Hogwash

And the pigs are running the House of Representatives.

Comments

  1. Time for a new thread.

  2. Stephen K. Trynosky says:

    If, like me, you think AOC is scary, I strongly recommend you watch this at 1 minute 50 seconds in where she talks about Zuckenberg and “white supremacists” at Facebook.

    • Many Crats have an unhealthy obsession with racism to the point they probably believe the BS they say.

      • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

        Personally, I think that AOC needs someone to tell her what time of day it is! With the Braintrust gone, they guy who put her there, I think it is just a matter of time till she implodes.

        I would strongly consider backing a dem for her seat in a primary or independent run. The GOP did that 30 plus years ago to get Jose Serrano in for the Bronx. The alternative candidate was gruesome!

        • I think she is quite helpful for conservatives. All she has to do is keep opening her mouth and faking photo shoots and the laughs will keep coming. I hear that she will be challenged in a Primary, I don’t expect her to do well.

    • Ray Hawkins says:

      I dunno Stephen – I keep doing the Zapruder-thingy with the video and don’t quite see/ear where she discusses “white supremacists at Facebook”. What am I missing here?

      • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

        A series of comments starting at 1: 49. Then there is the comment about “Daily Caller” having White supremicist roots.
        White supremicist publications meet a rigorous standard for fact checking,” She basically flabbergasted him.

  3. Didnt realize there was a new thread when I posted the tweet on the last page. Can we get some kudos from the left for Trump setting up Bagdaddy (dont usually post nicknames but too lazy to find correct spelling). Trump announced we were pulling away in Syria…gave the dummies enough hubris to poke their heads out, then we spring the tripwire. Guy blows himself up ( his poor kids, tho) and no dead American soldiers. Never announce the whole plan. Perfect!

    • I wouldn’t expect anything positive from the Left. They will throw shade because Trump had cooperation from the Russians and I’m sure they will claim that this proof of collusion, forgetting that that whole ridiculous mess was debunked, bigly. I did like Trump’s presser this morning, good stuff.

    • Ray Hawkins says:

      Not a lefty here but will take some bait.

      Kudos should be given – its a weighty decision to send the Special Ops guys in for a mission like that. President Trump and team deserve credit for a tough decision.

      Huge thank you to the operators that got it done.

      Scratching my head wondering why the weird “mine is bigger than yours” comments about the bin Laden raid? Why? Totally unnecessary, petty, and imo disrespectful to the operators that carried out that mission.

    • Ray Hawkins says:

      Then again – we could always have 2012 Donald Trump congratulate 2019 Donald Trump: “Stop congratulating Obama for killing Bin Laden. The Navy Seals killed Bin Laden.”

  4. Haven’t seen mention of this on SUFA yet. General Flynn’s case may just be dismissed. New attorney ,Sidney Powell, is in beast mode with her plain language, revealing how the government withheld Brady evidence on Flynn. Fascinating motion to read through. If somehow the judge finds it in himself to dismiss the case…he’d look pretty damned biased if he didn’t…the whole rest of the coup gets revealed as well.
    https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/10/25/stunning-potentially-game-changing-court-filing-by-flynn-defense-lawyer-sidney-powell/

    • Just a thought, but I wonder how much of this was responsible for the recently announced criminal investigation by the DOJ?

      On that note, all I want is for proper justice to be served, should laws have been broken, by EVERYONE who broke them. This may also include some Republicans and they should get double the justice 😛

      • Just A Citizen says:

        gman

        Nothing to with the DOJ investigation. This was driven by Flynn’s new lawyer and people providing information from past stories. She and her team put the pieces together.

        Anita

        Don’t hold your breath. There are no lengths the establishment won’t go to keep from being revealed or from looking stupid. I don’t see a judge overturning himself, unless he can find a Govt. prosecutor to blame.

    • By the way, the Spartan’s failed to show up against PSU. Is their coach in trouble? They were much better not to long ago.

    • Dale A Albrecht says:

      Sullivan has proved to be very tough in the prosecution in cases involving the Mueller investigation. The judge previous to him Costanza (sp) was a close personal friend of McCabe i believe and immediately recused himself from the Flynn case after the plea.

  5. Sparty hasn’t shown up in a few weeks now. Kathy even had to rub it in because the Badgers wooped us 38 – 0. I hope Dantonio isn’t in trouble. He became the winningest coach in Spartan history last month with 110, now 111. The Big 10 is tough. We had OSU, Wisconsin, then PSU back to back to back. Probably gonna lose to Michigan in the Big House too. Ugh.

  6. Trump has basically slammed Congress when asked if he briefed anyone in Congress about the Baghdadi mission, saying NO, they leak too much. This should serve as a slap in the face to Pelosi, and a good hard one 😛

    • Ray Hawkins says:

      Gman – isn’t there just as much leaking from his own administration? The argument here would have been, within 3093 the difference between “normal” and “extraordinary” conditions. Trump is generally allegedly “leaking” and using that as cover for the decision he made.

      • He was answering a specific question. He went on to say that he didn’t want to put the troops going in, in more danger because of a leaker. As I watched his answer become much more long winded than just a simple NO, it sure seemed like he was talking about Pelosi. Back when things were less partisan, the Speaker would have been briefed of such stuff, being the #3. The senate leader would have also been informed.

        He inferred that someone may leak the info to cause a failure of the OP, without actually saying that, he may as well have. Frankly, I think his haters would have tried to cause a failure if they could have.

        • Ray Hawkins says:

          G-man – I’d hope by failure you don’t mean the actual mission the boys were on. That means dead soldiers. As hateful as ALL of our politicians are I don’t think any desire that.

          • Yes, that is what I mean, and when Yrump talked about our troops going in under much heavier fire due to a leak, it may or may not have meant the same.

            I would hope that our politicians wouldn’t think that way too, but hope is one thing, confidence is another..

            I also have no doubt that if some would wish for a recession to beat Trump, killing a few troops isn’t that far behind.

            I didnt like Obama, but would never wish for suffering of any kind by anyone over an election. I have heard and read the very opposite from Trump haters.

      • Ray, This is Pelosi’s response:

        House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Sunday called on the White House to brief lawmakers on the raid that targeted Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, noting that President Trump had informed the Russians of the military operation before telling congressional leadership.

        The statement from Pelosi (D-Calif.) came after Trump told reporters at a lengthy news conference that he did not inform the House speaker of the raid because he “wanted to make sure this kept secret.”
        U.S. presidents typically follow the protocol of contacting congressional leaders, regardless of their political party, when a high-level military operation is conducted.
        “The House must be briefed on this raid, which the Russians but not top congressional leadership were notified of in advance, and on the administration’s overall strategy in the region,” Pelosi said. “Our military and allies deserve strong, smart and strategic leadership from Washington.”
        https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/pelosi-says-trump-notified-russians-of-baghdadi-raid-before-telling-congressional-leaders/ar-AAJriOB?ocid=spartanntp

        • Dale A Albrecht says:

          Of course he’d notify the Russians. They’d want BagDaddy dead and buried also. But also were probably in area and just might shoot in a war zone then ask questions. There was no OOPS friendly fire accident

  7. The comic for today’s post refers to “secret impeachment hearings.”

    I have a question on this.

    Now, perhaps Chuck is lying. He is a politician after all, so there’s always a good chance, but I think he’s smart enough that he doesn’t like to get caught out in the open like this. I’m guessing this is true. Does anyone care to dispute it? Has anyone on that list come out and deny they had access?

    By my quick count, that’s 49 names out of 199 Republicans in the House. That’s ~25%.
    Remember, also, of the 2 dozen-ish Republicans who “stormed” the room, a dozen were already allowed in there.

    So, how does the Republican narrative of these so called secret hearings hold up?

    Maybe someone would like to explain to me about these secret hearings the Democrats are holding and keeping the Republicans out of?

    • SMH, secret from the public. Things are getting tough for Liberals to grasp these days

      • Are closed-door hearings a new phenomenon?

        Were the Benghazi hearings open door and I missed it?

        • Closed door hearings are generally for classified stuff, of which these hearings
          Are not. Yes, the Benghazi hearings were broadcast live, remember Hrs
          Famous “what difference does it make now ” comment?
          The point is that Shumer is making a stupid comment that lacks logic to fool his
          Minions so they won’t ask the important questions, like why are these hearings secret from the public, got something to hide Mr. Schiff?

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Remember back a wee or two ago when I said they should not attend if they do not have full standing in any negotiation or investigation? Because the Dems would use their presence to claim they were in fact involved when they are not being granted the same full rights as committee members.

      Well now you see Schummer putting out a list and for what reason? To dispute the Republican claim that the process is “secret” and the R’s don’t have “equal participation”.

      The R’s should have thrown their hissy fit from day one and mobilized against the closed door interviews immediately and strongly.

      • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

        Designate ONE MEMBER to stay as a “recorder” , everyone else should have walked, and walked LOUDLY!

  8. Canine Weapon says:

  9. To Sir Mathius…..there is a difference about being “allowed” in and “let” in….it is possible that the Twain shall never meet.

  10. Been in the dark since 6:30 pm Saturday. Modest winds yesterday at the house but nothing to warrant a blackout. That’s not saying that elsewhere the winds were higher. Do not know when the power will come back on but they are already forecasting another blackout for tomorrow.
    Could not keep up at home with the news because no TV or internet. The stars do look brighter so God is making up for the difference.

    • You should come to PA. We don’t have near the problems California does. We did have a rare wildfire a couple decades ago about a mile from here. Probably burnt 5 acres. It was never a danger to anyone and controlled with in hours.

  11. The Big Lies

    Herman Göring’s concept of the BIG LIE is well known. Told often and loud enough, a lie can be accepted as the truth. In Donald Trump’s case, it is not just one big lie but multiple big lies. Since his inauguration, the objective of many is impeachment. This is not limited to the political opposition but also the never Trump Rhinos and many in the media. To accomplish this, we have been fed three years of lies about this president. No wonder the impeachment movement is so strong.

    Trump has been depicted as a white supremacist for his Charlottesville statement despite the fact that he explicitly condemned them during the same conversation. Too bad he did not also condemn the fascists Antifa group and the black racists BLM groups at the same time. Unfortunately, his out of context statement has been repeated many times by the media and his political opposition including major candidates.

    Trump was labelled a xenophobe for his travel bans that limit travel and immigration from war torn countries without viable governments that could help vet these people. These countries were also some of the same countries exporting terrorism around the world. It made no difference that travel from other Moslem majority countries went on as usual. Because he proposed a sensible solution, he was a xenophobe in the eyes of the opposition who broadcast this view to the world.

    What started as political dirty trick opposition research document turned out to be one of the biggest lies of all. We were subjected to three years of the Russian Hoax, costing us over $35M, dividing the country, and wasting the political capital of the new president. This huge lie not only involved the political opposition, but was actively participated in by members of our DOJ, FBI, and intelligence agencies. It is highly likely that crimes were committed to perpetrate this hoax. Unfortunately many in the media fell for it and actively pushed it as well. Is there any wonder why so many in this country believed this to be true. Once accepted as a fact, it is very difficult to change opinions of the general population.

    Trump is labeled a racist because he uses “trigger” words that only the triggered can hear. These secret words are real gotchas. It does no good to point out that race riots under Trump are virtually nonexistent, that minorities are making real economic progress, and that he has signed some positive legislation requested by the black community.

    Trump is a rich alpha male and as such likes women. For this and his lack of support for abortion, he is labeled a misogynist. His true transgression is the latter, since that puts him at odds with the liberal women of the country. He so hates women that he married three of them. He so hates women, his top campaign aid was female. He so hates women because….

    Now we have the extortion plot for political gain. Reading the transcript leaves one with legitimate reasonable doubt which is one of our legal standards. One might ask, does running for president mean that no one can ask a foreign government about your past criminal activity? Or is it just that Trump cannot do it but all others can?

    There are many reasons to dislike Trump. He is a bully, a braggart, nonintellectual, coarse individual. Before we impeach him, people need to take a serious look at their own motives and beliefs. Have you fallen for these big lies and how does that play into this action? It is time to honest with ourselves.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Yes, different cultures have different norms, ethics and standards.

      My new read made this point in the section I read this AM. Why did Europe take over the world when the Powers of the World at the time were pretty much even. In fact, Asia was the dominant economic power at the time.

      Because of CULTURE. Europe had created a culture which fostered exploration and expansion. The world was unknown and needed exploring. It provided new riches to expand trade and wealth. The other power cultures were focused on what was known and did not support the ideas of new science or technology, let alone the systems of Capitalism.

    • Dale A Albrecht says:

      👍

  12. Ray Hawkins says:

    As a fan, student and coach of the game (where I’ve spent the preponderance of any free time the last few years) I have to agree with Senator Coons. You can hate Trump to the core, but can we have a little more respect for the Office and the Game even if you don’t like the guy holding the office? Its October. Its baseball. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/trump-booed-nationals_n_5db6ed3ce4b05df62ec29a79

  13. President Donald Trump told reporters in Washington on Oct. 28 that the White House didn’t notify the House Intelligence Committee about a raid against the leader of the ISIS terrorist group because of concern that the information would be leaked by committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.).
    “Well, I guess the only thing is they were talking about why didn’t I give the information to Adam Schiff and his committee. And the answer is: Because I think Adam Schiff is the biggest leaker in Washington,” Trump said.
    “You know that. I know that. We all know that. I’ve watched Adam Schiff leak. He’s a corrupt politician. He’s a leaker like nobody has ever seen before.”
    https://www.theepochtimes.com/trump-we-did-not-notify-schiff-of-isis-raid-because-he-is-the-biggest-leaker-in-washington_3129662.html

    • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

      Not that any but the oldest will remember this but I’ve always felt, with absolutely no proof at all that the reason the Special Forces raid into North Vietnam to rescue the POW’s at the Son-Tay POW camp failed was because news of the raid was leaked. They were all there one week and gone the next. This was under the watch of Nixon who was despised by the left almost as much as President Trump. I did feel then, as I do now, that even being a traitorous son of a bitch was justified to fight the evil of someone like Nixon/Trump.

      Wonder if the Colonel, though a junior officer after these things happened, has an opinion??? He certainly wore the right collar brass.

      By the way, failure or not, it was a fantastically well executed operation led by a legend. Col. Bull Simons.

      https://www.warhistoryonline.com/instant-articles/son-tay-prison-raid.html

  14. Just A Citizen says:

    Working hard to get things buttoned up for winter. Enjoying the crisp air and sun when suddenly a blizzard rolled in about 3 pm. Tons of leaves piled in the yard under inches of snow. Drifts against the pile of firewood yet to be stacked. This global warming is getting real old. Third snow storm this past month. So far nothing has lasted but it is supposed to get in the teens starting tonight. Highs just above freezing.

    • I was thinking last night and trying to remember how the republicans reacted, couldn’t remember. Did read this.

      http://swampland.time.com/2011/05/02/how-republicans-reacted-to-bin-ladens-killing/

      I do remember people having a problem with him disposing of the body at sea. I’m kinda surprised Trump was a Republican in 2012.

      • I think your article captures it nicely. I remember a fair amount of begrudging credit to Obama and a lot of troop-thanking.

        And that may be. I think it’s true the Bush started the hunt (of course) and pursued it relentlessly through his terms. I think it’s true the Obama kept up on it into his term. I think the break landed on her term when it could easily not have. I think he was cautious and careful and disciplined and did what he had to do. I think deserves a fair amount of credit, and I think that credit was generally a bit under-done by the right and over-done by the left, but I think, generally he got his due.

        I do not thing Al Bhagdadi (sp?) is Osama Bin Laden. I think Trump’s efforts at an equivalence is forced and pointless. But I don’t really care. He was a bad hombre who needed killing, and he got killed under Trump, presumably at his instruction. Good for Trump.

        Where I find the rub is in TRUMP’S hypocrisy – yet again – where he (far more than was typical amongst Republicans at the time) denied credit to Obama while taking a huge victory lap for himself.

        • I find Trumps words to Wolf stupid. Hypocritical, okay. But now that he’s been President for a few years, I wonder if he would say the same thing now.

    • (2012)

      Wolf Blitzer: [Obama] killed Bin Laden…
      Trump: He didn’t kill Bin Laden, you know he gets so much credit for that. Ok, excuse me, excuse me.
      Wolf: [cross-talk] He authorized it, he had the guts to-
      Trump: “Guts.” I don’t know why Obama gets credit for the whole Bin Laden thing. He’s sitting there, he’s got three choices: leave him alone – which nobody would do-, take him out with a missile, or take him out with the military. So he said take him out with the military, ok, congratulations. I keep hearing about “oh, Bin Laden”… the military did an incredible job… and they called him they said “we have him” and he said “go get ’em.” What’s he going to do? Say “don’t get ’em”? And he gets all this credit? It’s a lot of crap.

      • Ray Hawkins says:

        Don’t forget how much credit Trump took for the botched Yakla raid.

      • Dale A Albrecht says:

        I’m sure many here on SUFA remember our dear Colonel saying during the Tora Bora operation in Afghanistan during the early parts of the war, the Soecial Firces had Bin Laden in their crosshairs and were DENIED the shot

        • The way I remember it, the Colonel, then only only an LT, had OBL personally in his sights, his finger applying gentle pressure to the trigger while he begged POTUS to let him fire. A gentle tear fell with a hiss onto the burning sand. “Please, sir!” he begged, only to be rebuffed again. “Stand down, son, that’s an order.” As the colonel lieutenant eased his finger from the trigger, it seemed that the weight of the world sat upon his shoulders, visions of all the future evil he could prevent danced in his heat-addled mind. For a moment, he contemplated defying the order. Sure, they’d bust him down again, but it wouldn’t be his first – or even third – time being a private. But the moment had passed, the target was gone. And with it, the lieutenant’s hope for a brighter future. He curled into the fetal position and had to be carried back to base where they coaxed him back to life Dr. Pepper and an MRE.

      • https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/10/28/trumps-news-conference-abu-bakr-al-baghdadis-death-annotated/

        So I saw and now read the transcript of his speech Sunday. Trump only spoke about his decision making that concerned wiping out the caliphate in March. He thanked a slew of people for the al-Baghdadi operation, but never once used the word “I”

        There is no comparison to Obama and his constant use of “I” and “my” in ANY speech. The guy couldn’t even refrain from talking about himself while speaking at Elijah Cumming’s service.

        I’m starting to notice some serious jealousy coming from the Left side of the isle. 😛

  15. Recidivism rate in Chicago tops 74%……..makes you want to live there, eh? Mayor says that it is no problem.

  16. Testing….

    • ahhhhh….test good…..finally.

      • Crap.. someone shove this varmint back into his cage!

        • Varmit? Moi? A Varmit??? Now, I am a varmit? Well, just add it to the long list of things I already am…actually, a deplorable varmit might be cute.

          • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

            Colonel, see what you think of my comment on the Son Tay raid 49 years ago posted above with link! As a contemporary you remember it. As a SF guy your comments would be worth a whole lot more than mine.

            • Ray Hawkins says:

              I can remember one of our Scout leaders from years ago that had a Son Tay patch – “KITD / FOHS”. Told some bizarre yarns about Bull Simons.

            • Hi Stephen….I have a slightly different take on this based upon a little first hand knowledge. I was with the 5th Special Forces as part of this raid. Our job was to set up a series of relay stations in Laos, along the E&E (escape and evade) route back to Thailand in the event that some of the rescue choppers were hit with fire and could not make it back. We were to provide a safe landing areas and triage in the Laotian jungle. We even made deals with Pathet Lao warlords in some of those areas. It was a well planned and perfectly executed raid.

              I am not so sure that the plans of the raid leaked out as much as our intelligence failure at the execution phase. The article refers to the attack on a North Vietnamese barracks that resulted in 200+ enemy deaths and non to us. What the article did not mention was the deaths of 60 odd Russian technicians and Spetz that had been moved to that area 2 weeks prior and were staying in the same barracks. They were totally caught by surprise. Hardly even got a round off.

              I do not buy the fact that the prisoners were moved because of the threat of floods. Monsoon rains are like clockwork and there was nothing else that was predicted and those prisoners had been there through monsoon as to the reason that the prisoners were moved, it is conceivable that word had leaked out but not the execution dates. This is supported by the fact that these prisoners had been there through the monsoons before so a threat of flooding was not feasible although surrounded by rivers. I think, like you did, with the amount of people involved in the planning that something leaked out.

              Also we were dealing with the Pathet Lao…..loyal to no one but their own warlords and poppy fields. So, it is possible for info to leak out, or to be sold, from that source as well.

              The planning and execution was meticulous. The troops selected were perfect for this type of operation and the Air Force Special Ops did not get enough credit. When my group was dropped in to secure a relay point, it was perfect. We encountered no resistance and the warlord of that area allowed us to set up right next to one of his poppy fields knowing full well that no one would attack him there while we were there. Some of his troops even helped us with security and we gave them new weapons.
              ———————————————-
              Now, in relation to this operation in Syria run by Special Ops…..Trump did nothing more than give the go order. Obama did nothing more than give the go order. Both Presidents took a victory lap and both Presidents deserved their victory lap because it happend on their watch.

              I happen to agree with the fact that Trump did not brief Pelosi and the Intelligence committee before hand was proper. I would not have done it either and on these types of operations, it is not incumbent upon prior notice. It is MY opinion that had the briefings been done with Pelosi and Shiff, given the political climate, it would have resulted in deaths of American troops. This was done correctly.

              Trump had it correct as well about the whining and whimpering that went on. This Baghdaddy and Bin Laden were not clerics as we know them…they were the Arabic Jim Jones. Pure horseshit and this Baghdaddy surrounded himself with children,,,,,he was a coward and I have no problem with tooting our horn.

              • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

                Thanks . I knew you could add something! I’ve read a lot about it over the years but did not even think about the alternative extractions that might have been necessary. That was one hell of a “textbook” operation!

              • Trump did nothing more than give the go order. Obama did nothing more than give the go order. Both Presidents took a victory lap and both Presidents deserved their victory lap because it happend on their watch.

                Why did even Dick Cheney compliment Obama for “wisely” keeping the course on pursuing OBL?

                From what (limited experience) I have as a manager of people, it seems to me that I “set agenda” and keep my people “on task” and then let them do the job. And, as necessary, I make sure the jobs they do are done well.

                As such, it seems to me that POTUS would have had to have at least a few conversations wherein he prioritized this, that, or the other thing. Whether Obama or Trump or Harry Truman, the President still has to “direct” the military, non?

                Trump did nothing more than give the go order. Obama did nothing more than give the go order. Both Presidents took a victory lap and both Presidents deserved their victory lap because it happend on their watch.

                What do you make of 2012 Trump insisting that Obama doesn’t deserve any credit? Especially in light of his current victory-lap taking?

                Trump did nothing more than give the go order.

                What do you make of Trump’s effort at portraying Al Baghdadi (sp?) as worse than OBL?

                Trump did nothing more than give the go order.

                What was Obama doing in the War Room during the raid? I mean this as an actual question. Was it just optics? To get the results sooner? Did he have any role to play? Or might he have had a role to play in certain scenarios which necessitate his presence? Or could he just as easily been out golfing?

                I happen to agree with the fact that Trump did not brief Pelosi and the Intelligence committee before hand was proper.

                Unless legally required to notify them, I see no reason to make the circle any bigger than absolutely necessary. And that includes congress-critters.

                It is MY opinion that had the briefings been done with Pelosi and Shiff, given the political climate, it would have resulted in deaths of American troops.

                Based on what? You think they’d tip off the head of ISIS in order to deny Trump the win? That’s impressively Machiavellian…

    • VH….you will get a plexy, worrying about this stuff…..it is all hyperbole. She is not about to risk the majority she holds by holding a “real” vote……even if she does have the votes (i do not think she has them), she would be stupid to hold a vote to get everyone on record one year before the election. But, we shall see……once the house votes, it goes to the Senate and everyone gets to be cross examined. She better have her “ducks” all in a row or it will be disasterous.

  17. Ray Hawkins says:

    Federal deficit increases 26% to $984 billion for fiscal 2019, highest in 7 years.

    https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/25/federal-deficit-increases-26percent-to-984-billion-for-fiscal-2019.html

    • It’s weird… it’s almost like cutting taxes for corporations and the rich while engaging in a trade war didn’t balance the budget…?

      • VERY weird.

        • Not weird at all. Revenues are up but spending is up more. The problem has never been tax revenues. The tax cuts worked. The economy is growing again and with it revenues. Growth is the best way out of the deficit but that takes responsible spending. Responsibility in DC is not existent.

          We see the same in CA. They ran a surplus this year and were falling all over themselves trying to figure out how to spend it. Lowering taxes or giving the money back never crossed their mind.

          So given that we are a debtor nation, how do the current crop of D hopefuls plan to fund all their giveaways?

          • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

            It is called, by MANDATE! It’s Really simple, just order it done and it becomes magically done.

            The US goes back to an 18th century economy, stops eating meat, stops heating and cooling its homes and voila! No more global warming. Now how simple is that! Problem solved, World saved!

            If you DON’T get it, we have a gulag to send you to.

            • It’s Really simple, just order it done and it becomes magically done.

              Donald Trump: “We’ve got to get rid of the $19 trillion in debt.”
              Bob Woodward: “How long would that take?”
              Trump: “I think I could do it fairly quickly, because of the fact the numbers…”
              Woodward: “What’s fairly quickly?”
              Trump: “Well, I would say over a period of eight years. [Trump goes on to blather about how he’ll fix it with trade and “deals”]”

              Seems Trump thought it was pretty simple…

              • Just A Citizen says:

                It might have been if the Democrats and Rhinos had helped. But POLITICS is more important.

                Given the mental acuity of those serving in Congress and running for POTUS, I don’t think we will ever see real improvement.

              • Shouldn’t Trump have known about the mental acuity and suspect motivations of Congress when he made his assertion that he could get rid of the national debt in 8 years… for an average surplus of around 2.3T / yr?

                I mean, it seems to me that it’s quite obvious that that’s a political impossibility. Yet he said it, clear as day. So was he lying? Was he so ignorant of the political landscape that he thought congress would just bend over and give him 2.3T surpluses? Was he economically illiterate to the point that he actually believed he’d make that much difference (~3T on net) up on re-negotiating trade deals? What?

                The Buck Stops… where?

              • Just A Citizen says:

                Mathius

                I think he was ignorant of the political landscape. I believe he was NAIVE to think that the ugliness of a campaign would just go away once he was sworn in. I think he underestimated the anger of the Dems and the Never Trump Republicans.

                But I also think his statement was correct. It wouldn’t be all that hard……….. based on numbers and actions required. However, it is almost insurmountable when you add politics to the mix.

                Your criticism on the other hand is primarily driven by your dislike for the man. Because they all present themselves as the savior or genius and none of them every produce everything they promise or present as easy. I am still waiting for the rising oceans to recede.

                So I don’t understand why Trump’s bragging and claims are so much more offensive to you than Obama’s or Clinton’s. Maybe it is your disgust for the man and not really just what he says. Or maybe you do it here just to poke people as part of your campaign against hypocrisy.

        • I know, right?

          It’s weird…

          I went ahead and made you a graph.

          See if you can guess where I’m going with this….

          • Ray Hawkins says:

            Totally have no idea what you’re headed with this. LOL

          • Considering the years, this is a graph of who was in the Whitehouse. Now, how about doing a follow up graph at who was the majority in the HoR, where the budgets are made.

            I did notice the deficit considerably while Obama was the Prez, but how do explain the near doubling of the National debt during that same period?

            • Deficit dropped under Obama. Sorry for the missing word 😀

            • Considering the years, this is a graph of who was in the Whitehouse.

              Correct.

              … vs the deficit.

              Now, how about doing a follow up graph at who was the majority in the HoR, where the budgets are made.

              Unfortunately, I deleted my spreadsheet and don’t feel like re-crating it, so you get the MS Paint edition..

              Hmmm….

              Still interesting…

              I did notice the deficit [dropped] considerably while Obama was the Prez, but how do explain the near doubling of the National debt during that same period?

              Because that’s the nature of debts and deficits.

              Even though the deficit decreased dramatically during his term, the amount of deficit was still very high. That gets added to the debt each year, leading to big increases.

              I think you get all this, so I’m not sure what you’re asking.. maybe you can clarify?

          • Just A Citizen says:
          • Just A Citizen says:

            Do you want to know the real reason for our fiscal mess???? IT IS CONVENTIONAL THINKING.

            The poison of Keynes has taken hold in academia. Following is a great example as you will find every excuse, rationalization and theory presented as fact. Right down to blaming a weak recovery this last time on people paying off debt, with increases in income they didn’t even notice because it showed up as lower withholding from paychecks. Also notice how she criticizes the Govt. for not paying back debt after recessions then criticizes individuals for paying back debt when they get a windfall.

            https://www.thebalance.com/current-u-s-federal-government-tax-revenue-3305762

            • The poison of Keynes has taken hold in academia.

              Because it is the only economic thinking that makes sense?

              The poison of Keynes has taken hold in academia.

              Well, I mean, to be fair, I have a BS in Economics from a pretty good school and an MBA in Finance from a pretty good university. And I’m a pretty adamant Keynesian… so maybe I’ve been infected, too?!

              Right down to blaming a weak recovery this last time on people paying off debt, with increases in income they didn’t even notice because it showed up as lower withholding from paychecks.

              I mean… it makes sense… you want people to spend to get that money into circulation. Paying off debt doesn’t really do that.

              Also notice how she criticizes the Govt. for not paying back debt after recessions then criticizes individuals for paying back debt when they get a windfall.

              I know you’re smart enough to understand the difference between “people” and “government.”

              • Just A Citizen says:

                Black Flag was correct. You are an economic illiterate. Bwahahahahaha

                There is no difference between people and Govt when it comes to the affects of borrowing, spending or stealing income from people.

                The USA economic problems begin with FDR and the change in economic theory pushed by academia. It matters not how fancy your pedigree. Purebred BS is still BS.

                BROKEN WINDOW FALLACY

              • Well, I mean, to be fair, I have a BS in Economics from a pretty good school and an MBA in Finance from a pretty good university. And I’m a pretty adamant Keynesian…

                In debt and in doctrinated, what a combination 😀

              • In debt

                Absolutely not!

                I went to college on scholarship, thank you very much. And my MBA was paid for by my work in exchange for a promise that I would stay a few years after completion.

                I do have a mortgage, but it’s maybe 40% of the value of my house.

                I have no other debt. None. I religiously avoid debt.

                and in doctrinated

                Well, that’s probably true… I mean, well, it would be.. if indoctrinated were two words.😀

  18. Dale A Albrecht says:

    Referring back to the photo of Hillary in Losing it, , my grandmother had better fashion tastes at 102 years old. Oven mitt fashionista us is accurate

  19. Dale A Albrecht says:

    Two more comments before I go away for awhile again.

    1) Medical science I thought had come up with a cure for “Foot in Mouth” disease. Please give Trump the vaccine.

    2) besides here in Eastern North Carolina where everyone is a veteran or active duty, there have been only two times where people have said to me “Thank you for your service” both times were in NY once in the 70’s when i went into a nice restaurant on the Hudson. The staff also pur two lobsters on my plate instead of just one. I was in full dress uniform. The second time was also in NY just the other week when I was coming out of a deli in Woodstock. A young lady, stopped me after seeing my front plate in my vehicle and said “Thank you”

  20. To JAC…you probably do not remember, but when you came to visit, you were in Parker County……we have just become the first county to establish a 2nd Amendment sanctuary county. Pretty cool………it means nothing, of course, but we are on record. LOL.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Did not notice the County. But that is cool. Of course you could come to Idaho, a 2nd Amendment Sanctuary State……….. without the gimmicks. 🙂

  21. (quarantine!)

  22. Just A Citizen says:

    Ooooooooooo a “retired Army Officer” is testifying today that he “reported concerns to the lawyers” over Trump’s phone call. In short, he had HIS OPINION of how diplomacy and relations with Ukraine should unfold and Trump violated that perception. This has been the essence of all the “insider” testimony we have been allowed to see.

    There is ONE MAJOR LESSON here if you are paying attention. This is the first time we have seen career bureaucrats actually testify as to “how things work”. So in the future you will now understand why when a new POTUS takes the chair, NOTHING CHANGES significantly.

    Also notice how all these “employees” of the Administration have all these processes and procedures which allow them to undermine POTUS. Creating constant tension and infighting if POTUS wants to go to A and they all want B or C.

    And before I have to consume one more ounce of blaming this on Trump’s style or picks, let me remind everyone this is exactly what happened to Obama when he tried to build his “healthcare reform legislation”.

    • Have you noticed that the complaint started out with any mention of Biden and investigation is bad to now, any mention of investigating Burisma is the same as investigating Biden.

      • I mean, the obvious goal is to get at Biden… you’ll have to excuse people if they’re not completely mollified because Trump et al don’t name his son explicitly in the attempt.

        Here’s a serious set of questions, V. I mean this in all sincerity, so please take it that way:
        A) What would it take for you to believe that Trump “did something wrong” here?
        B) What would it take for you to believe that Trump “did something illegal” here?
        C) What would it take for you to believe that Trump “did something he should be impeached / removed from office” for?

        It seems to me that, for Trump to be believed wrong, the burden of proof around here is impossibly high.

        • I have to visit my brother in law at rehab. So I’ll have to answer your questions later. But before I leave – why is it clear that Biden is the goal? I think the goal is what the hell went on in Ukraine during the 2016 election. I think what happened to all our money that was given to Ukraine, which many people believe Burisma was involved in, is a big deal. So the dems. making investigating Burisma a no no is questionable. Was the AG that Biden wanted gone corrupt because he did or didn’t investigate Burisma. Haven’t figured that out yet, but supposedly he was corrupt for some reason. And quite frankly, if Burisma was stealing money, His son working for them is even more of a big deal.

          • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

            Notice how Matt and his cohorts all focus on BIDEN and not Crowdstrike. Crowdstrike might actually be interesting as opposed to the crook Biden family which most of us have known about for years!

            But the again…..if thee was an issue with Crowdstrike Hill and Barack’s legacy gores up in smoke FOREVER!

            In answer to HIS question if Trump had said…..I want you to find out about Biden’s son right AFTER he said, “I want you to do a favor” then I might be interested. The intervening 500 plus words DO make a difference especially since it appears to be an add on or after thought for anyone who actually read the transcript.

        • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

          Biden is doing a fine job, all by himself in “getting Biden”. He has a great history of doing that in teh past too and record as being a liar.

    • Also notice how all these “employees” of the Administration have all these processes and procedures which allow them to undermine POTUS. Creating constant tension and infighting if POTUS wants to go to A and they all want B or C.

      Isn’t that why Trump was going to hire the best people and drain the swamp? I mean, I was promised that it’d be easy and that only he could do it.

      … maybe if he didn’t go out of his way to be overly antagonistic…?

      And before I have to consume one more ounce of blaming this on Trump’s style or picks, let me remind everyone this is exactly what happened to Obama when he tried to build his “healthcare reform legislation”.

      Oops

      Too late. 🙂

  23. Canine Weapon says:

    • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

      My experience of 40 plus years is…..If you don’t charge for it nobody believes it! So, Lucy is right with the 5 cent container.

      • There have been many experiments to support this.

        My favorite: they left a fridge out on the curb with a sign that said “free” and no one takes it. They hang a sign than says $50 and it’s stolen the next day.

        • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

          The very last day of the 1964-65 NY world’s fair I spent almost an hour, at the entrance trying to GIVE AWAY eight free tickets I had left over! finally got a group of grandmotherly ladies to take about five. When inside they were astonished they worked!

  24. JAC,

    I believe he was NAIVE to think that the ugliness of a campaign would just go away once he was sworn in. I think he underestimated the anger of the Dems and the Never Trump Republicans.

    Fair enough.

    That said, while some of that is inevitable in any campaign, do you think he campaigned differently any way such that he self-inflected a greater amount of DTS and NT resistance?

    Do you think that he was… maybe.. more antagonistic than a traditional campaign and that he bears some of the responsibility for the fact that so many are unwilling to give him a break?

  25. Mathius……you did not ask me…..but what the hell, you get my answers anyway.

    A) What would it take for you to believe that Trump “did something wrong” here? Very simple. Take it to the Senate for a full hearing. If the Senate votes to impeach…then do so. I do not trust closed door hearings.
    B) What would it take for you to believe that Trump “did something illegal” here? Not the way it is presented in the media and a one sided inquiry. A full Senate trial with cross examination and due process.
    C) What would it take for you to believe that Trump “did something he should be impeached / removed from office” for? A guilty verdict from the Senate. It is the way the process works.

    ————————–

    Now, the Lt Colonel better go ahead and retire. He is toast in the military community.

    • I meant this more in a “what could come to light to make you believe” sense.

      Like, if the transcript (not the summary) comes out and it turns out he said the words “I want you to publicly investigate Hunter Biden before the election”… would that make you believe he did something “wrong” / “illegal” / “impeachment-worthy”? What if Rudy turns on him and testifies that this was Trump’s explicit goal? What if Trump admits it all and says “yea, so what, of course I was trying to smear Joe Biden.. but it was totally within my power to do so”? What if a recording surfaces where he instructs Mulveney to hold the aid until Rudy can get them to open their Biden investigation?

      In other words, what left of explicit guilt would he need to exhibit before you, in your personal opinion say “you know what? He’s lost my support. This guy is up to no good.”

      And, do you – in your personal opinion – believe that you would have required the same standard of evidence before thinking the same of Obama?

      • Like, if the transcript (not the summary) comes out and it turns out he said the words “I want you to publicly investigate Hunter Biden before the election”… would that make you believe he did something “wrong” / “illegal” / “impeachment-worthy”? wrong, yes. illegal, yes if there were a specific law….impeachment worthy, no.

        What if Rudy turns on him and testifies that this was Trump’s explicit goal?No, I would not believe him on his word. Consequently, it renders this moot at this point.

        What if Trump admits it all and says “yea, so what, of course I was trying to smear Joe Biden.. but it was totally within my power to do so”? no different than anyone else is it is not against the law. So, no. I will apply your logic of the ax murderer here. There is no alternative as far as I am concerned.

        What if a recording surfaces where he instructs Mulveney to hold the aid until Rudy can get them to open their Biden investigation? Again, if that is against the law, then I would be in favor of impeachment or at least a good rap on the beak….removal from office..no.

        In other words, what left of explicit guilt would he need to exhibit before you, in your personal opinion say “you know what? He’s lost my support. This guy is up to no good.” He might be up to no good but, if not in violation of the law, I would have to look at the opponent, in this case…..again, applying your ax murderer scenario.

        And, do you – in your personal opinion – believe that you would have required the same standard of evidence before thinking the same of Obama? I would very definitely apply the same standard to Obama. He is entitled to due process as is Trump.

  26. JAC,

    But I also think his statement [that he could eliminate the national debt in 8 years] was correct. It wouldn’t be all that hard……….. based on numbers and actions required. However, it is almost insurmountable when you add politics to the mix.

    I think it is literally impossible unless you’re willing to crater the US (and probably world) economy.

    Alternatively, would could annex another country and sell them off to the highest bidder.

    Short of that, I see no way in hell to go from 600B-ish deficits to 2.3T surpluses. It’s not even a question of national will power.. it’s just.. the federal government took in 3.6T this year.. he’d have to give 2.3T of that to the debt each ear, leaving 1.3T for the entire rest of the budget. Considering he’s raised the military budget each year, that’s probably not going to go down… so that leaves, what? 700b for everything else?

    I mean, the math just doesn’t work. There’s no sane way to get there in 8 years.

    Maybe in 20… and that’s with some serious long-term sustained thinking.

  27. JAC,

    Your criticism on the other hand is primarily driven by your dislike for the man.

    Nope.

    But it is true that I dislike the man.

    Because they all present themselves as the savior or genius and none of them every produce everything they promise or present as easy.

    Well, they all present themselves as the hero, that’s for sure. I don’t remember Obama ever acting as savior-y as Trump.

    But yes, they do act that way.

    I will say, however, that at least for Obama, there was a recognition that it would be hard. There would be a battle, things would have to change and there would be sacrifices. Maybe he was off (dramtically) on the size, scale, and shape of those things… but he never made it out to be a snap of the fingers.

    I think that reflects the fact that Obama (and others) have had a concept of just how much it takes to make something happen. Of just how complicated and intractable these issues are. They – absolutely – have enormous egos.. but they had some idea of what they were up against. Whereas Trump was largely ignorant.

    Either he was profoundly ignorant, or he was lying, or he is stupid, or his ego is just so colossal that it dwarfs even those other Presidents and would-be Presidents.

    “Who knew health care could be so complicated!” You know who knew? Bernie Sanders knew. Hillary Clinton knew. Literally everyone else he faced off against for the Presidency knew that health care was complicated. Only Trump seemed to believe that “you’re going to have such great health care, at a tiny fraction of the cost—and it’s going to be so easy.” It’s that “easy” that’s baffling. No sane person would believe that a problem like that is “easy” to solve.

  28. JAC,

    So I don’t understand why Trump’s bragging and claims are so much more offensive to you than Obama’s or Clinton’s. Maybe it is your disgust for the man

    That certainly adds to it.

    So I don’t understand why Trump’s bragging and claims are so much more offensive to you than Obama’s or Clinton’s. Maybe […] maybe you do it here just to poke people as part of your campaign against hypocrisy.

    That’s my big ticket item.

    People made so. much. hay. out of bashing Obama for many of the same things Trump is suffering for now. TRUMP made so much hay out of it. How many times have I posted Trump tweets basically directly criticizing himself from the past?

    I sat through 8 years – EIGHT YEARS – of Republicans and SUFA and Trump shitting on Obama for literally everything he did in office. Even the left wouldn’t give him a break.

    One time, he got attacked by PETA for killing a fly. Literally.

    But now Republicans and Trump are in power.

    That’s ok. It sucks, but it’s ok. That’s just how the cookie crumbles. Sometimes you’re the windshield, sometimes you’re the bug.

    But I’ll be damned if I’m going to ignore the fact that Republicans and SUFA are cutting him slack they’d never cut Obama.

    I’ll be damned if I’m going to ignore all the times Trump explicitly criticized the Democratic President and then gets a free pass by the right when he does the same thing or worse.

    I won’t ignore it on the debt/deficit. I won’t ignore it when he takes a victory lap he denied Obama for killing a major terrorist.

    And neither should you.

    • That’s my big ticket item. Yep….it bothers you. You need to learn to recognize it for what it is…and then ignore it and focus on facts.

      People made so. much. hay. out of bashing Obama for many of the same things Trump is suffering for now. Yep, what goes around…comes around.

      I sat through 8 years – EIGHT YEARS – of Republicans and SUFA and Trump shitting on Obama for literally everything he did in office. Even the left wouldn’t give him a break. To quote you…..maybe…just maybe….he deserved it?

      One time, he got attacked by PETA for killing a fly. Literally. Yeah…..that was pretty stupid….but PETA is stupid.

      But now Republicans and Trump are in power. Yes, but not without some regret.

      That’s ok. It sucks, but it’s ok. That’s just how the cookie crumbles. Sometimes you’re the windshield, sometimes you’re the bug. Yep, that is it. Some days you get the bear and some days the bear gets you.

      But I’ll be damned if I’m going to ignore the fact that Republicans and SUFA are cutting him slack they’d never cut Obama. Some do and some don’t. I felt about Obama the same way that you feel about Trump…and rightly so….it is subjective.

      I’ll be damned if I’m going to ignore all the times Trump explicitly criticized the Democratic President and then gets a free pass by the right when he does the same thing or worse. Some do and some don’t.

      I won’t ignore it on the debt/deficit. And we should not, no matter who is in office.

      I won’t ignore it when he takes a victory lap he denied Obama for killing a major terrorist. Most Republicans agreed that Obama got to take the victory lap. He should have as it happened on his watch. He gave the go order. Trump did the same.

      • Yep, what goes around…comes around.

        And I’m the one bringin’ it around!

        To quote you…..maybe…just maybe….he deserved it?

        Maybe.

        But if Obama deserved it, by god, Trump has no leg to stand on when whining about “Presidential harassment.”

        Yeah…..that was pretty stupid….but PETA is stupid.

        Well… yea… I mean, yea.

        Some do and some don’t.

        Well I’m not addressing my comments to those who don’t.

        I’m addressing those who do.

        And we should not, no matter who is in office.

        Yet, for years, I couldn’t throw a rock without hitting some panicked comment on SUFA or talking head on FOX bemoaning the debt or deficit.. and then Trump came to power.. and… crickets.

        To his credit – and I do hate giving him credit for anything – JAC has remarked on the hypocrisy here.

        Gman, however, simply suggests that he has “given up” and “moved on” and no longer will concern himself with it. How convenient. When Obama has a deficit (a shrinking one, by the way) it’s a 5-alarm fire. When Trump has one (a growing one, by the way), it’s just ignored with fatalism. Hmm.

        I’d also point out that Republicans are allegedly the Party of Fiscal Responsibility whereas the Blue Team is.. not. So their alarmism should be ongoing or increasing.

        • When Obama has a deficit (a shrinking one, by the way) it’s a 5-alarm fire. When Trump has one (a growing one, by the way), it’s just ignored with fatalism. Hmm. This was hashed and re-hashed many times….If I remember correctly, you and I and one other person (racking my feeble brain here) agreed that creative accounting can prove both sides.

        • Gman, however, simply suggests that he has “given up” and “moved on” and no longer will concern himself with it. How convenient.

          Quite true, it’s called understanding that nobody in DC gives a shit. No need for my blood pressure to need help over it (when you get older, you’ll better understand).

      • Most Republicans agreed that Obama got to take the victory lap. He should have as it happened on his watch. He gave the go order. Trump did the same.

        Yes.

        But one of the people who thought he SHOULDN’T take that lap was Trump.

        The very same Trump who is currently taking a victory lap in similar circumstances.

        Then again, looking at the SUFA page when OBL got announced… we have …..

        Gman presenting a conspiracy theory that he’d been dead for seven years.
        VH posting a long and confusing article that seems to suggest that we’d known all along were OBL was and Obama didn’t act until wikileaks forced his hand. And another one questioning whether this is “what justice looks like” (answer: no). Separately, she adds “And some like me-give him credit but it simply doesn’t override the negative.” (which is fair)
        Puritan Descendant gripes that the OBL story removed the debt crisis from the news (oh, the irony!!!).
        Plainly spoken gives him credit for making the call before immediately offering: “But Obama didn’t “get” bin Laden, the United States military did and they’ve been chasing the sob for almost 10 years. The true credit is theirs alone.”
        Naten53 said “And thank the people that planned a successful operation (probably not obama, though I am glad that he finally showed a positive on his record by authorizing it”
        JB says “Sorry, Charlie, guess Bush and Obama get to share the credit.”.. so 50% credit, I guess? (fair)
        GA Rowe said “Please do not give credit to any one of these idiots [Clinton/BushII/Obama], it was the U.S. Military and the CIA who found and killed Usama Bin Laden. NOT Barack Hussein Obama.”

        And some mysterious character named D13TheColonel who said “he signed the order to do so. That is all the credit he will get. It was neither his staff nor him that planned the operation nor did he supervise the operation. Please note how this works.” (he sounds like a pretty reasonable guy..)

        ——

        So, while the Republicans / Conservatives / SUFA generally, begrudgingly, “agreed that Obama got to take the victory lap,” there was a fair amount of dissent in the ranks.

        ——

        Boy, we used to have a lot more people here… sad.

        • The very same Trump who is currently taking a victory lap in similar circumstances. This is true and Trump deserves no more faster or slower lar than Obama.

          • It’s not about the “lap”.. it’s about the hypocrisy of taking a lap after criticizing someone for doing so in virtually identical circumstances.

        • And some mysterious character named D13TheColonel who said “he signed the order to do so. That is all the credit he will get. It was neither his staff nor him that planned the operation nor did he supervise the operation. Please note how this works.” (he sounds like a pretty reasonable guy..)

          I will have to agree with you that this D13The Colonel guy sounds pretty reasonable…..but I also hear that he has a rather unique relationship with a Pirate.

          However, I will extrapolate that…Trump signed the order and that is all the credit I will give him. His staff had very little to do with the planning of the operation simply because I know how these things are done….but the Special Ops professional knew their job….and they got a gift intelligence handed to them from infilatrations that were not part of the Obama Administraion…..( If you remember, Obama stopped all military and industrial infiltrations during his administration )…trump did take the wraps off. But his staff did not do the work any more than Obama’s did…….the military did the work. But, Trump gave the order to “go” and that is the victory lar I will give him.

          Now, I will say this, and again, because of first hand knowledge, our militay intelligence and clandestine infiltrations were put back into operation. That was a good decision.

        • As I recall, Obama reluctantly took the shot after much cajoling from HRC and Podesta. Biden actually voted wait for more info. Obama then went upstairs and played Spades during most of the raid.

        • Gman presenting a conspiracy theory that he’d been dead for seven years.

          Hell YA I did! Proud of that one for awhile, but your side crushed every conspiracy theory ever invented by spending 35 million bucks and several years trying to prove it. Ya’ll OWN the CT stuff now 😛

        • Whew! I’m in the clear.

          • You were dealing with a loss in the family (my condolences, again), so you were staying out of the fray. I’m sure you would have said something I could have used.

  29. “We have declassified a picture of the wonderful dog (name not declassified) that did such a GREAT JOB in capturing and killing the Leader of ISIS, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.”

    —Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 28, 2019

    Fine! Are you happy now? I have to LIKE something Trump tweeted. Do you have any idea how this makes me feel? What it’s doing to my ulcer?

    What ulcer, you ask? The one that’s currently forming as I type this.

    My hair is turning gray in realtime. Patches are falling out. Suddenly my abs have transformed into a beer belly gut. My eyes are bloodshot and I think a tooth has just come loose.

    Is this what you wanted?! IS IT!??!?!??!!1!!

  30. NO!!!

  31. Sir Mathius…..you are on more lefty sites than I………………..if we have a word for word transcript of the Ukranian phone call….why is it ignored in favor of whistle blowers?

    • Trump moved it to that secure server, remember? 😉

      • Yes, rightly so, then printed it. Verbatim…..or are you suggesting that it was edited?

        • Maybe I missed something – I thought the “transcript” was a compiled contemporaneous notes, not a word-for-word transcript. I seem to recall that it explicitly stated it was not a “verbatim transcript of a discussion.”

          Additionally, the Lt. Colonel apparently testified that it was edited with additional references to Biden and Burisma removed. Supposedly. Who knows?

          I’d like the audio of the call. I mean, he’s released the “transcript,” so what’s the harm in the audio?

          • Additionally, the Lt. Colonel apparently testified that it was edited with additional references to Biden and Burisma removed.
            Sometimes I wonder where you get your ridiculous info. Adam Schiff maybe? NYT’s maybe? Alex Jones maybe?

            • I like the part where you ignored that I added “Supposedly. Who knows?” to the claim to denote my incredulity.

              • WRONG! The correct response is “Adam Schiff”. That’s obvious to anyone following this supposed “close door” hearing. IF, and I say IF with caps, all these hearing transcripts are ever released. Melonhead Schiff may find himself with some problems. Time will tell though, as any form of justice in DC seems to be really hard to come by, for either side.

                Question: Does Pelosi have a vote and will it pass?

  32. NOw, to Sir Mathius……this D13 The Colonel and his association with a certain Pirate could be a problem at some point.

  33. Trump gets Dems to interrupt the World Series, condemn dogs and side with terrorists all within 24 hours. Yet,they don’t see where the real problem lies (in the mirror).

    U.S.—Everyone praised the classified “Hero Dog” for taking down ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.

    Everyone, that is, except CNN, who quickly searched through the dog’s internet history and college yearbooks. Sure enough, CNN found a picture of the Hero Dog partying at obedience school. In the picture, the dog is seen sniffing a butt without consent.
    “Oh yeah, good old [redacted]? He was nuts!” said one German Shepherd who attended Old Yaler Obedience School with the hero dog, according to a CNN report. “He was always sniffing any butt he could find. Cats, dogs, humans, you name it. He didn’t have a preference. He identified as pansniffual.”
    Troubling reports from classmates indicate that the dog sniffed all these butts without consent. The dog wrote cryptic things in his college yearbook, apparently referring to different butt-sniffing maneuvers such as the Surprise Sniffarooski and the Canine’s Triangle.

    The dog has issued a statement: “I like butts. I’ve always liked butts. I still like butts, but I never sniff butts to the point of excess. Who’s a good boy? I am.”
    Democrats immediately called for the dog to be court-martialed and for the death of Baghdadi to be overturned.

    😀 😀 😀

    • Trump gets Dems to interrupt the World Series,

      They didn’t “interrupt” anything.

      They booed Trump.

      And then they went right back to cheering without missing a beat as soon as focus had shifted to the guy throwing out the pitch (a prominent anti-Trump activist, by the way).

      What I really loved about this was how Trump’s face fell when he realized they were booing him. The broad genuine smile shifting to a weak forced smile to a frown as he came face to face, for the first time in a long time, with The American People who weren’t a self-selected subset of adoring fans.

      Reminds me of something… but what…

      condemn dogs

      Who the hell is condemning dogs? This is some grade a Bullshit right here.

      Cite your sources or get outta here.

      and side with terrorists all within 24 hours.

      Bullshit again.

      No one is “siding with Al Bhagdadi (sp?). The left might be refusing to give Trump his due – I haven’t seen this, but I’m sure there are plenty who fit this bill – but no one is “siding” with the head of ISIS.

      Cite your sources or get outta here.

      • Did you catch the one about the WaPo’s original article about Baghdadi’s death? Called him an austere religious scholar….for about 2 hours until it was taken down. Might be a stretch to call it “siding with”, but sure did soften the blow about who he was.

        • I did not catch that…

          But let’s assume you’re correct that WaPo posted that and then removed it 2 hours later.

          “The newspaper came under fire on Sunday after it changed the headline on al-Baghdadi’s obituary two times – first calling him ‘terrorist-in-chief’, followed by ‘austere religious leader at the helm of ISIS’ and finally ‘extremist leader’.”

          Gman’s claim: “Trump gets Dems to [..] side with terrorists”

          I think that’s unreasonable to assert given what you’ve offered.

          A single paper had a brouhaha over the headline of a single article lasting two hours… and from this, Gman concludes that Trump owned the stupid TDS libtard cuck snowflakes by getting them to side with terrorists.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Mathius

        What the hell is this: “with The American People who weren’t a self-selected subset of adoring fans.”

        So in other words, the first time he was exposed to a “self-selected opposition crowd”?????

        Are you really just saying he is not exposed to large groups of people who hate him? Despite the fact he faces the PRESS on a weekly basis.

        • Are you really just saying he is not exposed to large groups of people who hate him? Despite the fact he faces the PRESS on a weekly basis.

          The press don’t “boo” him.

          They might be.. hostile… but they are civil… ish. But, in any event, “the press” aren’t “the American People.”

          • Just A Citizen says:

            Answer the question please.

            • I’m not sure what the actual question you’re asking is.

              I think that President (in general) and THIS President (in specific) are generally encapsulated in bubbles.

              Trump, in particular, clearly consumes a fair amount of Fox and Friends and Hannity – media which is overtly friendly. He is surrounded by generally pro-Trump employees (duh). He attends many Pro-Trump rallies populated by… pro Trump citizens. The only time, really, that he ever sees anything resembling a crowd that aren’t his supporters is the press pool.

              The Press are not The American People. The are the Press.

              It would be easy – dare I say natural – to feel like the Press are the exception, that The People are really with you and that it’s just a small cadre of vultures who hate you that paint a picture to the contrary.

              Imagine being booed by a 90,000-ish person stadium. Imagine that.. when you start from a position of thinking that The People love you.

              That’s why it’s important to get out of your bubble.

              Maybe I’ve missed it… I certainly don’t track his every movement… when was the last time Trump stood before a large crowd of people who weren’t congress or the press or his supporters?

              • First of all!!!…..Twitter. Have you ever read the comments to his tweets. They are for sure, not his friends.

                Second… the World Series Game 5 was played in Washington….no where near his base. I doubt he expected a crowd reaction like at his rallies. Also probably why he didn’t let Barron attend with him…which he got flak for.

                He’s not afraid to expose himself to the non friendlies.

  34. U.S.—New billboards have been popping up in California with the slogan “Move to Texas: We have electricity!” Many see this as a play to lure jobs away from California, as many jobs rely on electricity, especially in the modern economy. This could especially be attractive to jobs in the tech sector.

    Roy Rivera, a tech analyst with decades of experience in cutting edge technology, explained that “a lot of tech uses electricity.” He then pointed to a chart showing that tech businesses can be at least 300% more effective when they have power.
    California Governor Gavin Newsom was dismissive of Texas’s claims, though. “They’re making false claims of being able to deliver electricity 24/7,” Newsom said, “but it just can’t be done.” Newsom was also dismissive of the Lone Star State’s other claims, such as affordable housing, plenty of water, cheap gas, plastic straws, and not constantly being on fire. “It sounds made up,” said Newsom. “I don’t even think there is a Texas.”
    California plans to fight back. It’s now working on a wall to keep people and jobs from leaving California. The planned wall should extend along the entire California border, except for the southern part.

    • This is a good idea.. if we send a few million people to Texas, both states will be reliably Blue.

      • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

        And Texas will then have no electricity.

        Ya see, your folk cannot stand the cities because of what the people they elected did to them. Then they move somewhere else and do it all over again! When I arrived in NJ back in ’77, it was still fairly sane. That’s sure as hell gone now and all a result of the duplication of failed policies over and over and over and over……

      • Once again, it’s satire. But what I find sad is that you can’t seem to see the incredible failure of the Crats and their policies. California is the perfect example of what liberalism is bringing to the country. No Thanks!

        Trump 2020
        Eric Trump 2024 😛

        • Power out at 9am yesterday. Still in the dark. Had to make a propane run this morning to fire the grill. It’s fun for a day or two but this is getting old fast. May have to buy a bigger generator. Had my daughter order me a camp stove since one of the kids ran away with mine. Could have ordered it myself but no internet service at the house. For the last 15 years all we have heard is green energy and solar. But that is just a fraction of our power needs. We lost sight of the 90%.

        • This power outage is really hurting many small businesses. Restaurants are throwing out inventory because the they could not maintain temperatures in coolers. Plus they must close their doors so no customers or income. Our machine shops are down thus losing days of production can causing us to have part shortages thus missed ship dates. It will be interesting to see how many people and businesses leave the state as a result of this.

          This is a combination of business miss management and political intervention into the business of power generation. As with most major catastrophes, their are multiple causes.

      • This is a good idea.. if we send a few million people to Texas, both states will be reliably Blue. I,,,,I,,,,,just….don’t ……have…..the words for this.

        ————————————-

        I ove the pundits using the Beto election as a guideline that Texas is about to turn, what is it, purple? What the pundits do not understand is that we do not like Cruz either…..and voters stayed home. You gotta love the same pundits saying that Biden has a 20 point lead over Trump in Texas………….wooooooo boy. That Texas is solidly a blue state on 20/20.

        Wow……………….now Mathius knows where and why his red Bull disappeared.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Yea, right. They said the same thing of Idaho back in the 90’s when the migration really got going. We are now the Reddest State in the Union. And what was once a hold out of Blue, North Idaho, is now the Reddest area within the Reddest State in the Union.

        • So we’ll send even more! It’s not like California is running out of liberals..

          You could probably find the equivalent of the population of Idaho living homeless on the streets of San Francisco.

          • Just A Citizen says:

            You may be right. That would mean there are 2 million homeless in San Fran. Someone should notify Pelosi and Feinstein.

            • You may be right.

              I often am.

              Not that I ever get credit around here for it…

              That would mean there are 2 million homeless in San Fran.

              Well, it’s not enough to find 2mm homeless.. we need 2mm homeless who are liberal and willing / able to vote… that’s probably more like 5mm.

              That would mean there are 2 million homeless in San Fran.

              Hell, there are probably that many on any given block.

              Someone should notify Pelosi and Feinstein.

              As if they don’t know.

    • ******a Colonel dressed, in all black and camoflage paint, has been seen erecting signs on the Texas/ New Mexico border where I-10 comes through…saying go back. There is no room for you here. Quad 40mm mounts on either side of the highway have mysteriously appeared. And in the river, there is a “gilley” covered ship that looks like a ghost pirate ship, moored with some very mysterious looking weapons aimed at the border as well.

  35. “I worked with John Kelly, and he was totally unequipped to handle the genius of our great President.”

    Stephanie Grisham
    WH Press Secretaty

  36. Hey, old guys………………….care to weigh on on the continuing military career of the Lt Col that “supposedly” has made comments on this Ukraine thing?

    Here is my bet. If he has not already retired…….he better. His next assignment will be Adak, Alaska and he will not see full Colonel. He is toast….and it will not be Presidential. The military chain of command will handle this…..swiftly, silently, deadly.

    • Canine Weapon says:

      I heard his next assignment has already been posted… he has a bunk reserved at Guantanamo Bay.

      • Equine Weapon says:

        I heard he was planning on skipping town, but somehow his tickets for Bora Bora got switched to Tora Bora..

    • care to weigh on on the continuing military career of the Lt Col that “supposedly” has made comments on this Ukraine thing

      Question for the Full Colonel.

      You have spoken in the past that anonymous sources are lower than pond scum and not to be trusted. That any man who sees something he feels a duty to report ought to do so, but do so openly and with his name attached to it.

      Given this, and on the assumption that the Lt Col felt such a duty, how do you square the idea of his chain of command punishing him in the manner you describe? Is it that he somehow broke the appropriate reporting chain? Does it not matter that he was subpoenaed?

      If a man, with something he feels a duty to report, responds to a duly issued congressional subpoena and gets his life and career destroyed for it, then doesn’t this encourage and, to an extent “justify,” the decision of many to remain anonymous?

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Mathius

        I have some of the same questions. But I suspect the breakdown is in two parts.

        One, why did he seem to get his tail in a knot over certain unimportant wording being included in the transcript? Based on his reported testimony the guy seems a bit anal.

        Two, did he then go whining to others outside his chain of command. Remember, he is one of those supposedly cited by the whistle blower. So once he went to the lawyers and supervisors, who did he contact and what did he tell them?

        He should have testified. My concern is what appears to be a huge overreaction in the first place. One that also appears to be driven by a difference in opinion over POLICY. Then there is the issue of him consulting with Ukraine, separately from his assigned duties. I am not sure this last portrayal is accurate but it is now floating around and should be addressed.

        So the question you did not ask is what does one do if they still have heartburn after following the chain of command? THEY RESIGN.

        • One, why did he seem to get his tail in a knot over certain unimportant wording being included in the transcript? Based on his reported testimony the guy seems a bit anal.

          Tail in a knot… anal… there’s a joke here somewhere… anyone? I’m drawing a blank.

          One, why did he seem to get his tail in a knot over certain unimportant wording being included in the transcript? Based on his reported testimony the guy seems a bit anal.

          As someone who been involved in an SEC audit, I’ll tell you what I said the other day. It is extraordinarily important to be extraordinarily careful about what you say. Anything you say is on record exactly as you say it. Being clear and accurate is vital. It’s not up the the witness to decide what is and is not important or tail-twist-worthy.

          I’d be willing to bet that an Lt Col probably has had some experience with testifying or receiving testimony before and is acutely aware that he needs to be precise and thorough.

          Just a hunch though.

          Two, did he then go whining to others outside his chain of command. Remember, he is one of those supposedly cited by the whistle blower. So once he went to the lawyers and supervisors, who did he contact and what did he tell them?

          No idea.

          I am not sure this last portrayal is accurate but it is now floating around and should be addressed.

          I am not sure either.. but it sure is coincidental that he is Ukrainian by birth.. then again, perhaps that immigrant status is why he was on the call in the first place – seeing as he may have been able to offer valuable insights? Who knows? Not me.

          But I do agree with your general implication that this is being used as a smear to discredit him and, by extension, the inquiry.

          So the question you did not ask is what does one do if they still have heartburn after following the chain of command? THEY RESIGN.

          (thoughts here are “in general,” not necessarily related to this specific instance)

          I always see this kind of thing suggested.

          Resignation is a big deal.

          It’s the sacrifice of your entire career, your entire working life, all you’ve ever done or known professionally. And, what’s more, you may still wish to serve America… even in spite of wanting to root out some corrupt influence.

          Why should he have to quit? Let them fire him if they must, but he’s – ostensibly – trying to do what’s right. I fail to see why he has to leave the organization in order to throw rocks from the outside rather than using his position inside to improve it.

          • even in spite of wanting to root out some corrupt influence. He does not get to make that “judgement call.” Officers cannot dictate, influence, or make decisions concerning interpretation of policy.

            Why should he have to quit? He does not have to quit.

            I fail to see why he has to leave the organization in order to throw rocks from the outside rather than using his position inside to improve it. Because he signed an oath and affidavit that says he cannot. He WENT OUTSIDE of the chain of command.

            It’s not up the the witness to decide what is and is not important or tail-twist-worthy. Correct and that is what this individual did.

            • Boy, am I ever NOT cut out for the military…

              .. I’d probably be court marshaled before I finished talking to the recruiter ..

  37. test

    • will answer shortly……….

      • (2nd attempt)

        • Wait no longer…….the spousal unit had jurisdiction….

          1) First and foremost. The LTC is a United States Army Officer and, as such, there is a strict….no………very strict chain of command. He went outside the chain of command and for that………………there is no excuse.

          2) Congressional subpeona has no standing nor bearing upon a Military Officer or non commissioned officer for that matter……unless and until it is approved by the United States Judge Advocate General (military) and it was not.

          3) As a staff officer, he is NOT……repeat NOT NOT NOT entitled to an opinion while in uniform or on active duty. A military officer does not render public opinion nor judgement on civilian policies.

          4) This officer exercised his interprretation of Presidential policy and that is strictly prohibited and is a written protocol for military officers assigned to staff to sign. It was first reported that he was actually on the phone from the situation room listening to the conversation. Now it turns out….he was not. He made an interpretation by listening to “table” talk.

          5) By passing the JAG, this officer will be subject to an article 32 investigation and possible criminal courts martial even if he saw Jesus Christ rape Mother Theresa. All of us, as officers, know precisely…..P R E CI S E L Y what the rules are and what the protocol is involving staff work when assigned to Presidential details.

          6) He will lose his security clearance by reporting any interpretaion of his to any civilian authority. He really screwed up BIG TIME by not reporting to the JAG being approached by Democratic aides to Shiff after being named by a whistle blower.

          In conclusion, had he followed proper military protocol, he would be in no trouble. As I said, the military is a closed society. Do not mess with it. This man is toast. Even if he does not resign, he will never see another good post as his security clearance will be revoked. He might as well go join Shiff’s staff now.

          • One more thought……………………………I cannot emphasize this more………..

            Do not ever, under any circumstance, bypass the chain of command. Just do not…..that is worse than cheating on your wife with your own sister…………do not do it.

          • It was first reported that he was actually on the phone from the situation room listening to the conversation. Now it turns out….he was not. He made an interpretation by listening to “table” talk.

            I have read from the leaks that he also tried to change the transcript, I will have to find that article and link it. If so…..then unemployed with no pension, loss of all rank, dishonorable discharge and possible jail time. IF SO and after a proper trial.

            • Vindman did not posit a motive for the altered transcript and told the House that he attempted to change the transcript to better reflect the omissions, which was partially successful, but did not include those two corrections.
              https://www.nationalreview.com/news/vindman-testimony-alleges-white-house-left-key-details-out-of-trump-zelensky-call-transcript/

              My understanding is that 5 people listen and take notes, compare notes and draft a transcript. That means there are 4 people that can confirm this or deny this. My guess is that it will be denied and Schiff is behind this guy’s testimony. To Schiff, this LtC will be collateral damage for the greater good, when he’s in the pokie and his future destroyed, should it play out this way.

              • I doubt that anything more than re-assignment will happen. He has violated a protocol and nothing more, so far. He will be re-assigned until his time runs out or there is a RIF due to not being able to be promoted.

                No one will have him on their staff no matter his past record, which is quite remarkable. It appears that he got caught up in the “Potomac Squeeze”….and it is very contagious. He will retire an LTC.

  38. To Sir Mathius………As a Blue Team Member, or associate, set aside your bias the best you can, please.

    On this resolution vote today that will “set the rules” of the impeachment hearing, if the rules are voted on (and the blue team will obviously win this) and one of the rules is that a Republican cannot call a witness UNLESS it is approved by Shiff……..would you, as a blue team member, call this due process?

    Second question…..would Citizen Mathius not a blue or red team member but just as an observer, call that same rule due process.

    Just curious. Nancy Pelosi is a very smart politician but I do not see how this vote on the rules of impeachment inquiry is going to fly if they have the so over who gets to be called as a witness. You and I both know, that they will not allow the ones already called to be re-called. I certainly would not but we shall see I guess. Every Democrat will vote on the rules, that is for certain because Pelosi would not allow it otherwise. But………………………..

    Here is my bet……….she will never call for a public vote on the actual impeachment that goes before the Senate. Comments?

    • As a Blue Team Member, or associate,

      Reluctant ally.

      set aside your bias the best you can, please.

      I have no bias! I am completely unbiased!

      if the rules are voted on (and the blue team will obviously win this) and one of the rules is that a Republican cannot call a witness UNLESS it is approved by Shiff……..would you, as a blue team member, reluctant ally of the blue team call this due process?

      No…….

      Well…

      No…

      I mean, “maybe”… I can see how the ability to call unlimited and unrelated and unreliable witnesses could be abused by Red Team… so as long as Blue Team didn’t abuse their position and approved all “reasonable” witnesses…. I guess….?

      But I’d also point out that the HOUSE is not the trial. The HOUSE is the “grand jury”.. the job here is to determine any charges and whether there’s enough evidence to “go to trial” in the senate. As such, it’s not really “necessary” to give the “defense” their full due process. They get to provide their defense in-full in the senate.

      Now, if Blue Team controlled the Senate and said something like this, I would be far more adamant that it’s not ok.

      It’s kind of like being investigated by the police and then barging into the police station and demanding that the detective show you all the evidence and give you the opportunity to refute everything then and there. Well, no, that’s not how this works. You get your chance in the trial.

      So, all-in-all, I’m not thrilled about the prospect of such a rule, but I’m not exactly setting my hair on fire over it either.

      would Citizen Mathius not a blue or red team member but just as an observer, call that same rule due process.

      CITIZEN Mathius agrees with the above.

      He isn’t particularly concerned with what goes on in the house.. but is ADAMANT that the senate trial be fair.

      And, as a side note, given that the Senate is controlled by Red Team, he does not want them to “stack the deck” either. The trial – if there is one – should be full and fair and open. There are a million dirty little tricks that can be used by the party that controls the senate to ensure that the trial is biased one way or another, and, just as he wouldn’t want to see Blue Team abuse this power, neither does he want to see Red Team do so.

      Here is my bet……….she will never call for a public vote on the actual impeachment that goes before the Senate. Comments?

      I’ll take that action.

      The ball is rolling. If it comes to a stop, Trump wins.

      That’s basically an exoneration.

      The Deep Blues will revolt. Nancy would lose her speaker-ship, split the party in two, hand the next election to Trump on a silver platter, and virtually guarantee that, no matter what he does for the next (ugh) five years, the Blues will never politically be able to impeach him.

      No, it’s better to lose the vote, or kick it to the senate and lose it there.

      The best case for her is that the Republican support cracks and they actually win. But I’ll give 40:1 odds on that… then again, a month ago, I’d have given 100:1 odds, so…. ::shrug::

  39. There is a new thread posted to continue the chats.

%d bloggers like this: