Trump didn't fire him, he resigned. When the commander in chief has made a decision and as Truman said, "the buck stops here", you either agree with your boss or you are free to leave. I served in the military and didn't agree with many of the decisions my superiors made and I was not free to "leave". I don't know if Trump is making the right decision or not but if not perhaps the Brits or Germans would like to step up and fill in for our departing soldiers. You know, all of our NATO allies.
Search found 68 matches
Return to “Today in Trump's 1st term as President”
- Sun Dec 23, 2018 6:58 pm
- Forum: Off-Topic
- Topic: Today in Trump's 1st term as President
- Replies: 4857
- Views: 2119454
Re: Today in Trump's new term as President
- Fri Dec 21, 2018 6:08 pm
- Forum: Off-Topic
- Topic: Today in Trump's 1st term as President
- Replies: 4857
- Views: 2119454
Re: Today in Trump's new term as President
I don't know if Mattis is right or wrong but if one disagrees with the president than resigning is the right thing to do. My personal experience with generals is that they are not necessarily the smartest men in the world and that their self interest is not to wind things down but to keep things going. We also have a civilian commander in chief and one follows his orders in our system. The U.S. can not be the policemen of the world. We have enough men and women put in body bags over this fight and not enough of our "allies" doing their fair share. At least we won't have one of the guys we are training turn around and kill one of us.
We pulled out of Viet Nam and I believe history has shown that it was a smart move and that relations with that country are at least acceptable now. Time will tell how this move goes but I don't see that our generals have been overly correct in the past.
We pulled out of Viet Nam and I believe history has shown that it was a smart move and that relations with that country are at least acceptable now. Time will tell how this move goes but I don't see that our generals have been overly correct in the past.
- Mon Dec 10, 2018 5:39 pm
- Forum: Off-Topic
- Topic: Today in Trump's 1st term as President
- Replies: 4857
- Views: 2119454
- Tue Nov 27, 2018 4:43 pm
- Forum: Off-Topic
- Topic: Today in Trump's 1st term as President
- Replies: 4857
- Views: 2119454
Re: Today in Trump's new term as President
What would have been America's best interest. HRC? Why don't you tell us what you would have liked. Four more loser years of Obama? Liberal judge in supreme court to take away 2A rights? What exactly would philbo like? Every Trump talking point is true, lowest unemployment rate, salaries going up, confidence up, military up, no bombs from North Korea, etc. What did you want philbo? Another democrat? Did you want another republican beside Trump? Perhaps Beto is more to your liking. Maybe Bloomberg in 2020? Rather than telling us what you don't like tell us what you want. And when you tell us, tell us why.philbo wrote: ↑Tue Nov 27, 2018 11:25 amGranted that the spin on the tax cuts was that it was going to spur GDP and increase revenue to offset any loss it would otherwise cause. Only problem is that no one at the time could explain in specific terms how this would happen. Now that the numbers are in it appears that the tax cuts will likely never pay for themselves and the deficit will increase to record highs... something I and others have stated all along.
Even that might not be so bad, except that tRump's trade policies may damage his tax plans even more than expected. But, I'm sure this is more winning for tRump and his believers.![]()
Wall Street falls as Trump's threat sparks trade worries
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... op+News%29
GM warned Trump that his China tariffs would hurt jobs. He now complains that it's happening.
https://www.thisisinsider.com/china-tra ... fs-2018-11
Finally, while you may be ok with tRump's "easy to win " trade war and applaud farmers forced to lose their crops as a necessary expense, I respectfully disagree that such a policy is in America's best interest.
- Tue Nov 13, 2018 2:05 pm
- Forum: Off-Topic
- Topic: Today in Trump's 1st term as President
- Replies: 4857
- Views: 2119454
Re: Today in Trump's new term as President
I haven't seen it in writing anywhere that Trump had to call on Acosta. Although I think Acosta is a jerk I believe that Trump calls on him to provoke these outbursts as it is good showmanship and creates buzz.
- Sat Nov 10, 2018 2:46 pm
- Forum: Off-Topic
- Topic: Today in Trump's 1st term as President
- Replies: 4857
- Views: 2119454
Re: Today in Trump's new term as President
Exactly. To quote you i.e. agreeing to cooperate, encourage or assist them in any way in pursuing anything they were doing that was illegal, is most certainly a crime if you collude to do something already illegal it is a crime. Collusion though is not the crime. Collusion to do something that is illegal is a crime i.e. fraud against the U.S. government. Getting the dirt out on HRC is not illegal (although the people that hacked her accounts were doing illegal acts). So, I wish that Trump was able to get the dirty inside stuff on the true criminal, HRC, that would have put her in jail. The NYT publishes dirt that was illegally obtained all the time, called leaks, and it is not illegal for them to publish. Ellsberg papers were published legally. Trump could have released HRC email stuff obtained illegally by (we don't know) without him being a criminal and without the non-illegal act of collusion.dale blanker wrote: ↑Sat Nov 10, 2018 1:38 pmIt appears that the main question for Mueller's investigation was about obstruction of justice, the question being triggered by the President's comments to Comey, Comey's firing, and the President's comments afterward. Was there obstruction? Was hiding collusion the motivator to obstruct? Are there other factors, political or business or personal, to motivate the President to obstruct?
Stephen Schulhofer, a law professor at New York University, said the act of collusion can be either benign or criminal, depending on the circumstance.
“One of the most commonly used provisions of the U.S. Code, 18 USC §371, makes it a federal crime for two or more people to conspire ‘to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose,'” Schulhofer told us via email. “Agreeing (colluding) with someone for a perfectly lawful purpose, like arranging a game of golf or tennis, is not a crime. But colluding with the Russians, i.e. agreeing to cooperate, encourage or assist them in any way in pursuing anything they were doing that was illegal, is most certainly a crime.”
Do you remember?
- Sat Nov 10, 2018 11:23 am
- Forum: Off-Topic
- Topic: Today in Trump's 1st term as President
- Replies: 4857
- Views: 2119454
Re: Today in Trump's new term as President
And again, even if Trump or his people asked the Russians if they had any dirt on HRC (call it collusion or not) what Federal crime was committed?philbo wrote: ↑Sat Nov 10, 2018 1:09 amNever changed the subject, just pointed out that collusion was never used by anyone other than trump and his surrogates to distract from what Muellar was actually tasked to do. Attached is the original document authorizing the special counsel and what he was charged with investigating. Do you see the word "collusion"? Even once? Nope, no matter how far you stretch it. He was authorized to investigate "any matters that arose or may rise directly from the investigation". The reference to 28 C.F.R. Section 600.4(a) authorizes Special Counsel Mueller to investigate and prosecute “federal crimes committed in the course of, and with intent to interfere with, the Special Counsel’s investigation, such as perjury, obstruction of justice, destruction of evidence, and intimidation of witnesses.” So, the wild goose chase is you insisting we stick with the word "collusion" when the investigation was never hobbled with that limitation.rotor wrote: ↑Sat Nov 10, 2018 12:52 amAs I asked (and I didn't ask you), is collusion illegal and you didn't answer but it was nice of you to change the subject. Jaywalking is illegal but not collusion. So we have to find another crime to go after Trump with because collusion is not illegal. The special prosecutor did uncover illegal actions by some of Trump's associates and they were collateral damage. Even if Trump had asked Putin for info to use against HRC (and I did not say he did), what Federal statute would he have violated?philbo wrote: ↑Fri Nov 09, 2018 9:47 pmTrump and his surrogates have repeatedly sought to delegitimize the special counsel’s investigation by saying there was “no collusion” and calling the special counsel’s probe a “witch hunt.” By focusing on the word "collusion" one might miss the fact that the convictions of trumps former associates and indictments of more than 2 dozen russians has instead relied on statutes containing words such as “conspiracy,” “obstruction of justice” and making “false statements.”
https://assets.documentcloud.org/docume ... Russia.pdf
As far as responding, when you post in a public forum, one should expect the public to respond. Kinda thought that was obvious, but maybe not.
- Sat Nov 10, 2018 12:52 am
- Forum: Off-Topic
- Topic: Today in Trump's 1st term as President
- Replies: 4857
- Views: 2119454
Re: Today in Trump's new term as President
As I asked (and I didn't ask you), is collusion illegal and you didn't answer but it was nice of you to change the subject. Jaywalking is illegal but not collusion. So we have to find another crime to go after Trump with because collusion is not illegal. The special prosecutor did uncover illegal actions by some of Trump's associates and they were collateral damage. Even if Trump had asked Putin for info to use against HRC (and I did not say he did), what Federal statute would he have violated?philbo wrote: ↑Fri Nov 09, 2018 9:47 pmTrump and his surrogates have repeatedly sought to delegitimize the special counsel’s investigation by saying there was “no collusion” and calling the special counsel’s probe a “witch hunt.” By focusing on the word "collusion" one might miss the fact that the convictions of trumps former associates and indictments of more than 2 dozen russians has instead relied on statutes containing words such as “conspiracy,” “obstruction of justice” and making “false statements.”
- Fri Nov 09, 2018 7:07 pm
- Forum: Off-Topic
- Topic: Today in Trump's 1st term as President
- Replies: 4857
- Views: 2119454
Re: Today in Trump's new term as President
Not saying there was "collusion" but if there was what statute would have been violated? Is collusion illegal?dale blanker wrote: ↑Fri Nov 09, 2018 6:19 pmApparently a LOT! Have you not noticed the number of claims of "no collusion" or of complaints about Sessions' recusal even though Mueller has made no suggestions about collusion or obstruction YET? And have you noticed the background of the new Acting AG?Jusme wrote: ↑Thu Nov 08, 2018 11:27 pmHow concerned has he been?dale blanker wrote: ↑Thu Nov 08, 2018 6:31 pmDon't you wonder why the president has been so concerned about Mueller?philip964 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 08, 2018 3:07 pm https://www.politico.com/story/2018/11/ ... sis-973745
Sessions firing a constitutional crisis.
Not sure why. About time is my reaction.
No(?), well then welcome to planet Earth!![]()
- Thu Nov 08, 2018 12:15 am
- Forum: Off-Topic
- Topic: Today in Trump's 1st term as President
- Replies: 4857
- Views: 2119454
Re: Today in Trump's new term as President
Acosta physically pushed the intern's arm away as she was trying to retrieve the mic. Some might call this assault. I wouldn't go that far but if Trump had pushed some woman's arm away in a similar fashion it would have been called assault.WTR wrote: ↑Wed Nov 07, 2018 11:34 pmWhile I find his refusal to relinquish the mic disrespectful and boorish to the intern, after watching the video on FOX several times, he cannot be described as “ physically wrestling “ for the mic.flechero wrote: ↑Wed Nov 07, 2018 10:06 pmAs they should have been... besides the unbelievable disrespect, he physically wrestled the mic from the girl who was running it around the room and did it twice. He should have been escorted out on the spot.EastTexasRancher wrote: ↑Wed Nov 07, 2018 9:15 pm Acosta’s White House credentials have now been revoked.
Remember the screaming when Corey Lewandowski pushed the reporter in 2016?
- Mon Nov 05, 2018 11:36 pm
- Forum: Off-Topic
- Topic: Today in Trump's 1st term as President
- Replies: 4857
- Views: 2119454
Re: Today in Trump's new term as President
So perhaps Trump needs to put the Coast Guard on our southern border.G26ster wrote: ↑Mon Nov 05, 2018 8:29 pmAlthough it is an armed service, the U.S. Coast Guard, which operates under the Department of Homeland Security during peacetime, is not restricted by the Posse Comitatus Act but has explicit authority to enforce federal law. This is true even when the Coast Guard is operating as a service within the U.S. Navy during wartime.
- Mon Nov 05, 2018 7:49 pm
- Forum: Off-Topic
- Topic: Today in Trump's 1st term as President
- Replies: 4857
- Views: 2119454
Re: Today in Trump's new term as President
Correct me if I am wrong but doesn't the Coast Guard routinely seize drugs from smugglers? The Coast Guard is a military force isn't it?
- Tue Oct 30, 2018 11:05 pm
- Forum: Off-Topic
- Topic: Today in Trump's 1st term as President
- Replies: 4857
- Views: 2119454
Re: Today in Trump's new term as President
He has a pen and a phone. Wasn't that what Obama said when he authorized some unconstitutional dreamer stuff?philbo wrote: ↑Tue Oct 30, 2018 10:49 pm In either the most arrogant display of ignorance concerning the US Constitution, or the newest in a long line of absurd pronouncements to distract the populace just days before the mid-term elections, tRump proposes to end birthright citizenship protected in the 14th Amendment with an executive order... Yep, winning as only tRump knows how.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... SKCN1N41MD
- Tue Oct 16, 2018 12:39 pm
- Forum: Off-Topic
- Topic: Today in Trump's 1st term as President
- Replies: 4857
- Views: 2119454
Re: Today in Trump's new term as President
Technically wouldn't Stormy have to pay for the lawyers fees?flechero wrote: ↑Tue Oct 16, 2018 8:56 amCan you imagine the cost of the legal fees for the POTUS??? Probably a 1/2 dozen lawyers over the course of 18 months at what? $1000/hr?![]()
I hope Trump tries to cash the check and it bounces and then he charges avanoti a $25 returned check fee, announced via twitter!
Or better yet, avinoti can't pay it and Trump allows him to work it off as representing people in traffic court for $50/hr. and only credits him for the cases he wins.![]()
- Fri Oct 12, 2018 10:45 am
- Forum: Off-Topic
- Topic: Today in Trump's 1st term as President
- Replies: 4857
- Views: 2119454
Re: Today in Trump's new term as President
Finally something I can't agree with Trump about, increased ethanol in gasoline. Terrible stuff in gasoline.