Community > Posts By > Conrad_73

 
Conrad_73's photo
Fri 08/18/17 07:57 AM
real classy!

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/08/missouri-state-senator-calls-assassination-potus-trump-facebook/

Conrad_73's photo
Fri 08/18/17 04:26 AM

If YAHOO moves a tad more left,they will fall off the Flat Earth they have created!laugh

Conrad_73's photo
Fri 08/18/17 03:57 AM
bigsmile

Conrad_73's photo
Fri 08/18/17 03:37 AM
hope they roll him over,if he's still alive several months from now!
People have a propensity to fall down Stairs and break their Necks when remanded for Investigation!pitchfork

Conrad_73's photo
Thu 08/17/17 01:20 PM



will never happen to Trump, he has too many lawyers paid to lie FOR him,,

great way to avoid impeachment,, giving credit to the con artist, where credit is due,,

you might want to study the Process of Impeachment again!


Funny because the Clinton's and Obamas were lawyers themselves.

Disgraced ones eventually,I think!laugh

Conrad_73's photo
Thu 08/17/17 09:57 AM

not everyplace has a 'stand your ground' loophole


some places still expect 'reasonable' attempts to avoid danger or flee a threat



so,the Right to Selfdefense has now become a "Loophole"?

Conrad_73's photo
Thu 08/17/17 09:53 AM

will never happen to Trump, he has too many lawyers paid to lie FOR him,,

great way to avoid impeachment,, giving credit to the con artist, where credit is due,,

you might want to study the Process of Impeachment again!

Conrad_73's photo
Thu 08/17/17 07:55 AM





In Case of the Removal of the President from Office, or of his Death, Resignation, or Inability to discharge the Powers and Duties of the said Office, the Same shall devolve on the Vice President, and the Congress may by Law provide for the Case of Removal, Death, Resignation or Inability, both of the President and Vice President, declaring what Officer shall then act as President, and such Officer shall act accordingly, until the Disability be removed, or a President shall be elected.


The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.


These Constitutional clauses both allow for the impeachment and OR removal from office, of a President who is clearly acting against the best interests of the American People, and the United States.

The Republicans have already established the precedent that a President who lies to Congress can be impeached. Trump has told more lies than truths, so that's enough. However, I would myself prefer to look at the destructive incompetence he has repeatedly displayed while in office, endangering our military and our intelligence operatives, by openly revealing details of what we now and how we know it; ignoring and even praising attacks by other nations on our soil; that sort of thing.

and what is that "Precedent" pray tell?


The one they established when they impeached Clinton for lying about cheating on Hillary.

Nope,he got IMPEACHED for lying under Oath!


weird how they can't remember their own history... no wonder they want delete it, so they can write it how it suits them...
Right!:thumbsup:

Conrad_73's photo
Thu 08/17/17 04:27 AM
https://amgreatness.com/2017/08/14/mcauliffes-progressive-government-riot-charlottesville/

For over a century, police and military have been used successfully to contain possible violence between demonstrators and their opponents in our communities. Everyone knows how it works. One hardly need reinvent the wheel to support the conduct of decent civil demonstrations.

By simply interposing a police cordon between the opposing factions and some space, in labor marches in the 1930s, civil rights marches in the 1950s and 1960s, and anti-Vietnam war demonstrations, violence is minimized.

But in some cases, by an express act of government, the cordon was removed, and the Ford goons descended upon the UAW demonstrators, racist whites aided by police attacked civil rights marchers, and hard hats fought anti-war protesters. This was carefully masked by a gutless media dutifully spreading the word that the riots in Detroit were caused by “Communist agitators” who also were supposedly behind the “un-American” civil rights movement, and the Vietnam War demonstrators.

Let’s not kid ourselves. These riots were not simply the result of occasional mistakes by government. They were active political efforts having nothing to do with public safety and designed to cast the demonstrators in a villainous role and government as the valiant defender of the best interests of the public.

They were purely political and totally avoidable, deeply cynical, and anti-democratic. Whatever the demonstrators tried to do to comply with parade registration and regulation was cast aside and all government power was thrown against them while their opponents were spared. The clashes were, in other words, politically desirable by the authorities in question.

So there is nothing new about this pattern of behavior, which has waxed and waned over the past century at the election of government: sometimes intervening on one side, other times providing a level playing field.

What is new is the consistent pattern of anti-constitutional behavior by progressive governments during and in the wake of the Trump election. We have seen repeated removal of police protection by governments in progressive strongholds such as Chicago and San Jose for Trump supporters leading to cancellation of rallies and physical attacks on them by their opponents while the police were ordered to stand idly by.

This standing down in the face of potentially violent confrontations between left-wing activists and whomever happens to be the object of their ire is now policy for progressive government. Few things can be more absurd than seeing University of California President Janet Napolitano, once responsible for the protection of the entire United States as secretary of Homeland Security, pleading herself unable to keep order in a mere 17 square miles of the University of California campus, and allowing the ensuing riots.

Now in progressive Charlottesville, Virginia, home of the University of Virginia, a ragtag group of nostalgic sectionalists time has passed by, with a mixture of delusional white power activists under Richard Spencer and Jason Kessler, takes the trouble to comply with all the paperwork and get a proper permit to demonstrate against the removal of memorials to their Confederate heroes, now in the sights of the historical revisionists in power in Charlottesville and Richmond.

Like the Taliban, who destroyed the Buddhist shrines in Afghanistan, or ISIS, which destroyed sites in Baalbek and Nineveh, the only history these fanatics are interested in is the one they are busy reinventing at every level of academia and ramming down the throats of Americans.

So as the ACLU has established, Charlottesville first tried to invalidate the permit for their parade and then withdrew police protection, and then the police directed the disbanding demonstrators directly into a body of counterdemonstrators, more than 10 times their numbers and far more violent.

Up until this conscious choice by Virginia’s state government under progressive Governor Terry McAuliffe and Charlottesville Mayor Michael Signer, the original demonstrators had been noisy but peaceful. But the “Antifa faction” was weaponized by the progressive government forces in Charlottesville.

Without the local government’s active steps taken to release it, the Antifa was just a competing faction. And it appears that the police had ordered the original demonstrators to cease their demonstration, but did not extend that order to Antifa counterdemonstrators. The progressives in local government did this despite McAuliffe stating his police told him “80 percent of the people here had semi-automatic weapons.” As he pointed out, not a shot was fired. McAuliffe even regarded the death from the car crashing through the crowd an anomaly. “You can’t stop some crazy guy who came here from Ohio and used his car for a weapon,” McAuliffe said. “He was a terrorist.”

So whatever one might think of the motley cause of “Unite the Right” supposedly gathered to defend Confederate statues and reassert “white power,” the Virginia authorities turning loose a far larger component of violent Antifa and their allies on them was bound to cause a major confrontation.

Remember, Richard Spencer, Jason Kessler, and the other “Unite the Right” groups have been demonstrating peacefully in Charlottesville for weeks, complete with torchlit parades and no violence.

The difference this time was clear and easy to track. It had nothing to do with actions by “white supremacists” and certainly nothing to do with statements by the president. The progressives in government had decided once again to withdraw the police and let the Antifa storm troopers loose. The degraded press refused to report the clear reality and went forward with the progressives cover story blaming the violence on the “white supremacists.”

For all the blather from McAuliffe about the Unite the Right group being guilty of “terrorism,” if anyone should be denounced, it should be progressive local government for their deliberate and destructive actions. This meltdown of law and order was unnecessary as this unfortunate demonstration was ending as peacefully, if also as stupidly, as it began until the direct intervention of local authorities sparked a catastrophe.

Conrad_73's photo
Thu 08/17/17 04:23 AM



In Case of the Removal of the President from Office, or of his Death, Resignation, or Inability to discharge the Powers and Duties of the said Office, the Same shall devolve on the Vice President, and the Congress may by Law provide for the Case of Removal, Death, Resignation or Inability, both of the President and Vice President, declaring what Officer shall then act as President, and such Officer shall act accordingly, until the Disability be removed, or a President shall be elected.


The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.


These Constitutional clauses both allow for the impeachment and OR removal from office, of a President who is clearly acting against the best interests of the American People, and the United States.

The Republicans have already established the precedent that a President who lies to Congress can be impeached. Trump has told more lies than truths, so that's enough. However, I would myself prefer to look at the destructive incompetence he has repeatedly displayed while in office, endangering our military and our intelligence operatives, by openly revealing details of what we now and how we know it; ignoring and even praising attacks by other nations on our soil; that sort of thing.

and what is that "Precedent" pray tell?


The one they established when they impeached Clinton for lying about cheating on Hillary.

Nope,he got IMPEACHED for lying under Oath!

Conrad_73's photo
Thu 08/17/17 04:17 AM
Edited by Conrad_73 on Thu 08/17/17 04:21 AM
http://www.thenation.com/article/a-new-report-raises-big-questions-about-last-years-dnc-hack/

A New Report Raises Big Questions About Last Year’s DNC Hack
Former NSA experts say it wasn’t a hack at all, but a leak—an inside job by someone with access to the DNC’s system.
By Patrick LawrenceTwitter
August 9, 2017

It is now a year since the Democratic National Committee’s mail system was compromised—a year since events in the spring and early summer of 2016 were identified as remote hacks and, in short order, attributed to Russians acting in behalf of Donald Trump. A great edifice has been erected during this time. President Trump, members of his family, and numerous people around him stand accused of various corruptions and extensive collusion with Russians. Half a dozen simultaneous investigations proceed into these matters. Last week news broke that Special Counsel Robert Mueller had convened a grand jury, which issued its first subpoenas on August 3. Allegations of treason are common; prominent political figures and many media cultivate a case for impeachment.

The president’s ability to conduct foreign policy, notably but not only with regard to Russia, is now crippled. Forced into a corner and having no choice, Trump just signed legislation imposing severe new sanctions on Russia and European companies working with it on pipeline projects vital to Russia’s energy sector. Striking this close to the core of another nation’s economy is customarily considered an act of war, we must not forget. In retaliation, Moscow has announced that the United States must cut its embassy staff by roughly two-thirds. All sides agree that relations between the United States and Russia are now as fragile as they were during some of the Cold War’s worst moments. To suggest that military conflict between two nuclear powers inches ever closer can no longer be dismissed as hyperbole.

All this was set in motion when the DNC’s mail server was first violated in the spring of 2016 and by subsequent assertions that Russians were behind that “hack” and another such operation, also described as a Russian hack, on July 5. These are the foundation stones of the edifice just outlined. The evolution of public discourse in the year since is worthy of scholarly study: Possibilities became allegations, and these became probabilities. Then the probabilities turned into certainties, and these evolved into what are now taken to be established truths. By my reckoning, it required a few days to a few weeks to advance from each of these stages to the next. This was accomplished via the indefensibly corrupt manipulations of language repeated incessantly in our leading media.

We are urged to accept the word of institutions and senior officials with long records of deception.

Lost in a year that often appeared to veer into our peculiarly American kind of hysteria is the absence of any credible evidence of what happened last year and who was responsible for it. It is tiresome to note, but none has been made available. Instead, we are urged to accept the word of institutions and senior officials with long records of deception. These officials profess “high confidence” in their “assessment” as to what happened in the spring and summer of last year—this standing as their authoritative judgment. Few have noticed since these evasive terms first appeared that an assessment is an opinion, nothing more, and to express high confidence is an upside-down way of admitting the absence of certain knowledge. This is how officials avoid putting their names on the assertions we are so strongly urged to accept—as the record shows many of them have done.

We come now to a moment of great gravity.

There has been a long effort to counter the official narrative we now call “Russiagate.” This effort has so far focused on the key events noted above, leaving numerous others still to be addressed. Until recently, researchers undertaking this work faced critical shortcomings, and these are to be explained. But they have achieved significant new momentum in the past several weeks, and what they have done now yields very consequential fruit. Forensic investigators, intelligence analysts, system designers, program architects, and computer scientists of long experience and strongly credentialed are now producing evidence disproving the official version of key events last year. Their work is intricate and continues at a kinetic pace as we speak. But its certain results so far are two, simply stated, and freighted with implications:

There was no hack of the Democratic National Committee’s system on July 5 last year—not by the Russians, not by anyone else. Hard science now demonstrates it was a leak—a download executed locally with a memory key or a similarly portable data-storage device. In short, it was an inside job by someone with access to the DNC’s system. This casts serious doubt on the initial “hack,” as alleged, that led to the very consequential publication of a large store of documents on WikiLeaks last summer.
(more at the link)
If you have lost The Nation,you are in Sheep-Dip indeed!laugh

Conrad_73's photo
Thu 08/17/17 04:12 AM



he finances his wife in a lifestyle she would otherwise not have for her and her kids,,,


so does obarry and his husband mike...and their kids..


actually being that Ms Obama was working when she met him , had a career in LAW, and was his mentor, I am sure she could have managed a very similar lifestyle to what she currently has, with or without him,, they are both INDIVIDUALLY educated in the same area and INDIVIDUALLY capable of the same income potential based upon that education and experience,,,,,



Community-Organizing?

Conrad_73's photo
Wed 08/16/17 11:46 AM

These Constitutional clauses both allow for the impeachment and OR removal from office, of a President who is clearly acting against the best interests of the American People, and the United States.

The Republicans have already established the precedent that a President who lies to Congress can be impeached. Trump has told more lies than truths, so that's enough. However, I would myself prefer to look at the destructive incompetence he has repeatedly displayed while in office, endangering our military and our intelligence operatives, by openly revealing details of what we now and how we know it; ignoring and even praising attacks by other nations on our soil; that sort of thing.


For those reasons, Obama should have been impeached. bigsmile
laugh

Conrad_73's photo
Wed 08/16/17 10:52 AM
when I heard the News on the Radio,I felt like I was hit on my Head with a Bat!

Conrad_73's photo
Wed 08/16/17 10:50 AM
Oh Goody,let's go along with Maxine Waters!laugh

Conrad_73's photo
Wed 08/16/17 10:33 AM
Edited by Conrad_73 on Wed 08/16/17 10:51 AM

In Case of the Removal of the President from Office, or of his Death, Resignation, or Inability to discharge the Powers and Duties of the said Office, the Same shall devolve on the Vice President, and the Congress may by Law provide for the Case of Removal, Death, Resignation or Inability, both of the President and Vice President, declaring what Officer shall then act as President, and such Officer shall act accordingly, until the Disability be removed, or a President shall be elected.


The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.


These Constitutional clauses both allow for the impeachment and OR removal from office, of a President who is clearly acting against the best interests of the American People, and the United States.

The Republicans have already established the precedent that a President who lies to Congress can be impeached. Trump has told more lies than truths, so that's enough. However, I would myself prefer to look at the destructive incompetence he has repeatedly displayed while in office, endangering our military and our intelligence operatives, by openly revealing details of what we now and how we know it; ignoring and even praising attacks by other nations on our soil; that sort of thing.

and what is that "Precedent" pray tell?

Conrad_73's photo
Wed 08/16/17 01:48 AM

I am in favor of Confederate statues remaining on public property on one condition:

Such statues should have added to them plaques which say, "This statue represents one(s) who fought to keep black Americans enslaved."

very few actually owned Slaves,most of them fought for Home and Hearth!

Conrad_73's photo
Wed 08/16/17 01:44 AM

Conrad_73's photo
Wed 08/16/17 01:39 AM
Edited by Conrad_73 on Wed 08/16/17 01:40 AM
Goebbels' Book-burning all over again!
Orwell's Ministry Of Truth revisited!

Conrad_73's photo
Wed 08/16/17 01:38 AM

It is crucial to maintaining the hidden power of the deep state.
AG Jeff Sessions, says the state's have the right to do whatever the want with their monuments?

Do these people have jobs? That are protesting and do they know anything about history? All they know is they have some kind of distorted view on racism. I to thank Obama, but I believe it started way before.

Thinking about what Sessions said from many angles. Plural noun
A member of a German people, originally inhabitants of what is now Schleswig-holstein, who migrated to England in the 5th century AD. The Angles founded kingdoms in Mercia, Northumbria, and East Anglia and gave their name to England and the English. Or should I have used the word perspective? Just rambling like moe & Godzilla scared maybe I should research these people. glasses laugh

Soros pays them above Minimum-wage!

1 2 7 8 9 11 13 14 15 24 25