Good Behavior Trump Debate Thread

[Seek the Truth]

[Seek the Truth]

I love Trump because he put Gorsuch on the Supreme Court, discontinue trannie bathrooms in public schools, got us out of the Paris criminal agreement, is in the process of ending illegal immigration, banned trans in the military, banned travel from state sponsors of terror, is bloodying the Satanic MSM and bringing their reign of terror to an end and reordering our international relations to favor American interests, and stands ready with pen in hand to sign tax cuts, obamacare repeal and immigration reform if the true conservatives in the Congress ever get around to it.

Name any politicians in our history with a better track record and name their accomplishments.

And, tell us what have you ever done.

As for me, I'm living in an era of American Greatness.

bump

Looks like he couldn't name a single politician who had accomplished more. I am honestly not surprised.

[iWriteStuff]

I love Trump because he put Gorsuch on the Supreme Court, discontinue trannie bathrooms in public schools, got us out of the Paris criminal agreement, is in the process of ending illegal immigration, banned trans in the military, banned travel from state sponsors of terror, is bloodying the Satanic MSM and bringing their reign of terror to an end and reordering our international relations to favor American interests, and stands ready with pen in hand to sign tax cuts, obamacare repeal and immigration reform if the true conservatives in the Congress ever get around to it.

Name any politicians in our history with a better track record and name their accomplishments.

And, tell us what have you ever done.

As for me, I'm living in an era of American Greatness.

bump

Looks like he couldn't name a single politician who had accomplished more. I am honestly not surprised.

Actually, some of us sleep at night. But here we go (my responses in Red):

1) I love Trump because he put Gorsuch on the Supreme Court. Ok I actually like Gorsuch too. How about that?
2) discontinue trannie bathrooms in public schools. Sure that's nice too.
3) got us out of the Paris criminal agreement. Great.
4) is in the process of ending illegal immigration. In the process? His ideas are so hideously unconstitutional that they are being rejected left and right. The only thing he's managed in this front is to anger his Texas Trump supporters whose property he has promised to seize via imminent domain to build a wall (that won't work, wastes money, and will be paid for by us - see current budget proposals)
5) banned trans in the military. Actually, General Mattis (Trump's Defense Secretary) already overturned this one as well. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/pol ... 614711001/
6) banned travel from state sponsors of terror. Also overruled based on Constitutional grounds, until he threw out a watered down version that barely got through and is being appealed. Plus if you want to talk about state sponsors of terror, why isn't he banning travel from Saudi Arabia? That's where the majority of 9/11 attackers came from.
7) is bloodying the Satanic MSM and bringing their reign of terror to an end. Have you noticed that as soon as he started bombing other countries or threatening to do so that the MSM actually started cheering him on? Even CNN called him "Presidential" for bombing Syria.
8) and reordering our international relations to favor American interests. Yes, I noticed how relations with all of our allies have deteriorated. That's not exactly a win in my book. When trade and negotiations break down, wars begin.
9) and stands ready with pen in hand to sign tax cuts. He can't negotiate his way out of a paper bag, despite all the bluster. And believe it or not, his tax cut plan is being written by the very globalists you say he's against (Cohn, Mnuchin, Goldman Sachs, etc).
10) obamacare repeal. The proposed replacement is worse in every way imaginable. It was an act of mercy that this died (several times) and I hope we could just stick with REPEAL. Besides, one day he says he hopes the repeal efforts fail and the next day he insists the Senate pass it no matter what. He's inconsistent at best and shoving a terrible bill down our throats. This is not what he promised.
11) and immigration reform if the true conservatives in the Congress ever get around to it. Redundant. See #4.

How about some things he can actually claim to have accomplished?

1) Bomb Syria without a constitutionally mandated Declaration of War.
2) Essentially pardoned Hillary.
3) Tried to shove a horrible Health Insurance bill down our throats without consensus from even his own party.
4) Threatened to nuke a nation of peasant farmers.
5) Appointed multiple Globalists, CFR members, and Soros employees to his administration. (Google Mnuchin's background).
6) Spent more time golfing than even Obama:

trump golf.jpg (43.53 KiB) Viewed 796 times

7) Threatened to invade Venezuela, of all places.

And I could go on but you probably stopped reading a long time ago.

Who has done more/better? The list of successful politicians is too long for a thread like this. But let's throw out Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Jackson, Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, Eisenhower, and yes even Reagan was way better (although I hated his deficits, Grenada, Iran Contra, and funding of the Taliban).

[Seek the Truth]

Ok so you could only name 2 people since WWII. Noted.

Most of the rest was nevertrump rubbish and we all know where rubbish goes.

[iWriteStuff]

Ok so you could only name 2 people since WWII. Noted.

Most of the rest was nevertrump rubbish and we all know where rubbish goes.

haha, ok pal. I did what you asked, and I answered your question thoughtfully and with sources. Go ahead and dismiss it, it's your life.

You might ask yourself why there aren't many "good" presidents post WWII, though. Something both Eisenhower and President Benson warned us about.

[Seek the Truth]

Most of what you typed was deceptive and as I pointed out you could find only 2 people in your opinion who have delivered more conservatism than Trump since WWII, and you could even be wrong about that.

This illustrates your irrationality, or rather your inability to interface with reality in that you would portend to stand for certain principles yet you and those who think like you are completely incapable of electing one single human being to an office anywhere who would actually implement what you say you believe in, yet a man rises against all odds who is actually implementing by your own words more of what you believe in than anyone other than 2 people since WWII and all you can do is throw temper tantrums and sit in the corner throwing rocks and ankle biting.

You are a part of the problem.

[Silver]

Instead of being warmongers, let's seek peace. Some speak of preemptively killing Kim Jun Un and his leadership. However, that would clearly be in violation of the commandments of God. What are some Christlike things we could do instead?

Some claim Kim is crazy, but he and his father haven't killed nearly as many people as the US has in the past 20 years. Cooler heads would say that Kim is merely unpredictable and consider that America's policies towards NK have failed. To continue to try to implement the same failed sanctions to make Kim release his grip on power does not inspire much confidence.

Here's an article to consider:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-08-3 ... d-turn-sou

Professor Explains Why We Can't Pre-emptively Strike North Korea: "North Would Turn South Into A Desert"

Aug 31, 2017 11:50 PM

Authored by Mac Slavo via SHTFplan.com,

Following North Korea’s recent missile test, which ominously flew over Japan, the specter of war with the hotheaded nation was raised once again.

As time goes on, it seems less and less likely that the Kim regime will back down from its nuclear program. All forms of diplomacy and appeasement have failed, and not even threats of war from the US seem to have an effect on the regime.

There’s a very good reason for that. North Korea knows something that the United States, the most powerful nation on the planet, would absolutely hate to admit. Our country is is no position to engage in a preemptive strike on north Korea, because any attack would result in unimaginable devastation. The days when Americans would tolerate massive war casualties over a short period of time are long gone, and North Korea knows it. There simply isn’t anything we can offer or threaten that will stop their nuclear program.

And that’s understandable once you know how much destruction North Korea could really bring about if the Kim regime ever decided to let its military loose on South Korea.

If the current situation in East Asia is not resolved, a number of countries “will be living under a threat of a nuclear volcano erupting,” Russian diplomat and an expert in Asian studies, professor Georgy Toloraya told RT.com.

Everyone understands perfectly well that for North Korea, if it initiates an aggressive strike, a military conflict will mean a complete and immediate destruction, because no one can deny the US military might,” Toloraya said.

“However, for the US, attempts to solve this problem militarily also bring on a retaliatory strike by North Korea that would turn South Korea into a desert,” he warned, saying the North doesn’t even need nuclear weapons for that.

While Pyongyang’s artillery is able to reach Seoul, the entire territory of South Korea will also “be no good for life,” as Pyongyang’s missiles – even without nuclear warheads – might hit nuclear facilities in the South, he explained. He said there are some 30 such sites close to North Korea’s border.

Obviously, the destruction of nuclear facilities could have more of an impact than any other attack, by causing widespread radiation leaks. If anything, it could be more devastating than dropping a nuclear weapon, since the radioactive materials in these facilities often have a significantly longer half-life than what we see in atomic bombs.

It’s threats like that which make it clear that no military option is capable of reigning in North Korea. That’s a sentiment that former White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon expressed earlier this month.

Contrary to Trump’s threat of fire and fury, Bannon said: “There’s no military solution [to North Korea’s nuclear threats], forget it. Until somebody solves the part of the equation that shows me that ten million people in Seoul don’t die in the first 30 minutes from conventional weapons, I don’t know what you’re talking about, there’s no military solution here, they got us.”

And let’s not forget that North Korea has one of the largest chemical weapon stockpiles in the world, and is suspected of maintaining a bio-weapons program since the 1960’s. Given those possibilities, Bannon’s belief that North Korea could kill ten million people may be a gross understatement, and that doesn’t even consider the chances that war with North Korea could trigger another world war.

It’s time to accept the truth. We can bargain with the Kim regime, appease it, threaten it, and lay down sanctions on it, but nothing will actually stop that government from continuing its nuclear program without causing mass casualties. The only thing we can do is try to keep a lid on that country until their citizens rebel, or until the Chinese decide that they’ve had enough with their ally.

[iWriteStuff]

Trump: "Now Is Not The Time To Talk To North Korea"

President Trump spoke yesterday with UK Prime Minister Theresa Theresa May about North Korea and "agreed that this latest reckless act only strengthens the world’s determination to confront" growing threat from that nation, according to White House readout, adding that "now is not the time to talk to North Korea."

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-09-0 ... orth-korea

I wonder, if we won't talk to them now, when will we try it? Seems like they've been ringing our doorbell and we're sitting there pretending not to hear like they're a bunch of Jehovah's Witnesses on our doorstep.

[Silver]

If you're a liar (Mexico will pay for the wall...Obamacare repeal on day one) and a murderer (Syria, Yemen, Afghanistan), I guess appointing yet another CFR guy to an important administration role is just par for the course.

Behold, Adam Klein, the friend of all who want to rob you of your privacy.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/trump ... le/2633026

Trump nominates 'backdoor search' defender to lead privacy board
by Steven Nelson | Aug 30, 2017, 7:51 PM

Adam Klein, nominated Friday to serve as chairman of the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, has taken sides in one of the biggest policy debates this year.

President Trump is moving to revive the watchdog agency that oversees major surveillance programs, but some privacy advocates see his pick to lead it as overly deferential to the intelligence community.

Adam Klein, announced Friday as Trump's pick for chairman of the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, has taken sides in one of the biggest policy debates this year: whether authorities need a warrant to search American communications collected "incidentally" under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which expires this year unless Congress acts.

Klein, a former Antonin Scalia clerk who works at the Center for a New American Security, opposes a warrant rule, writing in a Wall Street Journal op-ed last month that "keeping officials from searching this data would make it more difficult to prevent homegrown terrorist attacks."

Klein pointed to the contested example of Najibullah Zazi, who was arrested in 2009 for plotting to bomb New York's subway system.

"He's extremely deferential to the intelligence community, almost to the point where he fails to ask the tough questions," said Robyn Greene, policy counsel and government affairs lead at the New America Foundation's Open Technology Institute.

"The warrantless query of U.S. person information is a perfect example," she said. "It's very important as the chair of the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board that you be really scrupulous about addressing the concerns of the privacy community as well as the arguments of the intelligence community."

Section 702 of FISA allows authorities to collect communications of foreigners that transit U.S. internet infrastructure, but sometimes wholly domestic communications are taken and loaded into searchable databases. Opponents say looking at those records for information on Americans is a "backdoor search" that violates the Fourth Amendment.

"It's an unfortunate situation that the head of the government's civil liberties watchdog panel [would be] on record opposing the reforms that the civil liberties community uniformly supports," said Elizabeth Goitein, co-director of the Brennan Center for Justice's Liberty and National Security Program.

"He's been very public and very detailed about what he thinks needs to happen with 702," she said. "There will be no surprises. The administration knows what it's getting. And what it's getting is someone who opposes any significant substantive reform."

Goitein added: "at the same time, he does support some tweaks to the law. And those tweaks won't get at the main issues, but they will make it a lot harder to dismiss him as an apologist for the status quo. And he's a smart, thoughtful guy."

Klein, who did not respond to a request for comment, wrote in a March report that searches of Section 702 records "raise legitimate privacy concerns — particularly if such information flows downstream into the criminal justice system" and recommended more transparency, as "relatively little public information is available about these queries: their frequency, how often they return 702 information, and precisely why the FBI views them as valuable."

PCLOB in its current form was established by 2007 legislation. It wasn't fully functional until 2013 and took a major role reviewing programs exposed that year by NSA contractor Edward Snowden. Its report on the mass-collection of domestic call records played a role in the legislated demise of that program and the board authored a lengthy report on Section 702 internet surveillance programs.

[Silver]

http://www.alt-market.com/articles/3268 ... acy-rights

Trump Quietly Nominates Mass Surveillance Advocate To “Protect” Your Privacy Rights
Monday, 04 September 2017 02:03 Casey Wedler


This article was written by Casey Wedler and originally published at Activist Post

Though outrage over mass surveillance swept the United States after Edward Snowden’s revelations in 2013, there is little discussion of these invasive practices just four years later.

This apathy comes despite former President Barack Obama’s move to expand to information sharing between agencies just days before Trump took office and after the Trump administration signaled its desire to continue widespread surveillance.

Amid this lack of attention toward the NSA, the president recently nominated a staunch advocate of mass surveillance to chair one of the few barriers standing between intrusive government spying and the American people’s privacy. The Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board (PCLOB) was created in 2004 at the recommendation of the 9/11 Commission and was intended “to help the executive branch balance national security priorities with individual rights,” the Intercept reported earlier this year.

“PCLOB is supposed to have five members, no more than three of whom come from the same political party; to employ a full-time chairperson; to have regular access to the 17 intelligence agencies; and to publish unclassified versions of its evaluations of U.S. espionage powers.”

However, as of March of this year, the board was down to just one part-time member, and this lack of personnel rendered it largely impotent.

“But with just one part-time board member left, after another member’s term ended last week, the agency has very few formal powers to police the so-called ‘deep state’ until President Trump nominates a new board,” the Intercept reported pursuant to emails they obtained regarding the remaining single member.

Though the board had been deteriorating before Trump became president, it may now be further undermined as a result of his recent appointment.

On August 25, the president announced his nomination of Adam I. Klein to chair the PCLOB. According to the White House release discussing this nomination:

Mr. Klein is the Robert M. Gates Senior Fellow at the Center for a New American Security, where his research centers on the intersection of national security policy and law. He previously served as a law clerk to Justice Antonin Scalia of the U.S. Supreme Court and Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.

Though the often loathed late Antonin Scalia was considered somewhat of a defender of the 4th Amendment, Klein fails to offer a strong buffer between intrusive policies and the American people.

Though Klein co-authored an advisory report for the incoming Trump administration advocating a balance between privacy and security, the paper criticized Edward Snowden and lamented the disintegration of trust in government his leaks helped to foster:

The post-Snowden backlash has impeded law enforcement and intelligence gathering, harmed the U.S. technology industry’s competitiveness in international markets, and created diplomatic friction with important allies. Most importantly, many Americans remain skeptical that their government respects their digital privacy.

Though the authors go on to highlight the importance of the leaks in bringing the issue of surveillance to the forefront — and continuously pay lip service to “privacy” — the authors’ emerging goal appears to focus on getting Americans to trust surveillance. Though they do advocate some reforms, they stress the importance of spying staples like the controversial Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) courts and affiliated Section 702 surveillance program, which will expire at the end of this year unless Congress reauthorizes it. Section 702 authorizes the broad collection of data, and though it allegedly applies to foreigners, it also sweeps up the data of Americans.

They also highlight reform efforts like the USA Freedom Act, which ultimately did little to scale back the foundational framework of mass surveillance and simply added an extra step to the government’s process of obtaining data. Digital rights group Electronic Freedom Foundation (EFF) ultimately pulled their support for the bill because it believed the reforms offered were insufficient. Another example of reforms they cite is Obama’s Presidential Policy Directive 28, which, according to EFF, offered “no significant change to the actual surveillance the U.S. has been conducting.” Where Klein and his associates claimed PPD-28 marked “a commitment still unequaled by any other country,” EFF argues “the U.S. is ten years behind Europe in requiring their government agencies to protect the privacy of noncitizens when government actions affect them.”

Further, in a defense of Section 702 Klein published in the Wall Street Journal this July, he contended that 9/11 occurred because the government did not have a powerful enough surveillance apparatus. He praised the FBI for foiling terror attacks (conveniently omitting the reality that the FBI has made a habit of entrapping unstable individuals, encouraging them to commit terror attacks, and then claiming credit for foiling said plots).

Klein also uses court decisions to justify his support of warrantless searches:

Courts have found that this practice comports with the Constitution. In November 2015, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court held that the Fourth Amendment does not require the FBI to get a warrant before conducting routine database checks, which include some 702 data.

However, both the FISA court and Section 702 have been thoroughly lambasted by privacy experts and advocates. Though some advocates stop short of calling FISA rulings “rubber stamps” despite their near universal approval of warrant requests, some less disputed problems are the court’s total secrecy and the lack of any type of defensive presence during proceedings; they are conducted by a judge and the prosecution.

As for Section 702 of FISA, the ACLU shared its pitfalls in a letter to the House Judiciary Committee in February expressing the organization’s opposition to the policy absent meaningful reforms. The letter read:

In its current form, Section 702 fails to comply with the government’s obligations under the Constitution and international law — and its sweeping nature results in the collection of information from individuals who pose no threat to national security. Indeed, although the government has not provided comprehensive statistics on the use of Section 702, a Washington Post analysis of over 160,000 intercepted emails likely collected under Section 702 was striking: 90% of individuals swept up in the surveillance were not the intended target, and nearly half of the files examined contained information or details related to a U.S. citizen or resident.

Klein showed no such concerns. Though he said in his op-ed that Congress was “right to examine the privacy implications of Section 702; powerful tools require powerful constraints,” he refused to disavow the demonstrably invasive policy. He wrote:

But members concerned about 702 should focus on bolstering the program’s oversight and transparency—by strengthening judicial review and requiring more transparency about how prosecutors use 702 information—rather than creating barriers to information-sharing within the intelligence community.

Make no mistake; though Klein advocates a balance between national security and privacy — and is likely genuine in his rhetoric — he routinely comes down on the side of government surveillance. Considering Trump’s previous actions and rhetoric, Klein’s appointment is nothing short of predictable. After all, while campaigning for the presidency, Trump made it clear he sided with the unconstitutional widespread practices.

[light from carm]

=)) =))

If you're a liar (Mexico will pay for the wall...Obamacare repeal on day one) and a murderer (Syria, Yemen, Afghanistan), I guess appointing yet another CFR guy to an important administration role is just par for the course.

Behold, Adam Klein, the friend of all who want to rob you of your privacy.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/trump ... le/2633026

Trump nominates 'backdoor search' defender to lead privacy board
by Steven Nelson | Aug 30, 2017, 7:51 PM

Adam Klein, nominated Friday to serve as chairman of the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, has taken sides in one of the biggest policy debates this year.

President Trump is moving to revive the watchdog agency that oversees major surveillance programs, but some privacy advocates see his pick to lead it as overly deferential to the intelligence community.

Adam Klein, announced Friday as Trump's pick for chairman of the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, has taken sides in one of the biggest policy debates this year: whether authorities need a warrant to search American communications collected "incidentally" under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which expires this year unless Congress acts.

Klein, a former Antonin Scalia clerk who works at the Center for a New American Security, opposes a warrant rule, writing in a Wall Street Journal op-ed last month that "keeping officials from searching this data would make it more difficult to prevent homegrown terrorist attacks."

Klein pointed to the contested example of Najibullah Zazi, who was arrested in 2009 for plotting to bomb New York's subway system.

"He's extremely deferential to the intelligence community, almost to the point where he fails to ask the tough questions," said Robyn Greene, policy counsel and government affairs lead at the New America Foundation's Open Technology Institute.

"The warrantless query of U.S. person information is a perfect example," she said. "It's very important as the chair of the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board that you be really scrupulous about addressing the concerns of the privacy community as well as the arguments of the intelligence community."

Section 702 of FISA allows authorities to collect communications of foreigners that transit U.S. internet infrastructure, but sometimes wholly domestic communications are taken and loaded into searchable databases. Opponents say looking at those records for information on Americans is a "backdoor search" that violates the Fourth Amendment.

"It's an unfortunate situation that the head of the government's civil liberties watchdog panel [would be] on record opposing the reforms that the civil liberties community uniformly supports," said Elizabeth Goitein, co-director of the Brennan Center for Justice's Liberty and National Security Program.

"He's been very public and very detailed about what he thinks needs to happen with 702," she said. "There will be no surprises. The administration knows what it's getting. And what it's getting is someone who opposes any significant substantive reform."

Goitein added: "at the same time, he does support some tweaks to the law. And those tweaks won't get at the main issues, but they will make it a lot harder to dismiss him as an apologist for the status quo. And he's a smart, thoughtful guy."

Klein, who did not respond to a request for comment, wrote in a March report that searches of Section 702 records "raise legitimate privacy concerns — particularly if such information flows downstream into the criminal justice system" and recommended more transparency, as "relatively little public information is available about these queries: their frequency, how often they return 702 information, and precisely why the FBI views them as valuable."

PCLOB in its current form was established by 2007 legislation. It wasn't fully functional until 2013 and took a major role reviewing programs exposed that year by NSA contractor Edward Snowden. Its report on the mass-collection of domestic call records played a role in the legislated demise of that program and the board authored a lengthy report on Section 702 internet surveillance programs.

Following President Trumps ways I put together a video at CommonSenseNewsToday.com that has possibly brought a major California University back to the free speech table. President Trump is a pretty good example to follow. =))

[Silver]

Looking mighty anarchistic in that black baseball cap.

[Silver]

He can't help himself.

again with the hands.jpg (29.16 KiB) Viewed 629 times

[Silver]

Oh, bother. I wish the John Birch Society would stop pointing out the treachery in Washington, DC.

https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/c ... us-history

Tuesday, 12 September 2017
National Debt Surpasses $20 Trillion for the First Time in U.S. History
Written by Raven Clabough

On September 8, the same day that President Trump signed a bill into law that suspended the debt ceiling and enabled unlimited federal borrowing, the national debt reached and exceeded $20 trillion for the first time in U.S. history.

It’s not as though it was much better before Friday, however, as the debt ceiling has been sitting comfortably at approximately $19.8 trillion since March. However, as a result of President Trump’s deal with the Democrats that raised the debt ceiling and also provided federal aid to the victims of the recent hurricanes, the Treasury Department was able to begin immediately borrowing money following months of being forced to use “extraordinary measures” to avoid exceeding the debt ceiling.

Under President Trump’s deal with the Democrats, the federal government will not have any spending cap until December 8, when a new debt ceiling will be in put in effect.

President Trump taunted Republicans following his deal with the Democrats with a tweet in which he ultimately blamed the GOP for forcing his hand and compelling him to reach across the aisle. “Republicans, sorry, but I've been hearing about Repeal & Replace for 7 years, didn't happen! Even worse, the Senate Filibuster Rule will never allow the Republicans to pass even great legislation. 8 Dems control – will rarely get 60 (vs. 51) votes. It is a Repub Death Wish...”

Sadly, congressional Republicans, allegedly the fiscally conservative ones, were complicit in President Trump’s agenda to achieve a legislative victory at the expense of his campaign promises and the American people. GOP leadership could have refused to bring up his deal for a vote, but instead, the legislation passed quickly in the House and Senate with overwhelming bipartisan support.

And though President Trump campaigned on opposition to the growing national debt under President Obama, he has now vocalized support for getting rid of the debt ceiling altogether. "For many years people have been talking about getting rid of debt ceiling altogether and there are a lot of good reasons to do that," Trump said. "So certainly that is something that could be discussed.”

But as noted by former Texas Congressman Ron Paul, this would be a disaster for the economy. “This would put the growth of government spending and debt on autopilot and make a mockery of his promise to drain the swamp,” Paul wrote in an editorial. “It would also hasten America’s economic day of reckoning.”

In the absence of a debt ceiling, the national debt typically increases by leaps and bounds, notes the Washington Examiner. When President Obama lifted the debt ceiling in 2015, for example, the national debt jumped $339 billion in just one day. Under Trump, it exploded by more than $317 billion overnight.

It goes without saying that the financial health of the United States is projected to be rather bleak, as the Office of Management and Budget also projects that the government will run a $702 billion deficit for 2017.

With the debt now over $20 trillion, the president of the globalist Peter G. Peterson Foundation, Michael A. Peterson, told The Hill that this new record will force the United States to pay $6 trillion in interest over the next decade. "That's more than we will invest in our kids. So, in effect, we have decided to spend more on our past than on our future," he added.

What’s worse is that as bad as these figures are, the real numbers are terrifyingly worse. Truth in Accounting (TIA), a Chicago-based government watchdog that pushes governments to release accurate financial reports, reports that the national debt is well above $100 trillion when unfunded liabilities such as Medicare and Social Security payments are taken into consideration. “The federal government doesn’t include those unfunded liabilities on its balance sheet,” said Bill Bergman, director of research for TIA.

TIA estimates the federal government owes about $31.4 trillion in unfunded Social Security promises and $44.7 trillion in unfunded Medicare promises, as well as $7.2 trillion in promised pension and other retiree benefits.

And so while lawmakers are expected to talk spending cuts when federal funding is set to run out in December, the typical recommendations are minimal at best, laughable at worst.

Many conservatives aknowledge that government spending is the problem and are generally opposed to increasing the borrowing limit without attaching it to spending cuts. However, in the political lexicon of Washington, D.C., “spending cuts” usually mean cuts in future projected increases based on current law, as opposed to cuts in the absolute sense. Thus spending continues to skyrocket even when politicians boast about tightening their fiscal belts.

If spending really were cut to the point where the government spends less money than it collects in taxes, then there would be no need to increase the debt limit. Once this is understood, it becomes clear that tying spending “cuts” to debt ceiling increases is itself a retreat from a fiscally sound position, since it means that the cuts are insufficient to balance the books.

Without being prepared to tackle the government’s spending problem, particularly as it relates to Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, or cutting spending by reducing the size of the federal government or ending overseas expenditures, there is no way the United States can ever reduce its national debt.

[Hezekiah]

He can't help himself.
again with the hands.jpg

Somebody nailed it:

stankface.jpg (127.52 KiB) Viewed 599 times

[Silver]

Who would have thought that children of the covenant would ever support neocon Gadiantons? Yet the continued fawning over Trump is on full display here.

Ron Paul, y'all. You Trump supporters are on the opposite side of Ron Paul. If that isn't a wake up call, nothing I can say will shake you from the satanic chains which bind you. (But unfortunately for the Trump supporters, my burning coal-dumping campaign will continue.)

The youtube link below leads you to a 14-minute video of the good doctor.

http://www.antiwar.com/blog/

The Neocon Case Against The Iran Nuclear Deal – Ron Paul Says It’s One Big Lie!
Posted on September 14, 2017

Why does President Trump listen to Nikki Haley and the neocons when it comes to Iran? Doesn’t he know they are always wrong? Trump has been consistent in his animosity toward Iran and especially the Iran deal, but why? Haley claims that Iran gave up nothing for the deal, but that is just not true. Does Trump think the rest of the world is going to follow the US if the US pulls out of the agreement? Or if the US attacks Iran? Tune in to today’s Ron Paul Liberty Report:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9OigCNTT_QM

[Thinker]

It seems that each president is in a way, a pawn & scapegoat.
They tend to be given way too much blame and credit, when they only represent many others who play parts.

Initially, I didn't want Trump & my impression of him was he didn't belong with the Republicans. He was different - maybe it was his NY accent and bluntness that reminded me of someone in the mob. I realize that is prejudice stereotyping & jumping to conclusions, but that's what I thought at first. I was surprised that when there were other (seemingly) better candidates, influential conservatives like Rush Limbaugh were so quick to promote Trump. I wondered if Trump bought them.

But 2 positive aspects stand out about Trump & are probably common reasons so many people voted for him...
1) He spoke his mind - what many craved after having leftist emotional-reasoning political correctness insanity shoved at us for so long.
2) He didn't have to answer to others as Obama did. Notice the differences between super-pac (tit-for-tat) contributor amounts between Obama & Trump:
http://presidential-candidates.insidego ... nald-Trump

[Silver]

It seems that each president is in a way, a pawn & scapegoat.
They tend to be given way too much blame and credit, when they only represent many others who play parts.

Initially, I didn't want Trump & my impression of him was he didn't belong with the Republicans. He was different - maybe it was his NY accent and bluntness that reminded me of someone in the mob. I realize that is prejudice stereotyping & jumping to conclusions, but that's what I thought at first. I was surprised that when there were other (seemingly) better candidates, influential conservatives like Rush Limbaugh were so quick to promote Trump. I wondered if Trump bought them.

But 2 positive aspects stand out about Trump & are probably common reasons so many people voted for him...
1) He spoke his mind - what many craved after having leftist emotional-reasoning political correctness insanity shoved at us for so long.
2) He didn't have to answer to others as Obama did. Notice the differences between super-pac (tit-for-tat) contributor amounts between Obama & Trump:
http://presidential-candidates.insidego ... nald-Trump

Yeah, Trump spoke his mind, but it all turned out to be lies like Mexico will pay for the wall, Lock Her Up!, stay out of Syria, and repeal Obamacare on day 1. That makes him on par with any other recent president you care to mention.

As for Trump not answering to others, you are sorely misinformed. He has been bailed out at every turn by Rothschild and Goldman Sachs. You'll note that Wilbur Ross, of Rothschild, is in the Trump administration, as are a bunch of Goldman executives like Cohn and Mnuchin. Trump is surrounded by CFR members, more than Obama's administration.

What else you got?

[Silver]

Choose ye this day, Ron Paul or the Marmalade In Chief

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-09-2 ... rea-crisis

Ron Paul: "How To End The Korea Crisis"

Sep 25, 2017 1:21 PM

Authored by Ron Paul via The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity,

The descent of US/North Korea “crisis” to the level of schoolyard taunts should be remembered as one of the most bizarre, dangerous, and disgraceful chapters in US foreign policy history.

President Trump, who holds the lives of millions of Koreans and Americans in his hands, has taken to calling the North Korean dictator “rocket man on a suicide mission.”

Why? To goad him into launching some sort of action to provoke an American response? Maybe the US president is not even going to wait for that.

We remember from the Tonkin Gulf false flag that the provocation doesn’t even need to be real.

We are in extremely dangerous territory and Congress for the most part either remains asleep or is cheering on the sabre-rattling.

Now we have North Korean threats to detonate hydrogen bombs over the Pacific Ocean and US threats to “totally destroy” the country.

We are told that North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un is a “madman.” That’s just what they said about Saddam, Gaddafi, Assad, and everyone else the neocons target for US military action. We don’t need to be fans of North Korea to be skeptical of the war propaganda delivered by the mainstream media to the benefit of the neocons and the military industrial complex.

Where are the cooler heads in Washington to tone down this war footing?

Making matters worse, there is very little understanding of the history of the conflict. The US spends more on its military than the next ten or so countries combined, with thousands of nuclear weapons that can destroy the world many times over. Nearly 70 years ago a US-led attack on Korea led to mass destruction and the death of nearly 30 percent of the North Korean population. That war has not yet ended.

Why hasn’t a peace treaty been signed? Newly-elected South Korean president Moon Jae-in has proposed direct negotiations with North Korea leading to a peace treaty. The US does not favor such a bilateral process. In fact, the US laughed off a perfectly sensible offer made by the Russians and Chinese, with the agreement of the North Koreans, for a “double freeze” – the North Koreans would suspend missile launches if the US and South Korea suspend military exercises aimed at the overthrow of the North Korean government.

So where are there cooler heads? Encouragingly, they are to be found in South Korea, which would surely suffer massively should a war break out. While US Ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, was bragging that the new UN sanctions against North Korea would result in a near-complete blockade of the country (an act of war), the South Korean government did something last week that shocked the world: it announced an eight million dollar humanitarian aid package for pregnant mothers and infant children in North Korea. The US and its allies are furious over the move, but how could anyone claim the mantle of “humanitarianism” while imposing sanctions that aim at starving civilians until they attempt an overthrow of their government?

Here’s how to solve the seven-decade old crisis:

pull all US troops out of North Korea;

end all military exercises on the North Korean border;

encourage direct talks between the North and South and offer to host or observe them with an international delegation including the Russians and Chinese, which are after all Korea’s neighbors.

The schoolyard insults back and forth between Donald Trump and Kim Jong-Un are not funny. They are in fact an insult to all of the rest of us!

[markharr]

Choose ye this day, Ron Paul or the Marmalade In Chief

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-09-2 ... rea-crisis

Ron Paul: "How To End The Korea Crisis"

Sep 25, 2017 1:21 PM

Authored by Ron Paul via The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity,

The descent of US/North Korea “crisis” to the level of schoolyard taunts should be remembered as one of the most bizarre, dangerous, and disgraceful chapters in US foreign policy history.

President Trump, who holds the lives of millions of Koreans and Americans in his hands, has taken to calling the North Korean dictator “rocket man on a suicide mission.”

Why? To goad him into launching some sort of action to provoke an American response? Maybe the US president is not even going to wait for that.

We remember from the Tonkin Gulf false flag that the provocation doesn’t even need to be real.

We are in extremely dangerous territory and Congress for the most part either remains asleep or is cheering on the sabre-rattling.

Now we have North Korean threats to detonate hydrogen bombs over the Pacific Ocean and US threats to “totally destroy” the country.

We are told that North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un is a “madman.” That’s just what they said about Saddam, Gaddafi, Assad, and everyone else the neocons target for US military action. We don’t need to be fans of North Korea to be skeptical of the war propaganda delivered by the mainstream media to the benefit of the neocons and the military industrial complex.

Where are the cooler heads in Washington to tone down this war footing?

Making matters worse, there is very little understanding of the history of the conflict. The US spends more on its military than the next ten or so countries combined, with thousands of nuclear weapons that can destroy the world many times over. Nearly 70 years ago a US-led attack on Korea led to mass destruction and the death of nearly 30 percent of the North Korean population. That war has not yet ended.

Why hasn’t a peace treaty been signed? Newly-elected South Korean president Moon Jae-in has proposed direct negotiations with North Korea leading to a peace treaty. The US does not favor such a bilateral process. In fact, the US laughed off a perfectly sensible offer made by the Russians and Chinese, with the agreement of the North Koreans, for a “double freeze” – the North Koreans would suspend missile launches if the US and South Korea suspend military exercises aimed at the overthrow of the North Korean government.

So where are there cooler heads? Encouragingly, they are to be found in South Korea, which would surely suffer massively should a war break out. While US Ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, was bragging that the new UN sanctions against North Korea would result in a near-complete blockade of the country (an act of war), the South Korean government did something last week that shocked the world: it announced an eight million dollar humanitarian aid package for pregnant mothers and infant children in North Korea. The US and its allies are furious over the move, but how could anyone claim the mantle of “humanitarianism” while imposing sanctions that aim at starving civilians until they attempt an overthrow of their government?

Here’s how to solve the seven-decade old crisis:

pull all US troops out of North Korea;

end all military exercises on the North Korean border;

encourage direct talks between the North and South and offer to host or observe them with an international delegation including the Russians and Chinese, which are after all Korea’s neighbors.

The schoolyard insults back and forth between Donald Trump and Kim Jong-Un are not funny. They are in fact an insult to all of the rest of us!

If we do as you and Ron Paul suggest will you and Ron Paul accept full responsibility for all of the lives lost when NK invades South Korea?

[Silver]

Choose ye this day, Ron Paul or the Marmalade In Chief

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-09-2 ... rea-crisis

Ron Paul: "How To End The Korea Crisis"

Sep 25, 2017 1:21 PM

Authored by Ron Paul via The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity,

The descent of US/North Korea “crisis” to the level of schoolyard taunts should be remembered as one of the most bizarre, dangerous, and disgraceful chapters in US foreign policy history.

President Trump, who holds the lives of millions of Koreans and Americans in his hands, has taken to calling the North Korean dictator “rocket man on a suicide mission.”

Why? To goad him into launching some sort of action to provoke an American response? Maybe the US president is not even going to wait for that.

We remember from the Tonkin Gulf false flag that the provocation doesn’t even need to be real.

We are in extremely dangerous territory and Congress for the most part either remains asleep or is cheering on the sabre-rattling.

Now we have North Korean threats to detonate hydrogen bombs over the Pacific Ocean and US threats to “totally destroy” the country.

We are told that North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un is a “madman.” That’s just what they said about Saddam, Gaddafi, Assad, and everyone else the neocons target for US military action. We don’t need to be fans of North Korea to be skeptical of the war propaganda delivered by the mainstream media to the benefit of the neocons and the military industrial complex.

Where are the cooler heads in Washington to tone down this war footing?

Making matters worse, there is very little understanding of the history of the conflict. The US spends more on its military than the next ten or so countries combined, with thousands of nuclear weapons that can destroy the world many times over. Nearly 70 years ago a US-led attack on Korea led to mass destruction and the death of nearly 30 percent of the North Korean population. That war has not yet ended.

Why hasn’t a peace treaty been signed? Newly-elected South Korean president Moon Jae-in has proposed direct negotiations with North Korea leading to a peace treaty. The US does not favor such a bilateral process. In fact, the US laughed off a perfectly sensible offer made by the Russians and Chinese, with the agreement of the North Koreans, for a “double freeze” – the North Koreans would suspend missile launches if the US and South Korea suspend military exercises aimed at the overthrow of the North Korean government.

So where are there cooler heads? Encouragingly, they are to be found in South Korea, which would surely suffer massively should a war break out. While US Ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, was bragging that the new UN sanctions against North Korea would result in a near-complete blockade of the country (an act of war), the South Korean government did something last week that shocked the world: it announced an eight million dollar humanitarian aid package for pregnant mothers and infant children in North Korea. The US and its allies are furious over the move, but how could anyone claim the mantle of “humanitarianism” while imposing sanctions that aim at starving civilians until they attempt an overthrow of their government?

Here’s how to solve the seven-decade old crisis:

pull all US troops out of North Korea;

end all military exercises on the North Korean border;

encourage direct talks between the North and South and offer to host or observe them with an international delegation including the Russians and Chinese, which are after all Korea’s neighbors.

The schoolyard insults back and forth between Donald Trump and Kim Jong-Un are not funny. They are in fact an insult to all of the rest of us!

If we do as you and Ron Paul suggest will you and Ron Paul accept full responsibility for all of the lives lost when NK invades South Korea?

Are you unaware of all the weapons currently aimed at Seoul?

[markharr]

Choose ye this day, Ron Paul or the Marmalade In Chief

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-09-2 ... rea-crisis

Ron Paul: "How To End The Korea Crisis"

Sep 25, 2017 1:21 PM

Authored by Ron Paul via The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity,

The descent of US/North Korea “crisis” to the level of schoolyard taunts should be remembered as one of the most bizarre, dangerous, and disgraceful chapters in US foreign policy history.

President Trump, who holds the lives of millions of Koreans and Americans in his hands, has taken to calling the North Korean dictator “rocket man on a suicide mission.”

Why? To goad him into launching some sort of action to provoke an American response? Maybe the US president is not even going to wait for that.

We remember from the Tonkin Gulf false flag that the provocation doesn’t even need to be real.

We are in extremely dangerous territory and Congress for the most part either remains asleep or is cheering on the sabre-rattling.

Now we have North Korean threats to detonate hydrogen bombs over the Pacific Ocean and US threats to “totally destroy” the country.

We are told that North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un is a “madman.” That’s just what they said about Saddam, Gaddafi, Assad, and everyone else the neocons target for US military action. We don’t need to be fans of North Korea to be skeptical of the war propaganda delivered by the mainstream media to the benefit of the neocons and the military industrial complex.

Where are the cooler heads in Washington to tone down this war footing?

Making matters worse, there is very little understanding of the history of the conflict. The US spends more on its military than the next ten or so countries combined, with thousands of nuclear weapons that can destroy the world many times over. Nearly 70 years ago a US-led attack on Korea led to mass destruction and the death of nearly 30 percent of the North Korean population. That war has not yet ended.

Why hasn’t a peace treaty been signed? Newly-elected South Korean president Moon Jae-in has proposed direct negotiations with North Korea leading to a peace treaty. The US does not favor such a bilateral process. In fact, the US laughed off a perfectly sensible offer made by the Russians and Chinese, with the agreement of the North Koreans, for a “double freeze” – the North Koreans would suspend missile launches if the US and South Korea suspend military exercises aimed at the overthrow of the North Korean government.

So where are there cooler heads? Encouragingly, they are to be found in South Korea, which would surely suffer massively should a war break out. While US Ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, was bragging that the new UN sanctions against North Korea would result in a near-complete blockade of the country (an act of war), the South Korean government did something last week that shocked the world: it announced an eight million dollar humanitarian aid package for pregnant mothers and infant children in North Korea. The US and its allies are furious over the move, but how could anyone claim the mantle of “humanitarianism” while imposing sanctions that aim at starving civilians until they attempt an overthrow of their government?

Here’s how to solve the seven-decade old crisis:

pull all US troops out of North Korea;

end all military exercises on the North Korean border;

encourage direct talks between the North and South and offer to host or observe them with an international delegation including the Russians and Chinese, which are after all Korea’s neighbors.

The schoolyard insults back and forth between Donald Trump and Kim Jong-Un are not funny. They are in fact an insult to all of the rest of us!

If we do as you and Ron Paul suggest will you and Ron Paul accept full responsibility for all of the lives lost when NK invades South Korea?

Are you unaware of all the weapons currently aimed at Seoul?

A simple yes or no will suffice.

[Silver]

Choose ye this day, Ron Paul or the Marmalade In Chief

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-09-2 ... rea-crisis

Ron Paul: "How To End The Korea Crisis"

Sep 25, 2017 1:21 PM

Authored by Ron Paul via The Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity,

The descent of US/North Korea “crisis” to the level of schoolyard taunts should be remembered as one of the most bizarre, dangerous, and disgraceful chapters in US foreign policy history.

President Trump, who holds the lives of millions of Koreans and Americans in his hands, has taken to calling the North Korean dictator “rocket man on a suicide mission.”

Why? To goad him into launching some sort of action to provoke an American response? Maybe the US president is not even going to wait for that.

We remember from the Tonkin Gulf false flag that the provocation doesn’t even need to be real.

We are in extremely dangerous territory and Congress for the most part either remains asleep or is cheering on the sabre-rattling.

Now we have North Korean threats to detonate hydrogen bombs over the Pacific Ocean and US threats to “totally destroy” the country.

We are told that North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un is a “madman.” That’s just what they said about Saddam, Gaddafi, Assad, and everyone else the neocons target for US military action. We don’t need to be fans of North Korea to be skeptical of the war propaganda delivered by the mainstream media to the benefit of the neocons and the military industrial complex.

Where are the cooler heads in Washington to tone down this war footing?

Making matters worse, there is very little understanding of the history of the conflict. The US spends more on its military than the next ten or so countries combined, with thousands of nuclear weapons that can destroy the world many times over. Nearly 70 years ago a US-led attack on Korea led to mass destruction and the death of nearly 30 percent of the North Korean population. That war has not yet ended.

Why hasn’t a peace treaty been signed? Newly-elected South Korean president Moon Jae-in has proposed direct negotiations with North Korea leading to a peace treaty. The US does not favor such a bilateral process. In fact, the US laughed off a perfectly sensible offer made by the Russians and Chinese, with the agreement of the North Koreans, for a “double freeze” – the North Koreans would suspend missile launches if the US and South Korea suspend military exercises aimed at the overthrow of the North Korean government.

So where are there cooler heads? Encouragingly, they are to be found in South Korea, which would surely suffer massively should a war break out. While US Ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, was bragging that the new UN sanctions against North Korea would result in a near-complete blockade of the country (an act of war), the South Korean government did something last week that shocked the world: it announced an eight million dollar humanitarian aid package for pregnant mothers and infant children in North Korea. The US and its allies are furious over the move, but how could anyone claim the mantle of “humanitarianism” while imposing sanctions that aim at starving civilians until they attempt an overthrow of their government?

Here’s how to solve the seven-decade old crisis:

pull all US troops out of North Korea;

end all military exercises on the North Korean border;

encourage direct talks between the North and South and offer to host or observe them with an international delegation including the Russians and Chinese, which are after all Korea’s neighbors.

The schoolyard insults back and forth between Donald Trump and Kim Jong-Un are not funny. They are in fact an insult to all of the rest of us!

If we do as you and Ron Paul suggest will you and Ron Paul accept full responsibility for all of the lives lost when NK invades South Korea?

Are you unaware of all the weapons currently aimed at Seoul?

A simple yes or no will suffice.

You ignored Ron Paul's questions (and other points), yet you won't allow me to ask a single question in return. Got it.

[markharr]

If we do as you and Ron Paul suggest will you and Ron Paul accept full responsibility for all of the lives lost when NK invades South Korea?

Are you unaware of all the weapons currently aimed at Seoul?

A simple yes or no will suffice.

You ignored Ron Paul's questions (and other points), yet you won't allow me to ask a single question in return. Got it.

I didn't ignore Ron Pauls opinion.

Unification of the North Korean peninsula under North Korean rule is stated North Korean policy.

The second we pull out of there, there is every reason to believe that North Korea will invade South Korea as they have said they will do.

[Silver]

Are you unaware of all the weapons currently aimed at Seoul?

A simple yes or no will suffice.

You ignored Ron Paul's questions (and other points), yet you won't allow me to ask a single question in return. Got it.

I didn't ignore Ron Pauls opinion.

Unification of the North Korean peninsula under North Korean rule is stated North Korean policy.

The second we pull out of there, there is every reason to believe that North Korea will invade South Korea as they have said they will do.

I appreciate you adding a bit more to your assertion. I still disagree with you though. The US spends too much defending other countries. Now is a good time for South Korea to decide if it wants to act like a real country and defend itself. It certainly has more population (51M) than North Korea (25.5M), and a higher GDP ($1.4T) than North Korea ($16.1B). Food security is a huge issue in North Korea with estimates of 50-70% of the population in danger of malnutrition or even starvation. These people are not your enemy and could not sustain a long-term battle. They do, however, have lots of artillery aimed at Seoul and might, if provoked, fire it all in desperation.

Many call Kim Jong Un crazy, but that's propaganda. What do crazy people do? They do crazy stuff. If Kim were truly mentally unstable, he should have already attacked Seoul or attacked the US. Or maybe he's not as free to act as he is portrayed on TEEVEE.

The US should end its warmongering and allow the Koreans to have the right of self-determination.