President Trump just declared a national emergency

originally posted by: purplemer
a reply to: Xcathdra

Where where they all reported. Type in executive order usa in google. How many hits do you get for this.

I asked a question you have not answered.

It helps if you know how to search:

www.nytimes.com...

abcnews.go.com...

thehill.com...

And straight from the horse's mouth:

www.state.gov...

As you can see, it is not a net designed to ensnare Hillary Clinton. The briefing suggests that State, Treasury, and, presumably, the "intelligence community" have been working on this since the act came out during the Obama administration. It does seem to be under-reported, but that is probably because the media are not inclined to let Trump take credit for the work of career civil servants.

I am very concerned by the way members here are not bothering to do "due diligence."The speculation goes far beyond what a simple interpretation of the facts would yield. I am increasingly of the opinion that the alleged "leaker"is part of a Russian disinformation campaign. S/he leaves vague, broad hints that something big is coming down, and then whatever happens over the next 48 hours, followers interpret it as being the "big event"that was "leaked."This is how charlatan psychics work. "A sweeping wind will come from the North." If there is a blizzard it is a hit. If Russia sends troops into Georgia it is a hit because Russia is in the "North." Ditto, if the Canadian Prime Minister calls for a vote of confidence, or if the United States sends ground troops into Mexico to fight the narcos. Nostradamus specialized in that line.

Be aware: Russian mind manipulation has a much darker side than you might think. Check out "The Rose of the World"cult, and "The Blue Whale Game." (Admittedly, the latter may be an internet rumor.)

The most interesting thing about this move is that no one I bring it up to irl knows about it at all. Trump is possibly fighting the most important fight in recent American and world history and no one knows. MSM is being oddly silent.

a reply to: ShamnaOahu

MSM is being oddly silent.

Can you blame them considering how many times they've been burned recently?

originally posted by: ShamnaOahu
The most interesting thing about this move is that no one I bring it up to irl knows about it at all. Trump is possibly fighting the most important fight in recent American and world history and no one knows. MSM is being oddly silent.

It is not very glamorous, is it? Sanctions against a long list of foreigners with unpronounceable names that no-one has heard of is not exactly the most exciting story. Trump, incidentally, is only taking credit for something the State Department and Treasury Department have been working on for over a year. Obama signed the legislation that authorized it. If you were to read a good newspaper instead of watching TV news you would have seen the story. I link to the New York Times' coverage in my last post.

originally posted by: the owlbear

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Yeah, but did you actually read the OP?

It looks like Trump is going after corrupt politicians

Not really. He can't shake things up too much without Trump University being brought up again, or His other bankruptcies that amount to the GDP of some third world nations.
Saying "locker room talk" isn't going to save him the next round of that also.

So you’re denying that Trump is $400 Million in debt to Deutsche Bank?

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: ShamnaOahu

MSM is being oddly silent.

Can you blame them considering how many times they've been burned recently?

I was thinking the MSM is so silent on the advice of their lawyers...

a reply to: drock905

Lionel Nation covers the Executive order and it's implications.

www.youtube.com...

a reply to: Xtrozero

Utopia?

I think not. In a Utopian situation, the legal concerns would be so far down the list of reasons not to do evil to others, that no one would ever read that far down the list. Top on that list would be much purer concepts like whether the action was honourable, whether it was dignified, whether the people on whose behalf the action was taken, would be elevated by it, or have their honour as citizens destroyed by it instead.

Well after that, waaaaaay after that, you have petty considerations like law.

originally posted by: TrueBrit

Utopia?

I think not. In a Utopian situation, the legal concerns would be so far down the list of reasons not to do evil to others, that no one would ever read that far down the list. Top on that list would be much purer concepts like whether the action was honourable, whether it was dignified, whether the people on whose behalf the action was taken, would be elevated by it, or have their honour as citizens destroyed by it instead.

Well after that, waaaaaay after that, you have petty considerations like law.

The problem is when you add humans into the mix, then it gets ugly. Just like pure Communism on paper is basically a Utopian society that at the last stage all the leaders step down and everyone is equal with all living this great same life, but we know better and see that Communism turns into a real nasty situation. So bad that it is the cause of the worst atrocities in human history. So much for Utopia...

There are many reasons why humans are to top predator on the planet and it has more to do with we are the velociraptor of the mammal world than we are just smart. That evil race of aliens that go to a planet and rape, pillage and plunders all its resources while eating anything that moves is us... We are smart enough to know better, but we don't actually care as it isn't truly in our nature.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Silent about what? At the top of the page I linked to several mainstream outlets that covered the story. And what is the relevance of your meme to the issue?

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Xcathdra

Silent about what? At the top of the page I linked to several mainstream outlets that covered the story. And what is the relevance of your meme to the issue?

The meme goes along with the msm intentional collusion to act against Trump. Their silence goes along with the MSM spinning every story and in other instances flat out failing to cover a story because they are complicit in it.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Please explain. If they do not cover the consular corps using diplomatic privilege to double park, does that make them complicit/

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Xcathdra

Please explain. If they do not cover the consular corps using diplomatic privilege to double park, does that make them complicit/

No however when people employed by the msm (on air talent) agree to publish certain stories beneficial to their candidate of choice, intentionally providing false information by choice, sending articles to a campaign for review and revision before print, is in fact being complicit.

It is compounded when they fail to report their involvement in the story they are reporting on.

a reply to: DJW001


The media has already been exposed as propagandists, partisans, provocateurs and other shameful forms of political prostitution.

The majority of what was considered "MSM" is in shambles, their ratings/viewership is failing and tens of millions of patriots have tuned out.

There is no dispute that "MSM" is in collusion with political hacks to slander the President. The disgraced FBI agents/DOJ lawyers are part of this hack-circus. Embarrassed MSM is also complicit.

a reply to: Xtrozero


Agreed

Very insightful metaphor by the way

a reply to: Xcathdra


Or in the case of folk-hero Donna Brazile (if not just for her stunning revelations about the DNC primary rigging), giving Hillary Clinton debate questions before-hand (giving her an unfair advantage)

I agree the MSM has been thoroughly discredited, but some folks still refuse to see what is right in front of them. It is like presenting corruption facts RE: Mueller probe, they refuse to acknowledge even basic truths

a reply to: JBurns

Speaking of Donna Brzaile and how the msm thinks about the people watch to the end.

a reply to: Xcathdra

No however when people employed by the msm (on air talent) agree to publish certain stories beneficial to their candidate of choice, intentionally providing false information by choice, sending articles to a campaign for review and revision before print, is in fact being complicit.

It is compounded when they fail to report their involvement in the story they are reporting on.

Is that what you see happening here? I see the media giving a routine diplomatic measure an appropriate amount of coverage. Why do you want to drag partisanship into this, other than wanting Trump to get credit for something he didn't do?

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Xcathdra

No however when people employed by the msm (on air talent) agree to publish certain stories beneficial to their candidate of choice, intentionally providing false information by choice, sending articles to a campaign for review and revision before print, is in fact being complicit.

It is compounded when they fail to report their involvement in the story they are reporting on.

Is that what you see happening here? I see the media giving a routine diplomatic measure an appropriate amount of coverage. Why do you want to drag partisanship into this, other than wanting Trump to get credit for something he didn't do?

If that is what you "see" then your next eye prescription is going to be a seeing eye dog. The media is not giving a diplomatic approach. The media has dragged partisanship into this and calling them out for it doesnt make me responsible for their partisanship.

bump.

see if anybody has anything to add