Oh the brutal irony.,

Oh, how times change.

I wouldn’t trust Wolf Blitzer if he insisted the sun will rise in the East tomorrow!

Trust Wolf Blitzer? What does this have to do with trusting him?

What, does he have his hand up Trump’s rear making Trump say the things he said??

There is a technique by which manipulators can take pieces of a speech and make the speaker APPEAR to be saying precisely the opposite of what he/she is actually saying. Blue Bloods even did a whole show about it being done to Sellick’s character, and I’ve seen it done on local TV.

1 Like

Are you serious?

Well, at least I know not to ever take you serious ever again.


LOL. Not that you ever HAVE taken anything I’ve posted “seriously,” of course.

Absolutely correct. Bush should have been impeached and removed for the Iraq War at a minimum. If the system worked as the Founders intended, he would have ended up in front of a firing squad. He lied us into a war that killed 3,000 Americans and over 100,000 Iraqis. Bush’s war killed more Iraqi civilians than Saddam did.

After Pelosi decides there isn’t enough cause to impeach Bush, she then thinks withholding military aid in order to investigate Joe Biden’s son rises to the level? Total BS.

100,000 dead Iraqis, 3,000 American troops, 3 trillion dollars vs Investigating Joe Biden’s family for corruption.

Bush and all of his connections are friends with Pelosi and Trump isn’t. That’s all the impeachment is about. “I really hate Trump and anyone outside of the D.C. wine cave crowd”.

Why wasn’t Bush impeached for his blatant abuse of power?

“He shares our values”

Bush wasn’t impeached because every single action he took regarding the War on Terror was legal in every way, approved by Congress and every shred of intelligence employed was the best available at the time. There were no “lies told” and everyone including Pelosi knew it.

Trump said he didn’t like the decision to go to war with Iraq but supported it once the decision was made, his opposition was wrong then and that was one of the reasons I didn’t vote for him when he ran for President; I was not comfortable with a President that could be so wrong about a course of action that was so obviously the only right choice.

Trump has since shown that as the one responsible for such decisions (and the results) that he is much more sane and far less naive than he was as a citizen critic.

No, no…This

A common tactic that liberal socialists use is to say that Republican presidents are stupid and uninformed. It was the tactic they used against Reagan for his entire presidency. Yet, at Reykjavik summit, Reagan showed that was well up and prepared on the issues. Unlike Carter, who got lost in the details, Reagan struck the right balance for an executive.

The Dems also called Bush 43 “stupid” for no valid reason.

Now Trump is labeled as stupid and dangerous. He’s so dangerous that he needs to be impeached immediately, Yet, after the House passed the bill, Pelosi sits on it.

1 Like

Let’s remember who is in the video in the OP.

Except there were, and she did know it as they provided her with everything at the time
(Starts at 25 seconds, ends at 1:40)

Not only that, he’s a stooge of Putin, so Pelosi votes to give him an extra 150 billion dollars for more bombs, and extend the Patriot Act so he can spy on everyone for the Kremlin.

IMO, Pelosi never planned on this amounting to anything. I believe this is about driving up votes for the Senate. Trump got about 200,000 fewer votes for Congress than Republican congressmen. Clinton got about 4 million more votes than Democrats for Congress. A lot of Democrats proceed to show up at the polls, literally tick off president, and just not bother to go further. I think Pelosi wants to say “We impeached him in the House, but the Republican senate protected him. Vote for a Democratic senate!”

1 Like

There were no lies told to Congress or anyone else regarding the fight against terrorism on the Iraqi front.

The technology is almost perfected, they can even lip sync it now. Bill Clinton used to say “lie your a$$ off unless they have pictures”. Not ant more.

Rumsfeld denied there was an insurgency for at least two years. He did this because he was a proponent of RMA doctrine, which stated you didn’t need alot of troops to take a nation’s Government out and usher in a transition.

Admitting there were insurgents, would have given strength to non-RMA voices who were saying more troops were needed.