Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!
article II. good enough for ya? the president by his article II powers conducts foreign policy. the intel community does not. Congress doesn't either unless a formal treaty needs to be ratified. the intel community is supposed to spy on foreign nations and leaders to provide intel to the president, not spy on the president.
yeah .. it really is that simple.
and there's that inconvenient article II to ruin your day.
Oh Please enlighten us all. wheres the Country headed?
Straight down the tubes after Elizabeth Warren is elected. Mystic and I are moving to Thailand, where we'll have hot and cold running poontang. 3000 Baht long time.
article II. good enough for ya? the president by his article II powers conducts foreign policy. the intel community does not. Congress doesn't either unless a formal treaty needs to be ratified. the intel community is supposed to spy on foreign nations and leaders to provide intel to the president, not spy on the president.
yeah .. it really is that simple.
Quote:
Originally Posted by eccieuser9500
Then we have a point of contention. How is the Intelligence Community supposed to act in good faith if it's at the whim of a mad man who doesn't know what the fuck he is doing? Much more, breaking the law?
Goes to the whistleblower. You voted for an idiot who doesn't know his limits when dealing with foreign leaders. Then the intelligence representative has to step in. Because the POTUS has none.
I agree the POTUS leads the U.S. in conducting policy. How is that policy to be carried out if it's held from those who are to act upon it? We have ambassadors who have to change their position in mid meeting because the POTUS just got slapped in the face by a powerful lobbyist. The channel has to be direct and clear.
intel agencies are not supposed to be conducting foreign policy they prefer that the president should be going. a certain intel agency have been known to sabotage a president's foreign poliy over stuff they disagree with.
they should be following his orders or if they can't; they should resign.
with regard to the tapes on a separate secure server; theres a good reason why they don't have access to it. the executive is not an intelligence agency. and trump officials had issues with phone conversation leaks.
all agencies data is departmentalized within the agencies. they have to ask permission to get that data. intel agencies are no exception.
Straight down the tubes after Elizabeth Warren is elected. Mystic and I are moving to Thailand, where we'll have hot and cold running poontang. 3000 Baht long time.
What the fuck is wrong with Americans? What's bad is that if Biden wouldn't have gotten in it would be even worse. Trump, Biden, Bernie and Warren is the best the country has to offer? That's fucking sad
800,000 Baht in the Bank and Income of 70,000 Baht. I'm in Brother Tiny!
First, I recall it was a majority vote as apposed to a two-thirds vote? Just change the rules. Or move the goal post? Am I correct?
Or . . . am I just reading the tea leaves all wrong?
You're wrong, as always. The 2/3 hurdle is written into the Constitution. Try reading it instead of your "tea leaves".
"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two-thirds of the Members present."
Then we have a point of contention. How is the Intelligence Community supposed to act in good faith if it's at the whim of a mad man who doesn't know what the fuck he is doing? Much more, breaking the law?
Goes to the whistleblower. You voted for an idiot who doesn't know his limits when dealing with foreign leaders. Then the intelligence representative has to step in.
Wrong again. 63 million Americans voted for him and they had ample opportunity to judge if he was a "mad man" or an "idiot" before they voted.
No unelected bureaucrat has the right to overturn or reverse the popular vote. The bureaucrats are there to serve the POTUS, not vice versa.
intel agencies are not supposed to be conducting foreign policy they prefer that the president should be going. a certain intel agency have been known to sabotage a president's foreign poliy over stuff they disagree with.
they should be following his orders or if they can't; they should resign.
with regard to the tapes on a separate secure server; theres a good reason why they don't have access to it. the executive is not an intelligence agency. and trump officials had issues with phone conversation leaks.
all agencies data is departmentalized within the agencies. they have to ask permission to get that data. intel agencies are no exception.
They need to follow the law!
Edit: Tiny, my apologies. Soaked in suds on football Sunday. Trolling too much.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lustylad
Hahahahaha!!
Your ignorance is staggering! The intel community exists to serve the POTUS, not vice versa!
YOUR STUPIDITY IS NOT SURPRISING! Every American who swears to uphold the Constitution is bound to serve the country. You fuckin' idiot! Get your head out of your master's ass.
Here we go! Fuck the Browns! Let's get our first win.
Remember...Mitch held up a SC nominee and lowered the vote count to get another pushed through.
Mitch has Trump by the balls though if the House impeaches like they probably will. What the GOP could do is actually convict Trump and then run Pence....who probably would stand a better chance of getting elected than Trump.
Our right wing nuts would be going bat shit crazy!
McConnell: 'I would have no choice but to take it up' if House votes to impeach Trump
At least 226 House members — all Democrats except for one independent — now favor some kind of action on impeachment, according to an NBC News tally. The chamber would need 218 votes for a simple majority to impeach Trump.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Levianon17
Oh Please enlighten us all. wheres the Country headed?
Nixon was elected on a pledge to extricate us from LBJ's Vietnam quagmire. His first-term foreign policy making was validated by voters who re-elected him in 1972.
Nixon got elected and re-elected because he pledged to the American people that "we shall have an honorable end to the war in Vietnam." But in the end he just got himself and our South Vietnamese ally a despicable raw deal from the North Vietnamese aggressors and their Viet Cong henchmen. Would you now please point out which items in the Paris Peace Accords aren't dishonorable?
He staunchly supported the Thieu regime until he was weakened by the Watergate scandal. The democrat-controlled Congress cut off our military assistance to Saigon in 1974. They're the ones who betrayed our South Vietnamese allies, not Nixon. Learn your history better, little andy.
Nixon made it so easy for Congress to cut off the funding after he made bad deals with the commies. Congress wouldn't dare to pull that shit off as long as we were still in an armed conflict fighting the enemies. That's why we're still fighting the Afghan War even though that war is so increasingly unpopular. Same for the 2003 invasion of Iraq, that invasion could only be ended after Shrub made a deal with Maliki.
But make no mistake, I'm not arguing that Nixon should be impeached for his despicable betrayal of our South Vietnamese allies, but he without the shadow of a doubt threatened his junior partner with economic ruins and bodily harm. I therefore stand by my statement that Nixon's treatment of Thieu is a classic quid pro quo shakedown.
