What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

POTUS 45.4 - What's a Battle?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: POTUS 45.4 - What's a Battle?

Kepler said:
So anyway, I'm not putting that on her -- it's just the reality of machine politics.
Click to expand...

But she was the victim of it.

She wasn't getting any Rs; however, the post-primary kumbahya re-coming together of a Party after it picks a candidate didn't happen. The Bernie Bros were mad. They didn't show up. And it ... Bern'd ... H.

Now that I think about it, did the re-coming together happen for either party? #NeverTrump
 
Last edited:
Re: POTUS 45.4 - What's a Battle?

St. Clown said:
Thanks for disagreeing with what I said and giving it some thought.
Click to expand...
There are plenty of negative things to say about Trump - I'm putting it at 89% chance that he's not going to be a good president, let alone person. The problem is that instead of taking a level head and discussing things here, as had been done at various times over the years, it's all hyperbole in statements and vitriol tossed at anyone who doesn't agree with you completely from a goodly portion of this board right now
Click to expand...

This is the part I have a problem with. The backhanded compliment at the end didn't soften it for me.
 
Re: POTUS 45.4 - What's a Battle?

The Sicatoka said:
But she was the victim of it.

She wasn't getting any Rs; however, the post-primary kumbahya re-coming together of a Party after it picks a candidate didn't happen. The Bernie Bros were mad. They didn't show up. And it ... Bern'd ... H.
Click to expand...

Bible verse about sowing and reaping. But it's over now, thank god. Walter Mondale doesn't come up a lot and neither should she.
 
Re: POTUS 45.4 - What's a Battle?

The Sicatoka said:
The Admin? Sure.
But DHS (which is still mainly Obama staffed at the top) denied it just as quickly.

It fit the paradigm and someone went with it.
Click to expand...

Reports say the memo has been circulating for 2 weeks, so it doesn't fit your new effort to smoke out the leaker narrative at all. Spicer and DHS can say that the Nat Guard won't be deployed and be telling the truth, but that doesn't mean the memo didn't exist.
 
Re: POTUS 45.4 - What's a Battle?

jerphisch said:
Reports say the memo has been circulating for 2 weeks, so it doesn't fit your new effort to smoke out the leaker narrative at all. Spicer and DHS can say that the Nat Guard won't be deployed and be telling the truth, but that doesn't mean the memo didn't exist.
Click to expand...

OK, so it wasn't a ruse to smoke out a mole. That was my personal pure speculation.

The memo exists. (The link I had said it's 11 pages and not on WH letterhead.) But, as I said, I'm quite sure there are memos out there with battle plans for the National Guard to invade Canada and Bermuda as well.

If it fits the narrative, the confirmation biases, people are running with it without second thought. (And that's from both sides.)
 
Last edited:
Re: POTUS 45.4 - What's a Battle?

The Sicatoka said:
OK, so it wasn't a ruse to smoke out a mole. That was my personal pure speculation.

The memo exists. (The link I had said it's 11 pages and not on WH letterhead.) But, as I said, I'm quite sure there are memos out there with battle plans for the National Guard to invade Canada and Bermuda as well.

If it fits the narrative, the confirmation biases, people are running with it without second thought. (And that's from both sides.)
Click to expand...

Well, I doubt it would be from the White House if Kelly was the one who drafted it. Right?
 
Re: POTUS 45.4 - What's a Battle?

The Sicatoka said:
OK, so it wasn't a ruse to smoke out a mole. That was my personal pure speculation.

The memo exists. (The link I had said it's 11 pages and not on WH letterhead.) But, as I said, I'm quite sure there are memos out there with battle plans for the National Guard to invade Canada and Bermuda as well.

If it fits the narrative, the confirmation biases, people are running with it without second thought. (And that's from both sides.)
Click to expand...

So your take is what? The guy who literally said he would put together a deportation force, couldn't possibly have written a memo describing how he would put together a deportation force? You really think this memo that started circulating at DHS 2 weeks ago was from Obama but just got lost in the company mail? That the people who put Bannon on the NSC without the President even knowing it couldn't have written this? What exactly makes you think that this is a case of people making false reports simply because of their confirmation bias?

Edit: To be clear, obviously I don't think Trump himself wrote it, I don't even know if I think Trump can write. I'm talking his administration.
 
Last edited:
Re: POTUS 45.4 - What's a Battle?

dxmnkd316 said:
Well, I doubt it would be from the White House if Kelly was the one who drafted it. Right?
Click to expand...

With him as author (U.S. Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly) it would be on DHS letterhead.

I still don't like using what I consider US military forces for US law enforcement. Bush was wrong. Obama was wrong. Even if they officially didn't enforce the law, just "support roles", the appearance alone is wrong.
 
Re: POTUS 45.4 - What's a Battle?

SJHovey said:
I think we have to agree with Exile on this.

Last summer, Kep, you told me and others that I was responsible for Trump, even if I never supported him, even if I voted for someone else in my primary, even if I hated him. Your explanation, and that of a few others on here, was that Trump was a product of Republican policies, positions and campaign tactics from years past, and that I had to "own" him (as I recall the phrase).

I think if that is true, then EODS is right. Even if we didn't vote for him, even if we can't tolerate what he stands for, he is nevertheless a product of the U.S. election system, the tactics that have been used, the policies we've adopted. As unpalatable as it may seem, we as U.S. citizens "own" him and are at least in some small way responsible for his election.
Click to expand...

This is what I am trying to say. It isnt like the Dems are pure as the driven snow riding on white horses with virtues unmatched...they are just as dirty and grimy as anyone. Drumpf is a product of the system...and the system fails because of ALL OF US!

BTW that is reason #1 why we cant let education crap the bed in this country...if we let states stay stupid this will only grow exponentially.
 
Re: POTUS 45.4 - What's a Battle?

Kepler said:
Someone's already anticipating deposition-discovery.
Click to expand...

The problem with absolute words (always, never) is that all it takes is one exception and you're wrong, and if you're in the wrong place, perjured. (That's a lesson I try to teach college kids: Look for the absolute words on exams. They're sucker plays.)

Don't believe me?
Say Handy ... have you ever cheered for North Dakota? He'll reply a horrified "NEVER!" ... And I'll say, even that time they beat up on Wisconsin? ... :eek: ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top