***Official Political Discussion Thread***

Outrageously stupid take gets 260k likes

Breaking news: Republicans want Mitt Romney because hes Republican

Far left and progressives want Bernie because social democratic stances

The “they” in the above two are completely different ideologically

And read any CNN/Hill tweet about Bernie and its full of ppl telling him to go away

These people infuriate me

They dont want Pelosi because Dems have lost almost everything in elections


The go away stuff toward Hillary and Nancy has always been covered in sexism. Even from the far left, less than what gets slung at her from the right, but it is still there.

I'm sorry, but IMO most leftist I encounter make a ****ty case for why Pelosi should go away. There are legit beefs people in the party should have with her, like some of the decision the DCCC has made and maybe someone can make the argument that after electoral losses party leaders naturally step aside for the Party to rebrand itself but those are not the objections I hear the most.

They call her a centrist, corporatist, a roadblock to the progressive movement, all those attacks are patently false; and talks of her temperament that are just sneak sexism. All the electoral losses that have happened since 2010 can't be put on Pelosi, just like it can't just be put on Obama. In fact, The argument is even worse when someones tries to apply it to Pelosi. From 2009 to 2010 the House was way more left than the Senate. Pelosi got enough blue dogs on board to pass a public option, environmental reform, and she had her caucus on board with the more left-wing version of Obama's proposal than the Senate. So if the argument is that the Dems lost because they were not progressive enough, Pelosi is not the person that should be really taking that blame.

Reid didn't catch it like she has. Schumer is more center and more corporate friendly and while he catches it too, he doesn't get it as bad as Pelosi.

Furthermore, Pelosi is good at her job. She is a great fundraiser for he caucus, she can keep them in line mostly, was ran one of the most productive Congresses in recent history. I mean the last dude that tried to come for her as party leader was a joke. But seemingly some "progressives" cheered him on.

The GOP is going after her because she is party leader and they are covering their messaging in sexism. The next person that takes the job, especially if it a woman, will catch it too. The GOP won't stop.

And the left is playing wrong by pushing this Pelosi must go thing. Like look around, their allies in this fight a fickle centrist and the GOP, that is a clue that their position should be reconsidered. The left should be defending her, and then make a better case for why someone else should lead the caucus, and most importantly put someone decent forward.

-Bernie has his problems too, like some glaring ones. His fans make excuses for them, but that it the nature of the game. Matter of fact, Bernie has slid on some things that progressives would have killed Hillary and Nancy on.
 
Last edited:
Also a reminder that Sarah Sanders in her list of former officials whose security clearances are "under review on a case by case basis" included at least 2 people who don't have a security clearance anymore. Contradicting his Press Secretary, Trump then tied his decision to revoke Brennan's clearance directly to the Russia probe in a WSJ interview.

Now the WH has reportedly drafted more orders to revoke clearances but are discussing optimum times to release them during negative news cycles. It appears that Trump may revoke Bruce Ohr's clearance soon, a currently active DOJ employee.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.fda7e0230725
White House drafts more clearance cancellations demanded by Trump
The White House has drafted documents revoking the security clearances of current and former officials whom President Trump has demanded be punished for criticizing him or playing a role in the investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election, according to senior administration officials.

Trump wants to sign “most, if not all” of them, said one senior White House official, who indicated that communications aides, including press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders and Bill Shine, the newly named deputy chief of staff, have discussed the optimum times to release them as a distraction during unfavorable news cycles.

Some presidential aides echoed concerns raised by outside critics that the threatened revocations smack of a Nixonian enemies list, with little or no substantive national security justification. Particular worry has been expressed inside the White House about Trump’s statement Friday that he intends “very quickly” to strip the clearance of current Justice Department official Bruce Ohr, according to officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.

Trump, speaking to reporters as he left the White House to spend the weekend at his New Jersey golf club, called Ohr “a disgrace,” charging that he is tied to special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s investigation of the Russia matter. “For him to be in the Justice Department, and to be doing what he did, that is a disgrace. That is disqualifying for Mueller,” he said.
His comments followed the release of a statement signed by 14 former CIA directors and deputy directors from Republican and Democratic administrations, as well as a former director of national intelligence, who called Trump’s revocation this week of former CIA director John Brennan’s clearance a blatant attempt to “stifle free speech” and send an “inappropriate and deeply regrettable” signal to other public servants.

Later Friday, 60 additional former CIA officials issued a statement objecting to the Brennan action and stating their belief “that former government officials have the right to express their unclassified views on what they see as critical national security issues without fear of being punished for doing so.”

While he has frequently called Mueller’s inquiry a “rigged witch hunt,” and did so again Friday, Trump’s move against Brennan, and threats to move against others, has brought the controversy to a new level. Sanders announced the Brennan decision Wednesday, citing what she called his “erratic conduct” and “wild outbursts” on television, as well as allegedly erroneous statements he had made.

The senior White House official acknowledged that the step against Brennan had been prepared in late July, when Sanders first said Trump was considering it. But the decision to take that step was made this week to divert attention from nonstop coverage of a critical book released by fired Trump aide Omarosa Manigault Newman.

Consideration is being given to holding other prepared documents in reserve for similar opportunities in the future, the official said.

Brennan, a career CIA official who served as director of the agency during President Barack Obama’s second term, briefed Trump during the presidential transition about intelligence conclusions that Russia had interfered in the election on Trump’s behalf. He has since been harshly critical, on Twitter and in appearances as a television commentator, of the president’s foreign policy and treatment of the intelligence community. He denounced Trump’s performance at a summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin last month as “treasonous.”

The White House did not suggest that Brennan had committed any security breaches, and Trump himself, in an interview with the Wall Street Journal, linked the clearance revocation to the “sham” Russia investigation, which he said Brennan and others had “led.”

It was unclear what the argument would be for revoking Ohr’s clearance, since Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein, while not specifying Ohr’s current job, has said he has had no involvement in the Mueller investigation, begun last year.

But Ohr knew Christopher Steele, the former British intelligence agent who was paid in 2016 to investigate Trump’s ties to Russia, first by anti-Trump conservative organizations and later by Hillary Clinton’s campaign. According to news reports and congressional testimony, the two men discussed Trump before the election, and Ohr reported the conversation to the FBI.

Ohr is the only current official on the White House list of clearances Trump wants to lift. The others are former director of national intelligence James R. Clapper Jr.; former CIA director Michael V. Hayden; former FBI director James B. Comey; Obama national security adviser Susan E. Rice; former FBI officials Andrew McCabe, Lisa Page and Peter Strzok; and former acting attorney general Sally Yates. Several of them have said they no longer have clearances.

In his Friday comments, Trump said he had gotten a “tremendous response” for his action against Brennan. “If anything, I’m giving him a bigger voice,” he said. “Many people don’t even know who he is . . . I’ve never respected him.”

Similarly, the president said he did not know retired Navy Adm. William H. McRaven, former head of the U.S. Special Operations Command, who in a Thursday op-ed in The Washington Post called Trump’s tactics “McCarthy-era” and said it would be an honor to have Trump lift his security clearance “so I can add my name to the list of men and women who have spoken up against your presidency.”

Meanwhile, the statement by former CIA directors and deputies was quickly pulled together Thursday by George Tenet, who served as CIA director in the Bill Clinton and George W. Bush administrations, and former deputy director Michael J. Morell, according to Hayden, who also signed the document.

Other signers include Clapper and former CIA directors William H. Webster, Robert M. Gates, Porter J. Goss, Leon E. Panetta and David H. Petraeus, as well as five former deputy directors and former director of national intelligence Dennis C. Blair.

“We all agree that the president’s action regarding John Brennan and the threats of similar action against other former officials has nothing to do with who should and should not hold security clearances — and everything to do with an attempt to stifle free speech,” the statement said.

Several former officials have said they rarely use their clearances, which allow them to serve as institutional memories and provide advice to current officials, if requested. Hayden said he had been to the agency once — at his own request, for a briefing on Africa in preparation for a speech — since stepping down a decade ago.

While Brennan was a clear target of Trump’s action, Hayden said in an interview, another is “everybody else on the list. . . . Watch your step or this is going to happen to you.”

“The third group, I think, is the broader intelligence community,” Hayden said. “In essence, it’s been demonstrated to them that if you tell this president something he doesn’t want to hear, something he doesn’t believe, he’s prepared to retaliate.”

“There are a lot of times you have to go in there and tell him something he doesn’t want to hear. This series of events,” he said, “has made that even harder than it already is.”
 
Last edited:
Flame suits can't stop this:

wxfyd6mdkpg11.jpg
Ole boy just hit Eric's soul with some Agent Orange Napalm
 
i think kamala shouldnt run during the next election
think she should wait til 2024
i feel she would have a better chance
 
http://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...ek-to-stop-release-of-trump-financial-records
DOJ lawyers seek to stop release of Trump financial records
Department of Justice (DOJ) lawyers have filed a request in federal court to halt a lawsuit surrounding President Trump’s hotel in Washington, D.C., while they file an appeal, a move that would stop the release of the property’s financial records on the property.

The request was made to U.S. District Judge Peter J. Messitte, who last month ruled that the lawsuit — alleging that Trump was profiting from foreign governments spending money at his D.C. hotel in violation of the Emoluments Clause — could move forward.

DOJ lawyers argued that conducting discovery, including the release of the financial records on Trump and his properties, on a sitting president could trigger “significant separation-of-powers concerns.”

“Moreover, the public interest is decidedly in favor of a stay because any discovery would necessarily be a distraction to the President’s performance of his constitutional duties,” the document states.

Officials in Maryland and D.C. have sought financial records on Trump and his properties. They argue, as alleged in the lawsuit, that Trump has personally benefitted from his presidency and is harming other competing businesses.

"After winning two major rulings in this case already, we anticipated President Trump's most recent motion,” D.C. Attorney General Karl Racine said in a statement obtained by the Associated Press. “Nonetheless, our case is still moving forward. We are on track to propose a schedule for discovery by September 14, and we hope to request relevant documents shortly thereafter."

Trump has faced several legal challenges alleging that he is violating the emoluments clause, which blocks elected officials from receiving gifts or benefits from foreign governments without the approval of Congress.

The president handed oversight of his businesses to his sons before he took office last year.
 
Anyone the democrats nominate to be speaker will almost instantly become as hated as Nacy Pelosi and they won't necessarily be as good as Nancy at getting **** done.


We already know Nancy is good at this ****, why roll the dice on someone else?
 
Anyone the democrats nominate to be speaker will almost instantly become as hated as Nacy Pelosi and they won't necessarily be as good as Nancy at getting **** done.


We already know Nancy is good at this ****, why roll the dice on someone else.
My homie stay on that "Pelosi must go" steez, so recently I asked him who he thinks should replace her; and with a straight face he says: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

I waited for him to start chuckling but ole boy was dead serious.

I was so taken aback I had a hard time responding. I was just sitting there like....

giphy.gif
 
My homie stay on that "Pelosi must go" steez, so recently I asked him who he thinks should replace her; and with a straight face he says: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

I waited for him to start chuckling but ole boy was dead serious.

I was so taken aback I had a hard time responding. I was just sitting there like....

giphy.gif

Trouble in paradise?
 
Any liberal that ever thought about running, their best chance would be to shoot their shot in 2020.

If a Dem wins in 2020, then they would be closed out until 2028. And by that point, the establishment might have a frontrunner.
 
My homie stay on that "Pelosi must go" steez, so recently I asked him who he thinks should replace her; and with a straight face he says: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

I waited for him to start chuckling but ole boy was dead serious.

I was so taken aback I had a hard time responding. I was just sitting there like....

giphy.gif

I like AOC but damn LOL

Barbara Lee has been floated as a possible Pelosi replacement

Interestingly, it would be a vote across the bay
(Pelosi/SF and Lee/Oakland)

The Bay has been stronggg in national politics

Newsom, Harris, Feinstein, Pelosi, Lee
 
My homie stay on that "Pelosi must go" steez, so recently I asked him who he thinks should replace her; and with a straight face he says: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

I waited for him to start chuckling but ole boy was dead serious.

I was so taken aback I had a hard time responding. I was just sitting there like....

giphy.gif

Rusty after the homie spewed that nonsense.

giphy (29).gif


#SmashMouthPolitics
 
Outrageously stupid take gets 260k likes

Breaking news: Republicans want Mitt Romney because hes Republican

Far left and progressives want Bernie because social democratic stances

The “they” in the above two are completely different ideologically

And read any CNN/Hill tweet about Bernie and its full of ppl telling him to go away

These people infuriate me

They dont want Pelosi because Dems have lost almost everything in elections




I don’t believe this.

If people were being sexist they would say overtly sexist things.
 
This timeline just increasingly gets more ridiculous
https://apnews.com/93049748e816424b86583ccfc6195d76/AP-source:-Omarosa-has-video,-audio,-texts
AP source: Omarosa has video, audio, texts
It’s not just audiotapes.

Omarosa Manigault Newman has a stash of video, emails, text messages and other documentation supporting the claims in her tell-all book about her time in the Trump White House, a person with direct knowledge of the records told The Associated Press Friday.

Manigault Newman has made clear that she plans to continue selectively releasing the pieces of evidence if President Donald Trump and his associates continue to attack her credibility and challenge the claims in her book, “Unhinged.” She’s already dribbled out audio recordings of conversations, and video clips, texts or email could follow, according to the person who described what Manigault Newman has called a multimedia “treasure trove.” The person was not authorized to discuss the issue publicly and asked for anonymity.

“I will not be silenced. I will not be intimidated. I’m not going to be bullied by Donald Trump,” the former Trump aide told The Associated Press this week as she seemed to dismiss a threat from Trump’s campaign. She spoke to the AP hours after Trump’s campaign announced it was filing an arbitration action against her alleging she’d violated a signed agreement with the campaign that prohibits her from disclosing confidential information.

She told PBS in a separate interview this week: “I have a significant amount, in fact, a treasure trove, of multimedia backup for everything that’s not only in “Unhinged,” but everything that I assert about Donald Trump.”

Manigault Newman claims Trump officials offered her a job on the campaign as a way of silencing her, after she was fired from the White House. She’s accused Trump of being racist and suffering from a mental decline.

The White House has countered by branding Manigault Newman as a disgruntled former staffer with credibility issues who is now trying to profit from a book based on false attacks against an individual she has called a mentor and has admired for more than a decade.

Trump has also lashed out at Manigault Newman, calling her a “lowlife,” ″wacky and deranged” and a “dog.”

Simon & Schuster this week also dismissed threatened legal action from Trump’s campaign. A campaign attorney told Simon & Schuster in a letter that “Unhinged” violated Manigault Newman’s confidentiality agreement, but the publisher responded that it was acting “well within” its rights.

“Unhinged” has spent the past few days at No. 2 on Amazon.com’s best-seller list, trailing only Rachel Hollis’ lifestyle book “Girl, Wash Your Face.”

Manigault Newman was director of communications for a White House office that networks with various constituency groups until she was fired last December by chief of staff John Kelly, citing “significant integrity issues.” Before joining the administration, Manigault Newman handled African-American outreach for Trump’s presidential campaign. She has known Trump since 2003, when she became a contestant on Trump’s TV show, “The Apprentice.”

She has already released several secret audio recordings, including of the meeting in which she was fired by Kelly.

In another recording, Trump’s daughter-in-law, Lara Trump, is heard offering Manigault Newman $15,000 a month - after she was fired from the White House - for a campaign job requiring her to be “positive.” Lara Trump is a senior adviser on Trump’s re-election campaign.

Manigault Newman also alleges that tape exists of Trump using a racial slur while working on “The Apprentice.” Trump has denied this, saying on Twitter that “I don’t have that word in my vocabulary, and never have. She made it up.”
 
In re: Brennan's security clearance, the President clearly has broad presidential powers as it relates to the right to remove security clearances. The argument that it violates the 1st amendment is without merit.
 
Trump actively broadcasting on Twitter that he is planning to obstruct justice.

such a lie because the president cannot obstruct himself! the argument that Trump is breaking the third crack commandment to never trust nobody is without merit.

He clearly has the presidential powers to do so. libbies lose again :lol:
 
Back
Top Bottom