HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » kentuck » Journal

kentuck

Profile Information

Gender: Do not display
Member since: 2001
Number of posts: 99,410

About Me

This land is your land; This land is my land.

Journal Archives

Six White Horses

By Tommy Cash, Johnny's Brother.

Remember when Trump made Romney look like a sniveling rodent?

https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/mitt-romney-rejected-trump-secretary-state-pick-article-1.2908488

"I smell the whiff of justice in the air..."

Saw this quote by a Trumpster on Facebook. The "Deep State" is about to be uncovered.


All we can hope for is the truth.

The endorsement everyone has been waiting on...

Mine!


Like most folks on DU, I have been undecided about which candidate might be best for the Democratic Party in 2020.

Also, like most folks on DU, I will support the eventual nominee, whomever, he/she might be.

After much deliberation, I have decided to support Elizabeth Warrren.

Why?

Because she has shown courage and conviction above and beyond all the others, in my opinion.

Although Joe Biden has come out and filled the vacuum by talking about Donald Trump, it was Elizabeth Warren that came out and said that he should be impeached. That is a position that I strongly agree with.

Others such as Kamala, Mayor Pete, Beto, et al, have made strong showings. But for knowledge of the issues, none are as bright as Elizabeth Warren, in my opinion. If for some reason she is not the nominee, I believe she should hold a Cabinet position in the next Administration. I do not think VP would be her best position, but rather, Secretary of the Treasury. She knows economic issues and she knows banking issues. She would tackle them head on, in my opinion. Kamala Harris would be the best VP candidate, in my opinion. She will get out the votes.

The last time around, I was an early supporter for Bernie Sanders. In my opinion, he brought a lot of new voters into the Democratic Party. However, some of those supporters deserted the Democrats for Donald Trump in the general election. Perhaps they bought into the Russian propaganda that Bernie was "ripped off" in some manner by the Clinton campaign? Whatever, that is water under the bridge. I do know that Bernie lost by a substantial margin to Hillary in the popular vote and did very well in the caucus states, which helped him tremendously in making it a competitive race.

Although I am not usually in favor of name-calling, a la Donald Trump, I do think we should make two or three exceptions for Elizabeth Warren if she is the nominee. There is no doubt but that Trump will try to get laughs by ridiculing Elizabeth as "Pocahontas". I happen to think that "Broke-ahontas" is the perfect response when that happens. And remind people that the "great businessman" lost over a billion dollars over a ten-year period and still refuses to show his tax returns.

Also, I think "Putin's Puppet" is another nickname that captures the essence of the criminal now in the White House. I do not think these nicknames should be repeated over and over, as is the general consensus, but should be used in a timely and appropriate manner. In my opinion, it would be more effective.

In the end, Elizabeth's intelligence and courage have swayed me to her side. I think she could be the first woman President.

An old country tune...

Bill Barr is a dumbass.

First of all, he believed that a President could not obstruct justice because he was the head of the Executive and could not obstruct himself. It's a foolish premise.

Now, he is giving equal weight to an investigation of the investigators because they may have put their thumb on the scales as they were investigating Russian infiltration of our election system. How could anyone give equal weight to such an argument?

Even with all the evidence staring him in the face, he makes a comment that he would have felt unfairly treated also if he had been blamed for things he didn't do? Or does he feel badly for someone that did just what the investigators said he did?

Yeah, he's pretty much a dumbass...

Who was the unknown "Congressman" mentioned in the unredacted Flynn testimony?

It was mentioned that a White House "personal lawyer" (believed to be John Dowd) and a Congressman were in contact with General Flynn? Who might it have been??

My first thought was Devin Nunes? Or Lindsey Graham? Or Richard Burr? Or Paul Ryan? The possibilites are endless.

A test for our Judical system.

It was heartening to see Judge Sullivan's ruling about unredacting much of the Flynn testimony. We can only hope that other judges will act likewise.

This lawless presidency is testing our entire political system. The Congress and Senate are divided along Party lines. The White House is claiming "executive privilege"on everything and is refusing to release any documents or tax returns to the Congress. After two and half years, we know nothing more about Donald Trump's finances than the day he came down the elevator. He has been the least transparent president in our memories.

However, the rulings are making their way to the Courts. Finally, we may get some resolution? It is scary to think that the Trump Party has rigged our Judicial system to meet their political goals and to protect themselves from any legal scrutiny.

It has been a hard and challenging journey up to this point.

We hope that our Judicial System will stand up to the challenge and save our democracy. Without a fair, honest , and impartial judicial, then our democracy's survival will be severely tested.

It appears that General Flynn is about to help Trump and Barr get to the "origins" of investigation?

There is a recording and an unredacted portion of a transcript of a phone call, that has been ordered to be released by Judge Emmett Sullivan.

A "personal lawyer" has a conversation with the General that sounds a lot like witness tampering. It is my understanding that if he is charged, there is no "executive immunity". There could also be obstruction of justice.

It will be interesting to hear Robert Mueller's comment on this.

Also, it could implicate others, including Donald Trump, in the discussion with the Russian Ambassador, Kisylak. If there is a quid pro quo mentioned, that could be bad news for Mr Trump.

It is getting rather interesting.

On a scale of 1-10, how much of a threat is Donald Trump to our democracy and our national security?

With a "1" being a barely negligible threat.

And "10" being an existential threat.
Go to Page: « Prev 1 ... 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 ... 253 Next »