Trump - hoće li biti impeachment ili 8 godina drugačijeg predsednikovanja?

[Budja]

Rand Paul o uglednom senatoru™

 

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2017/02/19/rand_paul_were_lucky_john_mccain_is_not_in_charge_we_would_be_in_perpetual_war.html

 

 

Rand Paul: We're Lucky John McCain Is Not In Charge, We Would Be In Perpetual War

KARL: But just to clarify, what McCain said specifically is dictators get started by limiting freedom of the press. I imagine you agree with that.

PAUL: Well, the thing is, is I don't agree with his analysis and applying that to the president. I haven't seen any legislation coming forward that wants to limit the press. I see President Trump expressing his opinion, rather forceful in his own -- you know, his own distinct way.

But I see no evidence that anybody is putting forward any kind of legislation to limit the press. So I think people -- you know, this is colored by John McCain's disagreement with President Trump. It all is.

Everything that he says about the president is colored by his own personal dispute he has got running with President Trump. And it should be taken with a grain of salt because John McCain is the guy that has advocated for war everywhere. He would bankrupt the nation.

And actually we're very lucky John McCain is not in charge because I think we would be in perpetual war.

Edited February 21, 2017 by Budja

[porucnik vasic]

Мрк.

[Eraserhead]

Ayn Rand je kanda prolupao sa ovim uvlacenjem. Trumpu.

[ObiW]

US senator calls 2017 year of 'kicking Russia in the ass'

A top US official has called for sanctions against Russia and Iran at the Munich Security Conference. His comments come amid heightened fears over the Trump administration's stance toward Moscow.

 

[...]

 

Promising to investigate Russian meddling just as several European countries gear up for their own elections this year, Graham urged Trump to take a tougher stance on Moscow and vowed to introduce a bipartisan motion to slap the Russian government with more sanctions.

 

"My goal is to put it on Trump's desk and I hope he'll embrace the idea that as the leader of the free world he should be working with us to punish Russia," Graham said.

 

http://www.dw.com/en/us-senator-calls-2017-year-of-kicking-russia-in-the-ass/a-37622830

[Razzmatazz]

Dobijem proliv svaki put kad čujem "leader of the free world". Počelo ss Dabjom, sad opet cveta.

[ObiW]

Dobijem proliv svaki put kad čujem "leader of the free world". Počelo ss Dabjom, sad opet cveta.

 

 

ova verzija ispod je muzicki bolja, ali ova gore ima slike za one koji slabo kapiraju o cemu se tu ustvari radi.

 

 

 

 

Pesma je nastala 1989, i citira deo slogana koji je koristio Bush stariji u kampanji 1988 ("1000 points of light...") 

Edited February 21, 2017 by ObiW

[Lord Protector]

US senator calls 2017 year of 'kicking Russia in the ass'

A top US official has called for sanctions against Russia and Iran at the Munich Security Conference. His comments come amid heightened fears over the Trump administration's stance toward Moscow.

 

[...]

 

Promising to investigate Russian meddling just as several European countries gear up for their own elections this year, Graham urged Trump to take a tougher stance on Moscow and vowed to introduce a bipartisan motion to slap the Russian government with more sanctions.

 

"My goal is to put it on Trump's desk and I hope he'll embrace the idea that as the leader of the free world he should be working with us to punish Russia," Graham said.

 

http://www.dw.com/en/us-senator-calls-2017-year-of-kicking-russia-in-the-ass/a-37622830

 

 

Uvaženi senator Lindsey Graham je kao i uvaženi senator McCain neopevana budala koja nema nikakav uticaj na Trampa.  Ne može Graham nikakav predlog koji bi se uvažio da stavi na Trampov sto jer su u stvarnosti dvojica senatora među njegovim najvećim političkim protivnicima. Breitbart im uveliko skida skalp. 

Edited February 21, 2017 by slow

[theanswer]

Hoce li ovo govno od Dzona Mekejna da crkne vec jednom posto nece da se povuce, govedo je u kasnim 80im, svet ce biti bezbednije mesto kada ratni huskac ne bude na njemu. Za drugog brata huskaca vec nemam sumnju da ce neko na prajmariju da posalje njegovu jadnu guzicu na smetliste juzne karoline, samo sto cemo morati da cekamo 4god na to

[Meazza]

Deda je dve godine proveo u vijentnamskoj samici i bio mucen, nije cudo sto je postao to sto je postao.

[Eraserhead]

McCain je trenutno glas razuma u ovoj ludnici.

[Lord Protector]

Deda je dve godine proveo u vijentnamskoj samici i bio mucen, nije cudo sto je postao to sto je postao.

 

Drugovi iz Komunističke partije Vijetnama su tada napravili veliku grešku 

[Weenie Pooh]

Shvatili su drugovi & drugarice grešku, ponudili čoveku early release ali je on herojski odbio, nije hteo da posluži kao propaganda smrdljivim komunjarama. Nego lepo odslužio do kraja rata... ali pod enhanced interrogation™ merama ipak potpisao izjavu kojom osuđuje prljave kapitalisičke osvajače.

[ObiW]

Hoce li ovo govno od Dzona Mekejna da crkne vec jednom posto nece da se povuce, govedo je u kasnim 80im, svet ce biti bezbednije mesto kada ratni huskac ne bude na njemu. Za drugog brata huskaca vec nemam sumnju da ce neko na prajmariju da posalje njegovu jadnu guzicu na smetliste juzne karoline, samo sto cemo morati da cekamo 4god na to

 

 

Deda je dve godine proveo u vijentnamskoj samici i bio mucen, nije cudo sto je postao to sto je postao.

 

Deda ima dobre gene. Patite.

 

"I'm the one that said Ronald Reagan shouldn't send Marines to Afghanistan," McCain told CNN in early February. "I'm the one that said Donald Rumsfeld should be fired. I've said the general in Afghanistan should be fired. Look, I have done what I have done right for this country under Republican and Democrat presidents. I will continue to do so. This is not a departure from the way I've conducted myself in the United States Senate."

...

 

Ne može Graham nikakav predlog koji bi se uvažio da stavi na Trampov sto jer su u stvarnosti dvojica senatora među njegovim najvećim političkim protivnicima. Breitbart im uveliko skida skalp.

 

Pricas bez veze.

 

Senatori ne pisu nekakve predloge necega, nego pisu zakone. Zakoni se 'stavljaju na sto' predsedniku kada ih Senat i vece gradjana izglasaju. Graham zapravo prica o tome da ce sa kolegama izglasati zakon koji ce obavezivati predsednika i vladu u vezi spoljne politike prema Rusiji. Tramp moze da ulozi veto na zakon, ali veto ne sprecava da se zakon sprovede ako je usvojen sa 66+ glasova. Svaki predsednik ponekad ulozi veto na zakone koje Senat i vece gradjana usvoje, ali se veoma retko dogadja da se ulaze veto na zakon koji je predlozio predstavnik partije koja ima predsednika na vlasti.

Edited February 22, 2017 by ObiW

[Lezilebovich]

 

Organizacija Amnesty International ocenjuje da je "otrovna" retorika američkog predsednika Donalda Trampa na putu do osvajanja Bele kuće predvodila globalni trend prema politici podela u 2016. koja je svet učinila "mračnijim" mestom.

U svom godišnjem izveštaju za 169 zemalja ova organizacija za zaštitu ljudskih prava sa sedištem u Londonu navodi da su političari napali načela ljudskog dostojanstva i jednakosti želeći da budu  izabrani.

"Otrovna retorika u kampanji Donalda Trampa primer je globalnih trendova prema gnevnijoj politici koja više unosi podele", navodi Amnesti u saopštenju a prenosi Rojters. Svet je, tvrde, postao "mračnije...nestabilno mesto", s porastom govora mržnje prema migrantima širom Evrope i Sjedinjenih Država.

"Rani pokazatelji od ...Trampa nagoveštavaju spoljnu politiku koja će bitno potkopati multilateralnu saradnju i uvesti u doba veće nestabilnosti i uzajamnog nepoverenja", dodaje Amnesti. 

Administracija Donalda Trampa označena je kontroverzama već na samom početku zbog žestokih napada na medije za koje tvrdi da lažu i politiziraju i borbom na sudovima oko njegove izvršne naredbe da se privremeno zabrani ulazak u SAD ljudima iz sedam većinski muslimanskih zemalja jer su, kako tvrdi, bezbednosni rizik.

Amnesti tvrdi kako postoji veliki jaz između imperativa i delovanja i retorike i realnosti te to ilustruje time što države koje su učestovavle na samitu UN-a o izbeglicama i migrantima u septembru 2016. nisu uspele da dogovore bilo kakvu odgovarajuću reakciju na globalnu migrantsku krizu.

Amnesty kaže da su populistički pokreti i poruke postali uobičajeniji i u Evropi, na primer u Poljskoj i Mađarskoj.

 

Trumpara kao Terminator, otrovnom retorikom došao do fotelje i onda je poslao retoriku u prošlost kako bi inspirisao Orbana. Ili je Orban bio fin i tih dok nije video Trumpa na televiziji.

Edited February 22, 2017 by Lezilebovich

[Lord Protector]

 

  Why Do "Progressives" Like War?

    Fleeing to Canada is no longer an option

     PHILIP GIRALDI • FEBRUARY 21, 2017

Liberals are supposed to be antiwar, right? I went to college in the 1960s, when students nationwide were rising up in opposition to the Vietnam War. I was a Young Republican back then and supported the war through sheer ignorance and dislike of the sanctimoniousness of the protesters, some of whom were surely making their way to Canada to live in exile on daddy’s money while I was on a bus going to Fort Leonard Wood for basic combat training. I can’t even claim that I had some grudging respect for the antiwar crowd because I didn’t, but I did believe that at least some of them who were not being motivated by being personally afraid of getting hurt were actually sincere in their opposition to the awful things that were happening in Southeast Asia.

As I look around now, however, I see something quite different. The lefties I knew in college are now part of the Establishment and generally speaking are retired limousine liberals. And they now call themselves progressives, of course, because it sounds more educated and sends a better message, implying as it does that troglodytic conservatives are anti-progress. But they also have done a flip on the issue of war and peace. In its most recent incarnation some of this might be attributed to a desperate desire to relate to the Hillary Clinton campaign with its bellicosity towards Russia, Syria and Iran, but I suspect that the inclination to identify enemies goes much deeper than that, back as far as the Bill Clinton Administration with its sanctions on Iraq and the Balkan adventure, which resulted in hundreds of thousands of deaths and the creation of a terror-narco state in the heart of Europe. And more recently we have seen the Obama meddling in Libya, Yemen and Syria in so called humanitarian interventions which have turned out to be largely fraudulent. Yes, under the Obama Dems it was “responsibility to protect time” (r2p) and all the world trembled as the drones were let loose.

Last Friday I started to read an op-ed in The Washington Post by David Ignatius that blew me away. It began “President Trump confronts complicated problems as the investigation widens into Russia’s attack on our political system.” It then proceeded to lay out the case for an “aggressive Russia” in the terms that have been repeated ad nauseam in the mainstream media. And it was, of course, lacking in any evidence, as if the opinions of coopted journalists and the highly politicized senior officials in the intelligence community should be regarded as sacrosanct. These are, not coincidentally, the same people who have reportedly recently been working together to undercut the White House by leaking and then reporting highly sensitive transcripts of phone calls with Russian officials.

Ignatius is well plugged into the national security community and inclined to be hawkish but he is also a typical Post politically correct progressive on most issues. So here was your typical liberal asserting something in a dangerous fashion that has not been demonstrated and might be completely untrue. Russia is attacking “our political system!” And The Post is not alone in accepting that Russia is trying to subvert and ultimately overthrow our republic. Reporting from The New York Times and on television news makes the same assumption whenever they discuss Russia, leading to what some critics have described as mounting American ‘hysteria’ relating to anything coming out of Moscow.

Rachel Maddow is another favorite of mine when it comes to talking real humanitarian feel good stuff out one side of her mouth while beating the drum for war from the other side. In a bravura performance on January 26th she roundly chastised Russia and its president Vladimir Putin. Rachel, who freaked out completely when Donald Trump was elected, is now keen to demonstrate that Trump has been corrupted by Russia and is now controlled out of the Kremlin. She described Trump’s lord and master Putin as an “intense little man” who murders his opponents before going into the whole “Trump stole the election with the aid of Moscow” saga, supporting sanctions on Russia and multiple investigations to get to the bottom of “Putin’s attacks on our democracy.” Per Maddow, Russia is the heart of darkness and, by way of Trump, has succeeded in exercising control over key elements in the new administration.

Unfortunately, people in the media like Ignatius and Maddow are not alone. Their willingness to sell a specific political line that carries with it a risk of nuclear war as fact, even when they know it is not, has been part of the fear-mongering engaged in by Democratic Party loyalists and many others on the left. Their intention is to “get Trump” whatever it takes, which opens the door to some truly dangerous maneuvering that could have awful consequences if the drumbeat and military buildup against Russia continues, leading Putin to decide that his country is being threatened and backed into a corner. Moscow has indicated that it would not hesitate use nuclear weapons if it is being confronted militarily and facing defeat.

The current wave of Russophobia is much more dangerous than the random depiction of foreigners in negative terms that has long bedeviled a certain type of American know-nothing politics. Apart from the progressive antipathy towards Putin personally, there is a virulent strain of anti-Russian sentiment among some self-styled conservatives in congress, best exemplified by Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham. Graham has recently said “2017 is going to be a year of kicking Russia in the ass in Congress.”

It is my belief that many in the National Security State have convinced themselves that Russia is indeed a major threat against the United States and not because it is a nuclear armed power that can strike the U.S. That appreciation, should, if anything constitute a good reason to work hard to maintain cordial relations rather than not, but it is seemingly ignored by everyone but Donald Trump.

No, the new brand of Russophobia derives from the belief that Moscow is “interfering” in places like Syria and Ukraine. Plus, it is a friend of Iran. That perception derives from the consensus view among liberals and conservatives alike that the U.S. sphere of influence encompasses the entire globe as well as the particularly progressive conceit that Washington should serve to “protect” anyone threatened at any time by anyone else, which provides a convenient pretext for military interventions that are euphemistically described as “peace missions.”

There might be a certain cynicism in many who hate Russia as having a powerful enemy also keeps the cash flowing from the treasuring into the pockets of the beneficiaries of the military industrial congressional complex, but my real fear is that, having been brainwashed for the past ten years, many government officials are actually sincere in their loathing of Moscow and all its works. Recent opinion polls suggest that that kind of thinking is popular among Americans, but it actually makes no sense. Though involvement by Moscow in the Middle East and Eastern Europe is undeniable, calling it a threat against U.S. vital interests is more than a bit of a stretch as Russia’s actual ability to make trouble is limited. It has exactly one overseas military facility, in Syria, while the U.S. has more than 800, and its economy and military budget are tiny compared to that of the United States. In fact, it is Washington that is most guilty of intervening globally and destabilizing entire regions, not Moscow, and when Donald Trump said in an interview that when it came to killing the U.S. was not so innocent it was a gross understatement.

Ironically, pursuing a reset with Russia is one of the things that Trump actually gets right but the new left won’t give him a break because they reflexively hate him for not embracing the usual progressive bromides that they believe are supposed to go with being antiwar. Other Moscow trashing comes from the John McCain camp which demonizes Russia because warmongers always need an enemy and McCain has never found a war he couldn’t support. It would be a tragedy for the United States if both the left and enough of the right were to join forces to limit Trump’s options on dealing with Moscow, thereby enabling an escalating conflict that could have tragic consequences for all parties.

 

Edited February 22, 2017 by slow