US US Politics General 2 - Discussion of President Trump and other politicians

General Trump Banner.png

Should be a wild four years.

Helpful links for those who need them:

Current members of the House of Representatives
https://www.house.gov/representatives

Current members of the Senate
https://www.senate.gov/senators/

Current members of the US Supreme Court
https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/biographies.aspx

Members of the Trump Administration
https://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Liberty thing was a long time ago. A very very very long time ago. That it keeps being brought up as this singular and massive that echoes forever to now is very autistic. It's a sign that one shit move, and possibly worse, is hounded on forever like it's some iconic thing. It's so blown out of proportion. There's been worse friendly anti-USA action done before and since. Namely France not allowing us to hit Libya over their airspace after Lockerbie.

Liberty was 1967 guys.
The holocaust thing was a long time ago. A very very very long time ago. That it keeps being brought up as this singular and massive that echoes forever to now is very autistic. It's a sign that one defensive war, and possibly worse, is hounded on forever like it's some iconic thing. It's so blown out of proportion. There have been worse genocidal acts done before and since.

Your holocaust was in 1945 guys.
 
Some jew in the thread has been sperging out because Tucker actually said Iran is by far not a main concern of the US and that there are more important concerns in the country. Tucker's right obviously, I think any non-jewish American agrees.


No, you twisted his words to say what you wanted him to say to try and create a false narrative that supports your view. Common Jewish tactic.
Don't like Iran and they've done a slot of shit to the us and they're Muslim, but I'd say china is more of a concern than Iran by a good mile.
 
And if you as a man say something like, "Young women shouldn't go out to bars at night and dress in a way which attracts every wolf and vulture in that place", people will jump down your throat like YOU'RE the problem.
"All men are ebil dangerous rapists"
Okay samantha with that in mind here are some precautions to take around areas full of potential rapists-
"Why are you victim blaming?"
🤷‍♂️


Damned if you do care, damned if you don't care.
 
Last edited:
And the Iranian hostage crisis was in 1979.
the fundamental difference is that with Israel it was once and with Iran it was multiple times again and again. Remember how they trained Shia militias in Iraq to build IEDs to blow up American soldiers? How they kidnapped William Buckley and tortured him to death? You cry about one incident but then praise the people who keep attacking America.

Maybe you should actually do what Tucker states in the quote and compare the numbers and see what hurts and causes America the most damage, it's not Iran, not even close
You say drugs are a problem, Hezbollah is one of the biggest drug running organizations in the world. Obama stopped the DEA investigation into Hezbollah to appease Iran during the negotiations leading up to the Iran deal.


In its determination to secure a nuclear deal with Iran, the Obama administration derailed an ambitious law enforcement campaign targeting drug trafficking by the Iranian-backed terrorist group Hezbollah, even as it was funneling cocaine into the United States, according to a POLITICO investigation.

The campaign, dubbed Project Cassandra, was launched in 2008 after the Drug Enforcement Administration amassed evidence that Hezbollah had transformed itself from a Middle East-focused military and political organization into an international crime syndicate that some investigators believed was collecting $1 billion a year from drug and weapons trafficking, money laundering and other criminal activities.


they actively work with the cartels to smuggle drugs into the US and launder money for these cartels. This is all under Iranian patronage.
 
She’s rich and went to Detroit’s old money grade school and highschool school called Cranbrook which is for rich Jews and honkeys.
Cranbrook's demographics may have shifted in recent years. The high school has a significant number of Chinese/Asian students along with dot Indians. I have no idea how many come from local affluent families and how many are boarding students from abroad. The junior highs (separate ones for boys and girls) have some black students in the mix - presumably those from families who dislike the area public school systems. Still, the point remains that Cranbook is for those with money (and plenty of it) and money and politics are heavily entwined.

What I think is particularly interesting is how it used to be LGB. There were no trannies when I was in high school or college. It was known about, but it was not a "thing." Then it absolutely exploded in the 2010's and it's almost like they rewrote history so everyone believed it was always a "thing."
I think transgendered people were probably more closeted during my high school and college years. Those that did cross dress were shrugged off as oddballs unless they were sex pests or some other sort of nuisance.

Their efforts to rewrite history is ironic when they are quick to complain about "erasure" themselves. :story:

Not gaslit - bullied. There are countless gay people who hate this tranny shit and can't stick their neck out or else they'll get the chop.
I've known gay and lesbian people who used to be associated with LGB support groups or oganizations who have long severed all ties to those groups because they those same groups now cater to the transgendered and other genderspecial groups except the LGB community that originally founded and ran those groups. The LGB community has been effectively excluded from the organizations they themselves created, but they can't speak up about it because of cancel culture and cries of "Hate speech!" if and when they ever do. The rumblings I hear are similar to what @Hey Johnny Bravo posted: Most LGB people can't stand the T but can neither say nor do much about it given the current poitical and social climate.

I might be overly optimistic but I honestly don't see troons being a big part of the DNC's coalition going forward.

Troons are gross and weird and tremendously off-putting to normie voters and women.
As long as the Democrats double, triple, quadruple, and even quintuple down on identity politics, they will not change this aspect of their party as it stands now. Look at their efforts to filibuster, stonewall, or otherwise stymie the efforts to pass a national bill banning transgendered people from competing in sports as something other than their gender at birth. As long as this continues to be the Democratic MO, nothing will change any time soon and the party will continue to alienate normie/moderate voters.
 
Name a war that America fought for Israel. Iraq was not a war that America fought for Israel because Israel advised the US not to go through with it.
An absolute fucking lie.

The actual truth:
Israel bombed Iraq's nuclear facilities. Iraq lobbed missiles at Israel in the early 90s and materially supported the Palestinians. There were constant tensions between the two countries.

Netanyahu personally lobbied Congress, claiming Iraq was developing WMDs, and pushed aggressively for the invasion behind the scenes. Much of the "intelligence" (intentional lies) claiming the WMDs existed was Israeli-sourced.

Sharon, PM at the time, said that Iraq, not Palestine, was Israel's greatest threat, that the US and Israel had unprecedented collaboration over it, and Israel was NOT opposed to its invasion. Should be enough to stop right there, as his claim Israel didn't support it is already demonstrable bullshit, but just in case anyone doesn't realize there's much much more.

Moreover, destabilization of Iraq was a priority for the right wing of Israel and the subsequent neo-con policy they helped create. Jewish Israeli neo-cons wrote the A Clean Break policy paper in the 90s advocating for an aggressive new approach to Israel's regional adversaries, including overthrowing Hussein, as he and the Iraqi state posed such a threat to Israel.

The two lead authors, Richard Perle and Doug Feith, were later prominent advisors in the Bush administration. Perle received millions of dollars from Ahmed Chalabi, who was the primary source for Judith Miller's (also Jewish) lies in the NY Times that Iraq had WMDs, used by Bush admin officials to justify invasion.

Neo-con foreign policy, an explicitly Jewish movement, was instrumental in the foreign policy decision making in different time periods in the US but was at its absolute peak of power and influence during the invasion of Iraq.

Perle and his fellow neo-cons were also instrumental in the aggressive reforms of the Pentagon's intelligence community, pushing out traditional foreign policy advisors and replacing them with appointees and figures from explicitly Israeli-Jewish think tanks, including MEMRI (run by Jews), Washington Institute for Near East Policy (founded by AIPAC and run by Jews) and the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (run by gentiles, actually.... just kidding it was run by fucking Jews).

The only claims Israel advised "against" it were made by anonymous officials years after the fact, after it became obvious what a disaster it was and how the US foreign policy establishment was being out-classed by Iranian influence in Iraq.

I'm sure I'm forgetting some things, but the reality is the invasion of Iraq really only makes sense as a Jewish Israeli project given how little impact it had on US foreign policy, how little was gained from it post invasion, yet what a critical component of Israeli policy it had been for decades prior.
 
I might be overly optimistic but I honestly don't see troons being a big part of the DNC's coalition going forward.
I think you're being overly optimistic. If last week is any indication they'll triple down out of sheer spite and arrogance in the same way the EU, UK, Canada, Aus & NZ would.

Or more eloquently put by @Kiwi Lime Pie
 
they actively work with the cartels to smuggle drugs into the US and launder money for these cartels. This is all under Iranian patronage.
So what you're saying is that the cartels are the more important and pressing issue, since they're the active buyers and distributors of narcotics from ME and China. The cartels that we funded? Gave weapons and free access to? Restricted other countries abilities to counter for? Those cartels, with billion dollar enterprises and are allies of convenience because everyone wants to make some money? They also take poppy from the people that the US ordered to make poppy instead of goddamn wheat.

Iran's bullshit is literally fuck all compared to the CIA, and China is barely second place when against the fucking incompetence of the DHS/FBI. Literally most of our problems are home grown because of malicious inter-government interests, no muslims needed. China is only an active player because we let it get that way. Europe and NATO are only retarded because we let them be. Our largest pressing problems are literally all domestically based. A bunch of idiot influencers pretending to be good at politics fucked up our entire situation, not Iran, or Afghanistan, or Mixco, or China, or anybody else. Literally the most important thing to do is deal with our own issues before even giving a shit about a literal nobody on an entirely different continent who's not even the regional power.
 
It reminds me a lot of the San Bernadino islamic shootings, it took way longer than it took to find the fucks because of how hard it was to find the exact brown people they were looking for. and that involved government employees and the cops already having footage and other shit that could help catch them.,
If all it takes to hide is be in an area where you are a member of the majority demographic then pretty much every crime would be impossible to solve. If Johhny Law wants your ass he will get it, and a high profile shooting will get their attention for sure.

I have no idea how many come from local affluent families and how many are boarding students from abroad.
They are majority abroad. A lot of wealthy families in Asia will send their kids to bilingual schools with the goal of going to a university in the west.
 
Sharon, PM at the time, said that Iraq, not Palestine, was Israel's greatest threat, that the US and Israel had unprecedented collaboration over it, and Israel was NOT opposed to its invasion. Should be enough to stop right there, as his claim Israel didn't support it is already demonstrable bullshit, but just in case anyone doesn't realize there's much much more.
demonstrably not true


In early January 2002, four months after the September 11 attacks, Israeli national security council director Uzi Dayan met in Washington with his American counterpart Condoleezza Rice. She told him — to his surprise, he later told me — that President Bush had decided to invade Iraq and topple Saddam Hussein. A month later Dayan’s boss, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, met with Bush in the White House and offered some advice, based on decades of Israeli intelligence.

Removing Saddam, Sharon said, according to three sources with direct knowledge, will have three main results, all negative. Iraq will implode into warring tribes of Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds. You’ll be stuck in an Iraqi quagmire for a decade. And Iran, a far more dangerous player, will be rid of its principal enemy and free to pursue its ambitions of regional hegemony. Bush didn’t agree.

Israeli leaders continued pooh-poohing Iraq all spring. Dismissal turned to alarm in August, when Iranian dissidents released evidence that Iran was pursuing nuclear weapons. In September Sharon told his cabinet to stop discussing Iraq. It was annoying the White House.


Some well-documented accounts have dated Bush’s decision to invade Iraq even earlier. Richard Clarke, counterterrorism chief at the National Security Council in 2001, wrote in his 2004 book “Against All Enemies” that on the morning after the attacks of September 11, 2001, Bush instructed him to look for evidence linking the attack to Saddam Hussein, even though it was already clear that Osama bin Laden was responsible.


Moreover, according to Bush’s first treasury secretary, Paul O’Neill, as reported in Ron Suskind’s 2004 book “The Price of Loyalty,” the Bush administration began planning the Iraq invasion on January 30, 2001, at Bush’s first National Security Council meeting, several days after his first inauguration and more than seven months before the 9/11 attacks.

Netanyahu personally lobbied Congress, claiming Iraq was developing WMDs, and pushed aggressively for the invasion behind the scenes. Much of the "intelligence" (intentional lies) claiming the WMDs existed was Israeli-sourced.
He was invited to speak at a house committee in September 2002. According to Uzi Dayan, Bush had told the Israelis that he had made the decision to invade in January of 2002. Netanyahu did nothing to change the outcome.

Moreover, destabilization of Iraq was a priority for the right wing of Israel and the subsequent neo-con policy they helped create. Jewish Israeli neo-cons wrote the A Clean Break policy paper in the 90s advocating for an aggressive new approach to Israel's regional adversaries, including overthrowing Hussein, as he and the Iraqi state posed such a threat to Israel.
Israel regarded Iran as a bigger threat thanks to its nuclear program and its funding of proxies like Hezbollah/Hamas. Iraq was not a priority for the Israelis.

Perle and his fellow neo-cons were instrumental in the aggressive reforms of the Pentagon's intelligence community, pushing out traditional foreign policy advisors and replaced them with appointees figures from explicitly Israeli-Jewish think tanks, including MEMRI (run by Jews), Washington Institute for Near East Policy (founded by AIPAC and run by Jews) and the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (run by gentiles, actually.... just kidding it was run by fucking Jews).
These Israelis somehow control Bush when it comes to Iraq but when Bush forced Israel to withdraw from Gaza and have Palestinians hold an election because Bush thought that the Palestinians would accept democracy and not elect terrorists, somehow the Israelis didn't control Bush then. Which is it?

The only claims Israel advised "against" it were made by anonymous officials years after the fact, after it became obvious what a disaster it was and how the US foreign policy establishment was being out-classed by Iranian influence in Iraq.
Danny Ayalon, Raanan Gissin, and Col. Lawrence Wilkerson are not anonymous officials.

Lawrence Wilkerson was very clear about this:


Israeli officials warned the George W. Bush administration that an invasion of Iraq would be destabilising to the region and urged the United States to instead target Iran as the primary enemy, according to former administration official Lawrence Wilkerson.

Wilkerson, then a member of the State Department's Policy Planning Staff and later chief of staff for Secretary of State Colin Powell, recalled in an interview with IPS that the Israelis reacted immediately to indications that the Bush administration was thinking of war against Iraq. After the Israeli government picked up the first signs of that intention, Wilkerson says, "The Israelis were telling us Iraq is not the enemy -- Iran is the enemy."

Wilkerson describes the Israeli message to the Bush administration in early 2002 as being, "If you are going to destabilise the balance of power, do it against the main enemy."

The warning against an invasion of Iraq was "pervasive" in Israeli communications with the administration, Wilkerson recalls. It was conveyed to the administration by a wide range of Israeli sources, including political figures, intelligence and private citizens.
The Israeli advice against using military force against Iraq was apparently triggered by reports reaching Israeli officials in December 2001 that the Bush administration was beginning serious planning for an attack on Iraq. Journalist Bob Woodward revealed in "Plan of Attack" that on Dec. 1, 2001, Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld had ordered the Central Command chief Gen. Tommy Franks to come up with the first formal briefing on a new war plan for Iraq on Dec. 4. That started a period of intense discussions of war planning between Rumsfeld and Franks.

I'm sure I'm forgetting some things, but the reality is the invasion of Iraq really only makes sense as a Jewish Israeli project given how little impact it had on US foreign policy, how little was gained from it post invasion, yet what a critical component of Israeli policy it had been for decades prior.
>critical component of israeli policy
>only mentioned once before in a clean break while another PM was in power
>no evidence that Sharon wanted to implement a clean break

If Israel is the people rather than the place, then yes, the US fought WW2 for Israel. I mean are we forgetting about the holocoaster that every Jew loves to remind us about?
the US didn't fight ww2 to liberate the Jews from the holocaust. Germany declared war on the US first. The Allied forces didn't take steps to stop the holocaust when they could have easily done so.
 
Gay marriage was solved and the NGOs pushing it needed a new justification to exist
Its like the Southern Poverty Law Center. Its mission was to combat white supremacy groups and take down the Klan 55 years ago. Now that kind of of racism is dead, its mission accomplished, but the grift has to continue, so they go to bat for trannies and fight cities' police departments in court now.
 
Back