That smell is the UCMJ and SOFA agreements going up in smoke.

Trump is probably thinking couple years in a white collar jail won't be that bad for Roger. I think he pardons Stone, either before or lets say 2 months into his jail term.

Roger Stone was found guilty. Now all eyes turn to Trump. - POLITICO

It's guaranteed if he loses in November.

He doesn't look as if he can survive that long even in a white collar prison.

My daughter does little kid gymnastics. Was talking with a couple parents while she was there today, turns out the guy I was sitting next to served with Lorance, and served under his CO in the exact same location.

Got a very different story from him than what the media gives.

Nine members of Lorance's platoon testified against him and not a single member testified for him. I'm comfortable letting the military justice system make a determination of what happened and what punishment was warranted.

Never Trumpers.

Would be curious to hear more

Short-ish version, from what I gathered. And I will also note, this is one person talking, and this isn't someone I know even remotely well, but it was interesting.

1) The CO of that unit was and still is *hated*. He was described to me as a self serving CYA officer, whose MO was to immediately blame a subordinate if one of his decisions turned out to be wrong. (His almost exact words - if he is told one thing, disagrees and decides another thing, if he's proven wrong, he blames the guy who told him the 'right' thing.)

2) This leads to how this went down (and I will point out, guy I spoke to agrees the guy fucked up, but disagrees the guy deserved the punishment he got). He (guy I talked to) summed it up like this: "He (Lorance), screwed up. But he called those guys were going to attack us, he warned his CO, and he turned out to be right.".

3) Which leads to the impression of why the hammer came down, in this guy (parent)'s eyes: Lorance screwed up, but his assessment of the incoming attack was dead on. Heat came on the self-serving CO, who basically decided Lorance was going to go down hard. Lorance's platoon effectively were told how this was going to play out, and played ball.

TLDR - According to one person I barely know, but says he plays in the same pond as many of the principles, he got railroaded by a carreerist superior officer (who is now a general) who needed someone to go down hard for this. Too many eyes.

edit: There's a lot of pronouns here. I apologize. I'm exhausted right now. Rough week.

Trump went, unannounced, to Walter Reed. The WH is saying he went to get a head start on his physical. They also released a statement verifying how healthy and strong he is.

Very odd.

Even if that was true, this WH lies so often that it doesn’t really matter what they say the reason is/was.

We’ll never know.

But I for one always go to the hospital, on a Saturday, 3 months prior to a scheduled physical when nothing is wrong with me.

Interesting thought in a very close election that I saw on twitter, would Edwards have won if LSU had lost to Alabama?

I wonder if this is true

Trump Chest Discomfort Claim After Walter Reed Visit | Heavy.com

Dems win another electon-this time the Louisiana Governor race. Curious as to why the election was held on a Saturday though?

Because that's what Louisiana's Election Code calls for.

Gubernatorial primaries and general elections are held on Saturdays. Everything else is Tuesdays.

Putin has run easily the greatest intelligence operation in history. Is there a country in the West that the Russians haven't interfered with top political leadership?

BREAKING: Boris Johnson flew to Italy without his security detail & met ex-kGB agent 2 days after NATO summit to discuss Russia sanctions. New from me & @TownsendMark https://t.co/bqifjUyWUo

— Carole Cadwalladr (@carolecadwalla) November 17, 2019

Thanks Sack, just seemed odd it was on a Sat.

It's no surprise that the Brexit (break up of the EU) and Trump election interference (pro-Russian slant) and activities in the Middle East (ceding control to Russia), Ukraine military aid hold up (pro Russian), G7 controversy to add Russia back in under Trump (pro Russian) all align nicely with Putin's silent war on the west. He's winning by allowing cancer to eat western democracy and alliances to be eaten from within.

When someone wants to tell me that Trump has Freedom of Speech and that they steadfastly support it...

Meaning what?

Should somebody be forced to hire him?

The Trump Presidency – 2016
 

Meaning some people felt that Colin needed to shut up and play even going so far as to saying he was anti patriotic for taking a knee in silent protest

Now let’s see those same people fawning over freedom of speech rights for an American who happens to be the president


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I've been thinking a lot about how different things may look politically in twenty or thirty years. With the GOP going all in on shrinking demo groups and the Dems pulling in a lot of former GOP moderates in the suburbs, I can see a future where the parties are very different ideologically than they are currently. I could see a future where the Dems are a Euro like right-center party and a new party emerges for the left. Meanwhile the GOP shrinks to the point of irrelevance.

NK sure has the measure of Trump. After Trump nearly begged for a new meeting, NK issued a statement that says they won't meet until they get something first.

So much winning.

I thought Trump reach out to NK was worth the gamble but you are right, nothing much has come of it.

Haven't heard much from Trump on HK either. Its understandable we wouldn't jeopardize foreign and trade policy on HK (blame the Brits for where they are now) but a nice "measured" statement of support would be nice.

Still hoping for a breakthrough on China. I read an article that they may want to deal with Trump as Warren may be tougher on them. My guess is a rollback on tariffs some but nothing else until after 2020 is settled which means 2 years of ups-and-downs and uncertainty for not much to show for it.

The first two parts I agree with are inevitable but not sure we can declare the far right dying yet.

I'm not sure any of it will happen, that's just a possibility that I see.

dola

The Fed. Chair certainly implies that Trump and Mnuchin leaned on him to change policy.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/doug-ma...ion-uncovered/

Why not a new scandal?

It would be fun to see/hear Trump testify.

First off, the way he did it was absurd. Saying " talk to you soon" at the end of a tweet. Can he be anymore embarrassing?

Second, there is zero reason for us to reach out to NK. All it does is legitimize them. Trump has been played over and over by them, and he comes off looking even weaker in this.

I thought this was pretty standard. Ambassadorships are mostly given out to big money supporters. Obama, Bush, etc did the same.

I guess this is different because instead of doing it without an implicit directive, this one was out in the open. But I guarantee behind the scenes this stuff takes place all the time.

And that's not to say it's right. I personally believe that you should not be given a post if you've donated to a candidate.

https://www.npr.org/2014/12/03/36814...ps-critics-say

That's because you live in Illinois :p

I thought it seemed like a nothingburger too.

A. Appointees to locations like that are often political supporters and donate large sums.

B. Campaigns always ask for more. And when you've already donated a million, what's the hurt asking for more.

That's nothing. Why worry about it when there's so much more actually on the record that is worrying?

I agree. It seems like the kind of non-scandal that the GOP would be pushing the media to discuss so they can use it as "proof" that everything is a nothingburger and everyone is just out to get Trump.

It's Ambassador to the Bahamas, for crying out loud. If you're not selling that, I don't even know what to say. I know this is jaded-insider talk, but come on.

Some people say they are worried that trump is ill and hiding his illness in order to fool the American public! Well, I don't know, but they do! Because they are people who know things, and they know that a sick president is a weak president. So for the good of the country, donald, come out to the world and tell us what your hiding!

Apparently we walked out of talks today with the Koreans...the South Koreans.

WTF?

Hey, you'd be upset too, if you raised my prices by 500%. I am so ungrateful.

Right?

Well the left (and some libertarians) always wanted to remove overseas bases that form our American Empire right?

Who is hungry for some Gym Jordan word salad!

Jennifer Williams looks hung over. Maybe she was hanging out with Brett Kavanaugh last night. Beer!

whoever that is

More of the same crap from Nunes. It is amazing almost half the country can't see through this nonsense.

Media is bad!

It's amazing that the GOP (Ron Johnson now & Trump) will literally set fire to anyone that doesn't drink the kool-aid and push everyone else to hold the line...

Who will be the last one set on fire? Pence?

I'd say no, but then I remembered despite being left overall, foreign policy is one of the areas I take a neorealist conservative view.

And again Nunes starts questioning with speculation about Hunter Biden. How about a defense of Trump, or questions relevant to the impeachment.

Isn't that the GOP defense right now though? That Trump was simply trying to root out corruption and therefore it was reasonable to withhold the money until Ukraine took actions against said corruption.

I don't buy it personally but I imagine it would sell well to the base.

They have 5 or 6 defenses floating around out there at the moment and that is one. The problem is that he only specifically mentioned Biden and the DNC server nonsense and the server thing is probably the dumbest conspiracy they could have come up with but I guess if you don't understand servers and have no idea at all of how digital forensics work then it sounds exciting.

They're also claiming that since it's Trump just being himself there's nothing wrong with it. Another is that since the quid pro quo failed its all good.

And SK announces they are developing new security ties with China.

So, so much winning.

You are just missing the long game.

NFL players can't kneel for the flag if the United States ends up as a vassal state of China/Russia with no flag of its own.

Getting our ass kicked in foreign policy is simply another way to own the libs.

Jim Jordan accusing people of not reporting misconduct properly breaks the irony scale.

I may hate him more than I hate Trump. We all know what Trump is. At least he owns it and hasn’t tried to convince us otherwise. The Gym Jordan’s of the world are really the horrible ones who defend him and spin doctor things. They are the ones who could truly make a difference but they have sold their souls for party over country.

He reminds me of the warden from Shawshank. He’s the worst.

If I was rich rich, what better way to end a career in a low stress job.

SK military budget is about $43B of the $420B+ budget. Total debt of $577B and debt to GNP is about 40%.

From $1B to $5B. I would like to know what the true cost is for our troops in Korea and assume its much greater than $1B ... not against SK paying more but yeah, how we are "negotiating" leaves a lot to be desired.

I really don't get how the GOP carries the label of the Pro Military party. Trump, obviously isn't pro military, and Vindman's exchanges today with Nunes and Stewart really show they give no shits about respect for the military.

South Korea is paying us and we gain a strategic advantage with our military forces. That alone puts us ahead. Asking for more defies common sense.

Same way they label themselves Christians? Just taking on a fake persona to make themselves feel better about their beliefs.

They get that label the same way they get the label of being fiscally conservative and the party of family values. They...ummm....

I got nothing.

I’ve been able to see a majority of the testimonies and Morrison’s testimony has to be the biggest stretch of them all. The I thought the call required me to notify lawyers for the first time ever BUT there was nothing wrong with the call. Ummm what?

The value of global and regional influence, coupled with the strategic value over decades transcends the pittance of cash that we're talking about in comparison. If the administration is willing to throw that away because of some kind of concept of fair payment for US protection then he and the administration are even dumber and more short sighted than they've been given credit for.

Welp. Looks like the Trump Admin definitely is ceding its sphere of influence in Asia, shedding off decades of traditional alliances. China’s slowly gobbling up the region in the last 3 years.

If it isn’t in our national interest, no amount is enough, and if it is in our national interest, we shouldn’t be haggling over small sums. The US military shouldn’t be rental mercenaries.

Let's be fair. Obama failed too. The time to stop China's spread to the Spratley islands was early on, its a done deal now. And China's reach into rest of SEA began prior to Trump.

TPP? Let's not forget that Hillary was for it initially and then was against it. Its better than nothing though which is what we have now.

But your ultimate point is correct, China is slowing gobbling up the region in the past 8+ years or so and in other places too via their silk road initiative (smart of them to invest in Africa, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, South America etc.).

The ways to stop China or slow down China is either a war (no thanks), regime change (fat chance), or my preferred option, a massive Chinese stock market crash (similar to the Japanese bubble crash) resulting in a lost decade or two.

Honest question. What is the true strategic value of SK to the US? Japan is arguably a stronger ally both economically and militarily. I get it, the more real allies the better, but from a strictly regional influence point of view, strong ties with Japan serves that purpose.

edit: And I repeat, this is an honest question. This is not me advocating one policy or another.

Historically, Japan may be larger (economically and military), but South Korea has been a closer ally. Our military forces have deeply integrated with SK's - especially in monitoring NK and China. And while South Korea's economy isn't as large as Japan's, it is very large (over $1.5trillion in GDP, over $2trillion in GDP PPP). As noted above, with the US signaling it won't stick with SK, SK may decide to look towards China - so you are strengthening China by walking away from SK.

I would argue its akin to asking what does it matter if we drop France if Germany is our regional partner in Europe.

Defense dept says it cost $4.8B and they are paying $1B with a pervious agreement to increase 8% to $1.08B.

South Korea isn't going anywhere, Trump isn't "throwing" it all away. But yeah, some feathers will be ruffled etc. but it'll recover ... at the very least with the next admin.

But they have a great deal and they know it. We have 20K+ troops there, let South Korea invest and make up the difference in number, quality, training etc. They are grown up now, lets give them a 5-10 year transition period and reduce our presence, move our troops further south (but keep, I assume, some tactical nukes handy in the country).

• So, why don't you think we should ask a wealthy country that can afford to pay what it cost the US to help protect them? Why give them a free pass?

In current day, I would argue the strategic value they get from us far exceeds the strategic value we get from them. Let's spend the $4B delta on Japan, Philippines (if they'll take it), Cambodia & Vietnam etc.

I'm all for asking for much more money but don't agree with how Trump has approached it

South Korea is paying us $1B and costs us $5B so we are losing $4B. That defies common sense especially when South Korea is getting more strategic value than we are and we are running deficits like crazy.

Same question as my above post.

Edward, this has nothing to do with who pays for what military services. This is about global hegenony.

I have been reading a fascinating book called The Nect 100 Years by George Friedman, and he talks about what American aims to do to keep at the top of the heap. The U.S. in the post-cold war era is about making sure another country doesn't rise up to overtake it in overall global influence and supremacy. The reason why the U.S. has continued to maintain a presence in South Korea (and Japan and the Phillipines) is because by being present it limits China's ability to grow outward. Right now, South Korea is a bulwark against Chinese expansion. South Korea fears China as much if not more than North Korea. It wants the U.S. there. But if the U.S. is not going to be there, it will embrace China instead, because it still needs protection.

Incidentally, Friedman believes China will eventually collapse under the weight of multiple tensions in its society, including that between an authoritarian government and a population that increasingly wants more personal freedom, government control of economy versus the expansion of capitalism already well under way, and the regional tension between a rich and urban east coast and a poorer and more eclectic group in rhe west.

That said, if we allow South Korea to fall more under China's sphere of influence than our own, we give China a pathway to get past these tensions, to extend its power into the Pacific Ocean (currently almost completely dominated by the U.S. Navy, pretty much the most poweful military force in history), and establish a regional foothold which will be a lot more difficult to loosen it from.

Btw, not so coincidentally, why do you think Ukraine is so important. Eerie parallel there...

I think in the long run, the Dumbass in Office will be removed (probably by 2020 election) and the U.S. will revert to its normal.policies of the past 25-30 years, and this will be a blip.

But this is much more important paying $4 B versus an ally's $1 B to protect that ally.

I heard about the book below when it first came up but never did pick it up. I'm all for US global hegemony, I've used the term Pax Americana a couple times here.


Maybe Friedman addresses this but here's my counter. There's little evidence IMO that South Korea in recent years has stopped China's "ability to grow outward".

Militarily in the Spratley's? Zilch that I know of. In Taiwan? SK doesn't get credit for that. In Hong Kong? the inevitable will happen over time.

Economically in SEA, Africa, South & Latin America? Zilch.

Technologically? Zilch

The only thing I can see South Korea stopping is North Korea and I'm all for that. South Korea is 11th largest economy and ranked 7th in military power and they can/should take care of their own over time (e.g. train up, buy more equipment etc.). Admittedly they will still need some nuke deterrence which we should provide.


I do agree that China has become more capitalistic and but I don't see it collapsing from within anytime soon unless there is a "trigger" (e.g. stock market crash). Unfortunately, the government effectively controls the Chinese media & propaganda, has the Great (fire)Wall, manipulates economic numbers etc. and can probably control the rate and impact of a stock market crash also.


Its hard for me to believe this one incident will make South Korea pivot more to China than they already were doing because of economic interests. Yes, if the relationship continues to be strained and contentious, it may come to that but not anytime soon (and by then we'll have a new administration who will negotiate in a better way).

Re: extending its power into the Pacific Ocean through South Korea, I don't see it. Japan is much more strategic there and re: South China Sea, they will effectively share-ownership of it with US because of the Spratleys.


I can see some parallels but as mentioned above, China economic activities transcends borders and is welcomed (so far) by nations wanting that money. I don't think that is the same for Russia, its more of a military buffer.


I agree. I would want the next administration to ask for much more money but in a more diplomatic, constructive, less face-loss way.


South Korea is an established ally. Its not going anywhere soon (and the next admin will return it back to somewhat normal).

Yes, the $4B is not relevant in the big scheme of things (Samsung made $6B in profits last quarter) but

(1) I'm not sure when the imbalanced happened but lets say 20 years ago. $80B is a nice chunk of money, time-value to money, opportunity costs etc.
(2) Was it asking South Korea to pay for it or was it how it was asked/threatened, I think the latter was the mistake
(3) We should be investing money and military in other places in Asia. Let's redirect those funds into making new/reinforcing new friends. Not sure I would pick Taiwan but Philippines and Thailand I think are the 2 possible choices (Malaysia, Indonesia are predominantly Muslim countries and don't see them welcoming China that much; Australia probably not an issue anytime soon. Its Cambodia, Vietnam, Laos, Myanmar and possibly Philippines that I would be very concerned about.

This is exactly the point that I was trying to make. Well stated.

I still get the regular official WH emails and I find it amusing that they send so many that over half of them find their way into my spam folder. I also find it amusing to see just what the angle is that comes out directly from the WH. For example, yesterday, the headline was about how the left is trashing the constitution. The only supporting point was Barr's speech at the Federalist Society where he stated that over last several decades the power of the executive has been eroded by the other branches. {no other commentary; personally I'd argue that it's gone the opposite way}




After that they go to an editorial from the NYPost about Vindman's audacity to know what US foreign policy should look like, and editorial from The Federalist, a report from National Review about Ivanka, and one from Fox Business about the Stock Market.



Shocked there was no Washington Examiner, Brietbart. Yet.



Today, the mailer is basically the answer to yesterday's testimony. The overall feeling was this. trump was elected by the people, therefore he is the only person who can say what the people want, and since he is the president he is allowed to set any sort of foreign policy that he wants, and those who work for him must do it, because he's the boss. Vindman doesn't personally know trump and has never met him, therefore his insight is completely invalidated. NEW TRANSCRIPT! SWAMP!



That's basically it. That's the whole thing. It looks like the prevailing official defense is going to be, I'm the president and I was elected, therefore I can do it, and nobody can disagree with me and I cannot legally do anything wrong....at all...and there is nobody that can argue with that and if they do then they are in the service of the enemy seeking to nullify the 'voice of the people'.

SK has one of the largest militaries in the world, millions larger than the Philippines. You can't just swap SK out for someone else just as good.

Again, if the troops in SK are vital to our national interests, arguing over less than one percent of the defense budget is moronic. If troops in SK are not vital to our national interests using a major portion of our resources to be rental mercenaries is moronic.

Sondland gets set on fire today


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

May have to watch CNN while working to hear this ... but I do want him to be more direct and say quid pro quo for Biden investigation (not for 2016 election investigation).

'The answer is yes': Sondland affirms 'quid pro quo' in Ukraine dealings - POLITICO

Darn, I think I missed it.

It's equal parts papal infallibility and Louis XIV's L'etat c'est moi.

I won the election, therefore I am the United States, and if I care about it, it is by definition "the American interest" therefore, suggesting I did (or even could do) something wrong is treasonous. It's airtight.

He's decided to throw everyone else under the bus.

No I didn't! Seems a major part of Sondland's defense re: perjury is he didn't have access to all his notes, emails etc. to do an accurate reconstruction for his first testimony. I get some mis-recollections here but com'on.

He did say quid pro quo for 2016 election and Burisma.

I do think Congress should pursue perjury against him. No pardon for him.

Sometimes that happens with you tell the truth.

Edit - that was in response to him throwing everyone else under the bus.

He should go down for perjury.

Doesn't change any of the rest though.

Sondland has basically said they ordered the code red.

Sondland has become the impeachment Santa Claus, he made a list and checked it twice and now everybody on it gets implicated in the crimes.

There was some discussion as to whether or not he would take the 5th under oath today. The argument then was that he was far more valuable to trump than he was to the house and to just take away trump's ability to hold the pardon in front of him. Therefore, give him complete immunity and let him go to town. With no fear of punishment he would be free to testify however and trump loses any advantage by being able to pardon him.

Can't wait to hear how the Republicans try to tear this apart. HAHAHAHHAH

:popcorn:

The best part is the GOP game is to plow headlong to the end with the same talking points and pray that the base doesn't care and that'll be enough.

They won't address it. They'll just keep playing the fruit of the poisoned tree charade. BTW this charade will continue for the next 20 years no matter the official outcomes.

And some R's have left the chamber to go run and find a new strategy.

At this point what do they have left? The Chewbacca defense?

Sondland says he didn't know Burisma meant Bidens at that time.

Good defense for him (if true and no contradictory evidence that he did know it meant the Bidens' back then).

Ambassador Nino Brown ftw!

Ambassador Nino Brown is leaving no doubts. pic.twitter.com/qNECVHLqIC

— Abe Froman (@kingkielbasa22) November 20, 2019

See, you're thinking they will feel duty bound to come up with a "coherent" approach. Nah...

Listen to Sondland and you'll understand why America elected Donald Trump president to get rid of people like Sondland.

— Brent Bozell (@BrentBozell) November 20, 2019

Obviously he’s just another Never Trumper....who donated a million dollars to Trump’s campaign.

They'll leave that to Rush Limbaugh

Sondland sure is taking a lot of sips of water.

I’m just listening to opening statement now, but I wonder how Trump feels being the one thrown under the bus so someone else can save their ass.

Do we need to wonder? I'm sure we"ll see a tweet soon, since he's "not watching" in the Oval Office right now.

How my ass taste, President Trump?

Piece of shit nunes face after realizing they will now need another new strategy to try to protect the criminal organization in the white house:

Face of a loser realizing they are losing...

My guess is it's now Rudy's turn to be thrown under the bus. Not sure what other argument they can make. And Bolton needs to testify.

If nunes was my public defender, I would just plead guilty in hopes I would get a less harsh sentence.