Trump decides not to sanction Russia, against urging of Democrats and Republicans

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: DJW001

Then why are you here? You don't think you can influence anyone, do you?

To pass the time.

Why are you here? How many people have you convinced?

More than you, probably.

a reply to: Wayfarer

Imagine what they would be saying about Obama if he did this!

The trump forgivers of course won’t mention this or even deal with it.

They'll distort reality to defend trump

Putin undoubtedly has something on trump

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Wardaddy454

Can you provide a source on the "fact" that Russia hacked the DNC?

www.apnews.com...

Does it not concern you that Seth Rich's laptop is still in FBI custody, despite the official story being a mugging gone wrong?

No.

Phishing is not hacking.

originally posted by: 23432

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: 23432

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: 23432

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: 23432

Sure but that doesn't have to do with what their power is in the Constitution.

Sure he has veto power but he may want to explain why he would ignore a law passed by all but 5 members.

I hate to break this to you but those who bought and paid for the Congress has already turned the Constitution into a toilet paper .

Can't you see what is on the horizon for US and why Trump the Jesuit Knight was brought into Presidency ?

You think the constitution became toilet paper when Trump became President?

You are ignorant of the last 16-24 years.

Again with assumptions and presumptions ; i have never said it became toilet paper when Trump got elected .

When Federal Reserve was founded the Congress became the puppet and Constitution became the toilet paper .

I thought everyone who is awoke knew this fact .

Then I suppose you should speak more plainly.

But could you elaborate on how Trump is a Jesuit Knight?

Trump said :

" Thank God he said I am a politician because Aristotle defined the human person as an 'animal politicus' (a political animal). So at least I am a human person.
As to whether I am a pawn, well, maybe, I don't know. I'll leave that up to your judgment and that of the people. "


Trump claims to be Presbyterian, but attended Jesuit Fordham University for two years and then transferred to Jesuit-controlled University of Pennsylvania.

The University of Pennsylvania is funded by The Annenberg Foundation.

Mr. Annenberg is a Knight Commander of the Order of St. Gregory the Great.

David L. Cohen is the Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania .

Pennsylvania area is controlled by the Roman Catholic hierarchy via the Jesuit provincial holding jurisdiction over Pennsylvania.

Donald John Trump, Jr. - Alma mater: University of Pennsylvania

Ivanka Marie Trump - Alma mater: University of Pennsylvania

Eric Frederic Trump - Alma mater: Georgetown University

Trump is a supporter of the NSA's Temporal Power domestic surveillance programs.

"security has to preside...and it has to be preeminent"
"if anyone wants to listen to my phone calls, it's fine"
"I think we have to err on the side of security"
"we don't love it, but we have probably not much of a choice"
"it doesn't seem to be very popular, what [Rand Paul's] doing"
"Most people seem to feel the way I do"
"My best trait will be security"

Two of Pope Francis’s closest collaborators have accused religious leaders close to the administration of President Donald Trump of having a “Manichean vision,” based on a “gradually radicalized” theology growing from the early 20th century fundamentalist movement.
Jesuit Father Antonio Spadaro, editor-in-chief of the influential Rome-based Jesuit publication La Civiltà Cattolica, and Marcelo Figueroa, the editor-in-chief of the Argentinean edition of the Vatican newspaper L’Osservatore Romano, co-wrote an article in the latest edition of La Civiltà Cattolica looking at the relationship between “Evangelical Fundamentalism” and “Catholic Integralism.”

cruxnow.com...

And finally here he is at the Jesuit Dinner :

My goodness. I think you need a break from the internet.

But its only fair, the last guy was a Muslim

I would hope that nobody takes what a politician says at face value and does there own due diligence

originally posted by: Wardaddy454


My goodness. I think you need a break from the internet.

But its only fair, the last guy was a Muslim

You think coc aine snorting bisexual was a muslim ?



OK .

lol

Gee, what I learned from high school civics was that Congress could have a vote to override a Presidential decision. Six months seems a little long between a vote and expiration date for the president to sign into law.

Maybe the bill was symbolic in nature and the sanctions were not meant to be enforced, but we wanted Russia to know that we were on to them? If that is the case, Trump played his part as he was supposed to do.

a reply to: Willtell

What does he have on Obama for Obama to say he will be able to work with them after the election?

originally posted by: 23432

originally posted by: Wardaddy454


My goodness. I think you need a break from the internet.

But its only fair, the last guy was a Muslim

You think coc aine snorting bisexual was a muslim ?

OK .

lol

Careful, your fundamentalism might show.

Did any of you read the Act that was passed? It is regarding Russia, NK and Iran. Russia is one part.

Part of the bill was for the US government to come up with a 'black list' of Russians. They were to deliver it in January.

They released a list that included even the Russian Prime Minister as someone who could be included. Again, the report is to be used to find who should be sanctioned. 210 Russians were named.

So once again, the news media has 'jumped the gun' as the Russian review of who to sanction is not even completed. And once again, the Trump haters on ATSNN are quick to pull the trigger but you look like uninformed lemmings.

a reply to: Ahabstar

See, here's the fun part: Trump isn't exercising veto power on the sanctions. Congress can (and in this case, almost certainly would) override a presidential veto via 2/3rds majority vote. The act enacting sanctions passed, Trump himself signed it into law. What you're seeing here is the executive branch openly defying the legislative in direct violation of Constitutional separation of powers. This situation has only happened once before, with Andrew Jackson's deportation of the Cherokee against a Supreme Court ruling, leading to the infamous "Trail of Tears." Trump is on very dangerous ground here, as is Congress.

originally posted by: ShadeWolf
a reply to: Ahabstar

See, here's the fun part: Trump isn't exercising veto power on the sanctions. Congress can (and in this case, almost certainly would) override a presidential veto via 2/3rds majority vote. The act enacting sanctions passed, Trump himself signed it into law. What you're seeing here is the executive branch openly defying the legislative in direct violation of Constitutional separation of powers. This situation has only happened once before, with Andrew Jackson's deportation of the Cherokee against a Supreme Court ruling, leading to the infamous "Trail of Tears." Trump is on very dangerous ground here, as is Congress.

And it would seem Trump exercised his one avenue that most assuredly lets the Russians off the hook, rather than veto it and have it go back to congress. It is strangely coincidental that the one action he chooses is precisely the one action the Russian's would want a stooge to do. I find it weird that those who profess to love America would favor actions that benefit Russia over the safety and sanctity of our electoral process.

originally posted by: Wayfarer

Why do you misrepresent the issue deliberately by only calling out the Democrats desire to sanction Russia? Unless you didn't read what I posted, I thought I made it pretty clear that support for the sanctions was practically Unanimous.

That might have been BEFORE Congress and Republicans got to see the information about the FAKE Russian dossier... I know you love to twist things, but it has been already mentioned that Obama did the same thing... Heck, i do remember some story about him (Obama) telling the Russians something about being able to be more lenient with them if he got elected a second time...

Barack Obama microphone gaffe: 'I'll have more flexibility after election'

So are you going to claim Obama was/is a stooge of the Russians?... Or do you just use that line only when a Republican is in office?...

originally posted by: Wayfarer
...
I find it weird that those who profess to love America would favor actions that benefit Russia over the safety and sanctity of our electoral process.

Can you provide proof the Russians hacked the electoral process?... I am pretty sure several threads have been made showing DEMOCRAT STOOGES themselves having to admit there is no such proof...

BTW, i find it hilarious that you are calling it "the sanctity of the electoral process", so where is your response about the TRUE meddling of the DNC/Hillary and Obama administration on the "safety and sanctity of the electoral process"?... Or do you just make such statements only when FALSE claims are made about a "republican President being a stooge of the Russians" when there is no evidence at all to this claim?...

a reply to: ShadeWolf

More fun part is that the law contains a whole lot of the “President May...” and “Shall upon determination....” when it gets into the sanctions against named list. Link to bill

In other words the president has discretion. But thank you for having me look it up as he did sign it into law August 2, 2017. I was going on the impression that he was letting the bill die in a desk drawer. And now that memory has been jogged, he did impose some sanctions after making it law. There was a discussion about that proving Trump didn’t collude too hard with Putin as his puppet master due to those sanctions.

a reply to: Wayfarer

Good, we don't want war over bs propaganda.

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: 23432

originally posted by: Wardaddy454


My goodness. I think you need a break from the internet.

But its only fair, the last guy was a Muslim

You think coc aine snorting bisexual was a muslim ?

OK .

lol

Careful, your fundamentalism might show.

I thought it was my own Taqiyya ; fundementalism ?

Really ?



ok .

a reply to: Wayfarer

well the FBI and the DOJ....ummm I mean .....

a reply to: Wayfarer

Screw sanctions and screw you if you support them. Russians aren't much different than us. You are a warmongering douchebag if you support this.