The Ukraine phone call

Post by **spot** » Fri Sep 27, 2019 2:54 pm

Ahso!;1525626 wrote: For the life of me, I can't understand why you don't support impeaching Trump then. He's as guilty as sin for what he's being charged with. He's admitted soliciting the Ukrainian President to investigate Biden and his son. Whether Biden is guilty of what Trump alleges or not, it's still soliciting meddling into our elections. That's a crime.

So he's a blatant criminal. The fact that America is currently ruled by a crime family isn't something which bothers me, it's more a matter of amusement. Who do you suppose America will get in office if this entirely justifiable impeachment succeeds? How can that new administration benefit the planet? The ideal solution is that the farce continues until 2024, I have no desire to see the current President fall short of completing his second term. For as long as he sits in the White House the world is a safer place and the rest of us can get on with our lives.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Fri Sep 27, 2019 3:08 pm

I doubt this process will end before the 2020 election. I think Warren or Sanders would also reign in our military. I think for sure Gabbard would.

If this were to end sooner with Trump's resignation, then Pence would have barely enough time to fill out his administration before the election, and I don't see Pence winning the presidency.

Post by **LarsMac** » Fri Sep 27, 2019 6:56 pm

The whole process of an impeachment and the following Circus in the Senate, will be more painful that watching Telly Tubbies on auto-rewind.

Perhaps the SoB will tire of the game and resign?

One can only hope.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 4:14 am

LarsMac;1525635 wrote: The whole process of an impeachment and the following Circus in the Senate, will be more painful that watching Telly Tubbies on auto-rewind.

Perhaps the SoB will tire of the game and resign?

One can only hope.

No doubt it will be a circus atmosphere, however, it will also cripple Trump's agenda a bit, but more so, it will lay out in plain sight Trumps style of governing and allow the public to make an informed decision (for those who choose to have an open mind) on whether or not this is person we really want representing our national priorities and guiding us through the early part of the 21st century. If he is reelected with all that exposed, then so be it. But I honestly believe his days are numbered one way or the other.

We might be stuck with this clown and his henchmen until election time, but we can neuter him by taking the fight to him for once.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 6:14 am

spot;1525628 wrote: Count the corpses. President Trump may have clocked up a few thousand, Presidents Obama and Bush were each into their millions.

I think Obama was headed in the same direction. It appears that presidents have little say in these matters, they've given their authority away long ago. That doesn't mean this is not reversible, but it would be a political fight for the ages. The pentagon is so entrenched in our political determination because the media is so complicit and accommodating in order to be the first in line recipient of leaks. Which is why so many previous military officials and spooks land jobs on these networks after retirement, or in the case of disgraced people like Andrew McCabe, being fired.

Post by **spot** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 6:45 am

Ahso!;1525643 wrote: I think Obama was headed in the same direction. It appears that presidents have little say in these matters, they've given their authority away long ago. That doesn't mean this is not reversible, but it would be a political fight for the ages.

There is a single reference point to all this. America does not react to international military crises, America instigates them. The American public may well be told repeatedly that America is responding but that is not how it happens. America has deliberately caused each event in the first place. Paramount to this discussion in the context of the last two Presidents are Libya and Syria. Both are President Obama's legacy, just as Afghanistan and Iraq are the legacy of President Bush. So far, and I'm quite sure it's a deliberate choice, President Trump has refused to engage in destabilizing abroad, he's far more interested in destabilizing domestically.

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 9:57 am

spot;1525625 wrote: President Trump praises the US military while keeping them kennelled. Praising them is a requirement for getting elected to any political post in America. Keeping them locked in their bedroom is a novelty.

I suppose that is an admission that he is not a warmonger?

I was surprised that when the Iranian's shot down our drone Trump pulled back on killing 200 Iranians but began to appreciate that decision.

Good call.

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 10:01 am

spot;1525628 wrote: Count the corpses. President Trump may have clocked up a few thousand, Presidents Obama and Bush were each into their millions.

Links, please.

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 10:04 am

LarsMac;1525635 wrote: The whole process of an impeachment and the following Circus in the Senate, will be more painful that watching Telly Tubbies on auto-rewind.

Perhaps the SoB will tire of the game and resign?

One can only hope.

Pence for President?

Post by **spot** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 11:13 am

tude dog;1525651 wrote: I suppose that is an admission that he is not a warmonger?

That's a good summary of my point, yes, along with my describing both Presidents Bush and Obama as being warmongers.

tude dog;1525652 wrote: [quote=spot]Count the corpses. President Trump may have clocked up a few thousand, Presidents Obama and Bush were each into their millions.Links, please.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualtie ... hs_overall

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualtie ... _Civil_War

http://www.unknownnews.net/casualties.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lancet_su ... casualties

I make that a demonstrable half million dead for President Obama and in excess of 800,000 for President Bush, though that ignores the increased mortality attributable to scarcity, hunger and disease brought on as a result of the conflicts. The Lancet study is reasonable confirmation of the Iraq estimate.

I'm prepared to bring the "millions" down to "hundreds of thousands" if you prefer. It still leaves the two of them responsible for hundreds of deaths for each death we could attribute to President Trump.

Do I not recall President Trump laughing at the inanity of the Pentagon when they wanted to use Massive Ordnance Air Blasts on the caves at Bora Bora and told them to go play at being soldiers if they really had to so long as they didn't hurt people? Maybe I made that up but the paltry effect was pretty much the same. "A BBC reporter [...] reported that an Afghan officer had said there were hundreds of similar caves in the area. The Afghan officer also said that trees 100 metres from the impact point had remained standing".

Post by **LarsMac** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 11:58 am

tude dog;1525653 wrote: Pence for President?

I can't think of much worse than leaving Trump in office, but he is on that very tiny list.

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 4:49 pm

spot;1525654 wrote: That's a good summary of my point, yes, along with my describing both Presidents Bush and Obama as being warmongers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualtie ... hs_overall

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualtie ... _Civil_War

http://www.unknownnews.net/casualties.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lancet_su ... casualties

I make that a demonstrable half million dead for President Obama and in excess of 800,000 for President Bush, though that ignores the increased mortality attributable to scarcity, hunger and disease brought on as a result of the conflicts. The Lancet study is reasonable confirmation of the Iraq estimate.

I'm prepared to bring the "millions" down to "hundreds of thousands" if you prefer. It still leaves the two of them responsible for hundreds of deaths for each death we could attribute to President Trump.

Do I not recall President Trump laughing at the inanity of the Pentagon when they wanted to use Massive Ordnance Air Blasts on the caves at Bora Bora and told them to go play at being soldiers if they really had to so long as they didn't hurt people? Maybe I made that up but the paltry effect was pretty much the same. "A BBC reporter [...] reported that an Afghan officer had said there were hundreds of similar caves in the area. The Afghan officer also said that trees 100 metres from the impact point had remained standing".

Thank you for the list of deaths. A lot of killing going on.

Not much directing credit/blame in any directe action.

Post by **spot** » Sat Sep 28, 2019 7:11 pm

tude dog;1525656 wrote: Thank you for the list of deaths. A lot of killing going on.

Not much directing credit/blame in any directe action.

Let me provide that too then.

We have four wars listed. The required answers involve deciding who invaded Afghanistan? And then who invaded Iraq? And then who destabilized Libya into a civil war by financing otherwise incapable anti-government exiles? And then who destabilized Syria into a civil war by financing otherwise incapable anti-government exiles?

If, as I do, you find the answer to all four question is America, you've found the direct responsibility for all the deaths.

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Sun Sep 29, 2019 10:40 am

spot;1525658 wrote: Let me provide that too then.

We have four wars listed. The required answers involve deciding who invaded Afghanistan? And then who invaded Iraq? And then who destabilized Libya into a civil war by financing otherwise incapable anti-government exiles? And then who destabilized Syria into a civil war by financing otherwise incapable anti-government exiles?

If, as I do, you find the answer to all four question is America, you've found the direct responsibility for all the deaths.

Dream on.

Let me provide that too then.

We have four wars listed. The required answers involve deciding who invaded Afghanistan?

For good reason the USA.

And then who invaded Iraq?

Perhaps we should have done that when we went to free Kuwait.

And then who destabilized Libya into a civil war by financing otherwise incapable anti-government exiles?

Never forget Benghazi

And then who destabilized Syria into a civil war by financing otherwise incapable anti-government exiles?

Good point. We should have just took direct action ourselves and let Israel help.

If, as I do, you find the answer to all four question is America, you've found the direct responsibility for all the deaths.

I am not a pacifist as pacificism is an evil concept.

Post by **spot** » Sun Sep 29, 2019 11:36 am

tude dog;1525673 wrote: Dream on.

Let me provide that too then.

Our two posts agree in every detail then, don't they. You've added what you appear to believe are extenuations or excuses or even reasons, I didn't offer any.

Can you recall far enough back to remember the Afghan Government offered to expel all Al Qaeda members from Afghanistan and to hand over Osama bin Laden in particular for interrogation, after 9/11 and before the "Coalition of the Willing" invaded? I wonder why, in your opinion, the Bush White House refused the offer. I wonder whether you think the fact that the Bush White House was so heavily influenced by The Project for the New American Century (PNAC). You will recall that PNAC was obsessed with remoulding the Middle East but that, in their words, ""the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event â€“ like a new Pearl Harbor"". What do you expect the Bush White House intention would be after 9/11, given statements like that from their own planners. They're going to look a gift horse in the mouth?

As for pacifism, most people admire the Mahatma and you must surely admit he was very effective, and that an armed conflict would not have been.

Post by **LarsMac** » Sun Sep 29, 2019 12:28 pm

spot;1525676 wrote: Our two posts agree in every detail then, don't they. You've added what you appear to believe are extenuations or excuses or even reasons, I didn't offer any.

Can you recall far enough back to remember the Afghan Government offered to expel all Al Qaeda members from Afghanistan and to hand over Osama bin Laden in particular for interrogation, after 9/11 and before the "Coalition of the Willing" invaded?...
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/ ... terrorism5

which followed this:

https://www.chicagotribune.com/nation-w ... story.html

Not that I agreed with the Bush administration (Either Bush Administration) on how they handled Afghanistan and Bin Laden, or Iraq.

Post by **spot** » Sun Sep 29, 2019 12:53 pm

You're quite right as far as attempted negotiation is concerned and I need to tone down my claim. The offer of 14th October was made by Haji Abdul Kabir, the Taliban's deputy prime minister, "to surrender Mr bin Laden if America would halt its bombing and provide evidence against the Saudi-born dissident" but I concede he lacked authority to make such an offer. I also appear to be wrong about who suggested Al Qaeda be expelled (to, I had thought, Yemen and Somalia), it was discussed but not offered by the Taliban leadership before the invasion began, after which it was irrelevant.

The official offer regarding bin Laden had only extended to his trial in a third party Islamic court under UN authority, with the US providing evidence to the prosecution.

Post by **spot** » Wed Oct 30, 2019 9:47 am

This is an impressive addition to the "transcript". Readers will recall that "a memorandum of a telephone conversation is not a verbatim transcript of a discussion" despite the President's offer of a "complete, fully declassified and unredacted transcript".

A decorated army officer and the top Ukraine expert on the national security council has reportedly told House impeachment investigators that the White House transcript of a call between the presidents of the US and Ukraine left out important words and phrases.

The New York Times cited three sources familiar with Alexander Vindmanâ€™s testimony on Tuesday who said the omissions included Donald Trump making reference to recordings of the former vice-president Joe Biden and Volodymyr Zelenskiy making reference to Burisma, the company for which Bidenâ€™s son Hunter worked.

Lt Col Vindman tried to edit the White House reconstruction of the call to correct the omissions, but some of his edits were not incorporated into the transcript, according to the report.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... s-quandary

I think a full transcript would be welcome at this stage.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Wed Oct 30, 2019 10:06 am

spot;1526916 wrote: This is an impressive addition to the "transcript". Readers will recall that "a memorandum of a telephone conversation is not a verbatim transcript of a discussion" despite the President's offer of a "complete, fully declassified and unredacted transcript".

I think a full transcript would be welcome at this stage.That's what we should have gotten from the beginning, but we didn't and if there is any thread of legal reason that we don't now or in the future, then that's probably going to be the outcome.

It's a bit ironic that it wasn't that long ago that Republicans would label anyone running for cover behind lawyers was considered the act of a guilty coward. Not anymore though now that their guy is doing it. I mean Trump looks like the most guilty coward in just about every sense that ever was, FFS. This guy hides behind lawyers like a kid hides behind momma's apron.