. President Carter banned Iranians and deported over 10K during the hostage crisis and the courts wisely did not interfere. Today they would try to block it.


    The difference here is that Trump’s tweets calling for a complete shutdown of Muslims to enter the nation put a monkey wrench for the courts to read immigration and constitutional law.....
     
    The first and second, revised EO didn't even come close to accomplishing a complete Muslim ban. Judges are supposed to rule based on the stated intent of the EO and not infer some secret/unstated, ill intent (i.e., anti-Muslim religious bigotry) based upon stray comments or tweets made on the campaign a year or so prior.
  116. annamaria says:
    @Corvinus
    "Trump is within his rights to defy since he is legally exercising his authority over incoming immigrants and refugees with regard to national security..."

    When it comes to national security matters, there is precedence for citizens and non-citizens to legally challenge such actions via the Supreme Court. You can thank Bush the junior during the war on terror for setting such precedence.

    "A president exercising powers he was granted by Congress is not circumventing checks and balances."

    Recall that the Supreme Court ruled against Obama in 2015 when it came to an immigration matter (temporary relief from deportation and work permits to illegal immigrants) because it believed he superseded his authority (I happen to agree with that ruling FWIW). Thus, there is precedence for the Supreme Court to review presidential power involving immigration.

    The difference here is that Trump's tweets calling for a complete shutdown of Muslims to enter the nation put a monkey wrench for the courts to read immigration and constitutional law with significant deference to the executive branch's broad delegated powers from Congress and broad discretion in foreign affairs. The issue was NOT about immigration per se, but rather to what extent would a travel ban serve the interests of national security.

    Well, let’s talk about national security: http://beforeitsnews.com/opinion-conservative/2017/07/at-least-12-questions-for-democrats-behind-the-awan-scandal-3307592.html
    “Clarice Feldman has a list of questions for those involved with Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Imran Awan, the Democrat side of the House Intelligence Committee…:
    1. Who coordinated the hiring of the Awan brothers by dozens of the Democratic congressman?
    2. Why were they [Awan brothers] so grossly over-compensated (millions of dollars) for no work?
    3. Were they kicking back money to the Democrats, doing “dirty” work for them, or blackmailing them?
    4. Why did Wasserman-Schultz keep the Capitol police from searching her laptop they had confiscated from Imran Awan?
    5. Why did Wasserman-Schultz keep him [Imran Awan - the attempted fugitive] on her payroll after the Capitol police further barred him and his brothers from accessing Congressional computers?
    6. Why did the Iraqi fugitive and Hezbollah supporter Dr. Ali-Al Attar “lend” them $ 100,000?
    7. Who is paying Chris Gowan, a Clinton insider, to represent Imran Awan?
    8. Why did the Awan brothers continue to have security clearances when they had declared several bankruptcies and were engaged in financial misleading? ”
    9. Why were the Awans broke when they were making so much money and living so modestly?
    10. Why did EIGHT members of the House Permanent Select Committee on INTELLIGENCE issue a letter demanding the Awans be granted access to top secret information?
    11.Were the Awans working for Pakistani intelligence and Moslem Brotherhood?
    12. To whom were the Awans sending data to on an offsite server?”

    Even the “Forbes” notices that “Awan allegedly stole hundreds of thousands of dollars in equipment from House offices and even allegedly funneled sensitive congressional data offsite in what some are calling a massive cyber-security breach.”
    That there was a “massive cyber-security breach” was already clear in the early spring of this year, but the MSM was too busy with pummeling Trump and “deplorables” while protecting the Clintonistas. It was alternative media that led the exposure: Disastrous National Security Breach in U.S. Congress,” http://www.shiftfrequency.com/awan-brothers-natl-sec-breach-congress/
    More from the same time: “PAKISTANI AWAN FAMILY UNDER INVESTIGATION FOR LARGEST BREACH OF U.S. NATIONAL SECURITY IN HISTORY”
    Again, the MSM was quiet.

    The story of Wasserman-Schultz & Awan brothers’ illegal activities is more than about the largest breach of the U.S. security – it seems that the Congressional Democrats have been blackmailed and, to protect their skins, the Democrats have been protecting the blackmailers/criminals. https://californiajimmy.com/2017/05/22/muslim-awan-bros-may-blackmailing-dem-congress-members-may-22-2017/
    “For years, it was widely known that Awan, and eventually his 20-year-old brother Jamal, did the bulk of the work for various offices, while no-show employees were listed on members’ staffs in order to collect additional $165,000 salaries… This circumvented a rule that prevents any one staffer from making more than members of Congress. Members were fiercely protective of the business, despite objectively shoddy work and requests for computer help routinely ignored for weeks. An IT specialist who took over an Awan office said they did not keep an inventory of what hardware was there, and the office was paying for phone lines it hadn’t used in years. “The number of offices they had would definitely be suspicious. The loyalty [members] had [coupled with] customer service that wasn’t there…”

    Read More
  117. Corvinus says:

    “That there was a “massive cyber-security breach” was already clear in the early spring of this year, but the MSM was too busy with pummeling Trump and “deplorables” while protecting the Clintonistas.”

    Yes, the old “well, they did it, too” argument. I have no problems if and when the Clintons and their henchmen are also investigated. Should they? Yes. Will they? Time will tell. But it would appear that Trump and company have their OWN issues to attend to, with numerous investigations being conducted for their OWN misdeeds going back years.

    Play the blame game if you want to, call it a Deep State driven operation, but will you change your tune IF the evidence bores out that Trump has engaged in numerous illegal activities, or will you put your hands over your ears, close your eyes, and pout?

    Read More
  118. @uslabor
    "Stonehands OTOH is a major Tough Guy. Lol"

    Yeah, a lot of tough guys posting from the comfort of their comfy chairs.

    Buddy, l own an all night pizzeria in the heart of Philadelphia across the street from a major Federal building. I am uniquely qualified to assess my enemies by dint of the fact that all night protests take place 20 feet from my doorway…

    Next time, why don’t you pause to reflect before vomiting out another inarticulate response which exposes your lack of ability to engage in abstract reasoning.

    Read More
    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
    What an awesome marketing opportunity for a pizza parlour, having customers on your doorstep. Do you ever give out small taster slices for free? Have you named a certain pizza after a revolutionary? I'm thinking The Che Special with lots of chilli, or Fidel's Favourite con chorizo. Something like that.

    Oh, and a plastic shatterproof film over all glass windows and doors.
  119. Alden says:
    @Corvinus
    "There 2 precedents, Jackson and Lincoln both successfully defied the courts."

    Please follow along. I did not say that presidents had unsuccessfully defied the courts, I am saying that their actions are unconstitutional. In Jackson's case, a majority of Americans preferred that tribes be removed by force from their lands. In Lincoln's case, there was a Civil War taking place, and there was division even among his allies regarding the legality of suspending habeas corpus.

    There is no criteria whatsoever for what is constitutional or unconstitutional. Our constitution and laws are whatever a state or federal judge says they are.

    That’s all. Our constitution claims separation and balance of powers. In reality it is judicial supremacy over the executive and legislative branches. Just admit it. It is futile to even discuss it.

    The founders set it up that way. Madison didn’t have to cave in to the supreme court in 1804 but he did. Which was exactly what he and the founders intended.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "There is no criteria whatsoever for what is constitutional or unconstitutional. Our constitution and laws are whatever a state or federal judge says they are."

    You are an embarrassment to private schools. When judges make decisions, they look at the statutory language, past court cases, and precedent. Since the law is a human creation, judges will have their own philosophy on what legislation means--balancing, Founders Intent, originalism, doctrinalism, and strict constructionism come to mind. Each philosophy has a particular way of viewing the law and how it ought to be applied.

    "That’s all. Our constitution claims separation and balance of powers. In reality it is judicial supremacy over the executive and legislative branches. Just admit it. It is futile to even discuss it."

    Again, you are an embarrassment to private schools. There is no "claiming" of separation and balance of powers. There are numerous instances in our nation's history where the Supreme Court has been kept in check or at bay by the legislative and executive branch. I am more than willing to help you find a basic United States history textbook that suits your comprehension level.

    "Madison didn’t have to cave in to the supreme court in 1804 but he did. Which was exactly what he and the founders intended."

    It was 1789 with the creation of the federal court system, and it was 1800 by which federal review was established.
  120. Corvinus says:
    @Alden
    There is no criteria whatsoever for what is constitutional or unconstitutional. Our constitution and laws are whatever a state or federal judge says they are.

    That's all. Our constitution claims separation and balance of powers. In reality it is judicial supremacy over the executive and legislative branches. Just admit it. It is futile to even discuss it.

    The founders set it up that way. Madison didn't have to cave in to the supreme court in 1804 but he did. Which was exactly what he and the founders intended.

    “There is no criteria whatsoever for what is constitutional or unconstitutional. Our constitution and laws are whatever a state or federal judge says they are.”

    You are an embarrassment to private schools. When judges make decisions, they look at the statutory language, past court cases, and precedent. Since the law is a human creation, judges will have their own philosophy on what legislation means–balancing, Founders Intent, originalism, doctrinalism, and strict constructionism come to mind. Each philosophy has a particular way of viewing the law and how it ought to be applied.

    “That’s all. Our constitution claims separation and balance of powers. In reality it is judicial supremacy over the executive and legislative branches. Just admit it. It is futile to even discuss it.”

    Again, you are an embarrassment to private schools. There is no “claiming” of separation and balance of powers. There are numerous instances in our nation’s history where the Supreme Court has been kept in check or at bay by the legislative and executive branch. I am more than willing to help you find a basic United States history textbook that suits your comprehension level.

    “Madison didn’t have to cave in to the supreme court in 1804 but he did. Which was exactly what he and the founders intended.”

    It was 1789 with the creation of the federal court system, and it was 1800 by which federal review was established.

    Read More
  121. AndrewR says:
    @uslabor
    The Left hasn't been provoking violence any more than the Right has. Any of you remember the Federal Building in OK city some years ago?

    McVey was not a leftist.

    This is divide and conquer in use by the powers that be against us on both right and left. The system is coming for all of us.

    It's a class issue.

    The loss of the editing feature is really outrageous.

    Anyway, to the extent that it’s a cpass issue it’s the high-low coalition. Elite parasites (banks, corporations and government) riling up low-class parasites (welfare leeches and criminals) and upper middle class parasites (media, academics, affirmative action beneficiaries, lawyers and diversity kommisars) against the productive class which is very disproportionately white male goyim.

    Read More
    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
    I still have the editing feature. Perhaps it's your browser.
    , @Ron Unz
    FYI:

    http://www.unz.com/announcement/new-software-releaseopen-thread/#comment-1951187
  122. KenH says:
    @Corvinus
    "Trump is within his rights to defy since he is legally exercising his authority over incoming immigrants and refugees with regard to national security..."

    When it comes to national security matters, there is precedence for citizens and non-citizens to legally challenge such actions via the Supreme Court. You can thank Bush the junior during the war on terror for setting such precedence.

    "A president exercising powers he was granted by Congress is not circumventing checks and balances."

    Recall that the Supreme Court ruled against Obama in 2015 when it came to an immigration matter (temporary relief from deportation and work permits to illegal immigrants) because it believed he superseded his authority (I happen to agree with that ruling FWIW). Thus, there is precedence for the Supreme Court to review presidential power involving immigration.

    The difference here is that Trump's tweets calling for a complete shutdown of Muslims to enter the nation put a monkey wrench for the courts to read immigration and constitutional law with significant deference to the executive branch's broad delegated powers from Congress and broad discretion in foreign affairs. The issue was NOT about immigration per se, but rather to what extent would a travel ban serve the interests of national security.

    Recall that the Supreme Court ruled against Obama in 2015 when it came to an immigration matter (temporary relief from deportation and work permits to illegal immigrants) because it believed he superseded his authority (I happen to agree with that ruling FWIW). Thus, there is precedence for the Supreme Court to review presidential power involving immigration.

    But that’s an apples and oranges comparison. A president does not have the authority to unilaterally bestow legal status on illegal aliens such as Obama did and the court was right to strike that down since he was exercising powers he does not have (since that’s the purview of the legislative branch). Even you agree.

    However, a president absolutely can bar certain groups from entering America for national security reasons and courts cannot usurp this authority for reasons of ideology or just because they don’t like the president elect. President Carter banned Iranians and deported over 10K during the hostage crisis and the courts wisely did not interfere. Today they would try to block it.

    The difference here is that Trump’s tweets calling for a complete shutdown of Muslims to enter the nation put a monkey wrench for the courts to read immigration and constitutional law…..

    The first and second, revised EO didn’t even come close to accomplishing a complete Muslim ban. Judges are supposed to rule based on the stated intent of the EO and not infer some secret/unstated, ill intent (i.e., anti-Muslim religious bigotry) based upon stray comments or tweets made on the campaign a year or so prior.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "A president does not have the authority to unilaterally bestow legal status on illegal aliens such as Obama did..."

    Obama was attempting to ease deportation threats for millions of undocumented immigrants via work authorization, NOT bestow legal status. In other words, he was trying to enable them to remain longer here in the States UNTIL their legal status could be resolved.

    "President Carter banned Iranians and deported over 10K during the hostage crisis and the courts wisely did not interfere. Today they would try to block it."

    Context here is important. Carter acted against citizens of Iran who sought to come here after their government defended the action taken by militants who took American diplomats hostage. He was responding to a crisis directly involving a sovereign nation. Trump, by contrast, was prohibiting Muslims for the actions taken by terrorist organizations not exclusively aligned to a nation. Carter was responding to a specific crisis involving a sovereign state; Trump was responding to an ongoing crisis whose threats come from non-state actors.

    "Today they would try to block it."

    You mean they COULD block it.
  123. The whole US is entering a kill box.

    I viewed a recent video demonstrating a US THAAD anti-ballistic missile (ABM) shooting down a live drone target.

    The test was practically worthless because it demonstrated a THAAD missile intercepting a live drone target in the boost phase, not the ballistic phase.

    A more realistic scenario for an NK ICBM attack on the US would be to attempt to intercept a target drone in the ballistic phase.

    Ballistic phase missiles exhibit no significant heat signature to assist a THAAD ABM missile tracking system.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Avery
    {A more realistic scenario for an NK ICBM attack on the US....}

    Why in the world would NK _attack_ US?
    It will be a suicide on a massive scale.
    US would turn the entire land mass of NK into a radioactive wasteland, if NK sends even one ICBM thisa way.

    A couple of things.

    Russia has offered to share radar data with US proving NK did not launch an ICBM, but rather a IRBM. US not interested, of course.

    NK's nuke program is a deterrent to US invasion: not intended to first-strike US.
    Why in the world would NK attack US?
    NK wants to be left alone.
    Why in the world would NK attack US?
  124. Avery says:
    @Joe Franklin
    The whole US is entering a kill box.

    I viewed a recent video demonstrating a US THAAD anti-ballistic missile (ABM) shooting down a live drone target.

    The test was practically worthless because it demonstrated a THAAD missile intercepting a live drone target in the boost phase, not the ballistic phase.

    A more realistic scenario for an NK ICBM attack on the US would be to attempt to intercept a target drone in the ballistic phase.

    Ballistic phase missiles exhibit no significant heat signature to assist a THAAD ABM missile tracking system.

    {A more realistic scenario for an NK ICBM attack on the US….}

    Why in the world would NK _attack_ US?
    It will be a suicide on a massive scale.
    US would turn the entire land mass of NK into a radioactive wasteland, if NK sends even one ICBM thisa way.

    A couple of things.

    Russia has offered to share radar data with US proving NK did not launch an ICBM, but rather a IRBM. US not interested, of course.

    NK’s nuke program is a deterrent to US invasion: not intended to first-strike US.
    Why in the world would NK attack US?
    NK wants to be left alone.
    Why in the world would NK attack US?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Joe Franklin
    Maybe because NK is run exclusively by a irrational dictator?

    Wishful thinking will not stop an irrational dictator that kills his own people for merely looking at him in the wrong way.

    Another reason for a NK nuke thrown at the US would be in response to the US protecting Japan and South Korea homelands with conventional forces after a major NK provocation.

    SK and Japan and the US have a mutual defense treaty.

    Perhaps a mutual defense treaty should not exist, but it's to late for what-ifs.

    The latest NK missile launch was not a IRBM:

    A combination of US, South Korean and Japanese analyses of the launch from Mupyong-ni, near North Korea's border with China, shows the missile flew about 45 minutes, going 3,700 kilometers (2,300 miles) high and for a distance of 1,000 kilometers (621 miles).

    If the missile were fired on a flatter, standard trajectory, it would have major US cities such as Los Angeles, Denver and Chicago well within its range, with the possible ability to reach as far as New York and Boston, according to David Wright, a missile expert at the Union of Concerned Scientists..
     
    http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/29/asia/north-korea-intercontinental-ballistic-missile-test/index.html
  125. Corvinus says:
    @KenH

    Recall that the Supreme Court ruled against Obama in 2015 when it came to an immigration matter (temporary relief from deportation and work permits to illegal immigrants) because it believed he superseded his authority (I happen to agree with that ruling FWIW). Thus, there is precedence for the Supreme Court to review presidential power involving immigration.
     
    But that's an apples and oranges comparison. A president does not have the authority to unilaterally bestow legal status on illegal aliens such as Obama did and the court was right to strike that down since he was exercising powers he does not have (since that's the purview of the legislative branch). Even you agree.

    However, a president absolutely can bar certain groups from entering America for national security reasons and courts cannot usurp this authority for reasons of ideology or just because they don't like the president elect. President Carter banned Iranians and deported over 10K during the hostage crisis and the courts wisely did not interfere. Today they would try to block it.


    The difference here is that Trump’s tweets calling for a complete shutdown of Muslims to enter the nation put a monkey wrench for the courts to read immigration and constitutional law.....
     
    The first and second, revised EO didn't even come close to accomplishing a complete Muslim ban. Judges are supposed to rule based on the stated intent of the EO and not infer some secret/unstated, ill intent (i.e., anti-Muslim religious bigotry) based upon stray comments or tweets made on the campaign a year or so prior.

    “A president does not have the authority to unilaterally bestow legal status on illegal aliens such as Obama did…”

    Obama was attempting to ease deportation threats for millions of undocumented immigrants via work authorization, NOT bestow legal status. In other words, he was trying to enable them to remain longer here in the States UNTIL their legal status could be resolved.

    “President Carter banned Iranians and deported over 10K during the hostage crisis and the courts wisely did not interfere. Today they would try to block it.”

    Context here is important. Carter acted against citizens of Iran who sought to come here after their government defended the action taken by militants who took American diplomats hostage. He was responding to a crisis directly involving a sovereign nation. Trump, by contrast, was prohibiting Muslims for the actions taken by terrorist organizations not exclusively aligned to a nation. Carter was responding to a specific crisis involving a sovereign state; Trump was responding to an ongoing crisis whose threats come from non-state actors.

    “Today they would try to block it.”

    You mean they COULD block it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @KenH

    Obama was attempting to ease deportation threats for millions of undocumented immigrants via work authorization, NOT bestow legal status.
     
    You can equivocate all you wish, but shielding illegal aliens from deportation and issuing work permits is de facto legal status. Essentially they were granted the limited rights of legal U.S. residents while avoiding to call it that. The supposedly Latino hating Trump has refused to rescind Obama's illegal executive order (DACA) after promising to do so on the campaign trail.

    Context here is important.......... He was responding to a crisis directly involving a sovereign nation...... Trump, by contrast, was prohibiting Muslims for the actions taken by terrorist organizations not exclusively aligned to a nation
     
    Alignment to a nation is immaterial to a president's decision to bar aliens or any class of aliens deemed detrimental to the United States per various immigration laws on the books. The six nations named on the EO are hotbeds of terrorist activity and it was in our interest to ban further entrants from those nations until our vetting system could be properly implemented. Moreover, these nations have almost no tracking system of who these people are and some terrorist groups openly boasted about infiltrating the refugee and immigrant population entering America and other Western nations.

    At some point common sense needs to trump left wing ideology and commitment to multiculturalism no matter the cost.

  126. @Avery
    {A more realistic scenario for an NK ICBM attack on the US....}

    Why in the world would NK _attack_ US?
    It will be a suicide on a massive scale.
    US would turn the entire land mass of NK into a radioactive wasteland, if NK sends even one ICBM thisa way.

    A couple of things.

    Russia has offered to share radar data with US proving NK did not launch an ICBM, but rather a IRBM. US not interested, of course.

    NK's nuke program is a deterrent to US invasion: not intended to first-strike US.
    Why in the world would NK attack US?
    NK wants to be left alone.
    Why in the world would NK attack US?

    Maybe because NK is run exclusively by a irrational dictator?

    Wishful thinking will not stop an irrational dictator that kills his own people for merely looking at him in the wrong way.

    Another reason for a NK nuke thrown at the US would be in response to the US protecting Japan and South Korea homelands with conventional forces after a major NK provocation.

    SK and Japan and the US have a mutual defense treaty.

    Perhaps a mutual defense treaty should not exist, but it’s to late for what-ifs.

    The latest NK missile launch was not a IRBM:

    A combination of US, South Korean and Japanese analyses of the launch from Mupyong-ni, near North Korea’s border with China, shows the missile flew about 45 minutes, going 3,700 kilometers (2,300 miles) high and for a distance of 1,000 kilometers (621 miles).

    If the missile were fired on a flatter, standard trajectory, it would have major US cities such as Los Angeles, Denver and Chicago well within its range, with the possible ability to reach as far as New York and Boston, according to David Wright, a missile expert at the Union of Concerned Scientists..

    http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/29/asia/north-korea-intercontinental-ballistic-missile-test/index.html

    Read More
    • Replies: @Avery
    {Maybe because NK is run exclusively by a irrational dictator?}

    Being allegedly irrational is not the same as being suicidal.

    {Wishful thinking will not stop an irrational dictator that kills his own people for merely looking at him in the wrong way.}

    Killing your own people does not mean a leader/dictator is irrational.
    Lots of very rational leaders kill their own people to, you know, "keep them in line".
    No need for me to list them here: I am sure you know.

    The same non- 'Wishful thinking', i.e. looking for trouble, resulted in an unnecessary war in Iraq costing ~4,500 American lives, $2 Trillion is wasted taxpayer money, several hundred thousand dead Iraqis, the rise of ISIS terrorizing the Middle East, Europe,.....and we still haven't found those mythical chemical weapons.
    , @Anonymous

    Wishful thinking will not stop an irrational dictator that kills his own people for merely looking at him in the wrong way.
     
    Cite one example from history of a dictator who committed his country/regime/empire to mass suicide, including his own death.

    Cite just one example.

    One.

    It's bullshit. You wackadoodles and your yammering hysteria about how various dictators and religious maniacs are going to launch a blitzkrieg of missiles and wipe out the USA.... Jesus H. Christ ... go back to living in the woods and accusing squirrels of plotting to kill you.
  127. Avery says:
    @Joe Franklin
    Maybe because NK is run exclusively by a irrational dictator?

    Wishful thinking will not stop an irrational dictator that kills his own people for merely looking at him in the wrong way.

    Another reason for a NK nuke thrown at the US would be in response to the US protecting Japan and South Korea homelands with conventional forces after a major NK provocation.

    SK and Japan and the US have a mutual defense treaty.

    Perhaps a mutual defense treaty should not exist, but it's to late for what-ifs.

    The latest NK missile launch was not a IRBM:

    A combination of US, South Korean and Japanese analyses of the launch from Mupyong-ni, near North Korea's border with China, shows the missile flew about 45 minutes, going 3,700 kilometers (2,300 miles) high and for a distance of 1,000 kilometers (621 miles).

    If the missile were fired on a flatter, standard trajectory, it would have major US cities such as Los Angeles, Denver and Chicago well within its range, with the possible ability to reach as far as New York and Boston, according to David Wright, a missile expert at the Union of Concerned Scientists..
     
    http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/29/asia/north-korea-intercontinental-ballistic-missile-test/index.html

    {Maybe because NK is run exclusively by a irrational dictator?}

    Being allegedly irrational is not the same as being suicidal.

    {Wishful thinking will not stop an irrational dictator that kills his own people for merely looking at him in the wrong way.}

    Killing your own people does not mean a leader/dictator is irrational.
    Lots of very rational leaders kill their own people to, you know, “keep them in line”.
    No need for me to list them here: I am sure you know.

    The same non- ‘Wishful thinking’, i.e. looking for trouble, resulted in an unnecessary war in Iraq costing ~4,500 American lives, $2 Trillion is wasted taxpayer money, several hundred thousand dead Iraqis, the rise of ISIS terrorizing the Middle East, Europe,…..and we still haven’t found those mythical chemical weapons.

    Read More
  128. @uslabor
    First of all, you don't know what stripe I'm wearing. Second, t's easy for a moron of either stripe to brag about scratching an itch.

    Your wives, your families are worth dying for? I guess armed folks on both sides of the spectrum feel the same way.

    It isn't Left vs Right, it IS the system VS you. You idiot.

    “It isn’t Left vs Right, it IS the system VS you.” 100% Correct!

    Read More
  129. utu says:

    Mooch is gone and Bannon is still in just as Buchanan wanted:

    “I think [Scaramucci] is the one that’s going to get his wings clipped,” Buchanan told host Michael Smerconish.

    “As for Bannon, everything I have seen Steve Bannon so far, he has kept his head down, done his job, advised the president, sometimes the way the president went sometimes the way he didn’t. If you’re looking at early casualties here, I would take a good look at the Mooch,” he continued.

    http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/07/29/buchanan-warns-scaramucci-a-possible-early-casualty/

    Very good!

    Read More
    • Replies: @SolontoCroesus
    Scaramucci was hired to whack a mole, Reince Priebus.

    Priebus was imposed on Trump by the Borg.
    Now he's gone, Scaramucci's mission is accomplished, exit stage left.
  130. @Stonehands
    Buddy, l own an all night pizzeria in the heart of Philadelphia across the street from a major Federal building. I am uniquely qualified to assess my enemies by dint of the fact that all night protests take place 20 feet from my doorway...

    Next time, why don't you pause to reflect before vomiting out another inarticulate response which exposes your lack of ability to engage in abstract reasoning.

    What an awesome marketing opportunity for a pizza parlour, having customers on your doorstep. Do you ever give out small taster slices for free? Have you named a certain pizza after a revolutionary? I’m thinking The Che Special with lots of chilli, or Fidel’s Favourite con chorizo. Something like that.

    Oh, and a plastic shatterproof film over all glass windows and doors.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Avery
    {.....or Fidel’s Favourite con chorizo.}

    And a complementary genuine Cuban cigar, for those who enjoy a cigar after a meal.
    , @Stonehands
    The infernal racket does attract the curiosity of the tourists, l am actually getting a" little bump" during the festivities.
  131. @AndrewR
    The loss of the editing feature is really outrageous.

    Anyway, to the extent that it's a cpass issue it's the high-low coalition. Elite parasites (banks, corporations and government) riling up low-class parasites (welfare leeches and criminals) and upper middle class parasites (media, academics, affirmative action beneficiaries, lawyers and diversity kommisars) against the productive class which is very disproportionately white male goyim.

    I still have the editing feature. Perhaps it’s your browser.

    Read More
  132. Ron Unz says:
    @AndrewR
    The loss of the editing feature is really outrageous.

    Anyway, to the extent that it's a cpass issue it's the high-low coalition. Elite parasites (banks, corporations and government) riling up low-class parasites (welfare leeches and criminals) and upper middle class parasites (media, academics, affirmative action beneficiaries, lawyers and diversity kommisars) against the productive class which is very disproportionately white male goyim.
    Read More
  133. Avery says:
    @NoseytheDuke
    What an awesome marketing opportunity for a pizza parlour, having customers on your doorstep. Do you ever give out small taster slices for free? Have you named a certain pizza after a revolutionary? I'm thinking The Che Special with lots of chilli, or Fidel's Favourite con chorizo. Something like that.

    Oh, and a plastic shatterproof film over all glass windows and doors.

    {…..or Fidel’s Favourite con chorizo.}

    And a complementary genuine Cuban cigar, for those who enjoy a cigar after a meal.

    Read More
  134. @NoseytheDuke
    What an awesome marketing opportunity for a pizza parlour, having customers on your doorstep. Do you ever give out small taster slices for free? Have you named a certain pizza after a revolutionary? I'm thinking The Che Special with lots of chilli, or Fidel's Favourite con chorizo. Something like that.

    Oh, and a plastic shatterproof film over all glass windows and doors.

    The infernal racket does attract the curiosity of the tourists, l am actually getting a” little bump” during the festivities.

    Read More
  135. Bill says:
    @Corvinus
    "My conclusion is that the Deep State is winning."

    Yes, it's all the doing of the Deep State. They, like the Jews, are the sources of all of our problems. Both only care about saving their necks and destroying careers and reputations. Politics is war. Sides win and sides lose.

    Now that we have that out of the way, let's focus on two of Mr. Buchanan's quotes.

    "A yearlong FBI investigation into Russian hacking has failed to produce a single indictment. Yet the president watches impotently as a special counsel pulls together a lethal force, inside his own administration, whose undeclared ambition is to bring him down."

    First, as he ought to know, these investigations are complicated. Indictments take time. There seems to be this conception that charges must be brought within a certain timeline and that overwhelming evidence ought to be forthcoming to the public; otherwise, the investigation is a "witch hunt". Second, it would appear, although it is not certain, that it is TRUMP and his own team's ambition is to bring themselves down if the accusations are shown to have legal merit to the point that people are arrested. Third, Buchanan has a blind spot here as he was part of the Nixon Administration who engaged in clear illegal activity.

    "How did we get to this peril point when there is no evidence that Trump or any senior aide colluded in the hacking? As for the June 2016 meeting with the Russians, called by Donald Trump Jr. when told by a friend that Moscow had dirt on Hillary Clinton, even that was no crime."

    There is evidence. Does it meet the legal definition of collusion? We don't know. Are there other investigations taking place? Yes. What will be the result? We have to wait to find out.

    There is evidence.

    No.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    Several ongoing investigations clearly indicate that Trump and his team probably committed illegal acts, the extent of which will be revealed in the coming months. How substantial and valid is this evidence, again, we will find out.
    , @RobinG
    Hey Bill, facts are irrelevant for Corvinus, an identified hasbaRat.
  136. @utu
    Mooch is gone and Bannon is still in just as Buchanan wanted:

    "I think [Scaramucci] is the one that’s going to get his wings clipped,” Buchanan told host Michael Smerconish.

    “As for Bannon, everything I have seen Steve Bannon so far, he has kept his head down, done his job, advised the president, sometimes the way the president went sometimes the way he didn’t. If you’re looking at early casualties here, I would take a good look at the Mooch,” he continued.

    http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/07/29/buchanan-warns-scaramucci-a-possible-early-casualty/

    Very good!

    Scaramucci was hired to whack a mole, Reince Priebus.

    Priebus was imposed on Trump by the Borg.
    Now he’s gone, Scaramucci’s mission is accomplished, exit stage left.

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    Nice ex post facto theory for Trumpians but I do not buy it.
    , @Anonymous

    Scaramucci was hired to whack a mole, Reince Priebus.

    Priebus was imposed on Trump by the Borg.
    Now he’s gone, Scaramucci’s mission is accomplished, exit stage left.
     
    ROFLMAO. The Mooch was hired as WH Comm director because Trump is an idiot who cannot judge character and performance by metrics demanded for public office.

    Hired to fire Priebus? You are dreaming, Jocko.
  137. AndrewR says:
    @NoseytheDuke
    I still have the editing feature. Perhaps it's your browser.

    Ron Unz addressed it
    Thanks.

    Read More
  138. Corvinus says:
    @Bill

    There is evidence.
     
    No.

    Several ongoing investigations clearly indicate that Trump and his team probably committed illegal acts, the extent of which will be revealed in the coming months. How substantial and valid is this evidence, again, we will find out.

    Read More
  139. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Joe Franklin
    Maybe because NK is run exclusively by a irrational dictator?

    Wishful thinking will not stop an irrational dictator that kills his own people for merely looking at him in the wrong way.

    Another reason for a NK nuke thrown at the US would be in response to the US protecting Japan and South Korea homelands with conventional forces after a major NK provocation.

    SK and Japan and the US have a mutual defense treaty.

    Perhaps a mutual defense treaty should not exist, but it's to late for what-ifs.

    The latest NK missile launch was not a IRBM:

    A combination of US, South Korean and Japanese analyses of the launch from Mupyong-ni, near North Korea's border with China, shows the missile flew about 45 minutes, going 3,700 kilometers (2,300 miles) high and for a distance of 1,000 kilometers (621 miles).

    If the missile were fired on a flatter, standard trajectory, it would have major US cities such as Los Angeles, Denver and Chicago well within its range, with the possible ability to reach as far as New York and Boston, according to David Wright, a missile expert at the Union of Concerned Scientists..
     
    http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/29/asia/north-korea-intercontinental-ballistic-missile-test/index.html

    Wishful thinking will not stop an irrational dictator that kills his own people for merely looking at him in the wrong way.

    Cite one example from history of a dictator who committed his country/regime/empire to mass suicide, including his own death.

    Cite just one example.

    One.

    It’s bullshit. You wackadoodles and your yammering hysteria about how various dictators and religious maniacs are going to launch a blitzkrieg of missiles and wipe out the USA…. Jesus H. Christ … go back to living in the woods and accusing squirrels of plotting to kill you.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Darin

    Cite one example from history of a dictator who committed his country/regime/empire to mass suicide, including his own death.

    Cite just one example.

    One.
     
    Hitler in 1945.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2223471/Guy-Liddell-diaries-Hitlers-rant-deceived-days-Berlin-bunker.html

    Castro and Che Guevara in 1962, during the Cuban missile crisis.

    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/442482/castro-letter-khrushchev

    Francisco Solano López of Paraguay in 1870.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraguayan_War
    , @Joe Franklin
    Your strawman claim is fairly stupid, requiring only a short response.

    Never did I claim that the NK dictator killed his own people in large quantities, only that the NK dictator's killings of his own people were irrational.

    If you are this emotional and stupid in general, you are likely part of the American neocon-left problem.

  140. utu says:
    @SolontoCroesus
    Scaramucci was hired to whack a mole, Reince Priebus.

    Priebus was imposed on Trump by the Borg.
    Now he's gone, Scaramucci's mission is accomplished, exit stage left.

    Nice ex post facto theory for Trumpians but I do not buy it.

    Read More
  141. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @SolontoCroesus
    Scaramucci was hired to whack a mole, Reince Priebus.

    Priebus was imposed on Trump by the Borg.
    Now he's gone, Scaramucci's mission is accomplished, exit stage left.

    Scaramucci was hired to whack a mole, Reince Priebus.

    Priebus was imposed on Trump by the Borg.
    Now he’s gone, Scaramucci’s mission is accomplished, exit stage left.

    ROFLMAO. The Mooch was hired as WH Comm director because Trump is an idiot who cannot judge character and performance by metrics demanded for public office.

    Hired to fire Priebus? You are dreaming, Jocko.

    Read More
  142. Darin says:
    @Anonymous

    Wishful thinking will not stop an irrational dictator that kills his own people for merely looking at him in the wrong way.
     
    Cite one example from history of a dictator who committed his country/regime/empire to mass suicide, including his own death.

    Cite just one example.

    One.

    It's bullshit. You wackadoodles and your yammering hysteria about how various dictators and religious maniacs are going to launch a blitzkrieg of missiles and wipe out the USA.... Jesus H. Christ ... go back to living in the woods and accusing squirrels of plotting to kill you.

    Cite one example from history of a dictator who committed his country/regime/empire to mass suicide, including his own death.

    Cite just one example.

    One.

    Hitler in 1945.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2223471/Guy-Liddell-diaries-Hitlers-rant-deceived-days-Berlin-bunker.html

    Castro and Che Guevara in 1962, during the Cuban missile crisis.

    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/442482/castro-letter-khrushchev

    Francisco Solano López of Paraguay in 1870.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraguayan_War

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Wrong.
    , @Avery
    Non sequitur 'examples' proving that you warmongers are unable to find even the flimsiest 'justification' to attack NK and kill and murder 10s of 1,000 of innocent people in NK, in SK, and possibly Japan. While sitting safe in US, thirsting for blood in faraway places.

    When Hitler launched his invasions and aggression, he was very rational and very calculating. Reasonably certain of success and victory. The incredible gains that Wehrmacht made in a very short time proved Hitler right. His becoming delusional in the end when Nazi Germany was collapsing all around him has zero relevance to how NK leaders behave at present.

    As poster [Anonymous] notes, dictators have committed personal suicide to escape the noose. Hitler did. So did Himmler, and Goebbels, and Göring.

    As to the alleged Castro letter to Khrushchev: this article is in National Review, a notorious warmongering Neocon propaganda and disinformation outlet. Part of the lying MSM (which include PBS). Yeah, sure, we are to believe an English translation of alleged letter that Khrushchev wrote. Is that like the chemical weapons in Iraq? Or maybe, you know, Trump partying in a Moscow hotel with Russian prostitutes who were urinating on him, or is it the other way around.....

    And what does the Paraguayan war have to do with North Korea?

  143. RobinG says:
    @Bill

    There is evidence.
     
    No.

    Hey Bill, facts are irrelevant for Corvinus, an identified hasbaRat.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "Hey Bill, facts are irrelevant for Corvinus, an identified hasbaRat."

    That would be projection on your part. Mueller and the AG from New York are not going to be wasting their precious time on a "fishing" expedition.
  144. KenH says:
    @Corvinus
    "A president does not have the authority to unilaterally bestow legal status on illegal aliens such as Obama did..."

    Obama was attempting to ease deportation threats for millions of undocumented immigrants via work authorization, NOT bestow legal status. In other words, he was trying to enable them to remain longer here in the States UNTIL their legal status could be resolved.

    "President Carter banned Iranians and deported over 10K during the hostage crisis and the courts wisely did not interfere. Today they would try to block it."

    Context here is important. Carter acted against citizens of Iran who sought to come here after their government defended the action taken by militants who took American diplomats hostage. He was responding to a crisis directly involving a sovereign nation. Trump, by contrast, was prohibiting Muslims for the actions taken by terrorist organizations not exclusively aligned to a nation. Carter was responding to a specific crisis involving a sovereign state; Trump was responding to an ongoing crisis whose threats come from non-state actors.

    "Today they would try to block it."

    You mean they COULD block it.

    Obama was attempting to ease deportation threats for millions of undocumented immigrants via work authorization, NOT bestow legal status.

    You can equivocate all you wish, but shielding illegal aliens from deportation and issuing work permits is de facto legal status. Essentially they were granted the limited rights of legal U.S. residents while avoiding to call it that. The supposedly Latino hating Trump has refused to rescind Obama’s illegal executive order (DACA) after promising to do so on the campaign trail.

    Context here is important………. He was responding to a crisis directly involving a sovereign nation…… Trump, by contrast, was prohibiting Muslims for the actions taken by terrorist organizations not exclusively aligned to a nation

    Alignment to a nation is immaterial to a president’s decision to bar aliens or any class of aliens deemed detrimental to the United States per various immigration laws on the books. The six nations named on the EO are hotbeds of terrorist activity and it was in our interest to ban further entrants from those nations until our vetting system could be properly implemented. Moreover, these nations have almost no tracking system of who these people are and some terrorist groups openly boasted about infiltrating the refugee and immigrant population entering America and other Western nations.

    At some point common sense needs to trump left wing ideology and commitment to multiculturalism no matter the cost.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Corvinus
    "You can equivocate all you wish, but shielding illegal aliens from deportation and issuing work permits is de facto legal status."

    Perhaps.

    "Essentially they were granted the limited rights of legal U.S. residents while avoiding to call it that."

    No, they are other than legal U.S. residents, as they represent a different class according to the law. The particular issue at the heart of the matter was receiving a work permit.

    "Alignment to a nation is immaterial to a president’s decision to bar aliens or any class of aliens deemed detrimental to the United States per various immigration laws on the books."

    Actually, alignment to a nation was essential in that decision in that it is assumed that the influx of Middle Easterners to America will inevitably lead to marked increases in terrorist activity.

    "Moreover, these nations have almost no tracking system of who these people are and some terrorist groups openly boasted about infiltrating the refugee and immigrant population entering America and other Western nations."

    Except the people in question generally had been individuals vetted by our government, as they were family members of American citizens, university students, and employees of American companies.
  145. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Darin

    Cite one example from history of a dictator who committed his country/regime/empire to mass suicide, including his own death.

    Cite just one example.

    One.
     
    Hitler in 1945.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2223471/Guy-Liddell-diaries-Hitlers-rant-deceived-days-Berlin-bunker.html

    Castro and Che Guevara in 1962, during the Cuban missile crisis.

    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/442482/castro-letter-khrushchev

    Francisco Solano López of Paraguay in 1870.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraguayan_War

    Wrong.

    Read More
    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
    I was expecting a more substantial rebuttal from you, kindly give it another try. Thanks.
  146. @Anonymous

    Wishful thinking will not stop an irrational dictator that kills his own people for merely looking at him in the wrong way.
     
    Cite one example from history of a dictator who committed his country/regime/empire to mass suicide, including his own death.

    Cite just one example.

    One.

    It's bullshit. You wackadoodles and your yammering hysteria about how various dictators and religious maniacs are going to launch a blitzkrieg of missiles and wipe out the USA.... Jesus H. Christ ... go back to living in the woods and accusing squirrels of plotting to kill you.

    Your strawman claim is fairly stupid, requiring only a short response.

    Never did I claim that the NK dictator killed his own people in large quantities, only that the NK dictator’s killings of his own people were irrational.

    If you are this emotional and stupid in general, you are likely part of the American neocon-left problem.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Stephen R. Diamond
    As to the psychiatric health of its leader, the U.S. has nothing to brag about.
    , @Anonymous

    Never did I claim that the NK dictator killed his own people in large quantities, only that the NK dictator’s killings of his own people were irrational.
     
    Oh, dear, that simmering violent anger so typical of dipshits like you. Get yourself under control. I didn't say the NK dictator "killed his own people in large quantities," nor that "the NK dictator’s killings of his own people were irrational."

    Perhaps YOU said that. It would be typical of angry dipshits that they would shout incoherently that they never said what another never said they said.

    I said "Cite one example from history of a dictator who committed his country/regime/empire to mass suicide, including his own death."

    Pay attention. Calm down.
  147. @Joe Franklin
    Your strawman claim is fairly stupid, requiring only a short response.

    Never did I claim that the NK dictator killed his own people in large quantities, only that the NK dictator's killings of his own people were irrational.

    If you are this emotional and stupid in general, you are likely part of the American neocon-left problem.

    As to the psychiatric health of its leader, the U.S. has nothing to brag about.

    Read More
  148. @Anonymous
    Wrong.

    I was expecting a more substantial rebuttal from you, kindly give it another try. Thanks.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous

    I was expecting a more substantial rebuttal from you, kindly give it another try. Thanks.
     
    Why rebut when no valid point was made, nor requested example given?

    NK is a small country. Thirty tactical nukes would, basically, destroy the entire country, 99% of the population, and the Boy Dictator. Absolutely no question of that fact. No dictator, throughout history, has committed national and personal suicide as a deliberate act and intention. Have suicidal attacks been ordered, to be carried out by dispensable armed forces? Yes. Have dictators committed personal suicide to escape consequences later? Yes.

    No initiating act of national aggression has ever been deliberately suicidal.
  149. Corvinus says:
    @KenH

    Obama was attempting to ease deportation threats for millions of undocumented immigrants via work authorization, NOT bestow legal status.
     
    You can equivocate all you wish, but shielding illegal aliens from deportation and issuing work permits is de facto legal status. Essentially they were granted the limited rights of legal U.S. residents while avoiding to call it that. The supposedly Latino hating Trump has refused to rescind Obama's illegal executive order (DACA) after promising to do so on the campaign trail.

    Context here is important.......... He was responding to a crisis directly involving a sovereign nation...... Trump, by contrast, was prohibiting Muslims for the actions taken by terrorist organizations not exclusively aligned to a nation
     
    Alignment to a nation is immaterial to a president's decision to bar aliens or any class of aliens deemed detrimental to the United States per various immigration laws on the books. The six nations named on the EO are hotbeds of terrorist activity and it was in our interest to ban further entrants from those nations until our vetting system could be properly implemented. Moreover, these nations have almost no tracking system of who these people are and some terrorist groups openly boasted about infiltrating the refugee and immigrant population entering America and other Western nations.

    At some point common sense needs to trump left wing ideology and commitment to multiculturalism no matter the cost.

    “You can equivocate all you wish, but shielding illegal aliens from deportation and issuing work permits is de facto legal status.”

    Perhaps.

    “Essentially they were granted the limited rights of legal U.S. residents while avoiding to call it that.”

    No, they are other than legal U.S. residents, as they represent a different class according to the law. The particular issue at the heart of the matter was receiving a work permit.

    “Alignment to a nation is immaterial to a president’s decision to bar aliens or any class of aliens deemed detrimental to the United States per various immigration laws on the books.”

    Actually, alignment to a nation was essential in that decision in that it is assumed that the influx of Middle Easterners to America will inevitably lead to marked increases in terrorist activity.

    “Moreover, these nations have almost no tracking system of who these people are and some terrorist groups openly boasted about infiltrating the refugee and immigrant population entering America and other Western nations.”

    Except the people in question generally had been individuals vetted by our government, as they were family members of American citizens, university students, and employees of American companies.

    Read More
  150. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @Joe Franklin
    Your strawman claim is fairly stupid, requiring only a short response.

    Never did I claim that the NK dictator killed his own people in large quantities, only that the NK dictator's killings of his own people were irrational.

    If you are this emotional and stupid in general, you are likely part of the American neocon-left problem.

    Never did I claim that the NK dictator killed his own people in large quantities, only that the NK dictator’s killings of his own people were irrational.

    Oh, dear, that simmering violent anger so typical of dipshits like you. Get yourself under control. I didn’t say the NK dictator “killed his own people in large quantities,” nor that “the NK dictator’s killings of his own people were irrational.”

    Perhaps YOU said that. It would be typical of angry dipshits that they would shout incoherently that they never said what another never said they said.

    I said “Cite one example from history of a dictator who committed his country/regime/empire to mass suicide, including his own death.”

    Pay attention. Calm down.

    Read More
  151. Anonymous says: • Disclaimer
    @NoseytheDuke
    I was expecting a more substantial rebuttal from you, kindly give it another try. Thanks.

    I was expecting a more substantial rebuttal from you, kindly give it another try. Thanks.

    Why rebut when no valid point was made, nor requested example given?

    NK is a small country. Thirty tactical nukes would, basically, destroy the entire country, 99% of the population, and the Boy Dictator. Absolutely no question of that fact. No dictator, throughout history, has committed national and personal suicide as a deliberate act and intention. Have suicidal attacks been ordered, to be carried out by dispensable armed forces? Yes. Have dictators committed personal suicide to escape consequences later? Yes.

    No initiating act of national aggression has ever been deliberately suicidal.

    Read More
  152. Avery says:
    @Darin

    Cite one example from history of a dictator who committed his country/regime/empire to mass suicide, including his own death.

    Cite just one example.

    One.
     
    Hitler in 1945.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2223471/Guy-Liddell-diaries-Hitlers-rant-deceived-days-Berlin-bunker.html

    Castro and Che Guevara in 1962, during the Cuban missile crisis.

    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/442482/castro-letter-khrushchev

    Francisco Solano López of Paraguay in 1870.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraguayan_War

    Non sequitur ‘examples’ proving that you warmongers are unable to find even the flimsiest ‘justification’ to attack NK and kill and murder 10s of 1,000 of innocent people in NK, in SK, and possibly Japan. While sitting safe in US, thirsting for blood in faraway places.

    When Hitler launched his invasions and aggression, he was very rational and very calculating. Reasonably certain of success and victory. The incredible gains that Wehrmacht made in a very short time proved Hitler right. His becoming delusional in the end when Nazi Germany was collapsing all around him has zero relevance to how NK leaders behave at present.

    As poster [Anonymous] notes, dictators have committed personal suicide to escape the noose. Hitler did. So did Himmler, and Goebbels, and Göring.

    As to the alleged Castro letter to Khrushchev: this article is in National Review, a notorious warmongering Neocon propaganda and disinformation outlet. Part of the lying MSM (which include PBS). Yeah, sure, we are to believe an English translation of alleged letter that Khrushchev wrote. Is that like the chemical weapons in Iraq? Or maybe, you know, Trump partying in a Moscow hotel with Russian prostitutes who were urinating on him, or is it the other way around…..

    And what does the Paraguayan war have to do with North Korea?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Avery
    One more thing.

    It is no big secret that Israel has let it be known, that if it sees it is going down for the count, then it will nuke European cities. Mind you, Europe is not the entity that is potentially threatening the existence of Israel (...not that there are any). But Israel is threatening to nuke Europe to let them know, in a roundabout way, that they better make sure nothing happens to Israel, or else.....

    This of course is considered quite 'rational' by the Neocon infestation in D.C.

    But NK developing nukes to ensure itself from being wiped out by US is considered 'irrational'. Of course.

    In fact, in view of world events and US's role in them, NK leaders are exceedingly rational.

    Just ask Gaddafi: he made the mistake of believing West's lies, and ended up being sodomized with a bayonet.
    Or ask Saddam: he believed US's lies (Amb Gillespie) and ended up hanged like a common criminal. After he was hanged, his body was mutilated by the mob.

    Kim Jong-un very rationally figures that if US attacks NK, which it regularly threatens to do, he is not going to end up like Gaddafi or Saddam.
    Smart man.
  153. All world leaders are crazy. It was Kennedy who almost caused a nuclear war over Cuban missiles. Much like asking whether Clinton or Trump is more likely to start a war, the effort to pick and chose on a personal basis which ones are most unstable is a silly subjective exercise.

    On the other hand, America has a system that needs war. N. Korea does not.

    Read More
  154. Avery says:
    @Avery
    Non sequitur 'examples' proving that you warmongers are unable to find even the flimsiest 'justification' to attack NK and kill and murder 10s of 1,000 of innocent people in NK, in SK, and possibly Japan. While sitting safe in US, thirsting for blood in faraway places.

    When Hitler launched his invasions and aggression, he was very rational and very calculating. Reasonably certain of success and victory. The incredible gains that Wehrmacht made in a very short time proved Hitler right. His becoming delusional in the end when Nazi Germany was collapsing all around him has zero relevance to how NK leaders behave at present.

    As poster [Anonymous] notes, dictators have committed personal suicide to escape the noose. Hitler did. So did Himmler, and Goebbels, and Göring.

    As to the alleged Castro letter to Khrushchev: this article is in National Review, a notorious warmongering Neocon propaganda and disinformation outlet. Part of the lying MSM (which include PBS). Yeah, sure, we are to believe an English translation of alleged letter that Khrushchev wrote. Is that like the chemical weapons in Iraq? Or maybe, you know, Trump partying in a Moscow hotel with Russian prostitutes who were urinating on him, or is it the other way around.....

    And what does the Paraguayan war have to do with North Korea?

    One more thing.

    It is no big secret that Israel has let it be known, that if it sees it is going down for the count, then it will nuke European cities. Mind you, Europe is not the entity that is potentially threatening the existence of Israel (…not that there are any). But Israel is threatening to nuke Europe to let them know, in a roundabout way, that they better make sure nothing happens to Israel, or else…..

    This of course is considered quite ‘rational’ by the Neocon infestation in D.C.

    But NK developing nukes to ensure itself from being wiped out by US is considered ‘irrational’. Of course.

    In fact, in view of world events and US’s role in them, NK leaders are exceedingly rational.

    Just ask Gaddafi: he made the mistake of believing West’s lies, and ended up being sodomized with a bayonet.
    Or ask Saddam: he believed US’s lies (Amb Gillespie) and ended up hanged like a common criminal. After he was hanged, his body was mutilated by the mob.

    Kim Jong-un very rationally figures that if US attacks NK, which it regularly threatens to do, he is not going to end up like Gaddafi or Saddam.
    Smart man.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Stephen R. Diamond

    It is no big secret that Israel has let it be known, that if it sees it is going down for the count, then it will nuke European cities.
     
    Evidence or cite?
  155. annamaria says:

    Only in a true banana republic: “Steven Wasserman, Brother of Debbie Wasserman Schultz, to Oversee Awan Family Investigation” https://squawker.org/all/steven-wasserman-brother-of-debbie-wasserman-schultz-to-oversee-awan-family-investigation/
    “Steyn: Wasserman Schultz scandal is media’s Russian dream:” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hXsgo1rbTE

    Read More
  156. Corvinus says:
    @RobinG
    Hey Bill, facts are irrelevant for Corvinus, an identified hasbaRat.

    “Hey Bill, facts are irrelevant for Corvinus, an identified hasbaRat.”

    That would be projection on your part. Mueller and the AG from New York are not going to be wasting their precious time on a “fishing” expedition.

    Read More
  157. @Avery
    One more thing.

    It is no big secret that Israel has let it be known, that if it sees it is going down for the count, then it will nuke European cities. Mind you, Europe is not the entity that is potentially threatening the existence of Israel (...not that there are any). But Israel is threatening to nuke Europe to let them know, in a roundabout way, that they better make sure nothing happens to Israel, or else.....

    This of course is considered quite 'rational' by the Neocon infestation in D.C.

    But NK developing nukes to ensure itself from being wiped out by US is considered 'irrational'. Of course.

    In fact, in view of world events and US's role in them, NK leaders are exceedingly rational.

    Just ask Gaddafi: he made the mistake of believing West's lies, and ended up being sodomized with a bayonet.
    Or ask Saddam: he believed US's lies (Amb Gillespie) and ended up hanged like a common criminal. After he was hanged, his body was mutilated by the mob.

    Kim Jong-un very rationally figures that if US attacks NK, which it regularly threatens to do, he is not going to end up like Gaddafi or Saddam.
    Smart man.

    It is no big secret that Israel has let it be known, that if it sees it is going down for the count, then it will nuke European cities.

    Evidence or cite?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Avery
    {Evidence or cite?}

    Certainly:

    {The Samson option has been described by leading Israeli military historian Martin van Creveld as follows: "We possess several hundred atomic warheads and rockets and can launch them at targets in all directions, perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets by our airforce. Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother". I consider it all hopeless at this point. We shall have to try to prevent things from coming to that if at all possible. Our armed forces, however, are not the 30th strongest in the world, but rather the second or third. We have the capacity to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes under". (Quoted in David Hirst, “The Gun and the Olive Branch” (2003), at "Samson Option", at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samson_Option).}*


    Note: obviously there can be no 'evidence' of something like this.
    Nuke policies by all nuke states are deliberately very vague and ambiguous.
    And my citing one link may not satisfy you.
    However, you can Google Sampson Option and verify for yourself: it's no myth.

    Now then: I have obliged and given you a citation; anything else?
    _____
    *

    https://thecross-roads.org/race-culture-nation/113-the-samson-option-will-israel-nuke-germany-and-iran

  158. Avery says:
    @Stephen R. Diamond

    It is no big secret that Israel has let it be known, that if it sees it is going down for the count, then it will nuke European cities.
     
    Evidence or cite?

    {Evidence or cite?}

    Certainly:

    {The Samson option has been described by leading Israeli military historian Martin van Creveld as follows: “We possess several hundred atomic warheads and rockets and can launch them at targets in all directions, perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets by our airforce. Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: “Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother”. I consider it all hopeless at this point. We shall have to try to prevent things from coming to that if at all possible. Our armed forces, however, are not the 30th strongest in the world, but rather the second or third. We have the capacity to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes under”. (Quoted in David Hirst, “The Gun and the Olive Branch” (2003), at “Samson Option”, at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samson_Option).}*

    Note: obviously there can be no ‘evidence’ of something like this.
    Nuke policies by all nuke states are deliberately very vague and ambiguous.
    And my citing one link may not satisfy you.
    However, you can Google Sampson Option and verify for yourself: it’s no myth.

    Now then: I have obliged and given you a citation; anything else?
    _____
    *

    https://thecross-roads.org/race-culture-nation/113-the-samson-option-will-israel-nuke-germany-and-iran

    Read More
    • Replies: @Stephen R. Diamond
    I've always thought Israel is the greatest danger to world survival, but I wasn't aware of this threat, which should receive much more publicity.
  159. @Avery
    {Evidence or cite?}

    Certainly:

    {The Samson option has been described by leading Israeli military historian Martin van Creveld as follows: "We possess several hundred atomic warheads and rockets and can launch them at targets in all directions, perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets by our airforce. Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother". I consider it all hopeless at this point. We shall have to try to prevent things from coming to that if at all possible. Our armed forces, however, are not the 30th strongest in the world, but rather the second or third. We have the capacity to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes under". (Quoted in David Hirst, “The Gun and the Olive Branch” (2003), at "Samson Option", at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samson_Option).}*


    Note: obviously there can be no 'evidence' of something like this.
    Nuke policies by all nuke states are deliberately very vague and ambiguous.
    And my citing one link may not satisfy you.
    However, you can Google Sampson Option and verify for yourself: it's no myth.

    Now then: I have obliged and given you a citation; anything else?
    _____
    *

    https://thecross-roads.org/race-culture-nation/113-the-samson-option-will-israel-nuke-germany-and-iran

    I’ve always thought Israel is the greatest danger to world survival, but I wasn’t aware of this threat, which should receive much more publicity.

    Read More
  160. Corvinus says:
    @YetAnotherAnon
    "thanks for your well-reasoned post"

    The commenter to whom you refer likes to leaven intellectual dishonesty with a sprinkling of reason, but never debates in good faith. Avoid/ignore.

    Fake News on your part.

    Read More
  161. Corvinus says:
    @yeah
    Your reply indicates partial agreement with some of my points and rebuttal of some others. In any case, thanks for your well-reasoned post.

    I don't mean to be pedantic but tracing hacks to identifiable groups is the real problem. It is not possible at a level of reasonable certainty because of the technical ease of several types of forgery and redirection of IP addresses. I am no technical expert on hacking but believe that, had compelling evidence of hacking existed, it would have ben produced ages ago. Note also that the anti-Trump media refers to the sins of hacking and leaks interchangeably, which is an affront to common sense akin to equating a bank robber to the teller who dips into cash: different crimes, different perpetrators.

    The real issue is this whole "there MAY have been illegal acts..." assertion. The big problem is that if the Chief Executive of a country can be spied upon and investigated by any minion who feels that illegal acts may have committed, then no stable and secure government is possible. Think about it, please. There is simply no choice but to vest high trust and strong power (not absolute power, simply strong enough power) in the Chief Executive. Do Chief Executives sometimes betray this trust. Of course they do, hey this is the real world. Are Chief Executives accused out of malevolent and selfish motives? Of course they are, happens a lot of times, perhaps 99.9% times.

    In the real world we need a delicate balance between obedience and dissent, hierarchy and free-for-all, and between absolute power and constrained power. There is no single clear-cut answer that can be claimed to be the only logically valid answer. Only a narrow range of solutions - narrower than what may be supposed at first sight - is possible and societies keep making fine adjustments. When narrow adjustments cannot be agreed upon, history shows that governmental breakdown, civil chaos and civil strife and wars inevitably follow. America should not go in that disastrous direction, regardless of our personal likes and dislikes. Remember, all people need do is to endure what some of them don't like for but four years then throw him out. There is no other low-risk solution.

    “I am no technical expert on hacking but believe that, had compelling evidence of hacking existed, it would have ben produced ages ago.”

    Not necessarily. If there was a conspiracy with multiple players involved, each person may have one part of the story that requires all to be properly vetted so the full picture can be revealed.

    “Note also that the anti-Trump media refers to the sins of hacking and leaks interchangeably, which is an affront to common sense akin to equating a bank robber to the teller who dips into cash: different crimes, different perpetrators.”

    Perhaps.

    “The big problem is that if the Chief Executive of a country can be spied upon and investigated by any minion who feels that illegal acts may have committed, then no stable and secure government is possible.”

    No, there must be reasonable cause that the acts committed are illegal. Moreover, in a number of cases, it was Trump’s associates who had been under investigation by the FBI prior to his election.

    Read More
  162. dfordoom says: • Website
    @wow
    So Trump "loses" to Mueller? Then what Pat? Are 60 million Trump voters going to accept that outcome?

    If Trump goes down, civil war will erupt....a lot of Lefties are gonna die. The USA will be officially done.

    Are 60 million Trump voters going to accept that outcome?

    If Trump goes down, civil war will erupt….a lot of Lefties are gonna die.

    You’re delusional. A civil war would be all over within 24 hours. The Deep State has the power of the entire government behind it – the police, the military, the intelligence agencies. With horrifyingly sophisticated technology.

    The deep state would be delighted if it happened. Finally their chance to crush every manifestation of dissent. The GULAGs would be filled with dissidents, including every single person with even the most tenuous connection to the alt-right. You’re day-dreaming about a war we could never win.

    In any case there is absolutely no chance that any more than a tiny handful of white people would ever offer any actual resistance.

    And the Christians will take the side of the Deep State, so forget any idea that they’ll be any help.

    Read More
  163. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Stonehands
    Face the facts: you lefties have been itching for a fight- and we ARE going to scratch that itch. These will be the new heroes not some dumb jock or moronic rapper.
    Our Western culture, art, philosophy, science and religion; our women; our families- are worth dying for. Societed must be righted, obviously we have had enough of Sodom.

    Societed must be righted, obviously we have had enough of Sodom.

    Agreed, but there is no evidence that any significant number of ordinary people realise what has gone wrong or that it needs to be fixed. They still have their super-hero movies and their disgusting pop music and their internet porn and their shiny iPhones. They don’t care.

    They have a vague understanding that something has gone wrong but they are totally unable to comprehend that fixing the problem requires the utter destruction of feminism and the crushing of the evil homosexual agenda. They don’t understand that legal immigration is a bigger threat then illegal immigration. They don’t understand the menace of crony capitalism and they don’t even know that the military-industrial complex exists. They don’t know that the institutions that they revere – the military, the police, the courts, the churches – are all in enemy hands. They don’t understand the endgame of the homosexual lobby.

    Read More
  164. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Numinous
    Trump wasn't president when he and his henchmen met with Russians. (If Kennedy had met Khruschev in 1959 trying to get dirt on Dick Nixon, there would have been holy hell to pay.) In fact, no one at that time gave Trump a prayer of winning (including himself and many in his team), so your comment that Trump was entitled to have such talks as befits a President is silly on its face.

    That said, whether or not whatever Trump did rises to the legal definition of misconduct, I believe this Russia issue has been a red herring from the start. The left and the media, even if they get many scalps this way, will likely come to regret the time and effort wasted on this. There's so much else to criticize Trump about. The guy is a empty suit, and a narcissistic as*****le, whose only "skill" is to throw his name and his ample funds (which he inherited from Daddy) around. He is both completely self-centered and has no ability to think about or analyze any issue, including the ones he ran on. The best description I have heard of him is "an evil Chauncey Gardner", as Sam Harris refers to him. He is a disgrace to your country and to your (alt-right) cause, and you all are chumps for sticking behind him.

    The left and the media, even if they get many scalps this way, will likely come to regret the time and effort wasted on this.

    It’s not wasted from their point of view. Trump himself is an irrelevance. He isn’t going to achieve anything and he was never going to be allowed to achieve anything. But he is a symbol. A symbol of opposition to the elites. He must be destroyed in order to teach the Deplorables a lesson – that they must never again presume to vote for anyone other than an approved candidate. They can vote Republican, so long as they vote for a safe Republican cuck who knows how to obey orders.

    Any amount of effort is justified to achieve this aim.

    Read More
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Pat Buchanan Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Confederate Flag Day, State Capitol, Raleigh, N.C. -- March 3, 2007
The major media overlooked Communist spies and Madoff’s fraud. What are they missing today?
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
The evidence is clear — but often ignored