US Election 2020 - Lame duck days

DreamKing

Honorary Master
Joined
Jul 23, 2009
Messages
14,483
Eh. The U.S. rather dethroned itself with all it's Amerika First™ own goals and utterly shambolic covid response, all but paving the way in gold-leaf for China to pick up the slack in trade arrangements.
Of course Tucker Carlson would be making howling noises about this now. He needs to whip up some emotions and anti-communist sentiment in order for his viewers to transfer their confused anger to something else.

the funny thing is, there is not a single report which comes from main stream media up to now.

so you are telling me that is not newsworthy or it is a fake news?

wake up, you can see how communism works now, just let the leftists to shut the opposition voice up? NO WAY.
 

buka001

Honorary Master
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
16,981
Lmao, epic shift of the goalposts.
Fair enough, I did contradict myself.

Still doesn't explain why they haven't brought this to the courts, if it is so obvious and inexplicable.

So what is the explanation as to why it has not been brought to court?
 

DreamKing

Honorary Master
Joined
Jul 23, 2009
Messages
14,483
giphy.gif

I posted so many evidences and sources and I remembered you told me "I didn't watch".

so why bother?

joke? that is you.
 
Joined
Mar 6, 2004
Messages
41,699
I am not at all happy with Biden's pick for SecDef.

Barely 2 years out of the Pentagon, works for defense contractor Raytheon.

Pentagon glass ceiling and all.

Trump may have established this precedent, but Biden following suit is even more unacceptable.

He's going to have problems getting the SecDef pick passed in the Senate, as Dems do not seem to be enamoured with him either. Seems to have been picked because he was buddies with Biden's son, Beau. No foreign policy experience. Embarrassing stuff.

But a host of new questions emerged on Tuesday about Austin’s 41-year record in the Army and the qualifications he would bring to a much more expansive portfolio as the top civilian overseeing the Department of Defense.

In particular, national security experts raised concerns about Austin’s lack of experience handling what many consider to be the most pressing challenge facing the United States for years to come: an increasingly aggressive China.

“This suggests quite loudly to me that Biden doesn’t take hard power, and the China military threat as seriously and urgently as we need to,” said Elbridge Colby, a former defense official and a lead author the 2018 National Defense Strategy that laid out the Pentagon’s pivot from counterterrorism to great power competition.

Despite making strides to address the Chinese threat during the Trump administration, the U.S. military continues to be surprised by the pace and sophistication of Beijing’s military buildup, Colby noted. In some ways the U.S. is already falling behind, he added.

“Lloyd Austin has an extremely distinguished military career — but to me that’s not really the issue. What we need is someone who already is at the forefront of thinking and leadership on Asia and China, on aerospace and maritime power, and on technology," Colby said. "That's what not Austin's background brings to the table, and we’re way beyond the point where we can have someone who doesn't have that.”

Bilal Saab, another former Trump-era defense official and Middle East Institute expert, also raised questions about the gap in Austin’s background.

“I am wondering how his lack of policy experience will influence his ability to translate the president's political priorities," he said. "I am concerned about his lack of Indo-Pacific background, which is our new foreign policy priority."



 

Tofu

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2011
Messages
519
the funny thing is, there is not a single report which comes from main stream media up to now.
so you are telling me that is not newsworthy or it is a fake news?
wake up, you can see how communism works now, just let the leftists to shut the opposition voice up? NO WAY.

Are you trying to frighten me with an impending communist takeover?
 

AfricanTech

Honorary Master
Joined
Mar 19, 2010
Messages
40,365
I agree absolutely. Shocking judgement.

But the fact that she wrote the letter means that she is definitely involved in such abuses, don't you think? That is probably what the honorable brit is saying.
It makes her an enabler :mad:
 
Joined
Mar 6, 2004
Messages
41,699
I'm not sure I see the relevance of the letter she wrote though, in terms of her abilities, experience and qualifications.

If you are elected to an influential position in public life, in addition to the abilities, experience and qualifications, you should pick someone with 'good character'. It's unlikely that the Senate would confirm someone convicted of fraud, for example, even if the fraud was committed 30 years ago and has no relevance to the current role.
 

buka001

Honorary Master
Joined
Oct 16, 2009
Messages
16,981
He's going to have problems getting the SecDef pick passed in the Senate, as Dems do not seem to be enamoured with him either. Seems to have been picked because he was buddies with Biden's son, Beau. No foreign policy experience. Embarrassing stuff.







Agreed. Disappointing. I hope he fails his nomination.
 

Gnarls

Expert Member
Joined
May 20, 2008
Messages
4,908
Fair enough, I did contradict myself.

Still doesn't explain why they haven't brought this to the courts, if it is so obvious and inexplicable.

So what is the explanation as to why it has not been brought to court?

Data analysis takes time. Maybe they're just buying time for the data nerds to investigate?
 

AfricanTech

Honorary Master
Joined
Mar 19, 2010
Messages
40,365
If you are elected to an influential position in public life, in addition to the abilities, experience and qualifications, you should pick someone with 'good character'. It's unlikely that the Senate would confirm someone convicted of fraud, for example, even if the fraud was committed 30 years ago and has no relevance to the current role.
Sadly, reality does not reflect this ideal - there are plenty in public office all over the globe who do not exhibit 'good character' - the pussy grabbing president being but an obvious example
 

surface

Honorary Master
Joined
Oct 23, 2006
Messages
26,596
I'm not sure I see the relevance of the letter she wrote though, in terms of her abilities, experience and qualifications.
Basically as a ardent trump supporter, I insist that all the biden's appointments should not have a single minute flaw in their character. Otherwise, they should just concede.
 
Joined
Mar 6, 2004
Messages
41,699
Sadly, reality does not reflect this ideal - there are plenty in public office all over the globe who do not exhibit 'good character' - the pussy grabbing president being but an obvious example

Of course, but the crucial difference between Trump being elected and the Housing and Urban Development Secretary being confirmed is the former is elected by the people while the other can only be confirmed by the Senate.
 

AfricanTech

Honorary Master
Joined
Mar 19, 2010
Messages
40,365
Of course, but the crucial difference between Trump being elected and the Housing and Urban Development Secretary being confirmed is the former is elected by the people while the other can only be confirmed by the Senate.
Do you seriously want to tell me that everyone sitting the Senate are people of good character?

PS: I don't know enough about this person you highlighted, but based on the piece of evidence your presented (ie assuming that this is comprehensive indicator of character), I am genuinely disappointed at the appointment.
 

C4Cat

Honorary Master
Joined
Nov 9, 2015
Messages
14,307
If you are elected to an influential position in public life, in addition to the abilities, experience and qualifications, you should pick someone with 'good character'. It's unlikely that the Senate would confirm someone convicted of fraud, for example, even if the fraud was committed 30 years ago and has no relevance to the current role.
Well, yes, but she didn't assault or murder anyone. She wrote a letter in support of someone who had been a friend for 30 years and she had never seen that side of him. She condemned the crimes committed by Mason and later clarified that her support for Mason was based on the person she knew for almost 30 years, writing that "the person who committed these crimes is not the Lance Mason familiar to me." That could happen to any of us, it's not really a reflection of anything other than that she gave a friend a second chance - which she maybe shouldn't have done but it's not really enough to condemn her for, IMO. I mean, I don't know enough about her to support her either, but if she is to be criticized let it be on something really worth being critical of.
 
Last edited:
Top