Donald Trump running for president
- Thread starter LiftWithDonuts
- Start date
Aleksandar37
Well-known member
You asked me what he did in my opinion that was so bad to deserve death. I said he leaked info on a covert agent. The prosecuting attorney (Pat Fitzgerald out of Chicago) never had enough evidence to charge him with that. He was charged with perjury for lying to a grand jury, obstruction of justice, and lying to investigators.
Where is the break down in miscommunication here? I don't doubt that he was part of a group and ended up being the scapegoat, but he pissed on national security and so did Trump by pardoning him. And you're correct, Bush did commute his sentence, so he pissed all over national security as well. I believe Valerie Plame's version of the story. If you choose to believe Scooter's or any other scapegoat that wants to take the fall for him, that's totally your choice.
hairygrandpa
Legend
Well, looking at Putin's previous reactions to aggression, US troops should be safe. At least one man understands what "Diplomacy" means. I'm worried about people who think Putin (Russia) is weak, by allowing those transgressions to happen, when its obviously not weakness -but protection of world peace what motivates him.
Hopefully the american people really understand what is happening, they are the only hope to change things around.
How sad is it to live in a world where a mere accusation is equal to proof? How ridiculous is it to wage war over a handful dead civilians, in a country far away, no matter if they died by fire, gas , bullets or radiation? How many civilians died by bombings already? Why weren't tomahawk missiles used against ISIS?
If it wasn't for the life of my family, I really would salute the fiery death of stupid humanity, we are apes with nuclear weapons, total idiots.
hairygrandpa
Legend
I doubt it, because since when is Putin NOT fulfilling what he said? He is no puppet of a shadow government and his statement was clear: "Russia says it will target US launch sites, in case ...." I sincerely hope he does it by means that disables ships by electronic counter measures, instead of sinking them.
jimbuick
Legend
Why do you think missile strikes weren't used against ISIS?
ax1
Legend
ISIS is fighting Assad so getting rid of them is a conflict of interest. As a matter of fact, ISIS was created by the CIA, armed, trained and financed by the US tax payer to overthrow Assad in the same manner the US government created the Mujahideen and Osama Bin Laden in the 70s to overthrown the Russians in Afghanistan. Now this does get complicated, there could be rebel groups branched off certain groups, tribes, etc (the ones that found out and say "shyt, we are just militant puppets of the globalists!")....Im not claiming to have all the answers but ISIS was propped up when we founded millions of dollars, sent thousands of tons of armory (its all in the defense budgets) after Obama obliterated Lybia and some of those fighters along with Kaddafi's weapons were sent to Syria (well actually Turkey first for training, also this is where Senator Stevens was assassinated by the deep state for not complying) to set up the Assad overthrow and start the full scale civil war blaming and setting up Assad for everything.
youngandfree
Well-known member
You said he leaked it. Dick Armitage admitted to doing it.
ax1
Legend
Im watching the Pentagon Live on TV this morning and they are still not providing evidence that Assad used the Chemical weapons. All they are telling reporters is that they are "confident" and they have "intelligence" yet they are basically moving past reporters asking for questions about evidence.
I personally wouldn't believe any evidence for the most part provided anyways, but the fact that we are on the stage where the US non-Government arent even providing evidence at this point after the fact we illegally bombed Syria and its capital based on being "confident" is a disgrace.
Ill give those international war criminals Hairy Bush and Colin "full of shyt' Powell credit on this... at least they came up with some lying bullshyt about "weapons of mass destruction" and made a public discussion of it prior to attacking Iraq. Now Dump and his war monger James gNattis have taken our country to new lows.
I personally wouldn't believe any evidence for the most part provided anyways, but the fact that we are on the stage where the US non-Government arent even providing evidence at this point after the fact we illegally bombed Syria and its capital based on being "confident" is a disgrace.
Ill give those international war criminals Hairy Bush and Colin "full of shyt' Powell credit on this... at least they came up with some lying bullshyt about "weapons of mass destruction" and made a public discussion of it prior to attacking Iraq. Now Dump and his war monger James gNattis have taken our country to new lows.
ax1
Legend
Its about time Alex Jones, you lost me there for over an entire year with your over the top Dump anti-globalist garbage. We all make mistakes, Obama had me for a few months until you helped me find out more about him. You should have simply voted for Gary Johnson.
“If he had been a piece of crap from the beginning, it wouldn’t be so bad,” a visibly emotional Jones said of Trump. “We’ve made so many sacrifices and now he’s crapping all over us. It makes me sick.”
Jones said the decision to strike Syria was especially painful because Trump had been “doing so good.”
“Trump’s now a fraud,” Jones later said. “Done.”
Long 2 hours show from late last night about the strikes for anyone into this stuff, otherwise move on, lol
“If he had been a piece of crap from the beginning, it wouldn’t be so bad,” a visibly emotional Jones said of Trump. “We’ve made so many sacrifices and now he’s crapping all over us. It makes me sick.”
Jones said the decision to strike Syria was especially painful because Trump had been “doing so good.”
“Trump’s now a fraud,” Jones later said. “Done.”
Long 2 hours show from late last night about the strikes for anyone into this stuff, otherwise move on, lol
hairygrandpa
Legend
Because if they did, I would have seen a bragging US president on all (fake) news channels, glorifying it, did I miss it?
As you are already cherry picking my comment, what is your stance on bombing a sovereign country, who is fighting ISIS ?
Wouldn't bombing them cause way more civilian deaths? Wouldn't it strengthen ISIS?
hairygrandpa
Legend
You don't know much about Russia's oil reserves either, I guess. They are leading exporter for Gas and they don't have even explored most of their own territory yet.
Both compete selling it to Europe, that's the only thing they have in common. One of them using all shady tactics possible, like sanctions and installing puppet governments in countries with oil and gas, guess who that is.
Cgkone
Well-known member
Russia isn't shootn at **** bud.
Hehehe
jimbuick
Legend
From last Sept.: Invalid Link Removed
That depends on where you are firing the missiles. This last attack was on military targets related to their chemical weapons program. That doesn't really kill many, if any, civilians. It also was a coalition effort between the U.S., U.K., and France. You also can't really just say that any and every attack will just strengthen ISIS. It is much more complex than that.
Getting rid of Assad might create a power vacuum that could give ISIS a strong foothold, but we haven't done that yet. Additionally, as much as President Trump likes to make unilateral decisions, I seriously doubt he made the call to attack without strong recommendations from Mattis and he certainly didn't do it without approval from our allies (as can be seen by the fact that they attacked alongside of us).
Aleksandar37
Well-known member
I've said it twice now and will say it a third. I know the scapegoat's scapegoat admitted to doing it after he could do so without doing jail time. jimbuick said that I said it as if Scooter was proven to have done so in court, so I clarified that I am only saying that he was charged with perjury-related crimes and nobody was ever indicted on the leaks.
You're choosing to believe Dick Armitage, I'm choosing to believe Valerie Plame and others associated with the investigation. You shouldn't be shocked that we disagree.
Aleksandar37
Well-known member
You seem to be missing key details, but taking a stance on one side of a topic. If you're that interested in it, do some more reading and then I would be happy to discuss any information that is already publicly available.
jimbuick
Legend
I'm not taking any side. I'm just asking questions about why he deserves to be shot.
I don't have an opinion on the pardon at all, good or bad. I even began this exchange by saying I don't know anything about it.
Aleksandar37
Well-known member
I must have misread your post, sorry. It's an interesting subject, but got swamped with politics from the start. The only reason why I even see Trump giving the pardon is as a swipe to Comey, but I'm open to hearing other possibilities.
Danes
Well-known member
hairygrandpa
Legend
Your link:
Says who?
Can't you see parallels to the bombing of chemical weapons, in Iraq, that never existed? Isn't it a lame excuse to start a conflict over the method used how people were killed (IF anyone was killed)?
If Assad had used rabid hamsters to kill a bunch of people, that would be okay, right?
Do you think that any accusation, without proof (or even with proof) is a free ticket to bomb a foreign country?
Nothing is complex if the US stayed out of the conflict.
jimbuick
Legend
It won't let me put the link because of the word sh*t being in it. The Newsweek article is titled "Trump Really is Bombing the Sh*t out of ISIS."
Per the rest of your post, that is what has been released by the Pentagon and the leaders of our allies who also targeted those facilities. You can choose whether or not you believe that or don't, but I very seriously doubt you are privy to any inside information that could disprove it.
I'm not really one to talk about conspiracy theories. If you choose to believe that no one was killed in Syria with chemical weapons, that is your choice. The U.S. claims to have proof that it was Assad, and that proof was apparently compelling enough to convince the U.K. and France to intervene as well.
The use of chemical weapons violates international treaties that most of the world (including Syria) have agreed to. That is why it matters.
Per the rest of your post, that is what has been released by the Pentagon and the leaders of our allies who also targeted those facilities. You can choose whether or not you believe that or don't, but I very seriously doubt you are privy to any inside information that could disprove it.
I'm not really one to talk about conspiracy theories. If you choose to believe that no one was killed in Syria with chemical weapons, that is your choice. The U.S. claims to have proof that it was Assad, and that proof was apparently compelling enough to convince the U.K. and France to intervene as well.
The use of chemical weapons violates international treaties that most of the world (including Syria) have agreed to. That is why it matters.
ax1
Legend
Ok so you officially trust what the US Government tells you, is that correct? Everything else is a conspiracy theory?
ax1
Legend
I was asking an honest question to you.
hairygrandpa
Legend
You missed my point AND evaded my questions.
Foreign country, people die because of gas = missile strike from the US + vassal states= your approval?
Foreign country, people die because of bullets = missile strike from the US + vassal states = your approval?
For the head of a foreign state, does the method of killing your own people influence whether there is -or not a missile strike from the US?
Am I crazy?
ax1
Legend
I have evidence that any chemical attack was to be pre-blamed on Assad.
Any further attacks done to the people of Syria will be blamed on Assad, but also on Russia & Iran who support him killing his own people.
Nicky Haley 2017
Invalid Link Removed
Well what did Alex say that bothers you so much in regards to this latest chemical attack? What was his reasoning behind it?
First off I dunno what really happened. I can look at this and see that Dump wanted to leave Syria just as he had last year after he won the election. Both times there were a alleged "chemical attack." Both times Assad had the west in his favor, and with the help of Russia he was defeating his enemies. Assad would have absolutely nothing strategically to gain from such a move, but everything to lose. Any opposing interest especially the civil war opposition would have everything to lose from US leaving and everything to gain with a chemical attack. They know strategically that will keep the US in and the financing/support extended. If the US is gone, they lose and die. There are no rules in war, and that includes staging false flag attacked to your strategic advantage. I can make other suspects but Ill keep that short as I feel I would start there.
Regardless of what happened, our policies have displaced and slaughtered hundreds of thousands of people in Syria which to me is a far worse atrocity than the chemical attack the other day assuming it really happened. But thats another issue.
hairygrandpa
Legend
You can't proof a negative. Can you proof to me that rabid hamsters were not used instead of gas?
hairygrandpa
Legend
ax1
Legend
And the CIA put him into power in the first, thats the big freaking joke of our foreign intervention in Iraq, talk about election meddling, ROFL!!!!!
jimbuick
Legend
I think you missed the point of my post. The U.S. and coalition forces bombed Syria for it's violation of an international treaty that they signed. It isn't because people are dying in Syria, it is 100% about *how* they are dying.
When pictures and testimony from people there (both of which are admissable in a court of law as evidence) says "we are being attacked with chemical weapons," and you make the claim that it is fake, then *you* must provide your own evidence to support that claim.
ax1
Legend
I think the debate is more so as to "who" did it than if it was fake or not.
ax1
Legend
I remember seeing video of people crying horrifically in Syria over dead and sick people that was shown on CNN last year where more video leaked out on the internetz where all these people got up off the floor having a great time.
You have to be careful what is shown. These easily are created to deceive the general public to both gain support and have more hatred thrown at their opposition. Its psyops, a normal part of combat and guerilla warfare. It works.
hairygrandpa
Legend
Well, lets have a look how many international treaties were broken by the US, shall we? After that lets bomb the US to sh1t, okay?
jimbuick
Legend
I'm not sure why you are running with this assumption that I believe the U.S. government is beyond reproach.
You said there is no difference between people dying in another country from chemical weapons, bullets, or rabid hamsters. I'm saying there absolutely is because of international treaties that were signed by all parties involved (including Syria).
Everyone already knows that international policy is based on "big stick" doctrine. He who has the biggest stick gets to tell everyone else how things are going to be. Right now, that is the U.S.
You said there is no difference between people dying in another country from chemical weapons, bullets, or rabid hamsters. I'm saying there absolutely is because of international treaties that were signed by all parties involved (including Syria).
Everyone already knows that international policy is based on "big stick" doctrine. He who has the biggest stick gets to tell everyone else how things are going to be. Right now, that is the U.S.
hairygrandpa
Legend
Corrected:
I think you missed the point of my post. The U.S. and coalition forces bombed Syria for it's supposed violation of an international treaty that they signed. It isn't because people are dying in Syria, it is 100% about *how* they are dying. Because if they were burnt slowly to death, it would be okay.
When pictures and testimony from people there (both of which are admissable in a court of law as evidence, but there was no court and the pictures provided cant show if gas was used, because pictures do not transmit odor says "we are being attacked with chemical weapons," and you make the claim that it is fake, then *you* must provide your own evidence to support that claim, but first must be concluded IF gas was used, what type of gas and by WHOM before launching shiny missiles.
jimbuick
Legend
I'm 99% sure that purposefully burning civilian non-combatants (that is to say: not collateral damage) is a violation of the Geneva Convention protocols that Syria has also signed.
Additionally, the French government (I know, I know, they are probably part of the big illuminati NWO too) report concludes that there was a chemical attack and that it was carried out by Assad.
Additionally, the French government (I know, I know, they are probably part of the big illuminati NWO too) report concludes that there was a chemical attack and that it was carried out by Assad.
ax1
Legend
And what evidence is provided by the French report? This morning the Pentagon provided reporters nothing but “confidence in their intelligence” so maybe the French have something?
hairygrandpa
Legend
Because lots of French live in Syria, in rebel controlled cities, right? Or do they use a crystal ball in Paris to see stuff in a god forsaken desert town?
Assad himself delivered the gas, they watched him from the Eiffel tower, he used a yellow chem-suit, LMAO
hairygrandpa
Legend
What do you guys think about that?
[video=youtube;AbffI52stc0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbffI52stc0[/video]
[video=youtube;AbffI52stc0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbffI52stc0[/video]
ax1
Legend
Beyond possible doubt, a chemical attack was carried out against civilians at Douma (and) there is no plausible scenario other than that of an attack by Syrian armed forces as part of a wider offensive in the Eastern Ghouta enclave," according to the report issued Saturday by the French government.
No France, there are several more plausible scenario's, and when the most likely is totally left out and not even questioned and you push the least likely on the general public as fact, that right there report is geared towards specific interests.
ax1
Legend
Non-governmental medical organizations active in Ghouta (the Syrian American Medical Society and the Union of Medical Care and Relief Organizations), whose information is generally reliable, publicly stated that strikes had targeted in particular local medical infrastructure on 6 and 7 April.
It would be easy for these people to assume who to put the blame on, I wouldnt exactly call them military historians or study guerilla warfare to any extent. There is no evidence in this "declassified intelligence report" as to who launched the attack.