2016 U.S. Presidential Elections: The Circus Is In Full Swing

Users who are viewing this thread

The National guard is provided by each state. It is not a national military. It is not part of the Army. Get your facts straight. There was an insistence that they receive adequate training after the Ohio National Guard panicked and shot people at Kent State University in 1970.
I did.

The United States National Guard is part of the reserve components of the United States Army and the United States Air Force... National Guard units are under the dual control of the state governments and the federal government.... In 2006, Congress passed the 2007 National Defense Authorization Act, which gave the president the authority to mobilize National Guard units within the U.S. without the consent of state governors.... The same ranks and insignia of the U.S. Army and U.S. Air Force are used by the Army National Guard and the Air National Guard, respectively, and National Guard members are eligible to receive all United States military awards...... the Iraq War, when nearly 28% of total US forces in Iraq and Afghanistan at the end of 2007 consisted of mobilized personnel of the National Guard and other Reserve components.

Sounds like the Army to me for all but the most formal nitpicking purposes.
 
This is the closest I've seen!

Black dude holding a mic: When was America great?
White woman: When it was founded
Black dude holding a mic: ...
:giggle:

76a1g.jpg
 
Last edited:
Yeah he's been tweeting a lot of those. Of course there is no evidence to support that.



To me lying like that on something this important, especially with the role he is supposed to have, is just treason and should be treated as that. I do hope he will pay his dues after he is removed from office.
 
Read somewhere that there are like a dozen civil cases being built against Trump, waiting to sue after he leaves office. God that'd be hilarious.
 
One thing the US definitely needs is more and more intense laws against deliberate lying while acting as a public official. I read not to long ago that the former Prime Minister of Finland was forced to resign because he lied about a government bill. He was replaced by the lovely Sanna.
 
That doesn't sound true. The government dissolved over a failure to push through the much talked about social and healthcare reform; I don't think personal scandals had any role in that.
 
Remember Russiagate?
Why are your responses always clouded in obscurity? You mean this Russiagate?

While Mueller received all the hype, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence kept its head down. Yesterday, having avoided cable speculation almost entirely, the SSCI released the fifth and final volume of a report on Russia’s attempt to sway the last election in Donald Trump’s favor. It finally delivered what Mueller either could not or would not: a comprehensive presentation of the evidence in the matter of “collusion.” The report confirms that Russiagate is no hoax. Whether or not the Trump campaign illegally coordinated with the Kremlin, Trump has no grounds for proclaiming vindication, much less that he’s the victim of a witch hunt.
Franklin Foer: Russia is well on its way to stealing the next election
Credit largely goes to Mark Warner, the ranking Democrat on the SSCI, who shrewdly orchestrated the proceedings. Cultivating a close relationship with the SSCI’s Republican chair, Richard Burr, he worked to keep the investigation deliberately low-key. (The committee did the bulk of its work behind closed doors, without leaks.) As a result, the committee on the whole miraculously avoided the politicization that tainted the broader debate over Russian interference. Each of its findings won bipartisan approval prior to publication. Instead of rushing forward, the committee left the incendiary question of collusion for last/
 
Russiagate was the Democrat's version of "they're defrauding the election". While it's definitely less pathological since there are a lot of factual claims embedded in it, it's basically the same thing, a desperate attempt to rally the party around something to account for the loss that they had convinced everyone wouldn't happen.

The thing is that Russia was using bots and other political influence tools to try and muddy the waters in western politics from about 2013, but the effect was tiny, and it was aimed at supplanting specific institutions like BBC News and CNN with Russia Today, and supporting a handful of radical groups. When this tactic really succeeded was when democrats and neoliberals media turned it into a psychotic conspiracy where Trump was basically receiving direct orders from the Kremlin. It turned everyone who disagreed into a kremlinbot and made people feel like the cold war was happening again.

Russia can hardly influence their own elections properly, and even if it could be proven somehow, I highly doubt that Putin had a significant effect on Trump's win. The entire Russian "influence" tactic is all about pretending to have more behind-the-scenes power than would be provable or even remotely possible, allowing people's fantasies about hidden malignant powers to go crazy.
 
Back
Top Bottom