I do fail to follow the logic there. Congress doesn’t issue subpoenas just because they are bored. A subpoena is an instrument of legal compulsion to comply with the laws of the land. The formal law holds very few exemptions from subpoena, and while there is an informal policy to not pursue legal action at the highest levels when executive privilege is invoked by Whitehouse staff by direction of the president- no such law exists- it is just the discretion of prosecutors to pursue the charges or not- and they won’t.
So the ethics of the situation are fairly clear. The fact the attorneys that would prosecute are his employees and thus unlikely to uphold any penalties congress would try to impose- the fact that he’s guarded by the FBI and to send security forces (as they are lawfully allowed to do to retrieve him for not answering), would be politically and publicly disastrous as two branches of US law enforcement “stand off” in their conflicting duties, and the fact that the only other way they can “make him” tends to take so long that by the time a verdict to compel him was reached (if reached,) the matter would be likely closed- are not the same as “not having to.”
Who he is gives him power and privilege he an use to subvert the due processes of a democratic system and abuse the checks and balances of power to exert his will over that of a congress of the people for the people is not the same as his position being granted an inherent right to an exception in the law. He is just as bound in principal of the law as any other, he just has the means to effectively scoff the law which makes the action no better than that of a common criminal or dictator- he just has the power to avoid direct consequences.
It all looks to me like moving goalposts. From treason to collusion to obstructing to contempt of court to whatever comes next.
An investigation's third or fourth iteration that all started from falsified evidence procured by parties that clearly do not have America's interests at heart.
The left has been trying to obstruct, resist, impeach, and delegitimize my nation's lawful president from the day the results came through.
Meanwhile, our enemies are dying or scared, the economy is booming, free speech is making a comeback, I feel my constitutional rights are more secure than they've been in my entire life, and myself and my unit have no reservations about carrying out the missions the current administration sends down the chain.
Guest is right in that congress wont issue a subpoena because they're bored. But they will clearly issue them for political purposes. Much to what famousone said above, there has been MASSIVE abuses of power in the last few years, and I'm not referring to the Trump administration. I'll bet some important heads are going to roll by the time this is all done. We'll have to wait and seen.
There HAVE been massive abuses of power- and yes, by the Trump administration, by the democrats- by everyone. Because it’s the wild fucking West. Because when one kid decides they don’t have to follow the rules and brings their toys to school, when they get away with it the other kids will too. It doesn’t matter who did what first because we can start naming scandals on all sides back to 1776. The fact is that in recent years too many people have been getting away with too much shit. Too many people are trying to write over the law and constitution and side step or steam roller the law and the will of the people and replace t with agendas- liberal or conservative.
And all the division is what let’s them get away with it in large part. Because their fellows in power and their constituents on whatever “side” are willing to not only excise the “home team” for doing whatever it takes to push their wants and needs- but will welcome them as heroes for it to boot. As a people we need to say enough is enough. When people in power break the letter or spirit of the rules we need to call them on their bullshit even if that bullshit gets us closer to what we want- because that isn’t the right way to do it.
Because today our “team” is in power and today these guys are winning battles for “our side” but the people in power after them- or they themselves if the favorable winds for them blow another direction- may not be on “our side.” So if we erode the rules and controls and checks and balances- if we make a mockery and an untenable mess of the imperfect but best system we have- we are all fucked. Because the way the laws work politicians NEED your support to get what THEY want. Erode those laws and they might not need to please or be accountable to you.
Let it sink in how fucking scary it is that a prominent politiciAn has been called to answer- for legitimate reason or not- to the body of the civilian government representation, and one of the primary things keeping them from exercising the tools and safety measures to ensure a functioning democracy is that armed agents of that same government are so beholden to those in power that there is serious risk they would resist agents working for the civilian representation to protect a supposed servant of the people from having to be beholden to the people.
Let it sink in how scary t is that a standing member of our senior government would refuse a lawful order publicly and flagrantly not under citation of legal reason why he isn’t required to do so- but because he doesn’t feel like it and you can’t fucking make him. All political beliefs asides that is a notion that should terrify anyone who supports a democratic republic.
I've been saying for years, if you want things to change we ALL need to vote third party. It may not actually stop the corruption, but it will send the message that we know of it and want it to stop.
If we would elect a 3rd party candidate, the sitting powers-that-be would stop at nothing to get them removed. They would use their media to slander them. They would make false accusations and use they're intelligence branches as "investigation" weapons to imply guilt. It would look a lot like.... well Trump.
He's arrogant and a bad role model, but Trump is the closest thing to a 3rd party we've ever had. He's an outsider, and the insiders (including Republicans) have done everything in their power to get him out.
Why would any of that be a reason not to vote for a third party? Even if everyone in Washington wants you out- it doesn’t seem to have worked so far has it? And imagine if there was this “outsider candidate” who the actual people of the United States hadn’t voted against by a record breaking margin of the majority of the country who never wanted to see said outsider in office to begin with... like Trump? It’s nice when the president has the support and respect of the government, the majority of their people; their own party. When they have none of those things and largely the support of a group of associates on the payroll who keep getting fired or put in jail.... I mean- Kanye West would be an outsider in the Oval Office but that doesn’t mean he should be president, and given Kanye or others behavior represents a country they also might not be the best representation of America either.
My point isn't that we should not vote for a 3rd party. My point is that the entire voting structure is rigged. Without Trump's presence in 2016 the Republican candidate would have been Jebb. A 3rd bush and a 2nd Clinton do NOT represent the two most qualified people our country has to offer.
.
A vote is a total mirage if the only two options are hand picked by the real people who truely run the country.
The fact that the establishment hate Trump, and we're simultaneously experiencing the best economic, military, constitutional, and diplomatic growth and enhancement in decades are closely related, I suspect
Yeah. It makes sense. Those guys on capital hill hate when the country is running well so they wouldn’t like any leader who would bring prosperity. Plus things are going so well right now thanks to policies enacted by the president that have caused international ill will and strained relations- I’m sure there would be no long term consequences from that- if there at who cares? Things are running well right NOW. Donald Trump is an enduring brand as a person. And his business ventures show equal foresight and long term strategy. That’s why Trump Airlines, Trump beverages, Trump Magazine, Trump Casinos, Trump montage, Trump Steaks, Trumpnet, Trump Towers Tampa, Trump University... are all doing so well.
And none of those things involved people really happy at how well things were going and how much money they were making or how much they were going to make, and then ended abruptly with law suits and charges. So yeah- I totally see what you mean. There’s no way this could go wrong, and no historical indication that there could be problems down the road directly relating to this.
The goal of a sports match is to win. Not to gain ground or stop the opponent or even to score points. You can win a tournament such as soccer/football without ever scoring a point. The goal is to win- the rest is about how you win. History and common sense prove some strategies more effective than others. We have societies and governments and diplomats for instance because we know for a fact that larger groups of people cooperating and communicating tends to lead to more prosperity and longevity.
Having good foreign relations is a way to reach a goal of prosperity. It’s a way to have some security for yourself as well. You may have all the snacks away camp but if there are 15 other kids and not only do you have few if any friends- most don’t like you- how’s that going to work out? It’s short sighted and foolish to think the goals of taking care of ones self and making an effort to get along, or at least not piss off, everyone else while doing it are mutually exclusive. We can look out for our selves and be diplomatic at the same time. One of the many skills that’s makes a good president. Business come and go so it’s not so bad if you alienate a business partner- countries tend to last longer and hold grudges.
To the sports metaphor- if the “goal” is to win, do you run your players so hard they are crippled to win one game, one championship even? What do you do next game or next years championship? Oh wow. Right NOW you have a trophy but in the long run you’ve created a situation where ultimate and or continued victory walk further and further away the more you “win.”
Tl:dr we don’t have to please other countries but there’s no reason to not put in effort to be diplomatic or to actively piss them off. Consistent history of cordial diplomatic relations is a tool that pays off down the line in helping get what you want. The person you’re always cool with is more likely to help you when you need it than the person you’re a bipolar asshole to all the time. Don’t confuse a goal with the methods of achieving a goal, and try not to fall prey to simplistic thinking in which you have a hammer so every problem is a nail. Many tools for many jobs.
As for “fucking the world...” the world is fully capable of fucking back. And yes, you don’t need to say it. We all know you have a mighty penis and will single handedly defeat the hordes of freedom hating invaders or die smiling while trying- but win or lose almost all scenarios result in the devastation and upheaval of countless people’s lives, homes, finances. When nations bicker and fight it is usually their people who feel the ill effects in their daily lives and in unforeseen ways. “Take a little today so you can take more tomorrow.” If you want to keep harvesting you have to leave something to grow for later. If you charge .02 extra everyday people don’t notice but if you overcharge $100 at once they don’t come back for more business.
I get not actively antagonizing others. I don't believe that's always the best course to take, but I get it.
On the other hand, you need to understand that there is a difference between not being an asshole, and allowing others to hit, cheat, and otherwise use or abuse us.
You do not gain by allowing foreign economies to cheat you. There is no benefit in allowing peoples to subvert our sovereignty at the cost of our citizens. And there is never a good reason to pay off or ignore entities that actively work to kill us.
There goes the “all or nothing” proposition that is very popular with so many. You can stand up when you’re being bullied and a strong hand is needed. A leader knows when to show strength directly and when to use diplomacy but still get your way. Refusing some foreign aid here and there or not rolling over isn’t the same as picking fights and insulting people- and as for “what we get out of it-“ EVERY successful and lasting relationship on earth is not all about what we get. Sometimes we do things that don’t directly benefit us because they indirectly benefit us by easing pressures, or by engendering good will. Do you ask yourself every time you do something g for a coworker, friend or even stranger “what do I get?” People like when people and organizations cooperate. It makes them more likely to cooperate back. To want to work with you, to do things you need them to that don’t benefit them or twist their nipples-
but they know it’s mutual so they are more likely to acquiesce. It builds rapport and can create moods more conducive to getting what you ultimately want. The UN delegation erupted in laughter when the president praised his administration. Long times allies called out the United States for being uncooperative- specifically even stating our agenda doesn’t mean we have to steam roller them.
The standing president has insulted world leaders and entire countries, has told entire delegations like the UN- who exist solely for the cooperation and mutual resolution of issues- he doesn’t care what anyone else thinks, says, or if they even listen. Is that your example of looking out for a nations best interests? To not only through a failing of diplomatic skill, but through active and often unsolicited “first strike” insults to antagonize and alienate trade and defense partners?
At its absolute strongest- at its “greatest” America has never had the capacity to exist as an island. It has always relied on allies and partners to provide defense, economic growth, and to help orchestrate our foreign policies abroad.
Tiny minds think tiny thoughts and then pat themselves on the back for being so much smarter than everyone else- when a world walks into a room to speak and everyone else in the room laughs at them- is every single other world leader a moron or are they a joke? You want to take on the world? You want to see what your daily life looks like without cheap foreign labor and the heavy manufacturing that we no longer have the capacity for at home? We NEED the world. America is not self sufficient and can not maintain the lifestyles we enjoy just with what we have. Things on this scale don’t happen overnight or even always in years. Today’s sins are visited on our future of our children’s future in the sentiments we breed in the world.
The anti American sentiment that breeds terrorists against us is growing and spreading further than just areas we’ve recently bombed. The sympathy and cooperation that has allowed us to try and track, capture, and prevent these types of attacks largely relies upon help from other nations. Use of resources and assets and infrastructure, sharing of information, permission and aid to conduct operations in the name of national interests. Without those assets and without staging and launching points and safe harbors how useful is our military abroad unless we occupy every nation we want to operate from?
Global politics and diplomacy isn’t a Bruce Willis movie boys and girls. It’s a complex management of allies and cultures, histories, egos, personalities and more. But at its core it’s not so different than being in a high school where you never graduate. There are cliques and rumors and managing who is on your side, who your playing like a friend, who you’re playing against who- all come in because just like high school without any friends it tends to suck.
That's on them for getting used to handouts.
I'll work with my brothers, but you know what we do to soldiers who do the bare minimum or less? Especially when they only ever ask for more, or come to expect that you will always go out your way for them?
You know what happens to soldiers who can't keep up? Who fail to meet the standard?
Or what happens to units with chains of command that don't prioritize their men and readiness?
No one to talk to, to help with assignments or look out for you. No party invites or anything else. Just you on your own getting by as best you can while the other kids hang out and do things together. Fear, force, these things motivate people only so long as they feel they can’t get one over on you. The moment they can there’s nothing stopping them. Only an idiot would rule on good will and sunshine smiles though. Controlling people can’t be done with one tool. You have to use a little of everything, applying the best pressure at the best points to keep them doing what you want and need them to do, but being careful not to show your hand or ride them so hard they start to resist out of resentment or ego.
But- lots of talk here. Prove me wrong. Live 3 months without using in any way shape or form at any level of transport, manufacture, or logistics- anything or economic source which relies on foreign sources or comes through foreign sources. Prove we don’t need to play nice by cutting off those things which are not in their entirety born from and through the United States and it’s territories. I will then gladly concede the point.
Famous- most people aren’t soldiers. Many people wouldn’t or couldn’t cut it as soldiers. Why do we have soldiers? What is the military for? To defend the people and principles of the United States and take action as directed by a civilian government for the best interests of those people and principals. You and yours are stationed somewhere or fighting somewhere and not someone else who didn’t join up. They aren’t fighting with you or serving with you. They can’t or refuse to. Every civilian cannot or will not put in the work to defend those things you are.
So then- do you not represent these people? Do you not defend them? Should the military not be required to provide security or act in a capacity that serves the interests of those unwilling or unable to serve themselves? Do you “cut off the chicken” to those people because they cannot or will not participate in providing defense for themselves? The cost in human life, military assets and budgets, etc that is incurred tending to freeloaders who refuse to even join the national guard and help carry the burden but expect you and yours to lay down your actual lives so that they don’t have to wake up early and follow discipline and put themselves through the stress and labor of military service?
So here you are, and there are people who actively oppose the military. They use the free speech you defend to call all military men and women murders and war mongers and worse- they try to defund the programs that support the lives and well being of troops at home and abroad. And surely these people might be as bad or worse as those who refuse to even lift a finger for the defense and preservation of their way of life no?
And yet- you took an oath to defend them. You agreed to allow them to sit around and not do the work while you shouldered the burden. Because you thought or knew that you were capable of the task and were compelled to answer a call to defend those who couldn’t or wouldn’t defend themselves. So how is the free chicken so different? If a city refused to or was unable to defend itself would you refuse to defend that city? Would your vote be to let them all die since they refuse to help themselves? Or- might you connect the dots that you are a soldier. You have something these people do not, or have not yet realized they have, and that as the person who can do something for these people who cannot or will not- it is your moral and literal duty to do so?
And yet- you took an oath to defend them. You agreed to allow them to sit around and not do the work while you shouldered the burden. Because you thought or knew that you were capable of the task and were compelled to answer a call to defend those who couldn’t or wouldn’t defend themselves. So how is the free chicken so different? If a city refused to or was unable to defend itself would you refuse to defend that city? Would your vote be to let them all die since they refuse to help themselves? Or- might you connect the dots that you are a soldier. You have something these people do not, or have not yet realized they have, and that as the person who can do something for these people who cannot or will not- it is your moral and literal duty to do so?
I took an oath to defend the Constitution of the United States.
I never swore to defend any international authority, the constitution has no provision stating that the United States needs the approval of the UN.
I did not swear to uphold China's economy, not to defend Mexican criminals, and sure as fuck not to appease Iranian terrorists.
Or did you think I'm arguing about a domestic program? Domestically I must, and will gladly, kill and die in the defense of my Constitution and my people. Anyone against the constitution is not my people.
Yes. And the apt comparison is that the prosecutor can choose to do so and how to pursue those charges. So in the case of the subpoena to bar- he knows the primary tool to enforce it is to bring charges through the attorney generals office- his office- which has a standing policy not to pursue charges of failure to appear in cases like his. Thus he who made it a point to prosecute another for not appearing is using his position to avoid charges for doing the same thing. Imagine if your HR said the dress code was super important and went out of their way to discipline violations- but then openly flaunted refusing to comply because only HR could reprimand them. It’s kinda like that.
An investigation's third or fourth iteration that all started from falsified evidence procured by parties that clearly do not have America's interests at heart.
The left has been trying to obstruct, resist, impeach, and delegitimize my nation's lawful president from the day the results came through.
Meanwhile, our enemies are dying or scared, the economy is booming, free speech is making a comeback, I feel my constitutional rights are more secure than they've been in my entire life, and myself and my unit have no reservations about carrying out the missions the current administration sends down the chain.
He's arrogant and a bad role model, but Trump is the closest thing to a 3rd party we've ever had. He's an outsider, and the insiders (including Republicans) have done everything in their power to get him out.
.
A vote is a total mirage if the only two options are hand picked by the real people who truely run the country.
On the other hand, you need to understand that there is a difference between not being an asshole, and allowing others to hit, cheat, and otherwise use or abuse us.
You do not gain by allowing foreign economies to cheat you. There is no benefit in allowing peoples to subvert our sovereignty at the cost of our citizens. And there is never a good reason to pay off or ignore entities that actively work to kill us.
I'll work with my brothers, but you know what we do to soldiers who do the bare minimum or less? Especially when they only ever ask for more, or come to expect that you will always go out your way for them?
You know what happens to soldiers who can't keep up? Who fail to meet the standard?
Or what happens to units with chains of command that don't prioritize their men and readiness?
I never swore to defend any international authority, the constitution has no provision stating that the United States needs the approval of the UN.
I did not swear to uphold China's economy, not to defend Mexican criminals, and sure as fuck not to appease Iranian terrorists.
Or did you think I'm arguing about a domestic program? Domestically I must, and will gladly, kill and die in the defense of my Constitution and my people. Anyone against the constitution is not my people.