A russian-speaking immigrant using a false identity infiltrated Mar a Lardo!
Good thing 45 was prescient of this kind of thing and sent all those top-secret documents back to DC where they belonged! Oh wait, he kept them in his basement.
Good god the Republicans are the biggest threat to this nation.
Inna Yashchyshen, who masqueraded as ''Anna de Rothschild,'' is the target of an inquiry into her financial activities — and her ability to easily reach the former president's inner circle.
A russian-speaking immigrant using a false identity infiltrated Mar a Lardo!
Good thing 45 was prescient of this kind of thing and sent all those top-secret documents back to DC where they belonged! Oh wait, he kept them in his basement.
Good god the Republicans are the biggest threat to this nation.
A russian-speaking immigrant using a false identity infiltrated Mar a Lardo!
Good thing 45 was prescient of this kind of thing and sent all those top-secret documents back to DC where they belonged! Oh wait, he kept them in his basement.
Good god the Republicans are the biggest threat to this nation.
People like YOU are much more unfit for office than people like Trump.
Ok, hold on there sweetheart. I am not interested nor remotely qualified to run a country. I can run a track program. But that's as far as I think I should go. However, had I been forced into being the President I know I would do a significantly better job of it than Trump. I could sit around the oval office all day watching news while eating McDonalds or go play endless rounds of golf and I could go on a victory tour for 2 years half filling small arenas with my biggest supporters so I can feel good about myself. But I know I would do a better job because I don't get off on belittling or cheating people. I'd also know well enough to listen to the advice of the people who actually have experience. I certainly wouldn't rinsing the wallets of my supporters every chance I get.
People like YOU are much more unfit for office than people like Trump.
Ok, hold on there sweetheart. I am not interested nor remotely qualified to run a country. I can run a track program. But that's as far as I think I should go. However, had I been forced into being the President I know I would do a significantly better job of it than Trump. I could sit around the oval office all day watching news while eating McDonalds or go play endless rounds of golf and I could go on a victory tour for 2 years half filling small arenas with my biggest supporters so I can feel good about myself. But I know I would do a better job because I don't get off on belittling or cheating people. I'd also know well enough to listen to the advice of the people who actually have experience. I certainly wouldn't rinsing the wallets of my supporters every chance I get.
Bear in mind every thing you "think" is severely tainted by your debilitating stupidity.
Trump is deeply flawed to be sure. Hillary and Diaper boy are much more flawed.
Hillary stole more money from Haiti alone than Trump is even worth.
Biden is pedophile and he's corrupt AF.
Your self righteous preening is hysterical given that the alternatives to Trump were Biden and Clinton.
Maggie Haberman @maggieNYT The affidavit makes clear that according to the government, the claim that the Trump team was asked to put a stronger lock on the storage room in the basement at MAL was not what they asked. They asked that the room be secured. Video showed people were coming in and out.
You post like a stream of diarrhea on every political thread. The threads wouldn't exist without you. It is your unceasing ranting that keeps them going. It's got to be some kind of condition.
17,454 posts.
Absolutely zero self awareness.
The posts are yours. I like how you have chosen to describe yourself. It is the equivalent of comatose.
JFC Trump had human intel information in an insecure spot.
How in the world do 'conservatives' defend this?
Oh right, they aren't conservatives. They are trumpies, first and last and medium. Whatever trump does is fine if it makes the libs cry a little.
Josh Campbell @joshscampbell A major point here: The FBI found documents marked "HCS," which refers to clandestine human sources who risk their lives to provide information to the US government.
Maggie Haberman @maggieNYT The affidavit makes clear that according to the government, the claim that the Trump team was asked to put a stronger lock on the storage room in the basement at MAL was not what they asked. They asked that the room be secured. Video showed people were coming in and out.
I had always found it strange that the FBI, upon learning that top secret documents were being stored in the basement of Maralago, said all they needed to do was put a lock on it. They actually said the location of the stored documents was not secured properly and they asked that the room be properly secured. So Trump's idea of securing top secret documents is to put a padlock on the door? Ladies and Gents, the former President.
Maggie Haberman @maggieNYT The affidavit makes clear that according to the government, the claim that the Trump team was asked to put a stronger lock on the storage room in the basement at MAL was not what they asked. They asked that the room be secured. Video showed people were coming in and out.
I had always found it strange that the FBI, upon learning that top secret documents were being stored in the basement of Maralago, said all they needed to do was put a lock on it. They actually said the location of the stored documents was not secured properly and they asked that the room be properly secured. So Trump's idea of securing top secret documents is to put a padlock on the door? Ladies and Gents, the former President.
Hillary and Obama's idea was putting their blackberries in their purses.
No, I can safely say they all would agree with me about negotiating with terrorists. You would have vehemently agreed with me too, until around 2018 or so, when you did an overnight one eighty (180) on this basic principle. You're a victim of weird woke-inspired political realignments mixed with a really bad case of Trumperitis.
If you think being in favor of staying in a permanent state of war FOREVER in Afghanistan makes you patriotic you're sadly mistaken.
We had 20 years to route the Taliban. We're clearly incapable of doing it. The American public has no interest in it and certainly wouldn't support the sort of tactics it would take to get it done.
No, what I posted was that being in favor of negotiating with Islamic terrorists (the Taliban) who were involved in terrorist attacks against Americans puts your patriotism in question. Being in favor of conceding to terrorist demands like Trump did, and that you support, effectively terminates your claim to American patriotism. Your newly-inspired immoral beliefs crush all claims to loving America.
You would have strongly agreed with me regarding this until around 2018 or whenever Trump first began thinking America should negotiate with Islamic terrorists. That's when your views on such a terribly immoral idea, and strategic blunder, changed drastically -- you did a complete 180 Exorcist head spin on the issue. You see, Trump didn't just turn many liberals and the mainstream media into irrational hysterics on several issues (e.g., race) -- he did the same to his hardcore supporters on other issues (pacifism, surrendering, giving aid and comfort to America's enemies, reading letters for content, pleading the Fifth). Can you imagine yourself, from say 2001 to 2017-18 ever defending the idea of conceding to terrorist demands that terrorist prisoners of war be released? It's totally inconceivable that you wouldn't have denounced such an idea. You would have understandably gone all wingo apeload at the idea.
Fred Wellman @FPWellman Don't fcking dare say you support our military, intelligence and law enforcement personnel then defend an ex-President who directly threatened their lives by treating our top secrets like fan mail to be tossed in boxes and a closet. How many lives did he put in danger?
If you think being in favor of staying in a permanent state of war FOREVER in Afghanistan makes you patriotic you're sadly mistaken.
We had 20 years to route the Taliban. We're clearly incapable of doing it. The American public has no interest in it and certainly wouldn't support the sort of tactics it would take to get it done.
No, what I posted was that being in favor of negotiating with Islamic terrorists (the Taliban) who were involved in terrorist attacks against Americans puts your patriotism in question. Being in favor of conceding to terrorist demands like Trump did, and that you support, effectively terminates your claim to American patriotism. Your newly-inspired immoral beliefs crush all claims to loving America.
You would have strongly agreed with me regarding this until around 2018 or whenever Trump first began thinking America should negotiate with Islamic terrorists. That's when your views on such a terribly immoral idea, and strategic blunder, changed drastically -- you did a complete 180 Exorcist head spin on the issue. You see, Trump didn't just turn many liberals and the mainstream media into irrational hysterics on several issues (e.g., race) -- he did the same to his hardcore supporters on other issues (pacifism, surrendering, giving aid and comfort to America's enemies, reading letters for content, pleading the Fifth). Can you imagine yourself, from say 2001 to 2017-18 ever defending the idea of conceding to terrorist demands that terrorist prisoners of war be released? It's totally inconceivable that you wouldn't have denounced such an idea. You would have understandably gone all wingo apeload at the idea.
No, I can safely say they all would agree with me about negotiating with terrorists. You would have vehemently agreed with me too, until around 2018 or so, when you did an overnight one eighty (180) on this basic principle. You're a victim of weird woke-inspired political realignments mixed with a really bad case of Trumperitis.
We had 20 years to route the Taliban. We're clearly incapable of doing it. The American public has no interest in it and certainly wouldn't support the sort of tactics it would take to get it done.
The Taliban/Al Qaeda was routed, by the way. The US (and its Allies) moved an entire invading and occupying force to Afghanistan, half way around the world, killed tens of thousands of Taliban psychos, dismantled Al Qaeda, put bin Laden on the run, and effectively ended the threat to Americans of Islamic terrorism.
Your suggestion that the US military is "clearly incapable" of defeating the Taliban is somewhat disgusting and factually inaccurate. The only "clearly incapable" component is the ability of Afghans to live in any kind of democratic society. They don't want it. Some cultures/people seem to prefer living under oppressive, dictatorial regimes where they are told what to do, when to do it, and how they should think. Look at Russia, for example. Russians crave being told what to do, and what to think when they get up in the morning. Russians will kill for their right to be subjugated serfs. Afghans, and many other inhabitants of Middle Eastern countries, are no different. Any mistakes the US made during the duration of the Afghan occupation -- which could hardly be called a "war" after 2012 -- were in failing to realize Afghans truly wanted Islamic whackjobs dictating what goes on in the country. Go figure.
We had 20 years to route the Taliban. We're clearly incapable of doing it. The American public has no interest in it and certainly wouldn't support the sort of tactics it would take to get it done.
The Taliban/Al Qaeda was routed, by the way. The US (and its Allies) moved an entire invading and occupying force to Afghanistan, half way around the world, killed tens of thousands of Taliban psychos, dismantled Al Qaeda, put bin Laden on the run, and effectively ended the threat to Americans of Islamic terrorism.
Your suggestion that the US military is "clearly incapable" of defeating the Taliban is somewhat disgusting and factually inaccurate. The only "clearly incapable" component is the ability of Afghans to live in any kind of democratic society. They don't want it. Some cultures/people seem to prefer living under oppressive, dictatorial regimes where they are told what to do, when to do it, and how they should think. Look at Russia, for example. Russians crave being told what to do, and what to think when they get up in the morning. Russians will kill for their right to be subjugated serfs. Afghans, and many other inhabitants of Middle Eastern countries, are no different. Any mistakes the US made during the duration of the Afghan occupation -- which could hardly be called a "war" after 2012 -- were in failing to realize Afghans truly wanted Islamic whackjobs dictating what goes on in the country. Go figure.
Trumpists and the Taliban have more in common than meets the eye. They both like oppression - but they Trumpists would like to exercise it over others.
The three laws at issue in the Mar-a-Lago raid DO NOT hinge on whether the documents were classified or declassified: Section 793 of Title 18 of the U.S. Code aka the Espionage Act focuses on harm to the United States or aid to an adversary; Section 1519 deals with obstruction; Section 2071 criminalizes theft or destruction of government documents.
In each case, whether a given document was classified, declassified, or other is irrelevant.
This bears repetition: FOR THE THREE LAWS AT ISSUE IT DOESN'T MATTER WHETHER THE DOCUMENTS WERE DECLASSIFIED OR NOT. Classification status is absolutely irrelevant with regard to those laws.
We had 20 years to route the Taliban. We're clearly incapable of doing it. The American public has no interest in it and certainly wouldn't support the sort of tactics it would take to get it done.
The Taliban/Al Qaeda was routed, by the way. The US (and its Allies) moved an entire invading and occupying force to Afghanistan, half way around the world, killed tens of thousands of Taliban psychos, dismantled Al Qaeda, put bin Laden on the run, and effectively ended the threat to Americans of Islamic terrorism.
Your suggestion that the US military is "clearly incapable" of defeating the Taliban is somewhat disgusting and factually inaccurate. The only "clearly incapable" component is the ability of Afghans to live in any kind of democratic society. They don't want it. Some cultures/people seem to prefer living under oppressive, dictatorial regimes where they are told what to do, when to do it, and how they should think. Look at Russia, for example. Russians crave being told what to do, and what to think when they get up in the morning. Russians will kill for their right to be subjugated serfs. Afghans, and many other inhabitants of Middle Eastern countries, are no different. Any mistakes the US made during the duration of the Afghan occupation -- which could hardly be called a "war" after 2012 -- were in failing to realize Afghans truly wanted Islamic whackjobs dictating what goes on in the country. Go figure.
You don't know anything about warfare.
You don't know anything about Afghanistan.
You've never spoken to any of these people.
You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
You cannot defeat an enemy in a mountainous country like Afghanistan with the handful of soldiers we sent over there. It would take at least a million combat troops and we never had more than 100,000 troops on the ground and more than half of them were support units.
Afghanistan is a bunch of mountains with little villages and towns in the valleys. The US can show up and clean out the valley with little effort. Then they go back to their bases or FOBs and the Taliban come back in. It was Vietnam all over again. Killing people and not holding the ground didn't work in Vietnam and it didn't work in Afghanistan.
Afghans do NOT want the Taliban. You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
The Taliban/Al Qaeda was routed, by the way. The US (and its Allies) moved an entire invading and occupying force to Afghanistan, half way around the world, killed tens of thousands of Taliban psychos, dismantled Al Qaeda, put bin Laden on the run, and effectively ended the threat to Americans of Islamic terrorism.
Your suggestion that the US military is "clearly incapable" of defeating the Taliban is somewhat disgusting and factually inaccurate. The only "clearly incapable" component is the ability of Afghans to live in any kind of democratic society. They don't want it. Some cultures/people seem to prefer living under oppressive, dictatorial regimes where they are told what to do, when to do it, and how they should think. Look at Russia, for example. Russians crave being told what to do, and what to think when they get up in the morning. Russians will kill for their right to be subjugated serfs. Afghans, and many other inhabitants of Middle Eastern countries, are no different. Any mistakes the US made during the duration of the Afghan occupation -- which could hardly be called a "war" after 2012 -- were in failing to realize Afghans truly wanted Islamic whackjobs dictating what goes on in the country. Go figure.
Trumpists and the Taliban have more in common than meets the eye. They both like oppression - but they Trumpists would like to exercise it over others.
You can be arrested for speech in your country you imbecile. NZ has much more in common with the Taliban than anyone in America.
No, what I posted was that being in favor of negotiating with Islamic terrorists (the Taliban) who were involved in terrorist attacks against Americans puts your patriotism in question. Being in favor of conceding to terrorist demands like Trump did, and that you support, effectively terminates your claim to American patriotism. Your newly-inspired immoral beliefs crush all claims to loving America.
You would have strongly agreed with me regarding this until around 2018 or whenever Trump first began thinking America should negotiate with Islamic terrorists. That's when your views on such a terribly immoral idea, and strategic blunder, changed drastically -- you did a complete 180 Exorcist head spin on the issue. You see, Trump didn't just turn many liberals and the mainstream media into irrational hysterics on several issues (e.g., race) -- he did the same to his hardcore supporters on other issues (pacifism, surrendering, giving aid and comfort to America's enemies, reading letters for content, pleading the Fifth). Can you imagine yourself, from say 2001 to 2017-18 ever defending the idea of conceding to terrorist demands that terrorist prisoners of war be released? It's totally inconceivable that you wouldn't have denounced such an idea. You would have understandably gone all wingo apeload at the idea.
My interest in Afghanistan ended on May 2, 2011.
The Taliban didn't attack America Al Qaeda did.
You have a weird penchant for arguing distinctions with no meaningful difference. The Taliban killed American soldiers in Afghanistan. The Taliban supported Al Qaeda, before and after the September 11, 2001 attacks on America, to such an extent that they are indistinguishable for purposes of the threat of, and responsibility for, terrorism against innocent Americans.
It doesn't matter when your interest in Afghanistan ended. What matters is that you believe in, and support, negotiating with terrorists, and conceding to terrorist demands that terrorist murderers be released from prison. You are defined as a person by those disgusting, immoral, un-American beliefs. That's what matters.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.
