OverSword 56,513 #26 Posted 11 hours ago 9 hours ago, psyche101 said: Well to be honest, if the foreign interest is dem orientated, and doesn't want to deal with Trump, and to be perfectly honest that's not out of the realm of possibilities, would it not be best to have a team that is seen in a better light for a successful negotiation? Could be viewed as a conflict of interest in a presidential race and also the president is the one who guides foreign policy not cabinet members of the prior president now working with a guy running for office. Sounds like a huge no no to me. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
OverSword 56,513 #27 Posted 11 hours ago 7 hours ago, psyche101 said: Who do you think would take him seriously? He wasn't well liked globally before the election debacle. Those lies weren't received well. https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2020/09/15/us-image-plummets-internationally-as-most-say-country-has-handled-coronavirus-badly/ How about Israel and pretty much every other country in that region but Yemen and Iran. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
psyche101 42,636 #28 Posted 2 hours ago 9 hours ago, OverSword said: Could be viewed as a conflict of interest in a presidential race and also the president is the one who guides foreign policy not cabinet members of the prior president now working with a guy running for office. Sounds like a huge no no to me. It sure could. And it probably does violate Logan's Law as noted by other members. But I would propose that it still was probably the best way to handle the situation. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
OverSword 56,513 #29 Posted 2 hours ago 1 minute ago, psyche101 said: It sure could. And it probably does violate Logan's Law as noted by other members. But I would propose that it still was probably the best way to handle the situation. No presidential candidate should be having conversations with hostile foreign governments. It looks less than ethical, and possibly treasonous. Suppose trump had been in conversation with North Korea before he was elected or a country such as Libya who there could be no doubt was hostile to Clinton? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
psyche101 42,636 #30 Posted 2 hours ago 9 hours ago, OverSword said: How about Israel and pretty much every other country in that region but Yemen and Iran. Like I mentioned, his election fraud garbology had cost him. https://www.timesofisrael.com/israel-and-the-shameful-dangerous-final-days-of-donald-trump/ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
OverSword 56,513 #31 Posted 1 hour ago Just now, psyche101 said: Like I mentioned, his election fraud garbology had cost him. https://www.timesofisrael.com/israel-and-the-shameful-dangerous-final-days-of-donald-trump/ You also specified "before the election" Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
psyche101 42,636 #32 Posted 1 hour ago 3 minutes ago, OverSword said: No presidential candidate should be having conversations with hostile foreign governments. It looks less than ethical, and possibly treasonous. Suppose trump had been in conversation with North Korea before he was elected or a country such as Libya who there could be no doubt was hostile to Clinton? He didn't. It wasn't Biden, it was Malley. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
psyche101 42,636 #33 Posted 1 hour ago (edited) 2 minutes ago, OverSword said: You also specified "before the election" Was supposed to be referencing "as well' in the reply to the post AT made. My error. He was referencing the now for me. Edited 1 hour ago by psyche101 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hammerclaw 28,662 #34 Posted 1 hour ago 3 minutes ago, OverSword said: No presidential candidate should be having conversations with hostile foreign governments. It looks less than ethical, and possibly treasonous. Suppose trump had been in conversation with North Korea before he was elected or a country such as Libya who there could be no doubt was hostile to Clinton? Now OverSword, you should know better'n that! It's alright for the Democrats to break the law 'cause they're the good guys! 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
psyche101 42,636 #35 Posted 1 hour ago Just now, Hammerclaw said: Now OverSword, you should know better'n that! It's alright for the Democrats to break the law 'cause they're the good guys! If a law was broken, it was by Malley, not Biden is the point there. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
OverSword 56,513 #36 Posted 1 hour ago 4 minutes ago, psyche101 said: He didn't. It wasn't Biden, it was Malley. nit picking. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
OverSword 56,513 #37 Posted 1 hour ago 1 minute ago, psyche101 said: If a law was broken, it was by Malley, not Biden is the point there. And Charles Manson didn't kill one single person. But........ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tatetopa 17,633 #38 Posted 1 hour ago Are we just about to go on the greatest witch hunt any president has ever had to endure? And for a president that has accomplished more in two weeks than most presidents accomplish in two terms? Disgraceful! In fact many foreign diplomats and US soldiers have come to him and said, " President Biden, we love you Sir. You are doing great things for America." Back to reality. All that aside, its not OK for either side to break the law. We should be pushing both sides out of office and choosing representatives by lottery every two years. We couldn't do much worse. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
OverSword 56,513 #39 Posted 1 hour ago 4 minutes ago, Tatetopa said: Are we just about to go on the greatest witch hunt any president has ever had to endure? What would it have been prior to this? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hammerclaw 28,662 #40 Posted 1 hour ago 16 minutes ago, psyche101 said: If a law was broken, it was by Malley, not Biden is the point there. No, My point is it was Democrats, conducting clandestine, DeepState parallel diplomacy behind a sitting President's back. As for Biden, his personal can of worms will be opened in good time. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
psyche101 42,636 #41 Posted 1 hour ago 15 minutes ago, OverSword said: And Charles Manson didn't kill one single person. But........ Where's the Biden connection? As noted earlier it strikes me that Iran didn't want to work with Trump. Javad Zarif met with Robert Malley of his own accord. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
psyche101 42,636 #42 Posted 1 hour ago 8 minutes ago, OverSword said: What would it have been prior to this? Exposure. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
psyche101 42,636 #43 Posted 1 hour ago 2 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said: No, My point is it was Democrats, conducting clandestine, DeepState parallel diplomacy behind a sitting President's back. As for Biden, his personal can of worms will be opened in good time. Malley was a citizen at the time, and part of a non governmental agency. That's why posters are bringing up Logan's Law. So nothing to do with Democrats. Biden seems of to a great start. The future looks brighter for the US than it has for four years. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pallidin 10,897 #44 Posted 1 hour ago Here's the truth... you can't convince conspiracy theorists that they are clearly wrong. It's impossible. They live in their own messed-up bubble world. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
OverSword 56,513 #45 Posted 13 minutes ago I wish I could say the level of partisan disconnect is unbelievable. Sadly it is not but it is no less disturbing because of that. Can anyone picture the reaction if a former trump cabinet member does a foreign policy end around Biden and Harris while Pence is running against them in four years? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
aztek 24,486 #46 Posted 11 minutes ago (edited) well, there is enough grounds to warrant an investigation. as well as impeachment article Edited 11 minutes ago by aztek Share this post Link to post Share on other sites