Joe Biden: President of the United States

[Technics 1210]

I respect BLM as a movement, though I deplore the violence that sometimes occurred. There were plenty of peaceful demonstrations. I would have taken part in one had Mrs R not been in COVID at-risk categories.

Trump shows a substantial break with reality, hence is not mentally competent.

There were plenty of peaceful demonstrations supporting Trump too.

Reality is based on perception. The reality of a poor man is different to the reality of a rich man. The same applies to White/Black, Man/Women etc.

Trump is as unorthodox as you can get in politics, but that doesn't mean he is disconnected with reality, and 70M voters agree with him.

Tell me whatis reality? A US president waging war on forgien soil? That's the normailty one should expect?

This was a long time coming; the divisions in society and gap between rich and poor was bound to result in this. History is littered with such examples.

As I have said time and time again, Trump is a symptom, not the cause.

 

[Robert]

There were plenty of peaceful demonstrations supporting Trump too.

Reality is based on perception. The reality of a poor man is different to the reality of a rich man. The same applies to White/Black, Man/Women etc.

Trump is as unorthodox as you can get in politics, but that doesn't mean he is disconnected with reality, and 70M voters agree with him.

Tell me whatis reality? A US president waging war on forgien soil? That's the normailty one should expect?

This was a long time coming; the divisions in society and gap between rich and poor was bound to result in this. History is littered with such examples.

As I have said time and time again, Trump is a symptom, not the cause.

Reality is accepting the result of an election certified at State and Federal level despite numerous legal and procedural challenges.

 

[Technics 1210]

Reality is accepting the result of an election certified at State and Federal level despite numerous legal and procedural challenges.

You mean like Brexit?

Or you mean like Trump 2016 win?

Why didn't the left accept those democratic results?

You see my point here right?

When the result favours the left, it's democracy, when it does not, it's collusion/Russians etc.

 

[JaDed]

As per news it will be an orderly transfer.

 

[Robert]

You mean like Brexit?

Or you mean like Trump 2016 win?

Why didn't the left accept those democratic results?

You see my point here right?

When the result favours the left, it's democracy, when it does not, it's collusion/Russians etc.

This is a false equivalence. Actually two.

Firstly, legislative checks and balances were in place in the 2019 election, which was why Trump’s legal challenges all failed. Whereas the Electoral Commission had no power to oversee the 2016 Referendum, so I wanted it to be re-run with the proper controls in place.

Secondly, I didn’t see any Remain leaders dogwhistling and fomenting a coup attempt. We marched, and waved a few placards, but we didn’t storm Westminster.

These are the differences.

 

[Technics 1210]

This is a false equivalence. Actually two.

Firstly, legislative checks and balances were in place in the 2019 election, which was why Trump’s legal challenges all failed. Whereas the Electoral Commission had no power to oversee the 2016 Referendum, so I wanted it to be re-run with the proper controls in place.

Secondly, I didn’t see any Remain leaders dogwhistling and fomenting a coup attempt. We marched, and waved a few placards, but we didn’t storm Westminster.

These are the differences.

No. It outlines hypocrisy.

You champion democracy (legislative checks etc is just a fancy way of saying a result is verified) but refused to accept the Brexit result as a Remainer. Excuses ranged from Russia, to lies, to 'it was an advisory referendum'. Why didn't Remainers accept the result gracefully?

Remainers went to court in the UK to challenge the result, made a mockery of the parliamentary process, we all know how Remainer MPs were dogwhistling and attempted coups in Parliament, and colluded with EU on side deals, resulting in 3, yes 3, general elections in the space of 4 years.

Remainers didn't just wave a few placards, they also resorted to name calling, labelling Brexit voters racists to bigots to fascists. Telling Brexiteers - you didn't know what you voted for - It is still happening now, even on PP. How patronising.

Trump 2016 was pretty much the same, the Democrats refused to accept the result and blamed Russia what not, blamed collusion, and spent over 3 years trying to impeach Trump.

The hypocrisy is now the same people want the world to accept a democratic result, because the result favours them. Why don't you support an investigation into Biden's links with China, like you did with Trump and Russia?

In summary you ignored the legislative checks and balances when the result was not in favour of the losing sides in 2016. Why? You refused to accept the result of the largest democratic exercise in UK history - now you want Brexiteers and Trump supporters to accept a democratic result? Why? Why were the LibDems campaiging on the back of a second referendum - the people's vote - when we already had the people vote, the referendum. Why?

Trump is not mentally ill. He is intelligent and calculating in every move. It's his way of retaliating to the nonsense he had to face since inauguration.

Why should I or any Brexit/Trump listen to cries of 'democratic result must be accepted' when the same people refused to accept the results of 2016? Why?

Remainers have divided and polarised the UK, just like Democrats have in the USA.

As I said, if the result of democracy were accepted in 2016 we would not be in this mess. Alas the precedent has been set, and it is the fault of Remainers/Democrats.

 

[MenInG]

Finally.


<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-partner="tweetdeck"><p lang="und" dir="ltr"><a href="https://t.co/csX07ZVWGe">pic.twitter.com/csX07ZVWGe</a></p>— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1347334804052844550?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 8, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[Robert]

No. It outlines hypocrisy.

You champion democracy (legislative checks etc is just a fancy way of saying a result is verified) but refused to accept the Brexit result as a Remainer. Excuses ranged from Russia, to lies, to 'it was an advisory referendum'. Why didn't Remainers accept the result gracefully?

Remainers went to court in the UK to challenge the result, made a mockery of the parliamentary process, we all know how Remainer MPs were dogwhistling and attempted coups in Parliament, and colluded with EU on side deals, resulting in 3, yes 3, general elections in the space of 4 years.

Remainers didn't just wave a few placards, they also resorted to name calling, labelling Brexit voters racists to bigots to fascists. Telling Brexiteers - you didn't know what you voted for - It is still happening now, even on PP. How patronising.

Trump 2016 was pretty much the same, the Democrats refused to accept the result and blamed Russia what not, blamed collusion, and spent over 3 years trying to impeach Trump.

The hypocrisy is now the same people want the world to accept a democratic result, because the result favours them. Why don't you support an investigation into Biden's links with China, like you did with Trump and Russia?

In summary you ignored the legislative checks and balances when the result was not in favour of the losing sides in 2016. Why? You refused to accept the result of the largest democratic exercise in UK history - now you want Brexiteers and Trump supporters to accept a democratic result? Why? Why were the LibDems campaiging on the back of a second referendum - the people's vote - when we already had the people vote, the referendum. Why?

Trump is not mentally ill. He is intelligent and calculating in every move. It's his way of retaliating to the nonsense he had to face since inauguration.

Why should I or any Brexit/Trump listen to cries of 'democratic result must be accepted' when the same people refused to accept the results of 2016? Why?

Remainers have divided and polarised the UK, just like Democrats have in the USA.

As I said, if the result of democracy were accepted in 2016 we would not be in this mess. Alas the precedent has been set, and it is the fault of Remainers/Democrats.

It’s quite simple and straightforward.

The US election in 2020 was overseen by Constitutional procedural checks and balances, so is lawful. Multiple attempts to try to overturn it failed in law.

The Democrats did not attempt to overturn the 2016 election. The Justice Department carried out an investigation into Trump and presented that to Congress, which voted for acquittal. Had they voted for impeachment, this would not have overturned the election result, but removed Trump from office and promoted Pence. As happened to Nixon.

The referendum was not overseen by the Electoral Commission, because it was advisory not binding, so should have been run again and made legally binding with Electorate Commission oversight. Then the checks and balances would be in place and the result would be acceptable to me.

Remainers did not challenge the referendum result in court. Gina Miller successfully challenged the Executive’s decision to implement Brexit without Parliamentary approval, then the Executive’s decision to prorogue Parliament. In other words, twice she stopped the PM from turning back the clock to before the English Civil War and ruling like a King. Gina Miller is a hero of British liberty and the rule of law over ones who would seek to ride roughshod over it.

We are now in a very dangerous time. US democracy is resilient because their Congress, their Executive and their judiciary all have equal power under their Constitution. So Trump was unable to hack the election. American democratic institutions withheld the assault. But the British constitution is unwritten and therefore vulnerable. If Johnson succeeds in changing the law so that he can prorogue Parliament without redress by the Supreme Court, we are well on the road to outright fascism.

(If people who voted for Brexit feel patronised by Remainers, wait until they lose their livelihoods. This is happening to the small fishermen in the South West right now. I take no pleasure in this. I feel terribly sad for them. I blame the conmen - Farage, the Mail and Express, Johnson - not the conned.)

 

[Robert]

Finally.


<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-partner="tweetdeck"><p lang="und" dir="ltr"><a href="https://t.co/csX07ZVWGe">pic.twitter.com/csX07ZVWGe</a></p>— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1347334804052844550?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 8, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

What a liar. He didn’t deploy the National Guard, the State Governers of VA and MD did. This bloke only operates out of self-interest from moment to moment. He’s exercising damage control.

 

[Stewie]

it’s quite simple and straightforward.

The us election in 2020 was overseen by constitutional procedural checks and balances, so is lawful. Multiple attempts to try to overturn it failed in law.

The democrats did not attempt to overturn the 2016 election. The justice department carried out an investigation into trump and presented that to congress, which voted for acquittal. Had they voted for impeachment, this would not have overturned the election result, but removed trump from office and promoted pence. As happened to nixon.

The referendum was not overseen by the electoral commission, because it was advisory not binding, so should have been run again and made legally binding with electorate commission oversight. Then the checks and balances would be in place and the result would be acceptable to me.

Remainers did not challenge the referendum result in court. Gina miller successfully challenged the executive’s decision to implement brexit without parliamentary approval, then the executive’s decision to prorogue parliament. In other words, twice she stopped the pm from turning back the clock to before the english civil war and ruling like a king. Gina miller is a hero of british liberty and the rule of law over ones who would seek to ride roughshod over it.

We are now in a very dangerous time. Us democracy is resilient because their congress, their executive and their judiciary all have equal power under their constitution. So trump was unable to hack the election. American democratic institutions withheld the assault. But the british constitution is unwritten and therefore vulnerable. If johnson succeeds in changing the law so that he can prorogue parliament without redress by the supreme court, we are well on the road to outright fascism.

(if people who voted for brexit feel patronised by remainers, wait until they lose their livelihoods. This is happening to the small fishermen in the south west right now. I take no pleasure in this. I feel terribly sad for them. I blame the conmen - farage, the mail and express, johnson - not the conned.)

potw!

 

[Technics 1210]

It’s quite simple and straightforward.

The US election in 2020 was overseen by Constitutional procedural checks and balances, so is lawful. Multiple attempts to try to overturn it failed in law.

The Democrats did not attempt to overturn the 2016 election. The Justice Department carried out an investigation into Trump and presented that to Congress, which voted for acquittal. Had they voted for impeachment, this would not have overturned the election result, but removed Trump from office and promoted Pence. As happened to Nixon.

The referendum was not overseen by the Electoral Commission, because it was advisory not binding, so should have been run again and made legally binding with Electorate Commission oversight. Then the checks and balances would be in place and the result would be acceptable to me.

Remainers did not challenge the referendum result in court. Gina Miller successfully challenged the Executive’s decision to implement Brexit without Parliamentary approval, then the Executive’s decision to prorogue Parliament. In other words, twice she stopped the PM from turning back the clock to before the English Civil War and ruling like a King. Gina Miller is a hero of British liberty and the rule of law over ones who would seek to ride roughshod over it.

We are now in a very dangerous time. US democracy is resilient because their Congress, their Executive and their judiciary all have equal power under their Constitution. So Trump was unable to hack the election. American democratic institutions withheld the assault. But the British constitution is unwritten and therefore vulnerable. If Johnson succeeds in changing the law so that he can prorogue Parliament without redress by the Supreme Court, we are well on the road to outright fascism.

(If people who voted for Brexit feel patronised by Remainers, wait until they lose their livelihoods. This is happening to the small fishermen in the South West right now. I take no pleasure in this. I feel terribly sad for them. I blame the conmen - Farage, the Mail and Express, Johnson - not the conned.)

See, you don't accept the referendum result. I once asked you to show me where the Brexit referendum was advisory, you linked me to a fact checking website.

The fact is Remainers and Democrats refused to accept 2016 results, and blamed Russia what not.

You only believe in democracy when it suits you.

Well it doesn't matter, we're out of the EU, Trump is out, but thanks to Remainers/Democrats - the damage has been done.

 

[Stewie]

See, you don't accept the referendum result. I once asked you to show me where the Brexit referendum was advisory, you linked me to a fact checking website.

The fact is Remainers and Democrats refused to accept 2016 results, and blamed Russia what not.

You only believe in democracy when it suits you.

Well it doesn't matter, we're out of the EU, Trump is out, but thanks to Remainers/Democrats - the damage has been done.

You really need to get a grip on reality. You have a habit of lumping all left wing and right wing stuff together. Brexit and US politics are two very different things.

Democrats did not refuse to accept the 2016 election results. Based in insurmountable evidence, from US intelligence agencies and the justice department that there was enough Russian interference to sway the vote towards trump. That and the fact a number of trump campaign officials were meeting with shady Russian officials and trumps own public suggestions of Russians to dig up dirt on Hillary is enough evidence there to support the Russians did try to interfere.

At the end of the day, it’s the American public who voted for trump. Democrats never claimed rigging or widespread fraud like republicans are now. They simply claimed and with enough supporting evidence and testimonies, that Russians interfered and trump camp collided with them.. the evidence was so much so that the articles of impeachment were passed and there was independent counsel investigation. Now the counsel (mueller) did not have the authority to indict sitting president .. his job was to report his findings to the congress. There was enough to put a number of trump colleagues in the slammer who he has pardoned most of now. But since senate was majority republicans, this did not end up in indictment for trump. But all legal experts will tell you there is enough there for at least obstruction of justice charge.

So the constitutional and legal process was followed. There was no allegation of election stealing, voter fraud, insurrection, etc by the Dems but We are all seeing that now with the trump camp when all their allegations about fraud have been debunked across the board by Dems and Republican officials alike.

I see you are very passionate in your hatred for the left, but be sensible and mature and don’t lose sight of facts.

 

[Robert]

See, you don't accept the referendum result. I once asked you to show me where the Brexit referendum was advisory, you linked me to a fact checking website.

The fact is Remainers and Democrats refused to accept 2016 results, and blamed Russia what not.

You only believe in democracy when it suits you.

Well it doesn't matter, we're out of the EU, Trump is out, but thanks to Remainers/Democrats - the damage has been done.

The Electoral Commission held no sway over the Referendum. Therefore the Referendum couldn’t have been legally binding, because it wasn’t legally bound. The law must take precedence - this is a fundamental principle of liberty.

Had the Electoral Commission held oversight, I would have no problem with the result. I believe in democracy when it is conducted under law, not the perversion of democracy we saw in 2016 and since with this rogue PM overriding Parliament.

You seem to think democracy is merely the will of the people, outside and above law - which if taken to its conclusion results in the storming of the Capital, or even the Terror that followed the French Revolution when the rule of law collapsed resulting in massacres. But the will of the people must be constrained by law in a liberal and open society. Law is what protects us from the sans-culottes and their guillotines.

UK is moving towards fascism now, and you my friend will be Othered and found by the sans-culottes to be an Enemy of the People before Mr Blue Eyes here. Don’t you see that I am trying to protect you, that liberalism is your strongest ally and best defence?

 

[Technics 1210]

The Electoral Commission held no sway over the Referendum. Therefore the Referendum couldn’t have been legally binding, because it wasn’t legally bound. The law must take precedence - this is a fundamental principle of liberty.

Had the Electoral Commission held oversight, I would have no problem with the result. I believe in democracy when it is conducted under law, not the perversion of democracy we saw in 2016 and since with this rogue PM overriding Parliament.

You seem to think democracy is merely the will of the people, outside and above law - which if taken to its conclusion results in the storming of the Capital, or even the Terror that followed the French Revolution when the rule of law collapsed resulting in massacres. But the will of the people must be constrained by law in a liberal and open society. Law is what protects us from the sans-culottes and their guillotines.

UK is moving towards fascism now, and you my friend will be Othered and found by the sans-culottes to be an Enemy of the People before Mr Blue Eyes here. Don’t you see that I am trying to protect you, that liberalism is your strongest ally and best defence?

Brexit and 2016 Trump were conducted under law. Why refuse the results? Why challenge Brexit in a court of law?

Democracy is the will of the people, but Remainers attempted to overturn the will. Why are you trying to change the definition?

UK is heading for fascism, but blaming the likes of Putin, Farage, and saying Brexiteers were conned, is an insult when the cause is austerity; not Putin, Boris, or Farage.

When people question immigration, it's the left who cry racist. This is not protection, this is accusation.

Why not support an investigation between Biden and China, the same way you supported an investigation between Russia and Trump?

Anyway, if you want to protect the people, then a good start is not to insult them by calling the racists just because they have legitimate concerns.

 

[IMMY69]

It’s quite simple and straightforward.

The US election in 2020 was overseen by Constitutional procedural checks and balances, so is lawful. Multiple attempts to try to overturn it failed in law.

The Democrats did not attempt to overturn the 2016 election. The Justice Department carried out an investigation into Trump and presented that to Congress, which voted for acquittal. Had they voted for impeachment, this would not have overturned the election result, but removed Trump from office and promoted Pence. As happened to Nixon.

The referendum was not overseen by the Electoral Commission, because it was advisory not binding, so should have been run again and made legally binding with Electorate Commission oversight. Then the checks and balances would be in place and the result would be acceptable to me.

Remainers did not challenge the referendum result in court. Gina Miller successfully challenged the Executive’s decision to implement Brexit without Parliamentary approval, then the Executive’s decision to prorogue Parliament. In other words, twice she stopped the PM from turning back the clock to before the English Civil War and ruling like a King. Gina Miller is a hero of British liberty and the rule of law over ones who would seek to ride roughshod over it.

We are now in a very dangerous time. US democracy is resilient because their Congress, their Executive and their judiciary all have equal power under their Constitution. So Trump was unable to hack the election. American democratic institutions withheld the assault. But the British constitution is unwritten and therefore vulnerable. If Johnson succeeds in changing the law so that he can prorogue Parliament without redress by the Supreme Court, we are well on the road to outright fascism.

(If people who voted for Brexit feel patronised by Remainers, wait until they lose their livelihoods. This is happening to the small fishermen in the South West right now. I take no pleasure in this. I feel terribly sad for them. I blame the conmen - Farage, the Mail and Express, Johnson - not the conned.)

Excellent Post.

POTW

 

[Robert]

Brexit and 2016 Trump were conducted under law. Why refuse the results? Why challenge Brexit in a court of law?

Democracy is the will of the people, but Remainers attempted to overturn the will. Why are you trying to change the definition?

UK is heading for fascism, but blaming the likes of Putin, Farage, and saying Brexiteers were conned, is an insult when the cause is austerity; not Putin, Boris, or Farage.

When people question immigration, it's the left who cry racist. This is not protection, this is accusation.

Why not support an investigation between Biden and China, the same way you supported an investigation between Russia and Trump?

Anyway, if you want to protect the people, then a good start is not to insult them by calling the racists just because they have legitimate concerns.

Ok, as I have pointed out Brexit was never challenged in a court of law, the behaviour of the PM was when he exceeded the Executive’s authority under law.

My definition of democracy is based on an understanding of the philosophy of John Locke and British political history. “The will of the people” could mean anything, and when not governed by law, you get mob rule with some strongman emerging to direct it. See Robespierre, and see for a brief moment Trump whipping up “the will of the people” into violence and attempt to intimidate lawmakers.

 

[Technics 1210]

The 'establishments' couldn't believe the results of 2016, they were shocked. Shocked because the political class were disconnected from reality, shocked because the media was spinning lies. They thought Brexit wouldn't happen, and thought Trump wouldn't win because the status quo would continue while talking the votes for granted.

This is why the day Trump won in 2016, they were trying to find out why, how could Clinton lose? Rather than focus at home, they decided to blame Russia.

This is why the day UK voted to leave the EU, Remainers couldn't stomach the fact people voted to leave, and rather than ask why, they decided to blame Russia and shout Racists!

Rather than blame Russia and god knows what else, the answer was closer to home - Austerity.

Now that Trump lost, all is well, and democracy has prevailed. Bull dust and hypocrisy of the highest order.

Remainers/Democrats have done more damage to democray than any 'racist' ever has.

I will say this again, Brexit and Trump were symptoms, not causes.

 

[Technics 1210]

Ok, as I have pointed out Brexit was never challenged in a court of law, the behaviour of the PM was when he exceeded the Executive’s authority under law.

My definition of democracy is based on an understanding of the philosophy of John Locke and British political history. “The will of the people” could mean anything, and when not governed by law, you get mob rule with some strongman emerging to direct it. See Robespierre, and see for a brief moment Trump whipping up “the will of the people” into violence and attempt to intimidate lawmakers.

Gina Miller says high.

In a democracy the highest number of votes wins. This is by definition the will of people. In fact, Brexit was true democracy, one man one vote. Even if you don't agree, LESS people vote in General Election, and governments are voted in power. Will of the people right?

Trump didn't whip up violence. Show me a post, tweet by Trump where he instructed violence.

On the contrary, BLM resorted to violence, where was the condemnation?

 

[Stewie]

Gina Miller says high.

In a democracy the highest number of votes wins. This is by definition the will of people. In fact, Brexit was true democracy, one man one vote. Even if you don't agree, LESS people vote in General Election, and governments are voted in power. Will of the people right?

Trump didn't whip up violence. Show me a post, tweet by Trump where he instructed violence.

On the contrary, BLM resorted to violence, where was the condemnation?

1. BLM violence was condemned across the board. I have cited evidence of that several times if you don’t want to admit thsts just you

2. Why do you think trumps own cabinet members are resigning citing he incited the violence? Why are his own party people admitting to it while you are behaving like a personal family member of trump?

 

[Firebat]

Los Angeles Lakers hope to meet President-elect Joe Biden but champions lose at Spurs

The Los Angeles Lakers hope to become the first NBA champions to visit the White House since 2016 when president elect Joe Biden takes office.

No team has visited the White House under the presidency of Donald Trump.

President Trump rescinded invitations to NBA championship winning teams in recent years after several players stated they did not wish to visit.

But US media claim the Lakers would be keen to visit Biden after he is sworn into office on 20 January.

The Cleveland Cavaliers were the last team to meet a sitting president when they visited Barack Obama after their 2016 win but the Golden State Warriors (2017 and 2018) and the Toronto Raptors (2019) did not go to see Trump.

The Lakers will potentially make their visit when they play at the home of the Washington Wizards, as long as Covid-19 restrictions or Biden's own engagements do not get in the way.

https://www.bbc.com/sport/basketball/55584721

 

[MenInG]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-partner="tweetdeck"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">To all of those who have asked, I will not be going to the Inauguration on January 20th.</p>— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1347569870578266115?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 8, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[Stewie]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-partner="tweetdeck"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">To all of those who have asked, I will not be going to the Inauguration on January 20th.</p>— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1347569870578266115?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 8, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

who didnt see that coming?

HAHAHAHA!

 

[Stewie]

Gina Miller says high.

In a democracy the highest number of votes wins. This is by definition the will of people. In fact, Brexit was true democracy, one man one vote. Even if you don't agree, LESS people vote in General Election, and governments are voted in power. Will of the people right?

Trump didn't whip up violence. Show me a post, tweet by Trump where he instructed violence.

On the contrary, BLM resorted to violence, where was the condemnation?

https://nationalpost.com/news/world...4p0M-77a-VpP9V8LGwr9Bsr3Km1DMgATIXUhsKHCAmiqU

 

[MenInG]

Democratic Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi says that she spoke today with the senior-most Pentagon general about Trump's access to nuclear weapons.

"This morning, I spoke to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley to discuss available precautions for preventing an unstable president from initiating military hostilities or accessing the launch codes and ordering a nuclear strike," she said in a statement.

"The situation of this unhinged President could not be more dangerous, and we must do everything that we can to protect the American people from his unbalanced assault on our country and our democracy."

Unfortunately, Pelosi did not share any details of what Milley told her in response.

Her statement comes amid efforts to eject Trump, either through impeachment or the US constitution's 25th amendment.

 

[Stewie]

Democratic Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi says that she spoke today with the senior-most Pentagon general about Trump's access to nuclear weapons.

"This morning, I spoke to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley to discuss available precautions for preventing an unstable president from initiating military hostilities or accessing the launch codes and ordering a nuclear strike," she said in a statement.

"The situation of this unhinged President could not be more dangerous, and we must do everything that we can to protect the American people from his unbalanced assault on our country and our democracy."

Unfortunately, Pelosi did not share any details of what Milley told her in response.

Her statement comes amid efforts to eject Trump, either through impeachment or the US constitution's 25th amendment.

It is a very real problem. Access to nukes and the fact he is itching to start something with Iran. But I am confident we have a good system in place to account for deranged presidents when it comes to such stuff. He cannot make unilateral calls to fire nukes or go to war.

 

[Robert]

Biden is giving a very good speech, nominating his cabinet, stressing his blue-collar roots, promising support for black and Hispanic businesses in particular, which are hardest hit by the pandemic due to lower levels of financial reserves.

 

[Robert]

It is a very real problem. Access to nukes and the fact he is itching to start something with Iran. But I am confident we have a good system in place to account for deranged presidents when it comes to such stuff. He cannot make unilateral calls to fire nukes or go to war.

He has the nuclear football. He would have to persuade the Sec of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff to fire. As there is no current existential emergency I doubt they would agree to transmit the instructions to the TACAMO aircraft.

 

[MenInG]

Biden says it is a "good thing" Trump will not come to his inauguration

Joe Biden has repeated his view that those who stormed the Capitol should be treated as domestic terrorists.

He added they should be prosecuted.

Mr Biden has also said Mr Trump is unfit for office.

He added he is looking forward to Mr Trump no longer being president.

Mr Biden also said it is a "good thing" Mr Trump will not show up to his inauguration, adding it is one of the few things they agree on.

The president-elect has told reporters the breakdown of security at the Capitol on Wednesday should be investigated.

 

[KingKhanWC]

It is a very real problem. Access to nukes and the fact he is itching to start something with Iran. But I am confident we have a good system in place to account for deranged presidents when it comes to such stuff. He cannot make unilateral calls to fire nukes or go to war.

He has the nuclear football. He would have to persuade the Sec of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff to fire. As there is no current existential emergency I doubt they would agree to transmit the instructions to the TACAMO aircraft.

Trump has assinated the Iranian general, crime. Nothing much else, not started any wars unlike Obama. Dont be fooled by Sleepy Joe being nice or Obama being a good chap, they are both warmongers and war criminals. Intersting people wouldnt support anyone who has murdered someone but support Biden , even fantasise over him being in charge. Like I said in another thread, as long as Americans dont kill others in far away lands, we have no complaints if they kill each other.

 

[Robert]

Gina Miller says high.

In a democracy the highest number of votes wins. This is by definition the will of people. In fact, Brexit was true democracy, one man one vote. Even if you don't agree, LESS people vote in General Election, and governments are voted in power. Will of the people right?

Trump didn't whip up violence. Show me a post, tweet by Trump where he instructed violence.

On the contrary, BLM resorted to violence, where was the condemnation?

The murder of tens of thousands in the Terror was also the “will of the people” according to your definition. The people willed it. They got away will mass murder, because the will of the people was not under law. That is why the law must apply to democratic process. Else that process will be hijacked by vested interests - overspend on advertising, bribes, ballot-stuffing and intimidation. The Electoral Commission would have ensured that the referendum process was fair, but as it was advisory instead of binding they had no power to prevent overspend by one side, and therefore the result was distorted.

 

[IMMY69]

Trump has assinated the Iranian general, crime. Nothing much else, not started any wars unlike Obama. Dont be fooled by Sleepy Joe being nice or Obama being a good chap, they are both warmongers and war criminals. Intersting people wouldnt support anyone who has murdered someone but support Biden , even fantasise over him being in charge. Like I said in another thread, as long as Americans dont kill others in far away lands, we have no complaints if they kill each other.

What about his drone attacks?

 

[MenInG]

Biden says Trump has 'exceeded even my worst notions about him'

Joe Biden told reporters earlier that Donald Trump is the "most incompetent president in the history of the United States of America".
He added: "He has exceeded even my worst notions about him."

President-elect says Pence is welcome

Joe Biden has said Mike Pence is welcome to his inauguration.
He said his overarching aim as president will be to unite the country.

Mr Biden said: "The vice president is welcome to come, it will be an honour to have him there and to move forward with the transition."

He added he has not spoken to Mr Pence.

Biden says it is a "good thing" Trump will not come to his inauguration

Joe Biden has repeated his view that those who stormed the Capitol should be treated as domestic terrorists.

He added they should be prosecuted.

Mr Biden has also said Mr Trump is unfit for office.

He added he is looking forward to Mr Trump no longer being president.

Mr Biden also said it is a "good thing" Mr Trump will not show up to his inauguration, adding it is one of the few things they agree on.

The president-elect has told reporters the breakdown of security at the Capitol on Wednesday should be investigated.

President-elect will allow Congress to decide on impeachment of Donald Trump

Joe Biden has said he will advise members of Congress that impeachment is their decision.

Senior Democrats are seeking Mr Trump's removal from office either through the 25th amendment or impeachment.

Biden tells Americans 'we're going to get through this'

The president-elect has finished a speech where he steered away from the events on Wednesday night.

After speaking about the minimum wage and the economy, Mr Biden said: "I know these times are tough but I want you to know, we're going to get through this.

"Help is on the way, (members of my future government) know what they're about, they know what it's like, may God bless you all."

The president-elect has moved his speech away from the astonishing scenes on Wednesday and has been talking about the minimum wage.

Mr Biden said he plans to raise the minimum wage, adding people are entitled at least $15 per hour.
He said no one should work a 40-hour week and be living below the poverty line.Mr Biden also said his full cabinet should be confirmed shortly after he is inaugurated.

 

[KingKhanWC]

What about his drone attacks?

No drone attacks in Pakistan. They did increase but Trump has little to do with them since Obama passed a new ruling meaning the President no longer has to personally authorise each strike, so pretty much left to the military now. Obama and Biden destroyed nations esp Libya which was a promsing land for its people but now in ruins. Trump is no angel but was no so trigger happy in starting new wars.

 

[IMMY69]

No drone attacks in Pakistan. They did increase but Trump has little to do with them since Obama passed a new ruling meaning the President no longer has to personally authorise each strike, so pretty much left to the military now. Obama and Biden destroyed nations esp Libya which was a promsing land for its people but now in ruins. Trump is no angel but was no so trigger happy in starting new wars.

That's not right.
Trumo changed the law so that the military can use drones without giving out the numbers.
Obama introduced the law which made it compulsory to dislike the number is drones and deaths caused from it

 

[IMMY69]

Regarding Libya,

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.po...9/03/19/barack-obama-libya-airstrikes-1224550

 

[KingKhanWC]

That's not right.
Trumo changed the law so that the military can use drones without giving out the numbers.
Obama introduced the law which made it compulsory to dislike the number is drones and deaths caused from it

In any case, Obama chose to allow the CIA, a secretive entity with a long history of unjust killings, to carry out strikes; he chose to keep the very fact of drone killings classified, deliberately invoking the state-secrets privilege in a way guaranteed to stymie oversight, public debate, and legal accountability; and he chose to permit killings outside the greater Afghanistan war zone, in countries with which the U.S. was not at war. Those choices made more unjust killings predictable and inevitable.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politic...efense-of-his-record-on-drone-strikes/511454/

I dont think you understood my point. Obama changed the policy meaning the President no longer needed to authorise each strike himself, instead letting the CIA decide who they want to murder.

All 3 are evil and should be in court for War Crimes or do you think Obama and Biden are liberals and care for people?

 

[KingKhanWC]

Regarding Libya,

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.po...9/03/19/barack-obama-libya-airstrikes-1224550

I can google, what is your personal view? Are you defending the war on Libya? If not , we have nothing to debate.

 

[IMMY69]

I can google, what is your personal view? Are you defending the war on Libya? If not , we have nothing to debate.

Let's just say for me it is a little bit personal as Obama is someone I know who has a lot of goodness in him.
The actions he took when President he did thinking he was doing it for the people of Libya. He is not a war mongerer, that I can assure you.

 

[Technics 1210]

The murder of tens of thousands in the Terror was also the “will of the people” according to your definition. The people willed it. They got away will mass murder, because the will of the people was not under law. That is why the law must apply to democratic process. Else that process will be hijacked by vested interests - overspend on advertising, bribes, ballot-stuffing and intimidation. The Electoral Commission would have ensured that the referendum process was fair, but as it was advisory instead of binding they had no power to prevent overspend by one side, and therefore the result was distorted.

It's clear you will never accept the result of the largest democratic exercise in the UK, nor did you accept Trump's 2016 win. You havn't answered why you do not support an investigation into Biden and China, when you were supporting an investigation into Trump and Russia. This is hypocrisy of the highest order.

If you are talking about the democratic voting models such FPTP or proportional representation, that's another argument. The fact is the EU referendum outcome was based on which side had the most votes, Brexit side won, doesn't matter by how much, a win is a win. Trump won in 2016, it was lawful, complied with all processes, checks, and balances.

Never in the history was a democratic result challengend in the way 2016 results were (in UK/USA - beacons of democracy)

Anyway, as I said, Brexit/Trump are symptoms, not causes. It's just a tradegy the so called intelligent, liberal-minded folk couldn't stomach this fact, and democratic results, and went on a blaming-name-calling spree instead.

It's time to look at the future; with or without Remainers.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Let's just say for me it is a little bit personal as Obama is someone I know who has a lot of goodness in him.
The actions he took when President he did thinking he was doing it for the people of Libya. He is not a war mongerer, that I can assure you.

Wow. The man is guilty of murdering hunreds in Pakistan including many children as commander of the US forces.

He has destroyed Libya knowing it was the most prosperous nation in North Africa and you think he was doing good in this?

Why the love for a war criminal? Would you stand up in front of the Pakistani parents or the Libyans parents who children he murdered and say this to their face?

 

[IMMY69]

Wow. The man is guilty of murdering hunreds in Pakistan including many children as commander of the US forces.

He has destroyed Libya knowing it was the most prosperous nation in North Africa and you think he was doing good in this?

Why the love for a war criminal? Would you stand up in front of the Pakistani parents or the Libyans parents who children he murdered and say this to their face?

I can't call him a war criminal.

 

[Robert]

Wow. The man is guilty of murdering hunreds in Pakistan including many children as commander of the US forces.

He has destroyed Libya knowing it was the most prosperous nation in North Africa and you think he was doing good in this?

Why the love for a war criminal? Would you stand up in front of the Pakistani parents or the Libyans parents who children he murdered and say this to their face?

Bin Laden and top level Al-Qaeda lieutenants had taken refuge in Pakistan. These guys authorised the 9/11 attacks and murdered 2700 Americans as well as 70 Britons. Pakistan was unwilling to help USA take them out, so Obama did it.

As for the Libya situation, as usual you distort the truth. The UN mandated a no-fly zone to protect Libyan civilians being bombed by Gaddafi in the Libyan Civil War. NATO forces launches strikes against airfields to enforce UNSRC1973. Obama did not want US forces to become involved, but the Arab League persuaded him to join the action. Perhaps you should thank Obama for at least trying to stop Gaddafi murdering all those Libyan civilians.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Bin Laden and top level Al-Qaeda lieutenants had taken refuge in Pakistan. These guys authorised the 9/11 attacks and murdered 2700 Americans as well as 70 Britons. Pakistan was unwilling to help USA take them out, so Obama did it.

As for the Libya situation, as usual you distort the truth. The UN mandated a no-fly zone to protect Libyan civilians being bombed by Gaddafi in the Libyan Civil War. NATO forces launches strikes against airfields to enforce UNSRC1973. Obama did not want US forces to become involved, but the Arab League persuaded him to join the action. Perhaps you should thank Obama for at least trying to stop Gaddafi murdering all those Libyan civilians.

911 was an inside job. There were 80 cameras at the pentagon and not a single photo of plane has been resleased to this day. Even if you accept the official story it doesnt justify murdering over 4 million people around the world with it's after policies.

Nothing happens without the US wanting it to happen. Obama joined in on Libya, he's a bare faced liar and murderer.

You keep supporting murder, imperialism and invasiongs, not to mention bombings because you and your family are safe and merry sitting in your house eating chips with gravy.

 

[Technics 1210]

Wow. The man is guilty of murdering hunreds in Pakistan including many children as commander of the US forces.

He has destroyed Libya knowing it was the most prosperous nation in North Africa and you think he was doing good in this?

Why the love for a war criminal? Would you stand up in front of the Pakistani parents or the Libyans parents who children he murdered and say this to their face?

They only support Obama cos he is black, technically half. They only support Biden cos he won against Trump.

Their support is not based on character, policies, or track record. They will support who the media will command them to.

 

[Technics 1210]

Bin Laden and top level Al-Qaeda lieutenants had taken refuge in Pakistan. These guys authorised the 9/11 attacks and murdered 2700 Americans as well as 70 Britons. Pakistan was unwilling to help USA take them out, so Obama did it.

As for the Libya situation, as usual you distort the truth. The UN mandated a no-fly zone to protect Libyan civilians being bombed by Gaddafi in the Libyan Civil War. NATO forces launches strikes against airfields to enforce UNSRC1973. Obama did not want US forces to become involved, but the Arab League persuaded him to join the action. Perhaps you should thank Obama for at least trying to stop Gaddafi murdering all those Libyan civilians.

Simple question - the 911 commission report - 'the official' report, placed blame on Saudi Arabian citizens.

Here's the question - why did Bush wage war in Afghanistan and Iraq under the excuse of 'war on terror'?

 

[Technics 1210]

We should not pay much attention to numbers because if 2700 American lives is a justification for waging war in Afghanistan and Iraq, pause, take a breath, and count how many innocent lives were lost in the ME, BEFORE 9/11.

Now ask youself, if it's a numbers game, Amreeka killed over 100000s innocent lives before 911. How's that justification excuse wash now?

 

[James]

[MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION] certainly had his Weetabix yesterday morning!

On fire.

 

[Robert]

911 was an inside job.

This statement is ridiculous.

I will debate with you when you start to post sensible statements again.

 

[Stewie]

This statement is ridiculous.

I will debate with you when you start to post sensible statements again.

Good luck with that!!

 

[Robert]

Simple question - the 911 commission report - 'the official' report, placed blame on Saudi Arabian citizens.

Here's the question - why did Bush wage war in Afghanistan and Iraq under the excuse of 'war on terror'?

Afghanistan - because that is where Bin Laden was.

Iraq - because he wanted to go one better than his Dad? To increase American hegemony? Because Saddam continued to frustrate Hans Blix in his inspections mandated by UNSCR1441 and Bush took it on himself to enforce? Because the neocons Cheney and Rumstead saw an opportunity to spread democracy in the post-USSR world? Probably a bit of each.

 

[Robert]

[MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION] certainly had his Weetabix yesterday morning!

On fire.

Thank you. It’s an opportunity to go back and read and understand the philosophical and historical basis of liberal democracy.

The well-invoked “will of the people” / General Will is a concept of Rousseau. It has come under criticism, notably by Bertrand Russell who pointed out how it unleashed carnage in the Reign of Terror. The law was so loose that any person could be found guilty in kangaroo court of flouting the “will of the people” for any reason at all and guillotined. That will has to be under law, which is why I bang on and on about the Electoral Commission. It has to be strong and functional. Some senior Tories talk of dissolving it - if that happens one of the safeguards of UK democracy is gone and we accelerate further down the slippery slope to fascism.

 

[Stewie]

Thank you. It’s an opportunity to go back and read and understand the philosophical and historical basis of liberal democracy.

The well-invoked “will of the people” / General Will is a concept of Rousseau. It has come under criticism, notably by Bertrand Russell who pointed out how it unleashed carnage in the Reign of Terror. The law was so loose that any person could be found guilty in kangaroo court of flouting the “will of the people” for any reason at all and guillotined. That will has to be under law, which is why I bang on and on about the Electoral Commission. It has to be strong and functional. Some senior Tories talk of dissolving it - if that happens one of the safeguards of UK democracy is gone and we accelerate further down the slippery slope to fascism.

You will observe certain individuals here simply churn out the RW narrative because they are actually enjoying the ongoing existential struggle between extreme RW and the left in the west right now. For once, the countries or governments they hate due to their misplaced Muslim brotherhood. Since these governments wreaked havoc in Muslim world, it’s good they are tearing each other apart. More power to these RWingers who mimic the self righteous behavior radical islamists.

You will find them bashing liberals, left wing policies, etc all the time here. It’s quite a fascinating pattern I have observed in a lot of young male Pakistanis living in Pakistan and quite a few in the west as well. They are simply enjoying the show the west is putting up right now.

 

[IMMY69]

You will observe certain individuals here simply churn out the RW narrative because they are actually enjoying the ongoing existential struggle between extreme RW and the left in the west right now. For once, the countries or governments they hate due to their misplaced Muslim brotherhood. Since these governments wreaked havoc in Muslim world, it’s good they are tearing each other apart. More power to these RWingers who mimic the self righteous behavior radical islamists.

You will find them bashing liberals, left wing policies, etc all the time here. It’s quite a fascinating pattern I have observed in a lot of young male Pakistanis living in Pakistan and quite a few in the west as well. They are simply enjoying the show the west is putting up right now.

You're being extremely polite.
I would call them a bunch of idiots

 

[Technics 1210]

Afghanistan - because that is where Bin Laden was.

Iraq - because he wanted to go one better than his Dad? To increase American hegemony? Because Saddam continued to frustrate Hans Blix in his inspections mandated by UNSCR1441 and Bush took it on himself to enforce? Because the neocons Cheney and Rumstead saw an opportunity to spread democracy in the post-USSR world? Probably a bit of each.

Took USA about 10 years to find OBL.

Iraq turned out to be an illegal war, there were no WMDs, despite Hans Blix confirming this before USA decided to fabricate a dossier and ignore the UN.

What are the USA still doing in Afghanistan/Iraq? OBL is dead, Saddam is dead, no WMDs, and a big joke to democracy.

 

[KingKhanWC]

This statement is ridiculous.

I will debate with you when you start to post sensible statements again.

Ive also said, IF you believe the official story, which of course you do.

So lets debate from the official story from the 911 commision but leave out WT7 as they forgot to mention it.

Lets start with...

Every nations leadership/government has the right to ask for evidence if another country wants a suspect extradiated or handed over. The then ruling Taliban asked the Yanks for evidence, can you tell me what they provided? Ill save you the time, nothing. Yanks used their power, made everyone feel sorry for them and then invaded one of the poorest nations on Earth. This led to policies which led to 4 million dead. So I ask 3,000 dead was worth then causing 4 million deaths?

 

[KingKhanWC]

Took USA about 10 years to find OBL.

Iraq turned out to be an illegal war, there were no WMDs, despite Hans Blix confirming this before USA decided to fabricate a dossier and ignore the UN.

What are the USA still doing in Afghanistan/Iraq? OBL is dead, Saddam is dead, no WMDs, and a big joke to democracy.

The problem with these people is they are desensitized to seeing brown folks being killed or their naitons invaded. If the Chinese or Russians landed on the shores of the UK simply because they had the power to do so, they would cry foul when seeing the reality of war and the threat to them and their families.

 

[Robert]

Ive also said, IF you believe the official story, which of course you do.

So lets debate from the official story from the 911 commision but leave out WT7 as they forgot to mention it.

Lets start with...

Every nations leadership/government has the right to ask for evidence if another country wants a suspect extradiated or handed over. The then ruling Taliban asked the Yanks for evidence, can you tell me what they provided? Ill save you the time, nothing. Yanks used their power, made everyone feel sorry for them and then invaded one of the poorest nations on Earth. This led to policies which led to 4 million dead. So I ask 3,000 dead was worth then causing 4 million deaths?

WT7 is easy to understand. Debris fell from the North Tower and set it alight. Fire suppression systems were not adequate as they were designed to stop the usual type of internal fire. A critical internal column to buckle, causing a cascade failure of other columns and the tower eventually fell over.

It depends what you mean by “evidence”. In order for suspects to be extradited, the extraditor does is not required to demonstrate proof of guilt - that is determined in court. The NSA, GCHQ and German intelligence had all intercepted communications pointing to OBL. It was obvious what the USA would do, any other option would be unthinkable. When someone declares war and kills thousands of your civilians you don’t offer evidence, you retaliate hard. Taliban should have got out of their way, and then bloodshed would have been minimised.

Your figure for casualties is absurd. The death toll is around 130k combatants on both sides including the Northern Alliance, and 35k civilians.

 

[Robert]

Peer-reviewed detail on the WTC7 collapse:

https://ascelibrary.org/doi/10.1061/%28ASCE%29ST.1943-541X.0000398

 

[Robert]

Took USA about 10 years to find OBL.

Iraq turned out to be an illegal war, there were no WMDs, despite Hans Blix confirming this before USA decided to fabricate a dossier and ignore the UN.

What are the USA still doing in Afghanistan/Iraq? OBL is dead, Saddam is dead, no WMDs, and a big joke to democracy.

Not just the USA. After the initial US invasion, mission creep set in and the UN mandated the ISAF mission with all of NATO and the Arab League contributing.

Trouble is that when your only tool is a hammer, everything else looks like a nail. Iraq was a truly bad idea. Bush looked at it through the lens of the American Revolution and WW2 - topple the tyrant and democracy will take root. But the Iraqis had no philosophical framework for the liberal thinking which underpins democracy. Plus, there were many factions which hated each other. So the conflict overspilled into other nations. It was a foreign policy disaster by US / UK. One would have thought that Blair would have tried to talk Bush out of it, but by then he had that liberator light in his eyes. Revealing that the other NATO states stayed out.

 

[Stewie]

The blame for the Iraq tragedy falls not just on US but even the Arab Muslim countries. But yes overall it was the greatest atrocity and tragedy of recent human history

 

[SpiritOf1903]

Every time he speaks it's an eternal dementia advert

 

[Technics 1210]

Not just the USA. After the initial US invasion, mission creep set in and the UN mandated the ISAF mission with all of NATO and the Arab League contributing.

Trouble is that when your only tool is a hammer, everything else looks like a nail. Iraq was a truly bad idea. Bush looked at it through the lens of the American Revolution and WW2 - topple the tyrant and democracy will take root. But the Iraqis had no philosophical framework for the liberal thinking which underpins democracy. Plus, there were many factions which hated each other. So the conflict overspilled into other nations. It was a foreign policy disaster by US / UK. One would have thought that Blair would have tried to talk Bush out of it, but by then he had that liberator light in his eyes. Revealing that the other NATO states stayed out.

Why is it the only tool is a 'hammer' when it comes to ME, when immunity and dialogue suffice when it comes to IRA?

 

[Mamoon]

[MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION] certainly had his Weetabix yesterday morning!

On fire.

To be fair, Robert has repeatedly dodged the question on Biden championing the Iraq War. The perception that Biden is a man of peace cannot be reconciled by his eagerness to see Bush invade Iraq under a false pretext.

 

[Stewie]

To be fair, Robert has repeatedly dodged the question on Biden championing the Iraq War. The perception that Biden is a man of peace cannot be reconciled by his eagerness to see Bush invade Iraq under a false pretext.

I am not a Biden fan. Heck I am not a fan of any of the politicians with the exception of maybe Bernie..

That being said, I really can’t see Biden doing worse than Trump.

 

[Bigboii]

To be fair, Robert has repeatedly dodged the question on Biden championing the Iraq War. The perception that Biden is a man of peace cannot be reconciled by his eagerness to see Bush invade Iraq under a false pretext.

NO ONE IN US POLITICS IS A MAN OF PEACE!

simple as that when you are high on power nothing can stop you from hurting innocent people
too bad because the very concept of US from the beginning was to avoid global wars and affairs

but now both left and right wings gov's forgot that advise and are now nothing but a bunch of war mongerers

 

[Bigboii]

To be fair, Robert has repeatedly dodged the question on Biden championing the Iraq War. The perception that Biden is a man of peace cannot be reconciled by his eagerness to see Bush invade Iraq under a false pretext.

Also I see that LW people try to avoid this topic or end up becoming apologists of Biden

but the fact is Biden is more likely to start a new war than Trump ever was

He is the establishment guy who plays buddy, buddy with all of the industrial complex lobby groups meanwhile people attack Trump for his isolationist policies

meaning of isolationism in US = "Isolationists advocated non-involvement in European and Asian conflicts and non-entanglement in international politics."
more in depth "Non-interventionism is the diplomatic policy whereby a nation seeks to avoid alliances with other nations in order to avoid being drawn into wars not related to direct territorial self-defense. It has had a long history among elite and popular opinion in the United States"

Trump is seen as the populist man of the people type of guy and vast majority of American dislike wars and international entanglement

so for his brand or the sort of people he attracts
making wars is a terrible political mistake

So to say that Trump and Biden are equal in that respect is incorrect to say the least and a bit disingenuous

But saying that

Trump is still a terrible president and deserves to be kicked out of the office
because US can afford tons of wars but it cant afford Trump and his chaotic administration

he risks everything US built for 100's of years
because he does not respect the system and that's all the difference a powerful country has in respect to a less powerful but resourceful country

System of governance is the ONLY great divider when it comes to making a country successful or not so successful

 

[Robert]

Why is it the only tool is a 'hammer' when it comes to ME, when immunity and dialogue suffice when it comes to IRA?

The hammer was used in NI for 29 years before dialogue worked.

 

[Robert]

To be fair, Robert has repeatedly dodged the question on Biden championing the Iraq War. The perception that Biden is a man of peace cannot be reconciled by his eagerness to see Bush invade Iraq under a false pretext.

I didn’t see such a question and didn’t call him a man of peace.

 

[Technics 1210]

I didn’t see such a question and didn’t call him a man of peace.

Here's my question again, why did you support an investigation into Trump/Russia, but not Biden/China?

 

[Robert]

Here's my question again, why did you support an investigation into Trump/Russia, but not Biden/China?

There is no such investigation.

If the FBI think there is grounds for an investigation they will investigate and pass the findings to Congress, who will choose to impeach or not.

 

[Technics 1210]

There is no such investigation.

If the FBI think there is grounds for an investigation they will investigate and pass the findings to Congress, who will choose to impeach or not.

That's not what I asked you.

 

[Robert]

That's not what I asked you.

Ask me about something that is really happening, instead of a hypothetical scenario.

 

[Robert]

but the fact is Biden is more likely to start a new war than Trump ever was

He is the establishment guy who plays buddy, buddy with all of the industrial complex lobby groups meanwhile people attack Trump for his isolationist

‘Fact’ and ‘likely’ don’t belong in the same sentence.

Biden’s huge task is firstly to get COVID under control, and secondly to tackle climate change - the latter is an incalculably larger threat to humanity than any local war, and one which Trump claimed didn’t exist. Get USA back in the Paris Agreement and start pushing development of green tech.

 

[Technics 1210]

Ask me about something that is really happening, instead of a hypothetical scenario.

Not the point. I was just checking to see whether you have the same standards in judging Trump than you do with Biden. It's clear you have different standards and are simply lifiting your opinion on the matter from mainstream media.

Please don't pretend the HoS wasn't against Trump when he was in office: Russia was an excuse to remove Trump and an investigation revealed Trump was innocent.

 

[Technics 1210]

Let me put it another way, do you think there should be an investigation into Biden's links with China?

 

[Robert]

Not the point. I was just checking to see whether you have the same standards in judging Trump than you do with Biden. It's clear you have different standards and are simply lifiting your opinion on the matter from mainstream media.

Please don't pretend the HoS wasn't against Trump when he was in office: Russia was an excuse to remove Trump and an investigation revealed Trump was innocent.

If you read the “mainstream media” you will get the facts. The Mueller investigation into Trump’s collusion with Russia revealed evidence which was presented to the House. Mueller also stated that Trump had obstructed justice in firing Comey, an impeachment offence in itself. The House adopted two articles of impeachment, but the Senate acquitted Trump of these charges.

https://time.com/5610317/mueller-report-myths-breakdown/

There is a Federal investigation into Hunter Biden’s alleged tax evasion and money-laundering through Chinese interests. Joe Biden is not implicated into this investigation.

So, once again, no double standard in my thinking.

 

[Technics 1210]

If you read the “mainstream media” you will get the facts. The Mueller investigation into Trump’s collusion with Russia revealed evidence which was presented to the House. Mueller also stated that Trump had obstructed justice in firing Comey, an impeachment offence in itself. The House adopted two articles of impeachment, but the Senate acquitted Trump of these charges.

https://time.com/5610317/mueller-report-myths-breakdown/

There is a Federal investigation into Hunter Biden’s alleged tax evasion and money-laundering through Chinese interests. Joe Biden is not implicated into this investigation.

So, once again, no double standard in my thinking.

The HoR wanted an excuse to get rid of Trump because he beat the establishment and the best they could come up was an allegation was Trump colluded with Russia - Trump was innocent. Comey's firing is neither here nor there. What was more important was once again the MI6 producing a fake document trying to implicate Trump.

The mainstream and and facts? Right.

 

[Technics 1210]

Steele dossier for those of you who don't know.

 

[Stewie]

Wow, Trumpers with their alternative facts out in full force here.

Excellent work, guys! Keep at your baseless, ridiculous fifth dimension facts and tales..

 

[Technics 1210]

Biden: ‘Priority’ For Economic Business Relief To Be Made Based In Part On Race, Gender

https://www.dailywire.com/news/bide...siness-relief-to-be-made-based-on-race-gender

Biden posted his policy via a video on his Twitter account, and lets just say, the reaction hasn't been a positive one.

Straight off the bat, a racist policy.