Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Farmer77

Trial runs for fascism are in full flow

753 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Farmer77
1 minute ago, RoofGardener said:

Well, a committee is supposed to subpeona a witness if it thinks that the witness may have insight into an investigation that the committee is legitimately .. um.. investigating. By legitimately, I mean it has reasonable grounds for concern, and that concern falls within the remit of the committee. 

I get the impression that many of these committees are basically "out to get Trump", and their investigations are highly spurious. Their subpeona's are not so much to get information,as to disrupt the operation of the Executive, and to harass and bully its members. 

Just stop youre just making my argument for me. Look at your post. No facts, no data, no evidence. Just a vague impression that its somehow unfair to Trump. This is a very perfect example of what im referring to. Enough people have said it with enough emotion that by golly you believe it to be true. THAT is a scary ass world to live in.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
6 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

Just stop youre just making my argument for me. Look at your post. No facts, no data, no evidence. Just a vague impression that its somehow unfair to Trump. This is a very perfect example of what im referring to. Enough people have said it with enough emotion that by golly you believe it to be true. THAT is a scary ass world to live in.

 

We all view the world through the lens of impressions, @Farmer77

OK, you want an example ? There was a subcommittee on terrorism. As soon as the Democrats took control of it (back in 2018) it dropped its other investigations, and focussed on Trump/Russia. How about THAT for subverted "get Trump" purposes ? 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
2 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

OK, you want an example ? There was a subcommittee on terrorism. As soon as the Democrats took control of it (back in 2018) it dropped its other investigations, and focussed on Trump/Russia. How about THAT for subverted "get Trump" purposes ? 

Tell me roofie, at the time , what was the biggest threat a potentially compromised POTUS or terrorism? Which of those two could do the most damage to the nation..hell to the entire world? So we know the answer to that question. Knowing that answer didnt it actually make sense for America to have congress focus their resources on ensuring that larger threat didnt actually exist?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
Posted (edited)
18 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

We all view the world through the lens of impressions

We absolutely do view the world through the lens of impressions. We should make decisions however on the basis of fact.

Edited by Farmer77
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dumbledore the Awesome
57 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

As for outlawing opposition parties, have you read any of the rhetoric in the Mueller Probe 2 thread? Or for fun wade into this corner of Trumpism https://twitter.com/hashtag/qanon?f=tweets&vertical=news&lang=en   It used to be that such fringe voices were just that; on the fringes. Today however such ignorance driven hatred is the base and not just to opposition "parties" but to their own members who dare step out of line and question the dear leader. Which brings me back to my point about the long term health of America.

Well, you could say the Opposition party is the one that refused to accept the result of the election and has been doing all it can to have an elected leader (even if only elected by means of Electoral College jiggery-pokery) ousted from office, which some might argue doesn't suggest a very great regard for democracy and the wishes of the people. And now, their campaign having failed in its primary thrust, they're doing all they can to keep it going and at the very least subvert said elected leader by now obsessing about some trivia that was nothing at all to do with the supposed investigation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dumbledore the Awesome
34 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

We all view the world through the lens of impressions, @Farmer77

OK, you want an example ? There was a subcommittee on terrorism. As soon as the Democrats took control of it (back in 2018) it dropped its other investigations, and focussed on Trump/Russia. How about THAT for subverted "get Trump" purposes ? 

What was it? The CIA had about 400 agents* working on the Mueller Probe, and 20 working on the threat from extremism.

* These precise figures I made up, but the proportions weren't far off that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dumbledore the Awesome
Posted (edited)
23 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

what was the biggest threat a potentially compromised POTUS or terrorism?

since no one ever really believed that the President was a tool of a Foreign Power, (probably and almost certainly not even any of those involved in the "investigation"), that was an extremely serious misuse of intelligence resources for overtly political ends. And for ******'s sake, even if he had been directly on the payroll of the Kremlim, how the hell would that have been worse than allowing, through their negligence, ultra-hardline extremism to spread like a cancer across the Middle East? How many people would have been killed if the White House had been a subsidiary of the Kremlin, and how many were through the diversion of effort of the intelligence services? It's an appalling national scandal.

Edited by Vlad the Mighty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
15 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

Tell me roofie, at the time , what was the biggest threat a potentially compromised POTUS or terrorism? Which of those two could do the most damage to the nation..hell to the entire world? So we know the answer to that question. Knowing that answer didnt it actually make sense for America to have congress focus their resources on ensuring that larger threat didnt actually exist?

Perhaps. But it wasn't terrorism. Another committee would have been involved if they thought the President was working for a foreign power. (indeed, I suspect several did). But it isn't (wasn't ) terrorism. So we have to ask why the terrorism sub-committee decided to investigate. The answer... for me.. is that (with a Democract majority and chairman on the committee) this was an attempt to "get Trump" at any cost, and subverted the purpose and remit of the committee. 

Hmm.. I must trawl through the internet to see if I can find other examples ? 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
Just now, Vlad the Mighty said:

Well, you could say the Opposition party is the one that refused to accept the result of the election and has been doing all it can to have an elected leader (even if only elected by means of Electoral College jiggery-pokery) ousted from office, which some might argue doesn't suggest a very great regard for democracy and the wishes of the people.

You could say that if reality didnt matter.  That this belief, which is all it is at this point right up there with the flat earth and the cottingly faries, is so prominent really truly speaks to my overall point about the long term health of society.

Seriously this scenario requires that the democrats control the FBI so in order to not get trump elected they launched an investigation into him BUT kept it secret while publicly announcing the investigation into their own candidate.....and you know very well thats just one of many rather comical holes in that fantasy theory thingy youre slinging

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
3 minutes ago, Vlad the Mighty said:

since no one ever really believed that the President was a tool of a Foreign Power,

Please. Imagine being an intelligence officer knowing that Trump was lying about the Moscow tower deal along with a number of contacts his campaign had and then seeing this as the man bowing publicly declares he believes the leader that he is looking like a whipped dog next to over your own intelligence work.

 

gettyimages-1000209212.jpg?w=1500

Yes people really believed it was a possibility that needed to be investigated.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Perhaps. But it wasn't terrorism. Another committee would have been involved if they thought the President was working for a foreign power. (indeed, I suspect several did). But it isn't (wasn't ) terrorism. So we have to ask why the terrorism sub-committee decided to investigate. The answer... for me.. is that (with a Democract majority and chairman on the committee) this was an attempt to "get Trump" at any cost, and subverted the purpose and remit of the committee. 

Hmm.. I must trawl through the internet to see if I can find other examples ? 

It may be part of an overall change in priorities in general

Democrats Are Finally Splitting With Republicans on Terrorism-Focused Foreign Policy

Edited by Farmer77

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
50 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

It may be part of an overall change in priorities in general

Democrats Are Finally Splitting With Republicans on Terrorism-Focused Foreign Policy

Content-Migration-and-Ever-Moving-Goalpo

:D 

Hmm.. this talk of committees has got me intrigued. Being a Sensible Brit, the political structures of you Colonials can sometimes seem baffling. 

I think I may start a new thread over the weekend, all about the Committees Against Trump. :) 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Wearer of Hats
12 hours ago, Farmer77 said:

Tell me roofie, at the time , what was the biggest threat a potentially compromised POTUS or terrorism? Which of those two could do the most damage to the nation..hell to the entire world? So we know the answer to that question. Knowing that answer didnt it actually make sense for America to have congress focus their resources on ensuring that larger threat didnt actually exist?

Terrorism.

the president is a man who seems to have a lot of power and influence. But his actual danger to the people is neglible. The army won’t attack the people on the President’s say so, a title of “commander in chief” or no. The FBI won’t go around arresting people on meaningless warrants just on rhe president’s say so. 

You can’t stop terrorism just by saying “no”, but you can stop a president thusly

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tatetopa
11 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

Hmm.. this talk of committees has got me intrigued. Being a Sensible Brit, the political structures of you Colonials can sometimes seem baffling. 

I think I may start a new thread over the weekend, all about the Committees Against Trump. :) 

How many Brits does it take to score a goal in football?  Seven, one to hold the ball steady  and six to move the goal.

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
16 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

Hmm.. this talk of committees has got me intrigued. Being a Sensible Brit, the political structures of you Colonials can sometimes seem baffling. 

Hey you at least seem to be mostly up to speed. I cant grasp your politics in the slightest.....it would help if ya'll spoke English though :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
5 hours ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

Terrorism.

the president is a man who seems to have a lot of power and influence. But his actual danger to the people is neglible. The army won’t attack the people on the President’s say so, a title of “commander in chief” or no. The FBI won’t go around arresting people on meaningless warrants just on rhe president’s say so. 

You can’t stop terrorism just by saying “no”, but you can stop a president thusly

POTUS has access to the highest levels of information. He has almost no oversight outside his inner circle. Youre thinking short term violence, im thinking long term strategy and asset placement. To me access to that intel alone makes a compromised POTUS a much larger threat than terrorism.

That said ive also been saying we need to dial back the mania regarding terrorism for a very long time

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dumbledore the Awesome
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

the president is a man who seems to have a lot of power and influence.

Well exactly. He has a lot of power and influence, in his own mind.  

 

2 hours ago, Farmer77 said:

POTUS has access to the highest levels of information. He has almost no oversight outside his inner circle. Youre thinking short term violence, im thinking long term strategy and asset placement. To me access to that intel alone makes a compromised POTUS a much larger threat than terrorism.

That said ive also been saying we need to dial back the mania regarding terrorism for a very long time

You'll do anything rather than accept what's obvious, that he has no ability to do anything unilaterally because the Democrats will always block it, and that in the area where the actions of the President really could be a danger - foreign policy - he's completely under the control of his "advisors", Pompeous the Great; Pedo-Mustache-in-Chief John Bolton; Little Marco Rubio, who despite Trump's derision of him is the one guiding "policy", if you can call it that, towards Venezuela; and of course his own (Trump)'s son in law Jared Kushner when it comes to Israel. 

Edited by Vlad the Mighty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dumbledore the Awesome

and let's not overlook that the Trump is without a doubt under the control of a foreign leader, in fact more than one, there's no question about it - but those foreign leaders' names are Benjamin "Bibi" Netanyahu and Mohammad bin Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud,

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
1 minute ago, Vlad the Mighty said:

You'll do anything rather than accept what's obvious, that he has no ability to do anything unilaterally because the Democrats will always block it, and that in the area where the actions of the President really could be a danger - foreign policy - he's completely under the control of his "advisors", Pompeous, Bolton, Little Marco Rubio, who despite Trump's derision of him is the one guiding "policy", if you can call it that, towards Venezuela, his (Trump)'s son in law Jared Kushner when it comes to Israel. 

I think you missed the part where we switched tenses. I was referring to when the democrats switched a terrorism committee into the Russia committee.

I fully agree with you, hell , its part of what makes Trumpism and Trumpians so mockable. Remember when "drain the swamp" was the rhetoric of a revolution against the "deep state" who did things like lied about WMD's in Iraq (cough* bolton* cough)  and not just partisan rhetoric?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Wearer of Hats
4 hours ago, Farmer77 said:

POTUS has access to the highest levels of information. He has almost no oversight outside his inner circle. Youre thinking short term violence, im thinking long term strategy and asset placement. To me access to that intel alone makes a compromised POTUS a much larger threat than terrorism.

That said ive also been saying we need to dial back the mania regarding terrorism for a very long time

And if you don’t think that “the opposition” doesn’t already know what secrets the President is party to due to other means, you’re being endearingly naive. 

And if you think the Alphabet agencies don’t have contingencies in place in case the President is “unsound” then that naievity ceases to be endearing.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
1 minute ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

And if you don’t think that “the opposition” doesn’t already know what secrets the President is party to due to other means, you’re being endearingly naive. 

And if you think the Alphabet agencies don’t have contingencies in place in case the President is “unsound” then that naievity ceases to be endearing.

LOL Ok :tu: 

I mean sure youre correct. However, if you think individuals with access to intelligence havent, cant or dont run their own operations independent of the other agencies then you and I should get matching "I'm with Naive" T-shirts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dumbledore the Awesome
5 hours ago, Farmer77 said:

Hey you at least seem to be mostly up to speed. I cant grasp your politics in the slightest.....it would help if ya'll spoke English though :D

There's not really very much difference: Conservatives = Republicans (right-wing dinosaurs); Labour (with a U) = Democrats (who wish to impose a totalitarian socialist dictatorship); various other parties that exist just the split the vote for one or other of the main ones (the "Liberal Democrats" , who are basically a watered down Democrats), or just to make a nuisance of themselves, such as Nigel Fromage's Brexit party

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
Just now, Vlad the Mighty said:

There's not really very much difference: Conservatives = Republicans (right-wing dinosaurs); Labour (with a U) = Democrats (who wish to impose a totalitarian socialist dictatorship); various other parties that exist just the split the vote for one or other of the main ones (the "Liberal Democrats" , who are basically a watered down Democrats), or just to make a nuisance of themselves, such as Nigel Fromage's Brexit party

So the various other parties are more akin to the fictional American "third party" than they are actual power players?  That does simplify things quite a bit. Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sir Wearer of Hats
1 hour ago, Farmer77 said:

LOL Ok :tu: 

I mean sure youre correct. However, if you think individuals with access to intelligence havent, cant or dont run their own operations independent of the other agencies then you and I should get matching "I'm with Naive" T-shirts.

As long as we can buy The Donald one that says “I’m with stupid” and the arrow points upwards, that’s fine.

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Black Red Devil
Posted (edited)
On 5/3/2019 at 9:30 PM, RoofGardener said:

Content-Migration-and-Ever-Moving-Goalpo

:D 

Hmm.. this talk of committees has got me intrigued. Being a Sensible Brit, the political structures of you Colonials can sometimes seem baffling. 

I think I may start a new thread over the weekend, all about the Committees Against Trump. :) 

Looks like Liverpool fans replacing the goal with a wider one to go behind the Barca goalkeeper.  You'll need it if you're going to score 4 goals against Messi & co.

Edited by Black Red Devil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.