WWTBAM Bored

A home for the weary.
It is currently Sun Mar 24, 2019 4:05 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 59 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Jan 25, 2019 11:35 am 
Offline
Bored Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Posts: 17935
Location: By the phone
Two career officials recommended that First Daughter Chelsea Clinton’s application for a top secret security clearance be denied on the basis of potential foreign influence, but their recommendation was overruled by their supervisor, who was appointed by President Clinton herself. The Clinton Administration is refusing to comment on the story, stating that it’s government policy not to discuss individual security clearances. Discuss. —Bob

_________________
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Jan 25, 2019 1:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 9:52 pm
Posts: 4476
Location: Merion, Pa.
Bob78164 wrote:
Two career officials recommended that First Daughter Chelsea Clinton’s application for a top secret security clearance be denied on the basis of potential foreign influence, but their recommendation was overruled by their supervisor, who was appointed by President Clinton herself. The Clinton Administration is refusing to comment on the story, stating that it’s government policy not to discuss individual security clearances. Discuss. —Bob
I got an SCI clearance in 1982. It took 11 months because of my Israeli birth and family connections (though the PM never slept in my bedroom). A few years later, I was having a hard time qualifying for an even higher clearance. A company security specialist told me there were reports that I had been careless with classified information. I expressed surprise and asked for specifics. He said I had revealed something classified to my then father-in-law in 1981 (see above). I discussed the problem with our customer (who was Jewish) the next time she was in town. I got the clearance soon after. So these things happen.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Jan 25, 2019 1:13 pm 
Online
Queen of Wack
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:38 am
Posts: 9792
Location: Location.Location.Location
Bob78164 wrote:
Two career officials recommended that First Daughter Chelsea Clinton’s application for a top secret security clearance be denied on the basis of potential foreign influence, but their recommendation was overruled by their supervisor, who was appointed by President Clinton herself. The Clinton Administration is refusing to comment on the story, stating that it’s government policy not to discuss individual security clearances. Discuss. —Bob


Eat more protein.

_________________
Oh please.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Jan 25, 2019 1:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 9:31 am
Posts: 6543
Location: Montana
Beebs52 wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:
Two career officials recommended that First Daughter Chelsea Clinton’s application for a top secret security clearance be denied on the basis of potential foreign influence, but their recommendation was overruled by their supervisor, who was appointed by President Clinton herself. The Clinton Administration is refusing to comment on the story, stating that it’s government policy not to discuss individual security clearances. Discuss. —Bob


Eat more protein.


I'd advise fiber.

_________________
The only thing we have to fear, is fear itself. And clowns.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Jan 25, 2019 1:38 pm 
Online
Queen of Wack
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:38 am
Posts: 9792
Location: Location.Location.Location
tlynn78 wrote:
Beebs52 wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:
Two career officials recommended that First Daughter Chelsea Clinton’s application for a top secret security clearance be denied on the basis of potential foreign influence, but their recommendation was overruled by their supervisor, who was appointed by President Clinton herself. The Clinton Administration is refusing to comment on the story, stating that it’s government policy not to discuss individual security clearances. Discuss. —Bob


Eat more protein.


I'd advise fiber.

Hmm. Remedy-wise you are correct.

_________________
Oh please.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Jan 25, 2019 3:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:07 pm
Posts: 4601
Location: Atlanta, GA
tlynn78 wrote:
Beebs52 wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:
Two career officials recommended that First Daughter Chelsea Clinton’s application for a top secret security clearance be denied on the basis of potential foreign influence, but their recommendation was overruled by their supervisor, who was appointed by President Clinton herself. The Clinton Administration is refusing to comment on the story, stating that it’s government policy not to discuss individual security clearances. Discuss. —Bob


Eat more protein.


I'd advise fiber.


Eat whatever the hell you want. But only every other day. Disgust.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Jan 25, 2019 4:10 pm 
Offline
Bored Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Posts: 17935
Location: By the phone
flockofseagulls104 wrote:
tlynn78 wrote:
Beebs52 wrote:

Eat more protein.


I'd advise fiber.


Eat whatever the hell you want. But only every other day. Disgust.
Are you seriously claiming the story as I wrote it wouldn’t outrage you? Because if you are claiming that, I call BS. —Bob

_________________
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Jan 25, 2019 4:16 pm 
Online
Queen of Wack
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:38 am
Posts: 9792
Location: Location.Location.Location
Bob78164 wrote:
flockofseagulls104 wrote:
tlynn78 wrote:

I'd advise fiber.


Eat whatever the hell you want. But only every other day. Disgust.
Are you seriously claiming the story as I wrote it wouldn’t outrage you? Because if you are claiming that, I call BS. —Bob


If this wasn't so funny I'd accuse you of....wait for it...HYPOTHETICAL whataboutism. Yep.

_________________
Oh please.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Jan 25, 2019 4:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 9:31 am
Posts: 6543
Location: Montana
Bob78164 wrote:
flockofseagulls104 wrote:
tlynn78 wrote:

I'd advise fiber.


Eat whatever the hell you want. But only every other day. Disgust.
Are you seriously claiming the story as I wrote it wouldn’t outrage you? Because if you are claiming that, I call BS. —Bob


LOL - nothing you write outrages me. It barely amuses me, anymore. Not everyone has a twisted need to fabricate fantasy scenarios - although SSS is a big fan.

_________________
The only thing we have to fear, is fear itself. And clowns.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Jan 25, 2019 4:42 pm 
Offline
Bored Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Posts: 17935
Location: By the phone
tlynn78 wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:
flockofseagulls104 wrote:

Eat whatever the hell you want. But only every other day. Disgust.
Are you seriously claiming the story as I wrote it wouldn’t outrage you? Because if you are claiming that, I call BS. —Bob


LOL - nothing you write outrages me. It barely amuses me, anymore. Not everyone has a twisted need to fabricate fantasy scenarios - although SSS is a big fan.
Did you read the actual story that I linked? —Bob

_________________
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Jan 25, 2019 5:00 pm 
Online
Queen of Wack
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:38 am
Posts: 9792
Location: Location.Location.Location
Bob78164 wrote:
tlynn78 wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:
Are you seriously claiming the story as I wrote it wouldn’t outrage you? Because if you are claiming that, I call BS. —Bob


LOL - nothing you write outrages me. It barely amuses me, anymore. Not everyone has a twisted need to fabricate fantasy scenarios - although SSS is a big fan.
Did you read the actual story that I linked? —Bob


I like Santa Claus (A Christmas Story)

_________________
Oh please.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Jan 25, 2019 6:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 9:31 am
Posts: 6543
Location: Montana
Bob78164 wrote:
tlynn78 wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:
Are you seriously claiming the story as I wrote it wouldn’t outrage you? Because if you are claiming that, I call BS. —Bob


LOL - nothing you write outrages me. It barely amuses me, anymore. Not everyone has a twisted need to fabricate fantasy scenarios - although SSS is a big fan.
Did you read the actual story that I linked? —Bob


LOL - a ten-year-old could have anticipated what your linked story was.

_________________
The only thing we have to fear, is fear itself. And clowns.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Mar 01, 2019 10:50 am 
Offline
Bored Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Posts: 17935
Location: By the phone
In a further development, it has now been revealed that President Clinton herself overruled Administration officials and personally ordered a security clearance for First Daughter Chelsea Clinton. The President's Chief of Staff was sufficiently concerned to draft a memo recording the "order" to provide the clearance. --Bob

_________________
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Mar 01, 2019 11:20 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 9:31 am
Posts: 6543
Location: Montana
Bob78164 wrote:
In a further development, it has now been revealed that President Clinton herself overruled Administration officials and personally ordered a security clearance for First Daughter Chelsea Clinton. The President's Chief of Staff was sufficiently concerned to draft a memo recording the "order" to provide the clearance. --Bob



Did you clutch your pearls when Secretary of State "Ivanka" was bandying classified emails around on unsecured private servers because she 'didn't know' "C" means classified? You do you, boo. I'm sure it gives you a tingle to type President Clinton, but not nearly as many tingles as I get knowing that will never happen.

_________________
The only thing we have to fear, is fear itself. And clowns.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Mar 01, 2019 4:41 pm 
Offline
Bored Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Posts: 17935
Location: By the phone
tlynn78 wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:
In a further development, it has now been revealed that President Clinton herself overruled Administration officials and personally ordered a security clearance for First Daughter Chelsea Clinton. The President's Chief of Staff was sufficiently concerned to draft a memo recording the "order" to provide the clearance. --Bob



Did you clutch your pearls when Secretary of State "Ivanka" was bandying classified emails around on unsecured private servers because she 'didn't know' "C" means classified? You do you, boo. I'm sure it gives you a tingle to type President Clinton, but not nearly as many tingles as I get knowing that will never happen.
No, because I always understood that there was no "there" there, and that the only reason most Republicans cared about it was electoral advantage. By dismissing an actual security threat, people like you are proving me right --Bob

_________________
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Mar 01, 2019 6:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:07 pm
Posts: 4601
Location: Atlanta, GA
Quote:
and that the only reason most Republicans cared about it was electoral advantage.


Really bob-tel? Tell me why the word 'Emoluments' has come out of retirement in the last 2 years? Tell me why a hollywood B actor decided to fake an attack upon himself? Why did the House decide it needed to hear from Michael Cohen and schedule it the same day as the NK summit? And I can ask at least 8000 more questions like that, and the answer to all of them is the same. You are such a hypocrite.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Mar 01, 2019 6:08 pm 
Offline
Bored Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:02 pm
Posts: 17935
Location: By the phone
flockofseagulls104 wrote:
Quote:
and that the only reason most Republicans cared about it was electoral advantage.


Really bob-tel? Tell me why the word 'Emoluments' has come out of retirement in the last 2 years? Tell me why a hollywood B actor decided to fake an attack upon himself? Why did the House decide it needed to hear from Michael Cohen and schedule it the same day as the NK summit? And I can ask at least 8000 more questions like that, and the answer to all of them is the same. You are such a hypocrite.
The word Emoluments has come out of retirement because Donny is the first person in my memory to work behind the Resolute Desk who refused to put his holdings in a blind trust. Smollett is a jackass who's on track to get what he deserves. And the House tried to hear from Cohen earlier. The hearing got kicked when Cohen got worried about Donny's threats against his safety and his family's wellbeing.

But given the fiasco the North Korea summit turned out to be, the scheduling probably turned out to be a net benefit for Donny. --Bob

_________________
"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Mar 02, 2019 4:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:15 pm
Posts: 681
Location: Skipperville, Tx.
tlynn78 wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:
In a further development, it has now been revealed that President Clinton herself overruled Administration officials and personally ordered a security clearance for First Daughter Chelsea Clinton. The President's Chief of Staff was sufficiently concerned to draft a memo recording the "order" to provide the clearance. --Bob



Did you clutch your pearls when Secretary of State "Ivanka" was bandying classified emails around on unsecured private servers because she 'didn't know' "C" means classified? You do you, boo. I'm sure it gives you a tingle to type President Clinton, but not nearly as many tingles as I get knowing that will never happen.


Really? Wow.

Cool. I guess if I'm ever in a situation where I need to try to seduce you I'll just go straight to the "Lock her up! Lock her up!" chant to try to get wettishness.

I know, I know. It probably wouldn't be quite as easy as it would be for Trump since, as he says, "they'll" let you do anything when you're a star. But hey, I'm not proud. I'll ride his coattails if I have to.

Back in the day when I had top secret-plus clearance, if we would have had e-mail I probably would have assumed that "C" would mean "Confidential." Just about everything was stamped Confidential back then. It was pretty ridiculous, and I can't say whether it's still that way, but I'd be somewhat surprised to hear that it isn't.

I'd imagine that you have studied the matter of her e-mails enough to where you might be able to show me an example of one of them that was really a big deal -- or even just a deal. In the meantime, I'm going to continue to assume that there wasn't really any national-security situation presented by them since after all of the investigations into that and the Benghazi stuff she remains out of jail, despite 2 years of a Trump-run DOJ.

Oh. Forgot for a second. Deep state.

Never mind.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Mar 02, 2019 6:50 pm 
Online
Queen of Wack
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:38 am
Posts: 9792
Location: Location.Location.Location
wbtravis007 wrote:
tlynn78 wrote:
Bob78164 wrote:
In a further development, it has now been revealed that President Clinton herself overruled Administration officials and personally ordered a security clearance for First Daughter Chelsea Clinton. The President's Chief of Staff was sufficiently concerned to draft a memo recording the "order" to provide the clearance. --Bob



Did you clutch your pearls when Secretary of State "Ivanka" was bandying classified emails around on unsecured private servers because she 'didn't know' "C" means classified? You do you, boo. I'm sure it gives you a tingle to type President Clinton, but not nearly as many tingles as I get knowing that will never happen.


Really? Wow.

Cool. I guess if I'm ever in a situation where I need to try to seduce you I'll just go straight to the "Lock her up! Lock her up!" chant to try to get wettishness.

I know, I know. It probably wouldn't be quite as easy as it would be for Trump since, as he says, "they'll" let you do anything when you're a star. But hey, I'm not proud. I'll ride his coattails if I have to.

Back in the day when I had top secret-plus clearance, if we would have had e-mail I probably would have assumed that "C" would mean "Confidential." Just about everything was stamped Confidential back then. It was pretty ridiculous, and I can't say whether it's still that way, but I'd be somewhat surprised to hear that it isn't.

I'd imagine that you have studied the matter of her e-mails enough to where you might be able to show me an example of one of them that was really a big deal -- or even just a deal. In the meantime, I'm going to continue to assume that there wasn't really any national-security situation presented by them since after all of the investigations into that and the Benghazi stuff she remains out of jail, despite 2 years of a Trump-run DOJ.

Oh. Forgot for a second. Deep state.

Never mind.

Really? Wow.

_________________
Oh please.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Mar 02, 2019 8:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:21 pm
Posts: 16096
flockofseagulls104 wrote:
Why did the House decide it needed to hear from Michael Cohen and schedule it the same day as the NK summit?


Flock, you should be glad that the Cohen testimony took attention away from Trump looking like an idiot with the Koreans yet again. But only you and your fellow conspiracy theorists could come away from a week in which the President's former attorney accused him, with documentation for some of them, of multiple felonies, and his diplomacy efforts with North Korea fell completely apart and fixate on the scheduling of Cohen's testimony (which by the way was part of three days of testimony before both the House and the Senate).

_________________
Check out our website: http://www.silverscreenvideos.com


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Mar 02, 2019 9:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:58 am
Posts: 22241
Location: Oro Valley, Arizona
Beebs52 wrote:
wbtravis007 wrote:
tlynn78 wrote:


Did you clutch your pearls when Secretary of State "Ivanka" was bandying classified emails around on unsecured private servers because she 'didn't know' "C" means classified? You do you, boo. I'm sure it gives you a tingle to type President Clinton, but not nearly as many tingles as I get knowing that will never happen.


Really? Wow.

Cool. I guess if I'm ever in a situation where I need to try to seduce you I'll just go straight to the "Lock her up! Lock her up!" chant to try to get wettishness.

I know, I know. It probably wouldn't be quite as easy as it would be for Trump since, as he says, "they'll" let you do anything when you're a star. But hey, I'm not proud. I'll ride his coattails if I have to.

Back in the day when I had top secret-plus clearance, if we would have had e-mail I probably would have assumed that "C" would mean "Confidential." Just about everything was stamped Confidential back then. It was pretty ridiculous, and I can't say whether it's still that way, but I'd be somewhat surprised to hear that it isn't.

I'd imagine that you have studied the matter of her e-mails enough to where you might be able to show me an example of one of them that was really a big deal -- or even just a deal. In the meantime, I'm going to continue to assume that there wasn't really any national-security situation presented by them since after all of the investigations into that and the Benghazi stuff she remains out of jail, despite 2 years of a Trump-run DOJ.

Oh. Forgot for a second. Deep state.

Never mind.

Really? Wow.

Yes

_________________
I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.
- Douglas Adams (1952 - 2001)

Si fractum non sit, noli id reficere.

Teach a child to be polite and courteous in the home and, when he grows up, he'll never be able to drive in New Jersey.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Mar 02, 2019 11:54 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 12:43 pm
Posts: 10267
Location: In Texas of course!
silverscreenselect wrote:
flockofseagulls104 wrote:
Why did the House decide it needed to hear from Michael Cohen and schedule it the same day as the NK summit?


Flock, you should be glad that the Cohen testimony took attention away from Trump looking like an idiot with the Koreans yet again. But only you and your fellow conspiracy theorists could come away from a week in which the President's former attorney accused him, with documentation for some of them, of multiple felonies, and his diplomacy efforts with North Korea fell completely apart and fixate on the scheduling of Cohen's testimony (which by the way was part of three days of testimony before both the House and the Senate).


Please explain how President Trump looked like an idiot, because right now you are looking like the idiot.

Quote:
“President Trump did the right thing by walking away and not cutting a poor deal for the sake of a photo op,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, a New York Democrat, said on the Senate floor.


Quote:
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told reporters, “It’s good that the president did not give him anything for the little he was proposing.”


Quote:
The minority leader urged Trump to use the same strategy in trade talks with China: “


Quote:
Democratic Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut said on Twitter that talking is never a bad idea and “If outcome is that both missile test moratorium and our sanctions continue, and we keep dialogue going, that’s not a bad outcome.”


Quote:
Democratic Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia agreed, saying, “if there’s no deal, you’ve got to walk away from the table.”


Link

_________________
In the end, they will all pretty much taste the same.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Mar 04, 2019 10:44 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 9:31 am
Posts: 6543
Location: Montana
Beebs52 wrote:
wbtravis007 wrote:
tlynn78 wrote:


Did you clutch your pearls when Secretary of State "Ivanka" was bandying classified emails around on unsecured private servers because she 'didn't know' "C" means classified? You do you, boo. I'm sure it gives you a tingle to type President Clinton, but not nearly as many tingles as I get knowing that will never happen.


Really? Wow.

Cool. I guess if I'm ever in a situation where I need to try to seduce you I'll just go straight to the "Lock her up! Lock her up!" chant to try to get wettishness.

I know, I know. It probably wouldn't be quite as easy as it would be for Trump since, as he says, "they'll" let you do anything when you're a star. But hey, I'm not proud. I'll ride his coattails if I have to.

Back in the day when I had top secret-plus clearance, if we would have had e-mail I probably would have assumed that "C" would mean "Confidential." Just about everything was stamped Confidential back then. It was pretty ridiculous, and I can't say whether it's still that way, but I'd be somewhat surprised to hear that it isn't.

I'd imagine that you have studied the matter of her e-mails enough to where you might be able to show me an example of one of them that was really a big deal -- or even just a deal. In the meantime, I'm going to continue to assume that there wasn't really any national-security situation presented by them since after all of the investigations into that and the Benghazi stuff she remains out of jail, despite 2 years of a Trump-run DOJ.

Oh. Forgot for a second. Deep state.

Never mind.

Really? Wow.


LOL - I believe his latest 90-day hold expired.

_________________
The only thing we have to fear, is fear itself. And clowns.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Mar 04, 2019 1:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:21 pm
Posts: 16096
BackInTex wrote:
Please explain how President Trump looked like an idiot, because right now you are looking like the idiot.


The stupidity was taking part in this dumb summit to begin with, followed by sucking up to Kim Jung Un about Otto Warmbier. This summit was something Trump pulled out of his rear end during the State of the Union address and it should have been obvious to everyone that there was never going to be a deal (especially after we told the Koreans they would have to account for all their missiles before any deal was signed).

Aside from Trump rhetoric, we're in the exact same spot we were before Summit I, only Kim once again boosts his international status and Trump has people again questioning his love of autocrats like him. Congratulating Trump for not agreeing to a ridiculously bad deal is like congratulating a child for not putting his hand on a burning stove.

Kim is going to keep this charade going as long as Trump is willing, and Trump seems willing as long as Kim holds out the vaguest hint of a carrot.

For some perspective:

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/nation ... as-n977866

_________________
Check out our website: http://www.silverscreenvideos.com


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Mon Mar 04, 2019 1:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 8:07 pm
Posts: 4601
Location: Atlanta, GA
silverscreenselect wrote:
BackInTex wrote:
Please explain how President Trump looked like an idiot, because right now you are looking like the idiot.


The stupidity was taking part in this dumb summit to begin with, followed by sucking up to Kim Jung Un about Otto Warmbier. This summit was something Trump pulled out of his rear end during the State of the Union address and it should have been obvious to everyone that there was never going to be a deal (especially after we told the Koreans they would have to account for all their missiles before any deal was signed).

Aside from Trump rhetoric, we're in the exact same spot we were before Summit I, only Kim once again boosts his international status and Trump has people again questioning his love of autocrats like him. Congratulating Trump for not agreeing to a ridiculously bad deal is like congratulating a child for not putting his hand on a burning stove.

Kim is going to keep this charade going as long as Trump is willing, and Trump seems willing as long as Kim holds out the vaguest hint of a carrot.

For some perspective:

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/nation ... as-n977866

Aside from the FACT that there have been no more nuclear tests and no more missiles flying and that we're actually talking rather than exchanging threats, I'd say you're right. And I'd say if the President was Obama, you'd be in your glory about what is happening. And so would NBC. And, what's more, you know it.
Before the summit, your narrative was he was going to give away the store for nothing. Well, he didn't and now it's a failure because he didn't come back with an agreement, which we know you would have criticized no matter what it was.

I don't know why you bother to post your batphone messages. Just post Groucho singing 'Whatever it is, I'm against it" and be done with it. If only we could convince AOC to adopt the teachings of Groucho instead of Karl.

Here's the only cogent passage from your 'perspective':

Quote:
The analogy is not perfect, but the collapse of the Hanoi summit and the abrupt departure of the president reminded me of the 1986 summit in Reykjavik, Iceland, when Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev — counting on their personal chemistry from their first meeting in Geneva — ran into the cold reality of their conflicting positions on nuclear weapons.

Their meeting collapsed in acrimony, but a year later they were signing the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces treaty in Washington. Perhaps it's a good omen that hard lessons can be learned from diplomatic failures.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 59 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: BackInTex, Beebs52 and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Americanized by Maël Soucaze.