What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

TRUMP TO INFINITY AND BEYOND HQ - The Great and Positive Place (10 Viewers)

HellToupee said:
It’s like saying the sun came up today.This happens all the time from both sides. 
Click to expand...
Maybe I wasn’t clear with my point. Blade was calling this place a liberal fantasy land. I was just pointing out there’s non-liberal people here too. The people laughing at that post were some of the non-left I was referring to. 

 
Max Power said:
Basically
Click to expand...
:shrug:   Fair enough, I guess.  I would have thought that her previous advocacy of Q conspiracies plus her current theories on Dominion (GA governor was paid off, Hillary used it to defeat Bernie in 2016 but they paid Bernie off to keep quiet) would have trashed that notion, but to each their own.  Hypothetically speaking, what would it take for you conclude that she doesn't actually have anything?  Is it purely a time limit thing (e.g. by December 1)?

 
Joe Bryant said:
Of course. Way more complicated. That's just a general 40,000 foot view.

I have a friend who was considering going into business with another wealthy person I knew. The wealthy person was a trust fund guy that had never had the realities of real life business. His dad was always there to add more money to the account if it got tough. I advised my friend to pass on the opportunity as I just didn't think his potential partner had the real life experience to operate a real life business. Turns out I was completely right. 

The "business" of government can be like this in some ways. Not all of course. 
Click to expand...
Good points. Finding one person to manage the whole country seems insane actually. It made more sense in the 1700s but I still think we would be better off electing an executive board- an economy person defense person, foreign affairs person, etc.

 
Rich Conway said:
:shrug:   Fair enough, I guess.  I would have thought that her previous advocacy of Q conspiracies plus her current theories on Dominion (GA governor was paid off, Hillary used it to defeat Bernie in 2016 but they paid Bernie off to keep quiet) would have trashed that notion, but to each their own.  Hypothetically speaking, what would it take for you conclude that she doesn't actually have anything?  Is it purely a time limit thing (e.g. by December 1)?
Click to expand...
She said she is hoping to file this week. I want to see what she has.

Have you already dismissed whatever she brings already? Don't you want to hear her out? 

 
Max Power said:
She said she is hoping to file this week. I want to see what she has.

Have you already dismissed whatever she brings already? Don't you want to hear her out? 
Click to expand...
I'll admit I'm curious, certainly.  That said, I believe if there was anything at all, it would have been released already.  The angles taken so far line up with team Trump's tradition of screaming something outrageous and when challenged to produce proof, instead screaming something even more outrageous.  Combined with some of the other happenings here, such as the vast differences between the public statements and court filings ("it's fraud" in public versus "this isn't a fraud case" in court) and the "she's part of elite strike force" versus two days later "she's not part of the team", Occam's Razor for me says it's overwhelmingly likely she has nothing.  More to the point, I think my overall attitude is "until you show me something, I will assume you have nothing" rather than the reverse.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Rich Conway said:
I'll admit I'm curious, certainly.  That said, I believe if there was anything at all, it would have been released already.  The angles taken so far line up with team Trump's tradition of screaming something outrageous and when challenged to produce proof, instead scream something more outrageous.  Combined with some of the other happenings here, such as the vast differences between the public statements and court filings ("it's fraud" in public versus "this isn't a fraud case" in court) and the "she's part of elite strike force" versus two days later "she's not part of the team", Occam's Razor for me says it's overwhelmingly likely she has nothing.  More to the point, I think my overall attitude is "until you show me something, I will assume you have nothing" rather than the reverse.
Click to expand...
I can understand being skeptical that she has anything. I just don't understand those who are outright dismissing anything she could bring.

Election integrity should concern us all. 

 
Ilov80s said:
Good points. Finding one person to manage the whole country seems insane actually. It made more sense in the 1700s but I still think we would be better off electing an executive board- an economy person defense person, foreign affairs person, etc.
Click to expand...
Not directly elected, but this sounds a lot like the Cabinet's role. I understand the model was somewhat broken under the current administration.

 
  • Smile
Reactions: JAA
Max Power said:
She said she is hoping to file this week. I want to see what she has.

Have you already dismissed whatever she brings already? Don't you want to hear her out? 
Click to expand...
For me personally, I have no issue with her bringing her case to court and making an argument.  I have no issue with Trump's team, in general, pursuing all legal avenues on this issue.  I think Trump's behavior is rather petty and unbecoming of the president, but that ship sailed long ago.

All of that said, it's painfully clear how this is likely going to proceed.  Powell will go through the court system, and her evidence will be some kind of vague half-baked conspiracy theory.  There will be a bunch of shaky, tenuous loose connections that don't lead anywhere, claims that make no real sense, but have just enough of a veneer of possibility that they will continue to fuel conspiracy theories going into the future.  Dominion voting, seizure of servers in Germany, rinse repeat.  It will be the legal equivalent of this.

The courts will throw out these claims for not being credible, or at the very least, not providing nearly enough evidence to overturn what is becoming a larger lead for Biden.  The narrative from right wing media will shift to the idea that Powell brought the goods and/or her claims have enough potential credibility to warrant a further investigation, but that the Democrats / RINOs / Deep State / Soros / <insert bogeyman> are blocking the truth.  Time will run out, and the narrative will become that the election was likely stolen from Trump.  Parler, Newsmax, and OAN - among others - will capitalize on this newfound opportunity and fan the flames.  Fringe folks will continue to parrot these talking points for years to come - not outright saying the election was stolen, but saying that we don't know whether the election was stolen because we don't have all of the evidence.  Powell will probably write a book, run the talk show circuit, etc., and become a fringe hero for years to come.

 
Doug B said:
Not directly elected, but this sounds a lot like the Cabinet's role. I understand the model was somewhat broken under the current administration.
Click to expand...
Well yes like the cabinet. Maybe not quite as large but definitely elected. I would hope it might make issues and policy come more to the forefront during elections. That’s probably too optimistic though. 

 
Steve Tasker said:
For me personally, I have no issue with her bringing her case to court and making an argument.  I have no issue with Trump's team, in general, pursuing all legal avenues on this issue.  I think Trump's behavior is rather petty and unbecoming of the president, but that ship sailed long ago.

All of that said, it's painfully clear how this is likely going to proceed.  Powell will go through the court system, and her evidence will be some kind of vague half-baked conspiracy theory.  There will be a bunch of shaky, tenuous loose connections that don't lead anywhere, claims that make no real sense, but have just enough of a veneer of possibility that they will continue to fuel conspiracy theories going into the future.  Dominion voting, seizure of servers in Germany, rinse repeat.  It will be the legal equivalent of this.

The courts will throw out these claims for not being credible, or at the very least, not providing nearly enough evidence to overturn what is becoming a larger lead for Biden.  The narrative from right wing media will shift to the idea that Powell brought the goods and/or her claims have enough potential credibility to warrant a further investigation, but that the Democrats / RINOs / Deep State / Soros / <insert bogeyman> are blocking the truth.  Time will run out, and the narrative will become that the election was likely stolen from Trump.  Parler, Newsmax, and OAN - among others - will capitalize on this newfound opportunity and fan the flames.  Fringe folks will continue to parrot these talking points for years to come - not outright saying the election was stolen, but saying that we don't know whether the election was stolen because we don't have all of the evidence.  Powell will probably write a book, run the talk show circuit, etc., and become a fringe hero for years to come.
Click to expand...
The problem with your prediction is it likely won't just be "the fringe" that believes there was something there.

 
Steve Tasker said:
For me personally, I have no issue with her bringing her case to court and making an argument.  I have no issue with Trump's team, in general, pursuing all legal avenues on this issue.  I think Trump's behavior is rather petty and unbecoming of the president, but that ship sailed long ago.

All of that said, it's painfully clear how this is likely going to proceed.  Powell will go through the court system, and her evidence will be some kind of vague half-baked conspiracy theory.  There will be a bunch of shaky, tenuous loose connections that don't lead anywhere, claims that make no real sense, but have just enough of a veneer of possibility that they will continue to fuel conspiracy theories going into the future.  Dominion voting, seizure of servers in Germany, rinse repeat.  It will be the legal equivalent of this.

The courts will throw out these claims for not being credible, or at the very least, not providing nearly enough evidence to overturn what is becoming a larger lead for Biden.  The narrative from right wing media will shift to the idea that Powell brought the goods and/or her claims have enough potential credibility to warrant a further investigation, but that the Democrats / RINOs / Deep State / Soros / <insert bogeyman> are blocking the truth.  Time will run out, and the narrative will become that the election was likely stolen from Trump.  Parler, Newsmax, and OAN - among others - will capitalize on this newfound opportunity and fan the flames.  Fringe folks will continue to parrot these talking points for years to come - not outright saying the election was stolen, but saying that we don't know whether the election was stolen because we don't have all of the evidence.  Powell will probably write a book, run the talk show circuit, etc., and become a fringe hero for years to come.
Click to expand...
I'll submit to the bolded.  However, here are the 3 main issues with their current actions

1)  They are withholding funds and access to the transition team.  That has never happened before and it is literally costing Americans their lives while we are at the height of a pandemic.  Allow the access/funds and if things are reversed, so be it.  That is beyond petty and is unAmerican and unpatriotic. 

2)  You can't claim fraud, fraud, fraud in the media and then when you show up to court admit to there not being fraud.  That is what is happening.

3)  Along with the two points above, the administration is sowing doubt into the election process that can't be undone.  Claiming the election was stolen is, once again, unAmerican and does a disservice to our country and all the work election officials did across this country in an awful situation as well as every single person that cast a vote.  If it turns out this is all a mirage (which it obviously looks like), that's irreversible damage.  And there should be penalties for doing what they've done.

 
gianmarco said:
I'll submit to the bolded.  However, here are the 3 main issues with their current actions

1)  They are withholding funds and access to the transition team.  That has never happened before and it is literally costing Americans their lives while we are at the height of a pandemic.  Allow the access/funds and if things are reversed, so be it.  That is beyond petty and is unAmerican and unpatriotic. 

2)  You can't claim fraud, fraud, fraud in the media and then when you show up to court admit to there not being fraud.  That is what is happening.

3)  Along with the two points above, the administration is sowing doubt into the election process that can't be undone.  Claiming the election was stolen is, once again, unAmerican and does a disservice to our country and all the work election officials did across this country in an awful situation as well as every single person that cast a vote.  If it turns out this is all a mirage (which it obviously looks like), that's irreversible damage.  And there should be penalties for doing what they've done.
Click to expand...
No disagreement on my part.  I'm just guessing what's gonna happen......it doesn't appear to be a very complicated playbook.

 
To expand on Gianmarco's point 3:  This could really backfire for the republicans.  IF many voters who backed Trump buy into this faulty rhetoric that the election was stolen and the process is somehow broken, then these voters who believe this might not vote again.  Running the risk of losing a great deal of voters who backed you previously.

 
  • Smile
Reactions: JAA
Max Power said:
I can understand being skeptical that she has anything. I just don't understand those who are outright dismissing anything she could bring.

Election integrity should concern us all. 
Click to expand...


gianmarco said:
I'll submit to the bolded.  However, here are the 3 main issues with their current actions

1)  They are withholding funds and access to the transition team.  That has never happened before and it is literally costing Americans their lives while we are at the height of a pandemic.  Allow the access/funds and if things are reversed, so be it.  That is beyond petty and is unAmerican and unpatriotic. 

2)  You can't claim fraud, fraud, fraud in the media and then when you show up to court admit to there not being fraud.  That is what is happening.

3)  Along with the two points above, the administration is sowing doubt into the election process that can't be undone.  Claiming the election was stolen is, once again, unAmerican and does a disservice to our country and all the work election officials did across this country in an awful situation as well as every single person that cast a vote.  If it turns out this is all a mirage (which it obviously looks like), that's irreversible damage.  And there should be penalties for doing what they've done.
Click to expand...
@Max Power - With respect to gianmarco's second two points above (#1 has nothing to do with Powell, best I can tell), this is where I also take serious issue with the way in which Powell has gone about her claims.  If it turns out she's full of it, the damage she's doing can't be undone.  To that end, I would support treason charges against both her and Giuliani for their actions if they can't back up their claims with real, actionable evidence.  Thoughts?

 
Rich Conway said:
@Max Power - With respect to gianmarco's second two points above (#1 has nothing to do with Powell, best I can tell), this is where I also take serious issue with the way in which Powell has gone about her claims.  If it turns out she's full of it, the damage she's doing can't be undone.  To that end, I would support treason charges against both her and Giuliani for their actions if they can't back up their claims with real, actionable evidence.  Thoughts?
Click to expand...
Filing frivolous lawsuits and engaging in dangerous political speech isn't treason that i know of.

We should be careful with the words we use when engaging Trump.  When you fight certain people on their level they drag you down and beat you with experience.

 
gianmarco said:
I'll submit to the bolded.  However, here are the 3 main issues with their current actions

1)  They are withholding funds and access to the transition team.  That has never happened before and it is literally costing Americans their lives while we are at the height of a pandemic.  Allow the access/funds and if things are reversed, so be it.  That is beyond petty and is unAmerican and unpatriotic. 

2)  You can't claim fraud, fraud, fraud in the media and then when you show up to court admit to there not being fraud.  That is what is happening.

3)  Along with the two points above, the administration is sowing doubt into the election process that can't be undone.  Claiming the election was stolen is, once again, unAmerican and does a disservice to our country and all the work election officials did across this country in an awful situation as well as every single person that cast a vote.  If it turns out this is all a mirage (which it obviously looks like), that's irreversible damage.  And there should be penalties for doing what they've done.
Click to expand...
These are the kinds of things that I think are major violations of conservative ideals and why I don't think I consider Trumpism as being true conservatism. The respect for the voter and our Democratic process, the respect of the Constitution and legal tradition, honoring of the rule of law to me are major conservative ideals. I do not see respect for that from Trump or his backers. People who had deep respect for our nearly 250 years of democratic elections and peaceful transfers of power would not so brazenly make these kinds of accusations of fraud and dishonesty without hard evidence. 

 
Max Power said:
She said she is hoping to file this week. I want to see what she has.

Have you already dismissed whatever she brings already? Don't you want to hear her out? 
Click to expand...
I'd like to see what she has too, but I think I already know what she has -- squat.

After all this time, with so many accusations and not one of them with a shred of real evidence, with nearly 30 court cases rejected entirely (the only post-election case Trump has won was shortening the cure deadline in PA for a small subset of rejected mail-in ballots from 9 days to 6), to think that there is anything substantive at this point in time that would alter the election results seems beyond reason to me.

She's gone down some bizarre roads about Venezuela and a long-dead Chavez, George Soros, and other weird claims of how this election was interfered with -- if all she has is the mere specter of impropriety around unprovable tampering of machines swayed by mysterious motives of unseen holding company owners, without any provable evidence, then this is truly frivolous litigation and an abuse of the judicial process. And worse, this stalling for time delays actions that can be taken -- around COVID an a lot of other things -- in the meantime. 

So far, in terms of the two member of Trump's "elite strike force" that was going to change the results of the elections, we've seen one have all her ties -- campaign and personal representation -- officially cut by Trump's administration, with the other's head literally melting on TV as he rubbed snot all over his face.

It would be a hilarious farce if it wasn't so sad and a waste of time the American people don't have.

 
Yankee23Fan said:
Filing frivolous lawsuits and engaging in dangerous political speech isn't treason that i know of.

We should be careful with the words we use when engaging Trump.  When you fight certain people on their level they drag you down and beat you with experience.
Click to expand...
I admit to not being a Constitutional law expert (or an attorney at all).  I think what Giuliani and Powell did last week rises above "dangerous political speech", however.  If it's not treason, is it actionable in any way?  It seems clear to me that it should be legally actionable (assuming they never produce evidence) in some way.

 
Rich Conway said:
I admit to not being a Constitutional law expert (or an attorney at all).  I think what Giuliani and Powell did last week rises above "dangerous political speech", however.  If it's not treason, is it actionable in any way?  It seems clear to me that it should be legally actionable (assuming they never produce evidence) in some way.
Click to expand...
Treason is mainly a violent action; war or aiding our enemy in a war. That isn't what is going on.

Sedition usually requires physical actions as well, i.e. some form of war, insurrection or revolt that is violent.

Conceding an election has been the act of honorable men treating the importance of our political system with its own level of honor. Trump and his kind have proven they have none, so this shouldn't surprise anyone.

Attorney's enjoy a certain level of immunity in what we say in a courtroom so that we can zealously represent our clients.

Political speech is given a wide, wide arena and we would rather err on the side of allowing more than less.

Powell is a nutcase who is going to walk into a disbarment hearing if she keeps this up. Giuliani has already made what was once a legacy worth remembering into nothing more than footnote of political vanity. He will never be anything more than a joke now. 

Beyond that, short of sanctions for these truly incompetent filings, I don't see much at the moment.

 
Yankee23Fan said:
Treason is mainly a violent action; war or aiding our enemy in a war. That isn't what is going on.

Sedition usually requires physical actions as well, i.e. some form of war, insurrection or revolt that is violent.

Conceding an election has been the act of honorable men treating the importance of our political system with its own level of honor. Trump and his kind have proven they have none, so this shouldn't surprise anyone.

Attorney's enjoy a certain level of immunity in what we say in a courtroom so that we can zealously represent our clients.

Political speech is given a wide, wide arena and we would rather err on the side of allowing more than less.

Powell is a nutcase who is going to walk into a disbarment hearing if she keeps this up. Giuliani has already made what was once a legacy worth remembering into nothing more than footnote of political vanity. He will never be anything more than a joke now. 

Beyond that, short of sanctions for these truly incompetent filings, I don't see much at the moment.
Click to expand...
Yeah my first thought on all of this is whether she's already received a bar complaint from another attorney or a judge. 

 
Ilov80s said:
Yep and being 18 from an a very white Catholic suburban school in a town whose wealth was entirely tied to the auto industry, it definitely made sense to me at the time. 
Click to expand...
I can see that. Pat also thinks entering WW2 was wrong, but he didn't develop that part of his, um, appeal until later. Imagine a nuclear-armed Third Reich. It's why I think Trump getting out of the Iran deal was one of the best things about his administration. Inspected by Iran and reported upon by Iran? No way, Jose.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
We should be awfully, awfully careful about punishing our political opponents once they leave office. Unless rank corruption is the order of the day, I don't see any way in which we should bring charges against the President. That's been a longstanding thing. A certain degree of unspoken immunity is needed to do the job.

Anybody not preaching the exercise of caution (but just this time!) regrading this is either a fool or a blowhard and shouldn't be taken seriously.

 
rockaction said:
We should be awfully, awfully careful about punishing our political opponents once they leave office. Unless rank corruption is the order of the day, I don't see any way in which we should bring charges against the President. That's been a longstanding thing. A certain degree of unspoken immunity is needed to do the job.

Anybody not preaching the exercise of caution (but just this time!) regrading this is either a fool or a blowhard and shouldn't be taken seriously.
Click to expand...
Caution is merited. But if he did commit crimes, he can not be immune to prosecution and redress. The President can not be completely above the law.

 
Gr00vus said:
Caution is merited. But if he did commit crimes, he can not be immune to prosecution and redress. The President can not be completely above the law.
Click to expand...
It would have to be a very serious, clear and obvious crime with undeniable hard evidence.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
rockaction said:
I can see that. Pat also thinks entering WW2 was wrong, but he didn't develop that part of his, um, appeal until later. Imagine a nuclear-armed Third Reich. It's why I think Trump getting out of the Iran deal was one of the best things about his administration. Inspected by Iran and reported upon by Iran? No way, Jose.
Click to expand...
Do we have a plan though with Iran now? I think I read something recently that said Iran has developed a significant stockpile of uranium since the deal was ended. And as for Pat, I definitely wasn’t on board with that WW2 take. Hell I was in favor of the Iraq War at the time.

 
rockaction said:
We should be awfully, awfully careful about punishing our political opponents once they leave office. Unless rank corruption is the order of the day, I don't see any way in which we should bring charges against the President. That's been a longstanding thing. A certain degree of unspoken immunity is needed to do the job.

Anybody not preaching the exercise of caution (but just this time!) regrading this is either a fool or a blowhard and shouldn't be taken seriously.
Click to expand...
Very fair.

 
Ilov80s said:
Do we have a plan though with Iran now? I think I read something recently that said Iran has developed a significant stockpile of uranium since the deal was ended. And as for Pat, I definitely wasn’t on board with that WW2 take. Hell I was in favor of the Iraq War at the time.
Click to expand...
No, we really don't have a plan with Iran. But we were just speeding toward the obvious instead of at least delaying it. There really is no plan. They're a country that is determined on nuclear energy. What that energy is used in is the question. My feeling is that the clerics that run Iran are dead set on enriching uranium for weaponry. A nuclear-capable Iran is something I shudder to think about.

 
rockaction said:
We should be awfully, awfully careful about punishing our political opponents once they leave office. Unless rank corruption is the order of the day, I don't see any way in which we should bring charges against the President. That's been a longstanding thing. A certain degree of unspoken immunity is needed to do the job.

Anybody not preaching the exercise of caution (but just this time!) regrading this is either a fool or a blowhard and shouldn't be taken seriously.
Click to expand...
It's been a longstanding tradition to not prosecute a sitting president as doing so is disruptive to running the country.

What's the case for not prosecuting a president once he no longer holds office?

 
Stompin' Tom Connors said:
GSA Administrator Emily Murphy approves transition.
Click to expand...
Looks like Trump himself gave Murphy the go-ahead -- posted this elsewhere, but it seems to fit in multiple threads:
 

NYT reporter Maggie Haberman thinks Trump's tweet is 'the closest to a concession' he'll give (The Week, 11/23/2020)

President Trump has yet to concede the election, and New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman thinks his Monday evening tweet about what is in "the best interest of our country" is "the closest to a concession Trump is going to get."

Trump wrote that he spoke to Emily Murphy, the head of the General Services Administration, and recommended that she "do what needs to be done with regard to initial protocols," adding that he has "told my team to do the same." Murphy needed to ascertain the election in order to formally start the transition process, and after weeks of delays, she sent President-elect Joe Biden a letter on Monday telling him the transition can officially start.

Haberman tweeted that she's been told some of Trump's advisers "had been urging him" to let the transition begin before Thanksgiving, "even if he never said the word 'concede.'" Between the Trump campaign and other Republicans, more than 30 lawsuits have been filed in six swing states, in an attempt to contest the election results, NBC News reports. Despite Trump and members of his legal team claiming there has been widespread voter fraud, no court has found a single piece of evidence.

Trump's election legal team is being led by his longtime friend and personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, the former mayor of New York City. Giuliani has been "key in stoking Trump's conspiracy theories," Haberman said, but people with knowledge of the matter told her that a recent court loss in Pennsylvania made Trump realize "Giuliani was not painting an honest picture" of his chances of actually changing the election results. Giuliani, she added, took control of Trump's legal team after the campaign dropped a lawsuit in Maricopa County, Arizona, and he warned Trump that "other advisers were lying to him."
Click to expand...

 
Rich Conway said:
@Max Power - With respect to gianmarco's second two points above (#1 has nothing to do with Powell, best I can tell), this is where I also take serious issue with the way in which Powell has gone about her claims.  If it turns out she's full of it, the damage she's doing can't be undone.  To that end, I would support treason charges against both her and Giuliani for their actions if they can't back up their claims with real, actionable evidence.  Thoughts?
Click to expand...
Treason is out of the question. I find that a little silly since I didnt see these same calls for treason coming when the head our intelligence agencies were going on the news saying Trump is colluding with Russia. THAT was undermining our democracy.  

 
Max Power said:
Treason is out of the question. I find that a little silly since I didnt see these same calls for treason coming when the head our intelligence agencies were going on the news saying Trump is colluding with Russia. THAT was undermining our democracy.  
Click to expand...
If/when neither Giuliani nor Powell can produce any evidence whatsoever, what should occur?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Max Power said:
Treason is out of the question. I find that a little silly since I didnt see these same calls for treason coming when the head our intelligence agencies were going on the news saying Trump is colluding with Russia. THAT was undermining our democracy.  
Click to expand...
One could make the argument that those who were calling for treason when the head of our intelligence agencies were going on the news saying Trump is colluding with Russia are not even entertaining the idea that this is treason.*

* I don't think either are treason.

 
Yankee23Fan said:
Treason is mainly a violent action; war or aiding our enemy in a war. That isn't what is going on.

Sedition usually requires physical actions as well, i.e. some form of war, insurrection or revolt that is violent.

Conceding an election has been the act of honorable men treating the importance of our political system with its own level of honor. Trump and his kind have proven they have none, so this shouldn't surprise anyone.

Attorney's enjoy a certain level of immunity in what we say in a courtroom so that we can zealously represent our clients.

Political speech is given a wide, wide arena and we would rather err on the side of allowing more than less.

Powell is a nutcase who is going to walk into a disbarment hearing if she keeps this up. Giuliani has already made what was once a legacy worth remembering into nothing more than footnote of political vanity. He will never be anything more than a joke now. 

Beyond that, short of sanctions for these truly incompetent filings, I don't see much at the moment.
Click to expand...
When this is all over history will not be kind to these individuals. I’m thinking 30 years from now the kids will be learning about this era and the lessons will be loud and clear. 

 
https://www.axios.com/israeli-military-prepares-trump-iran-0d0a5725-c410-4f5c-a0ea-9c6f9add4966.html?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=organic&utm_content=1100

The Israel Defense Forces have in recent weeks been instructed to prepare for the possibility that the U.S. will conduct a military strike against Iran before President Trump leaves office, senior Israeli officials tell me.

Why it matters: The Israeli government instructed the IDF to undertake the preparations not because of any intelligence or assessment that Trump will order such a strike, but because senior Israeli officials anticipate “a very sensitive period” ahead of Biden's inauguration on Jan. 20.

The IDF's preparedness measures relate to possible Iranian retaliation against Israel directly or through Iranian proxies in Syria, Gaza and Lebanon, the Israeli officials said.

Flashback: Last week, the New York Times reported that Trump raised the possibility of attacking Iran’s uranium enrichment facility in Natanz in a meeting with senior members of his national security team.

Trump raised the idea after being briefed on an International Atomic Energy Agency report about Iran’s growing stockpiles of enriched uranium, but top officials — including Vice President Mike Pence and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo — warned about the risks of regional escalation, per the Times.

Trump seemed convinced that it would be too risky to strike Iran directly, but has considered other options, the Times reports.

What's happening: Israeli minister of defense Benny Gantz spoke twice in the last two weeks with Christopher Miller, Trump's acting defense secretary. They discussed Iran as well as Syria and defense cooperation.

Last Sunday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met in Saudi Arabia with Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman. One of the main issues discussed was Iran, Israeli officials say.

Pompeo visited Israel and several Gulf countries last week to discuss Iran. State Department officials traveling with Pompeo told reporters “all options are on the table."

While Pompeo was in the Gulf, U.S. Central Command announced that B-52 strategic bombers conducted a “short-notice, long-range mission into the Middle East to deter aggression and reassure U.S. partners and allies." That was seen as another signal to Iran.

Hossein Dehghan, an adviser to Iran’s leader and a possible candidate in Iran's upcoming presidential elections, told AP last week that a U.S. military strike against Iran could set off a “full-fledged war” in the Middle East.

What’s next: Senior Israeli officials tell me they expect Israel will get prior notice ahead of any U.S. strike against Iran. But they're concerned that won't be sufficient to fully prepare. Thus the order to the IDF to start taking preparatory steps under the assumption that such a scenario is possible.
Click to expand...

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

dozer
****Official DOJ Investigation into Trump, Fake Electors, Fraud, Etc.****
5 6 7
Replies
348
Views
11K
Sabertooth
Sabertooth
L
McCarthy and McConnell Wanted ‘Son of a B*tch’ Trump Out of Politics After Jan. 6 Riot,
2 3
Replies
124
Views
3K
ignatiusjreilly
ignatiusjreilly
GordonGekko
Revisiting The Young Turks 2016 Election Meltdown Over Trump's Stunning Victory (7/7/2022 9:35 PST)
Replies
16
Views
458
GordonGekko
GordonGekko

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 11 (members: 0, guests: 11)
Top