KevinRome Posted February 22, 2019 Share Posted February 22, 2019 13 hours ago, DC Tom said: It's possible Roosevelt was an agent of the Soviet Union... I just started reading Diane West's book American Betrayal, and am pretty stunned by the evidence of soviet infiltration of gov't in the 30s. I had no clue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted February 22, 2019 Share Posted February 22, 2019 (edited) 32 minutes ago, row_33 said: They did remove him for deep concerns, whether it was wise or just is another question. I’m grateful Truman stepped in. They removed him because he was an impediment to their preferred policy prescriptions towards the Soviets. It was a political difference, nothing more. It was framed as more by those in power who didn’t want to have a policy debate because it was easier, and more politically expedient, to destroy the man than to take on his arguments. Edited February 22, 2019 by TakeYouToTasker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted February 22, 2019 Share Posted February 22, 2019 14 hours ago, DC Tom said: It's possible Roosevelt was an agent of the Soviet Union... That makes more sense. I heard he was an Asian from the Soviet Union and it seemed odd, but I still told lots of people. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted February 22, 2019 Share Posted February 22, 2019 17 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said: They removed him because he was an impediment to their preferred policy prescriptions towards the Soviets. It was a political difference, nothing more. It was framed as more by those in power who didn’t want to have a policy debate because it was easier, and more politically expedient, to destroy the man than to take on his arguments. He was soft on the USSR and removed rightfully. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted February 22, 2019 Share Posted February 22, 2019 6 minutes ago, row_33 said: He was soft on the USSR and removed rightfully. You’re demonstrating ignorance on the topic. You should read more and opine less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 22, 2019 Share Posted February 22, 2019 CONRAD BLACK: The Real Scandal Of Trump Term Starts To Unravel. For more than two years, the United States and the world have had two competing narratives: that an elected president of the United States was a Russian agent whom the Kremlin helped elect; and its rival narrative that senior officials of the Justice Department, FBI, CIA, and other national intelligence organizations had repeatedly lied under oath, misinformed federal officials, and meddled in partisan political matters illegally and unconstitutionally and had effectively tried to influence the outcome of a presidential election, and then undo its result by falsely propagating the first narrative. It is now obvious and indisputable that the second narrative is the correct one. The authors, accomplices, and dupes of this attempted overthrow of constitutional government are now well along in reciting their misconduct without embarrassment or remorse because — in fired FBI Director James Comey’s formulation — a “higher duty” than the oath they swore to uphold the Constitution compelled them. Or — in fired FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe’s words — “the threat” was too great. Never mind that the nature of “the threat” was that the people might elect someone he and Mr. Comey disapproved of as president, and that that person might actually serve his term, as elected. DOJ Planned a Coup Against Trump - And the Press Doesn't Care by Victoria Toensing Original Article 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted February 22, 2019 Share Posted February 22, 2019 38 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said: They removed him because he was an impediment to their preferred policy prescriptions towards the Soviets. It was a political difference, nothing more. It was framed as more by those in power who didn’t want to have a policy debate because it was easier, and more politically expedient, to destroy the man than to take on his arguments. And his dovish tone towards the Soviets ensured that tens of millions met an early grave. But I'm sure his intentions were good Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted February 22, 2019 Share Posted February 22, 2019 Just now, GG said: And his dovish tone towards the Soviets ensured that tens of millions met an early grave. But I'm sure his intentions were good Please outline exactly how Wallace‘s desire not to involve the United States in future European conflicts led to the deaths of tens of millions? It seems to me that Wallace was ousted, his policy preferences went unutilized, and tens of millions died anyway. You’re making the argument that a policy of non-aggression in the pursuit of peace should be criminalized. What happened to Wallace is not entirely dissimilar to what has happened to the current administration in terms of attempting to criminalize foreign policy which doesn’t meet with the entrenched orthodoxy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted February 22, 2019 Share Posted February 22, 2019 Coming soon. WJC offered RBG's Supreme Court Seat for LL's cooperation. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted February 22, 2019 Share Posted February 22, 2019 14 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said: Please outline exactly how Wallace‘s desire not to involve the United States in future European conflicts led to the deaths of tens of millions? It seems to me that Wallace was ousted, his policy preferences went unutilized, and tens of millions died anyway. You’re making the argument that a policy of non-aggression in the pursuit of peace should be criminalized. What happened to Wallace is not entirely dissimilar to what has happened to the current administration in terms of attempting to criminalize foreign policy which doesn’t meet with the entrenched orthodoxy. I think you're understating his position. It wasn't just that US should no longer be involved in Europe's matters, he also was a firm believer that US hawks overestimated the Soviet intentions, who he believed were very nice and kind people who wanted nothing better than peace and love for mankind. To have a US VP take a warm approach towards Stalin and his intentions was a colossal mistake. His policy preferences would have resigned a hell of a lot more people to the gulags than the unfortunate millions who ended up there, and there would have been another major war in Europe. History has spoken, and he's on the same side of history as US isolationists who were against US involvement in European matters in the late 1930's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted February 22, 2019 Share Posted February 22, 2019 1 minute ago, GG said: I think you're understating his position. It wasn't just that US should no longer be involved in Europe's matters, he also was a firm believer that US hawks overestimated the Soviet intentions, who he believed were very nice and kind people who wanted nothing better than peace and love for mankind. To have a US VP take a warm approach towards Stalin and his intentions was a colossal mistake. His policy preferences would have resigned a hell of a lot more people to the gulags than the unfortunate millions who ended up there, and there would have been another major war in Europe. History has spoken, and he's on the same side of history as US isolationists who were against US involvement in European matters in the late 1930's. I have no problem with history metering out judgement of policy. None. It’s the proper place. My issue is with the attempt to criminalize policy preferences which cut against the orthodoxy of the day; which is what the Trump Administration is dealing with today. Process is far more important than individual outcome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted February 22, 2019 Share Posted February 22, 2019 Just for the record - Stalin is still viewed as a "bad guy" right? But Bernie went bare chested to the USSR on his honeymoon. Na Zdorovie! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 22, 2019 Share Posted February 22, 2019 What will @RepAdamSchiff do with a Mueller report that finds no collusion? WaPo’s deep state stenographer David Ignatius telegraphs how Schiff will seamlessly transition from 2 years of Russia hysteria to something else... Schiffting to Phase 2 of Collusion Wall Street Journal, by Kimberley A. Strassel Original Article There’s been no more reliable regurgitator of fantastical Trump-Russia collusion theories than Democratic Rep. Adam Schiff. So when the House Intelligence Committee chairman sits down to describe a “new phase” of the Trump investigation, pay attention. These are the fever swamps into which we will descend after Robert Mueller’s probe. The collusionists need a “new phase” as signs grow that the special counsel won’t help realize their reveries of a Donald Trump takedown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted February 22, 2019 Share Posted February 22, 2019 (edited) 57 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: Coming soon. WJC offered RBG's Supreme Court Seat for LL's cooperation. That's big if true, but it'll need to be backed up. Firmly backed up. 21 hours ago, 3rdnlng said: Meathead being Meathead. Didn't know Rob Reiner was working with Adam Schiff. Edited February 22, 2019 by keepthefaith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 22, 2019 Share Posted February 22, 2019 10 minutes ago, keepthefaith said: That's big if true, but it'll need to be backed up. Firmly backed up. Remember, we wouldn't even know about it if it wasn't for local reporter, ABC15’s Christopher Sign. He broke the story of the Lynch-Clinton meeting, a few hours after it occurred. Sign reported at the time that sources told him that federal agents were on the tarmac, telling bystanders “no photos, no pictures, no cell phones.” And, apparently, someone hoped, no evidence that the meeting ever occurred. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted February 22, 2019 Share Posted February 22, 2019 (edited) 4 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said: Coming soon. WJC offered RBG's Supreme Court Seat for LL's cooperation. Edited February 22, 2019 by Foxx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted February 22, 2019 Share Posted February 22, 2019 MSNBC Getting Real About the Mueller Report! At what point do leftists here suddenly realize how embarrassing their side looks on any given day? 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 23, 2019 Share Posted February 23, 2019 The Mueller joke https://theweek.com/articles/824999/mueller-joke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 23, 2019 Share Posted February 23, 2019 . 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted February 23, 2019 Share Posted February 23, 2019 . 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts