quote:

Originally posted by saigonsmuggler:
Ah I see that Sarah Silverman has now advocated a military overthrow of the freely elected Trump Administration. For all the democracy and tolerance that the left espouses, apparently they'd much prefer that we become a banana republic now, with a General rolling his tanks into DC.

Laughable snowflakes.

BTW Sarah, the military love Trump, your new President.

Is there a "Go ahead, make my day" Trump meme?

President Trump is taking heat for his phone call with Australia.

President Trump has very good reason to be unhappy w Australia.

Australia made a secret deal w obama right after the November election.

" For more than three years Australia has consistently maintained it will never settle asylum seekers on the Australian mainland that arrive by boat , a position that has been popular with voters and is still supported by both main parties. But the policy has led to regular reports of human rights abuses, many of them documented in the Guardian’s publication of the Nauru files, and is bitterly condemned by refugees advocates inside and outside Australia."

https://www.theguardian.com/au...has-it-angered-trump

So Australia had immigrants it didn't know what to do with. Obama agreed to take them.

http://www.washingtontimes.com...agreement-australia/

The Obama administration has written a secret deal that could let Australia ship more than 2,400 refugees waiting to enter its borders over to the U.S. instead, including refugees from terrorism-connected countries such as Somalia and Syria

But the details of the agreement have been deemed classified by the administration, shielding Americans from knowledge of what President Obama has agreed to, said House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte of Virginia and Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley of Iowa.

. “American taxpayers not only foot the bill for the majority of the refugee resettlements in the United States, but they bear any consequences regarding the security implications of those admitted to the U.S.”
Australian authorities are frightened that the deal could go south under President-elect Donald Trump, who has been harshly critical of the Obama administration’s refugee policy.


From 13 November 2016:

"I can now confirm that the government has reached a further third country resettlement arrangement for refugees presently in regional processing centers. The agreement is with the United States," Turnbull said at a press conference, as quoted by the ABC broadcaster.

Malcolm Turnbull, Prime Minister of Australia
and the Leader of the Liberal Party

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:

Australian authorities are frightened that the deal could go south under President-elect Donald Trump, who has been harshly critical of the Obama administration’s refugee policy.

They can kiss our butts. I sincerely hope President Trump torpedoes this stupid deal tout de suite.

I can't help myself-I know how many times this has already been said here but I'm going to say it again: Do we know how lucky we are that we got this guy, this guy that many of us, including myself, thought was a clown?

I'm about the same age as Trump and he is wearing my ass out just trying to read about what he is doing, and he is doing this for us which includes the GDCs if they will give him a half a chance.

Color me Lucky.

the wing-bats on the left will continue to march and parade and spout off calling for bombings, coups, destruction of property and general disobedience bordering on sedition

once the AG gets in the seat, before it even warms up, he needs to direct the FBI and USSS to issue warrants for their arrests, and have them publicly roasted and shown the error of their ways

first Madonna - that crack-whore needs to be in chains and a jumpsuit until she can prove she's not a threat to the country

make a few solid examples of these cretins, and the problem will stop really quickly

yes, they have a 1st Amendment right to freedom of speech, but they also assume the consequences of such speech

and if they're neither old enough or smart enough to understand that, then life should start to be really hard on them

as for posting bail - probably a bad idea because they all have the resources to be flight risks unless their bank accounts are frozen

So in Berkeley last night, why were people not arrested for rioting? Vandalism? Assault?

Surely the police know the DOJ is now behind them?

What could the Feds do, if anything? Some heads need to be busted, before someone gets killed.

quote:

why were people not arrested for rioting?

From the videos, there were no police present.

Milo talked about that in his interviews last night.

https://youtu.be/TcmE-9hqxCc

It wasn't that the police didn't do anything, they weren't even around.

Like Mickey Mantle "I'm get deja vu all over again"

quote:

Originally posted by Hound Dog:

quote:

Originally posted by sgalczyn:

Who?

She voiced a main character in "Wreck It Ralph" and had a secondary role in a Star Trek Voyager episode. That's about the only things she ever did of note. She's another D-list actor trying to remain relevant. . .

She was never relevant.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/...lag-convoy/97388366/

LOUISVILLE — It's official: The military convoy seen flying a Trump flag in Louisville on Sunday belonged to a Navy Special Warfare unit, and the flag was "unauthorized," a Navy spokeswoman said.

Lt. Jacqui Maxwell of the Naval Special Warfare Group 2 in Virginia Beach, Va., said a command inquiry is underway.

“Yes, it was inappropriate,” Maxwell said. “It was unauthorized.”

She said she did not know the potential penalties for the violation.

Military regulations say personnel should avoid implying Department of Defense sponsorship or endorsement of any “political candidate, campaign or cause.”

Maxwell said the Special Warfare forces were training in and around Fort Knox.

First a no name actress and now this loon.

Obama Official Suggests ‘Military Coup’ Against Trump:

In a blog post for Foreign Policy magazine, Rosa Brooks, a former Obama administration official, outlined four ways to “get rid” of President Trump, including declaring him mentally unfit for command or carrying out a military coup.
Brooks is a Schwartz senior fellow at the New America Foundation, which is funded by billionaire George Soros’s Open Society Foundations. She served from 2009-2011 as Counselor to the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy and served as a senior adviser at Obama’s State Department.

Her posting is titled “3 Ways to Get Rid of President Trump Before 2020,” although the piece actually outlines four ways.

In what seems to be a deliberate tactic, Brooks repeatedly questions Trump’s mental stability, claiming that the president’s first week in office “has made it all too clear: Yes, he is as crazy as everyone feared.”

Brooks, who is not a mental health professional, offered no evidence for her armchair psychological evaluation other than citing policies that she doesn’t like.

Remember those optimistic pre-inauguration fantasies? I cherished them, too. You know: “Once he’s president, I’m sure he’ll realize it doesn’t really make sense to withdraw from all those treaties.” “Once he’s president, surely he’ll understand that he needs to stop tweeting out those random insults.” “Once he’s president, he’ll have to put aside that ridiculous campaign braggadocio about building a wall along the Mexican border.” And so on.

Nope. In his first week in office, Trump has made it eminently clear that he meant every loopy, appalling word — and then some.

Brooks listed four ways to get rid of a “crummy” president.

Elect him out of office after his four-year term. “But after such a catastrophic first week, four years seems like a long time to wait,” she wrote.
Impeachment. However, she lamented, “impeachments take time: months, if not longer — even with an enthusiastic Congress. And when you have a lunatic controlling the nuclear codes, even a few months seems like a perilously long time to wait.”
Utilizing a claim of mental instability to invoke the 25th Amendment of the Constitution, which sets the path for the commander-in-chief’s removal if the “president is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office.”
A military coup. She writes: “The fourth possibility is one that until recently I would have said was unthinkable in the United States of America: a military coup, or at least a refusal by military leaders to obey certain orders.”
Regarding her suggested military coup, a creative Brooks proposes preposterous scenarios that she fears Trump might try to play out:

What would top U.S. military leaders do if given an order that struck them as not merely ill-advised, but dangerously unhinged? An order that wasn’t along the lines of “Prepare a plan to invade Iraq if Congress authorizes it based on questionable intelligence,” but “Prepare to invade Mexico tomorrow!” or “Start rounding up Muslim Americans and sending them to Guantánamo!” or “I’m going to teach China a lesson — with nukes!”

When it comes to invoking the 25th Amendment, Brooks argues for appealing to the “ambitions” of Vice President Mike Pence.

That Amendment states:

Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.

“Surely Pence wants to be president himself one day, right?” Brooks writes. “Pence isn’t exactly a political moderate — he’s been unremittingly hostile to gay rights, he’s a climate change skeptic, etc. — but, unappealing as his politics may be to many Americans, he does not appear to actually be insane. (This is the new threshold for plausibility in American politics: ‘not actually insane.’)”

During the 2016 presidential campaign, opponents of Trump similarly attempted to delegitimize his policies by raising questions about his mental health. As I wrote at the time, the template for such attacks may have been set more than five decades ago when such claims were deployed against Senator Barry Goldwater during his 1964 presidential campaign, which was widely considered a threat to the political establishment.

That theme has continued into Trump’s first two weeks in office.

Earlier this week, U.S. News and World Report ran a story titled, “Temperament Tantrum: Some say President Donald Trump’s personality isn’t just flawed, it’s dangerous.”

Apparently violating the so-called Goldwater Rule, established by the American Psychiatric Association after similar attacks against Goldwater, the magazine quoted numerous health care professionals attempting to categorize Trump’s mental stability. The APA’s Goldwater Rule forbids psychiatrists from commenting on someone’s mental status unless they first carry out an examination and the doctor is authorized by the patient to speak to the public.

The U.S. News story, for example, quotes John D. Gartner, described as a “practicing psychotherapist who taught psychiatric residents at Johns Hopkins University Medical School” as claiming Trump is “dangerously mentally ill and temperamentally incapable of being president.”

The Independent newspaper this week ran a story that also attempted to diagnose Trump. It was titled, “’Malignant narcisissm’: Donald Trump displays classic traits of mental illness, claim psychologists.” The article similarly cited mental health professionals commenting on Trump’s alleged psychological disorder.

The Independent article partially drew from a New York Daily News story from this week titled, “President Trump exhibits classic signs of mental illness, including ‘malignant narcissism,’ shrinks say.”

“Narcissism impairs his ability to see reality,” Dr. Julie Futrell, a clinical psychologist, told the newspaper while pointing out that she never actually treated Trump.

During Goldwater’s candidacy, the campaign to distort the public’s perception of the politician culminated in an infamous 1964 article in Fact Magazine, which surveyed members of the American Psychiatric Association, or APA, on Goldwater’s mental stability, though none of the psychiatrists had personally examined the presidential candidate.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-g...military-coup-trump/

All these leftists know their days in politics are numbered anyway so they are trying every desperate tactic to start a fight.
It tickles me so.

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/...lag-convoy/97388366/

LOUISVILLE — It's official: The military convoy seen flying a Trump flag in Louisville on Sunday belonged to a Navy Special Warfare unit, and the flag was "unauthorized," a Navy spokeswoman said.

That makes no sense, President Trump is the CIC, what am I missing. Is there a rule about the flags that can be flown from military vehicles?

I can see them getting hit for the flag, that is not a signal flag or unit flag or something they might fly. As for it being political, Trump is, by law, their commander whether they like his politics or not. So the political angle to me is BS. Now if they want to say displaying pride in the CIC is political, they need to remove his picture from every federal building in the nation.

quote:

Originally posted by roberth:

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/...lag-convoy/97388366/

LOUISVILLE — It's official: The military convoy seen flying a Trump flag in Louisville on Sunday belonged to a Navy Special Warfare unit, and the flag was "unauthorized," a Navy spokeswoman said.

That makes no sense, President Trump is the CIC, what am I missing. Is there a rule about the flags that can be flown from military vehicles?

Military personnel are not allowed to show overt political preferences in uniform. That vehicle is US Govt property, and isn't the appropriate place to fly a Trump banner (though it IS awesome). . .

The rules are the rules, and must be applied even if we happen to agree with the sentiment expressed by the people flying that banner.

quote:

Originally posted by Hound Dog:

quote:

Originally posted by roberth:

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/...lag-convoy/97388366/

LOUISVILLE — It's official: The military convoy seen flying a Trump flag in Louisville on Sunday belonged to a Navy Special Warfare unit, and the flag was "unauthorized," a Navy spokeswoman said.

That makes no sense, President Trump is the CIC, what am I missing. Is there a rule about the flags that can be flown from military vehicles?

Military personnel are not allowed to show overt political preferences in uniform. That vehicle is US Govt property, and isn't the appropriate place to fly a Trump banner (though it IS awesome). . .

The rules are the rules, and must be applied even if we happen to agree with the sentiment expressed by the people flying that banner.

Thank you, Hound Dog, for the explanation. I hope the punishment is very light.

Anybody with any sense in any branch of the military knows you can't just take it upon yourself to add something to the uniform or a vehicle, no matter how patriotic or cool, not a flag or pin or visible pocket knife or anything. War zones and such aside, where while they may get ignored or occasionally authorized - it's still almost always against the rules.

quote:

Some motorists said they were alarmed by military units flying the flag of a national leader rather than the country, which they said is reminiscent of a fascist government or banana republic.

I'm so utterly sick of this garbage.

Yea. There's gonna' be a run on bigger air sick bags.

Do these idiots realize that in order to have military coup you'd need a good portion of the military to decide that safe spaces, entitlement, no soldiers, political correctness, open borders, a complete ban on firearm ownership, and no American jobs is the best direction for our country.

I just don't see that happening. Then again, she is a comedian.