Trump is tearing our country apart

With the exception of two Somalian refugees at St.Cloud and Ohio State that were failures because the only ones killed were the two attackers, there has never been a successful terrorist attack in the U.S. by a refugee. Those attacks have come from American citizens and legal permanent residents.

Who is Trump protecting us from? We already have extreme vetting and the system works. Fortunately, saner minds prevailed and Trump's executive order was voided by the courts.

- - - Updated - - -

Thank you, Sushi.

 

All Democratic party talking points.

You may not be a Democrat, but you nailed their talking points to a T.

Now you launch attacks on Flynn. Amazing.

 

Democrats have more important things in their minds to do, not we who support Trump.

Notice the Democrats have not a single shred of evidence of voter suppression yet even the media accepts it happens.

We who live in CA as natives do notice the flaws of the CA voter registration system. They seem quite clever here about using the holes in the law to drive a Mexican truck through. It is impossible not to be voter fraud. not in CA since CA is ultra lax about this issue, but in TX a Mexican woman voted 8 times I think it was and will serve time in prison.

Voter fraud is not a Federal matter due to voting being states rights issues.

Those arguing Trump lost the popular vote are dealing with a sort of fraud since this is not the way presidents are voted for.

CA has 55 votes. So, CA can have a squeaker or a runaway and we get no more or less than 55 votes. Point being, that so long as Clinton got just enough votes, she got all 55. So Democrats would have a far better point saying that illegals voting did not tip the scale than denying illegals voted.

So it might not matter that much in CA as it would not matter on any voter suppression issue, which Democrats bleat daily is a major issue. They can't have it both ways.

Trump can drop the issue but it will not solve voter fraud.

 

You are wrong. I believe you are quoting the cost of Afghanistan alone, but I'm not sure where you got that figure and you didn't say. I am talking about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan beginning in Oct. 2001.

The final price tag of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan could reach $6 trillion, 50 percent more than the whole federal government spends in a year, with biggest piece to be paid in the future as aging veterans consume health care, according to a new report.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/r...-hits-a-staggering-6-trillion/article/2560928

Those war went badly. Fifteen years and $6 trillion worth of failure, and your boy, Trump, wants plans to defeat ISIS. History tells us that will fail, too.

 

A simple suggestion to poster aka Sandy.

Why not try to put one or perhaps two points in each reply?

You load the bin so to speak.

It is more difficult to deal with your shotgun approach than were you to lighten the load. Thanks Sandy.

 

Once again, the switch to Democrats. Democrats have nothing to do with the post. You evaded the best part of the post. Voter fraud is a non-issue. The really interesting part of the post concerned Flynn. I guess you didn't want to address that subject. Wise move.

 

Robert, I get most of my material from conservative Fox News. I am, after all, a conservative. If they are Democratic talking points, that only goes to show how bad it looks for the Trump White House.

 

Bloomberg is the source and you know darned well there is the link to back me up.

They claim all the wars cost that much to the fiscal end of 2014. I said the time frame had to be extended but if you want to accuse Obama of blowing 4 more billion, go for it. I need proof he did this. Bush never came close to spending that much.

We had 8 miserable years of the Obama spending. Seems you may have forgot who the last president was.

When Bush commanded, both wars were stunning successes.

I see ISIS as armed. Armed men can be either killed off, captured and held in prison or converted.

Terrorists can't be converted. You resist handling them as an Army, seems you offer zero solutions.

I don't know what you did as an Officer, or if you contacted Peter to confirm he as an officer captured WMD in Iraq or if you chatted with Don who also is a former fairly high ranking officer to get those views, but for you to say the military can't deal with terrorism sure amazes me and smacks of saying you as an officer lacked the training or skills to smack terrorists about the head and shoulders. I am stunned an officer talks that way.

 

What did that reply have to do with the OP?

 

I get what you claim to be. It will prove your case when you operate as if you are one. I have admitted I spent 20 years a loyal Democrat. I see both sides. I think Democrats have dropped off the face of the planet over Trump.

I get next to zero from FOX. See what I am able to get there.

http://www.foxnews.com/

- - - Updated - - -

Look, you make hundreds of claims against Trump. You are angry he is the president.

i look forward to you limiting your arguments to one point or even two points. Dealing with you is like dealing with a hurricane.

 

That is true.

"I think it will send them scurrying to our shores." That is only partly true. It is very difficult for a terrorist to arrive in the U.S. from the Middle East, which explains why it has not been done successfully since 9/11. More than likely they will be "scurrying" across the land bridge connecting the Middle East to Europe. First stop, Turkey, and Turkey has had some real problems with Islamic terrorists. Islamic terrorists love killing Muslims. Westerners are more heavily protected with better intelligence and law enforcement.

In the end those two factors will stop ISIS, not military force.

 

Let's ignore voter fraud. I know very well there is. But will drop it.

Flynn bothers you a lot. Fine and all that rot.

Flynn does not bother me.

We all knew who won the election. Clearly Putin had to deal with a new cowboy. And Flynn had commanded troops.

He says he did not discuss what he is accused of. Still, it will be decided no laws were broken. I have faced that we had one terrible past president who was a shuck and jive artist. Trump was not then installed as president so we have to talk in terms that it was still Obama the president. He was a major mess up. I want to use the F word up but won't out of consideration for others.

 

Wow! We found something to agree on. Now I understand why you never defend Trump.

 

First I want to agree on this point. We should keep our mitts out of the ME. I hope Trump keeps his mitts out of there.

We need to keep our mitts out of the Russian situation. none of our business. Crimea is nothing to the USA.

Terrorists here will kill our people. i doubt you deny they will. They will figure it out. I suspect they have. They will use the means created by Democrats to cave our system until they obtain what they want. they don't mind dying.

I blame Democrats if we do get more attacks. Donald wants us safe. He is being fought tooth and nail by Democrats to stop him.

 

He said " I don't enjoy defending him" doesn't mean never.

 

Sandy, hear me well. I don't know how many more times I need to say I too am a Reagan republican. I feel bad i voted against him to govern California but he won and did a great job for this state. I was his vocal opponent to be governor. I was still a stupid Democrat.

Reagan is buried and of no use. I had alternatives in mind. Scott Walker was number one and later it was Kasich. But mark my words, had Kasich won, I believe you would be equally against him or Walker. I think Bush would be an excellent president but realize the media to trashed his brother he was not viable.

Who made Trump possible is two people and the media. Obama and Clinton made him viable. And we have now to support him. We don't have to endorse his failures,. but must we be negative because he is Trump?

 

Unfortunately ISIS is like cancer, we (free world) have to destroy it.

 

I catch him failing to read my posts well also. Then the whining starts up by me saying Obama. Guess we have to forget what we endured for 8 miserable years.

 

fish in a barrel , they're hatred blinds them.

 

I've read reports the administration wants to increase the military size and spending significantly so perhaps they're preparing the ground. Or perhaps because "war presidents" ( or prime ministers) historically get a boost in the polls. Maybe they thought it would work this time, but it backfired.

 

On September 10th, 2001 the thought of flying jet planes into buildings was simply absurd, after all no one had ever done that before.

 

The nation will be fine in the long run. We have sent a boy to do a man's job in hiring Donald Trump to be President. That his supporters will not call bull(*)(*)(*)(*) on this jerk's repeated lies and hysterical comments is all the proof one needs that buyers remorse has set in; big time.

 

"Trollin"! Trollin on the River"!............Sandy man, do you really think Trump got elected by sub normal people!...have you served in any military branch?.....do you really think there is a danger from unlimited immigration?.....why do we have immigration laws...why do we have border police?.....are laws made to be broken?.......I think most people secretly love what Trumps doing!....because he is the only modern day American that is not politically correct...the word "backlash" mean anything?....God Bless America!

 

Here is the timeline and it is certainly suspect.

In October seventeen American intelligence agencies concluded that Russia interfered in our elections on Trump's behalf.

On December 29th Obama imposed sanctions on Russia for the interference.

That same day civilian Michael Flynn called the Russian ambassador and spoke to him about the sanctions.

On December 30th, uncharacteristically, Putin refused to retaliate against the sanctions, saying he will discuss the matter with soon-to-be President Trump.

On January 1, Flynn lied to Vice-President Pence saying sanctions were not discussed. Later that day Pence appeared on the Sunday news shows, and said he had spoken to Flynn, and, no, the sanctions were not discussed.

On February 8 Flynn said he had not discuss sanctions with the Russian ambassador. Later he said he couldn't remember discussing the sanctions with the Russian ambassador but it could have happened. Later still White House officials admitted that Flynn discussed the sanctions with the Russian ambassador. At this writing there is no transcript of the conversation.

By February 13, uncharacteristically, Trump was absolutely silent on the subject, no tweets, and he would not allow questions about Flynn at a news conference. That was very odd.

The rest is pure speculation, but educated speculation based on circumstantial evidence. Flynn calls the very same day Obama unleashes the sanctions, and Putin is unusually kind to the U.S. Did Flynn promise the sanctions would be lifted, even the ones imposed as a consequence of Russian's aggression against Ukraine? It would seem likely because Putin's reaction the very next day was historically restrained, and many do not buy such a coincidence.

Flynn lied to the Vice-President. When the National Security Officer lies to the Vice-President, serious questions can be asked about his trustworthiness and should he remain in that capacity. If private citizen Flynn (obviously he was not the NSA yet) spoke to the Russians about Presidential sanctions, that would be a very serious crime and a historic one. It has never happened before, or so the history books say.

When Flynn lied to the Vice-President, was not that the same as lying to the President? That would be true except for one possible factor. The President told Flynn to make a deal with the Russians. That would fit with Trump's penchant for praising Putin over the last several months and his wish for Russia to help us destroy ISIS. Naturally, Trump would like to win Putin's favor for such an alliance.

It should be stressed the accusation against Trump is pure innuendo based entirely upon circumstances.

 

Who is they?