Jump to content
The Education Forum

Kirk Gallaway

Members
  • Posts

    3,053
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Kirk Gallaway

  1. No Matt, she's not automatically entitled because she's VP. If Biden were to get ill and/or back out now. It would be a jump start open race. I think the only situation by which Harris becomes President is if Biden dies or becomes incapacitated. Both the DNC and the RNC are pretty similar in they'll back who they think is the strongest candidate to be elected President. But they can become overruled as they were with Trump in 2016, Mc Govern in 72, and Goldwater in 64.
  2. Biden, obviously was offended by the Trump appointee Hur's commentary and thought he had overstepped and got too personal and revealed things of a sitting President that should have been left unsaid. it does look like Hur is unconvinced that Biden is not guilty but conjectures that Biden would never be convicted because a jury would compassionately give him a pass because he's a weak frail old man. Unlike Trump, I don't think there was any malicious or self serving intent in taking those files, and it sounds like Hur is getting his pound of flesh back at Biden for the 91 felony counts on Trump, but the bottom line is he did exonerate Biden. Then when Biden was insulted at the allegation that Biden himself couldn't remember details about his own sons death. He fights back, goes on the air and forgets the award that his son got and called it called the"Lady of --------and couldn't remember "Guadalupe." Doug: Biden has had it. He is too old. His foreign policy mistakes are leading the world to nuclear war. About the policy mistakes, maybe I'll address that later. There's too much sh-t coming to a head. Doug, from what I gather you're about 12-13 years older than me. Being closer to Biden's age, I assume you can in part relate to Biden's situation. He needs a super dose of Prevagen, if that works at all! I confess, just the other day, I had a hard time recalling George Santos's name, and he's been in the news a lot! I don't think that impairs any of Biden's policy judgments, but it looks absolutely horrible and is a definite liability in the election. Not that Trump's gaffes are any better, but he at least projects a robustness and an insincere cockiness that a lot of people find appealing, and overlook his mistakes. I have spent many years watching my Father's gradual demise before his death at 101, and can tell you there were several years that if you asked him what was the year my Mother died. He couldn't tell you but that wouldn't impair his judgment in the his present reality, and he exhibited good judgment. W. --I've made no secret of the fact that I have disagreed, since October, with Biden's support for Netanyahu's bombing of Gaza. Biden, himself, now seems to recognize his mistake, and the risk of being drawn into the longstanding Israeli/Neocon plan to engage the U.S. in a war with Iran. As you know, I agree with you W. but I don't think Biden has made any any recognition or realized that he has made a mistake. If you see the arc of what is politically possible. I can tell you Biden's actions have been completely predictable. The vast majority of people and the Congress don't agree with your or my position , including people in this conversation right now. Discounting that reality is akin to a Trumpist discounting us as sheep and pro establishment for being outraged at the insurrection and Trump's attempts to throw the election, when in reality we are a solid majority, or Di Eugenio inferring that we're Cold War neocons because we don't walk in lockstep with him and his mentor Oliver Stone about Putin. There was no way Biden could take an action against Israel from the onset, as it would show America to not have any credibility as an ally. In the political sphere, once alliances start breaking down., then all bets are off! But that's not to mention it would be Biden's political suicide to soon turn on Israel after the Hamas terrorism. For the first few months, he couldn't do anything any faster than he has. He has a more Herculean task before him than any President in recent memory. At this point, he has to conspire and drum up support among all the neighbors in the region for a Palestinian state, because Netanyahu is probably not going to be out of office this year. But is he up to it? We all know the stakes are higher than they've ever been. At this moment, you could make a case that his beginning stages of dementia are no worse than Reagan's as his son once said in an interview that Reagan was never the same after he was shot, which occurred in the first 3 months of his Presidency, and he served for another 8 years after that! Up to now, I've discounted these polls and felt Biden would win. But for you guys who are circling the wagons with Biden, you have to keep in mind, we are talking about Biden, the candidate here. We've already witnessed a decline in Biden! How much worse may it get this year with the pressures of the campaign? Given the present decline, whose to say that the gaffes couldn't become much worse.? And if Biden does win, how much more in another 4 years? Would a Jerry Mahoney dummy with a competent staff and Kamala Harris be worth denying a deranged tyrant who assaults our democracy? People may end up coming to the realization that that is what the Democrats may be selling. "Don't go to the apocalypse," but a lot of people are not convinced that we would be going to an apocalypse. Despite all the hand wringing about the DNC affecting the outcome of the primaries, we might end up being thankful, for their intervention. But how is that going to happen, unless somebody comes forward, and changes the equation?
  3. Right, they couldn't get a 2/3rds majority. Though I'm not sure the charge was technically for leading an insurrection. And he hasn't been found guilty by the courts. So would conviction by Jack Smith automatically fulfill his ineligibility? Somehow, i don't think so. They've been talking that technically Trump could be convicted and be President! Which sounds insane! On a related matter. It definitely could be mind boggling and needs some clarification. Let me see if I got this right. Let's go all the way with this. If the standard is "innocent until proven guilty." That is what Trump's lawyers were arguing about the prospect of Trump becoming President and using Seal Team 6 to kill his political rival, stating that he could only be removed from office 1)if he was impeached and convicted, but we know now 2) he could also be prosecuted in court and found guilty (that is, we know now he has no immunity). Right? But we also know now, by going through the courts they haven't convicted Trump of any crime in 3 years now and he hasn't even been in office!. So even if we got a direct witness from the assassinating seal team saying a standing President ordered the assassination of his political rival. If we can't get an impeachment in the House and a 2/3rds majority in the Senate, (including some aberrant political faction, like MAGAs) to remove the President from office. He could probably stall off his conviction for the rest of his term, because nobody could speed up the due process in the courts, particularly of a standing President. Right? Just trippin'
  4. Yes, MSNBC does keep hammering in their lead stories to the point that they're like CNN in that news wise you hear one hour and if no news breaks, you hear the same stories over and over again each hour! I don't watch any show every day. I thought the hardest hitting guy on MSNBC was Meidi Asan, but he was too anti Israel and got booted off the network. I like Stephanie Ruhle, Nicole Wallace, though I don't get too much chance to see her, and Alex Wagner. I've never quite understood Rachael Maddow's popularity that she is by far the highest paid of the non Fox talent, and she can now make more than any of the others and work one day a week! I was glad they dumped blowhard Chris Matthews for talking about Bernie in early 2020 as if he was some sort of evil socialist figure, but he was really talking for the MSNBC program managers who thought Biden was the only candidate who could beat Trump. I guess that will always be a matter of controversy. I think the hardest hitting interviewer of MAGA and the Republicans is Caitlan Collins on CNN. Republicans and MAGA are much more likely to appear on CNN rather than MSNBC, if they're feeling brave. So W. Did you make it down to Roatan? It's always been too far out of the way so I've never been there but I've heard it's excellent for scuba and snorkeling!
  5. No it's not going to dismiss the case, but it will delay it. My feeling is that you can''t stop people from feeling attraction toward one another. I hope I'm wrong but what I heard is apparently they went on 2 vacations together , with each one paying the separate bills for each vacation. and after their Aruba vacation,Fanni Willis made a deal with to pay him $10,000 a week for his services. It looks crummy. This seemed like the best case to nail Trump with hard evidence before the election and I just wish they could have spared us this.
  6. Yeah Yikes Ron.! This is what I mean by an oiligarchy slave state. You guys are treated so poorly. But your state is so energy rich! It just seems one of these days the population has got to rebel! Matt, it would be interesting to know what you typically pay as I've heard about the freezing temperatures lately there. But in fairness. I don't mean to rub it it in. I've never paid $200! Tomorrow's high for the playoffs is 73! But in part, because of that, the cost of housing is insane!
  7. Doug, I think you might like this, Bill Maher Overtime with Seth Mac Farlane, ,Adam Schiff and Steven A. Smith. Now 2 good Covid debates. IMO Seth Mac Farlane sticks to facts and hijacks Bill Maher's appeals to the right wing Covid deniers. Now watch Bill Burr do the same to Joe Rogan. i still maintain nobody is more unfunny than a pumped up comedian into martial arts. Cool W. Rotaan sounds nice!
  8. Trump derangement syndrome ? ...... Or the new Christo fascists! 12 million in the U.S.A.! I assume using A.I. with Paul Harvey's voice. God made a dictator - The Lincoln Project https://youtu.be/xOi2cYz5nXE
  9. Good fun. Trump gets cleverly heckled during one of his speeches, and doesn't appear to like it, and was getting rattled.
  10. As I said, I thought Jim's disjointed piece was in the first half a rehash of previous posts about JFK and Nasser and how Jim dreamed of a JFK/Nasser Socialist takeover of the Middle East where the Sauds and other oil rich countries would give up their wealth to the non oil countries like Egypt, in Nasser's always changing politically expedient vision of a Pan Arab League. And by the way, the Palestinians would have been given a permanent home! As if any powers anywhere would look forward to a revolution in oil country! It was a dream that was betrayed early on when JFK sided with Sauds against Nasser in the War in Yemen. Then near the end, JIm brings in Henry Jackson as the starter of the neocon movement! I'm not sure if Jim knows JFK actually was considering Henry Jackson as his VP running mate in 1960, before he decided on his southern strategy with LBJ.! Then imagine my surprise when I find that jt was Jackson who was there for RFK's support when he appeared at the 1964 Democratic Convention. First coming on camera with RFK at 5:25. https://youtu.be/o2rdKbOmPKs Besides to assume without Henry Jackson, there wouldn't have been a PNAC movement 20 years after his death is BS! The invasion of Iraq is totally on George W. Bush and his PNACer's. The Democrats in the house solidly voted against going to the War in Iraq. If we hadn't gotten that very questionable electoral result and we had Al Gore, the war never would have happened! I never liked Joe Biden through his entire career but I've been surprised to see his economic policies were certainly more for the working class than JFK, or any President in the last 45 years. Has anybody asked Di Eugenio since I can't because he has me on ignore, heh heh about RK Jr. making the most hawkish defense of Israel of any American politician up to this day? I think not, and wouldn't expect it! Would any other of you hard core RK /peace in Israel people like to weigh in on that as well!? My guess no matter whatever shock they possess over Israel's atrocities, they'd vote for RK anyway. Because we have a President in the U.S. I think a lot of people across the pond think that that must mean he has super powers. But we have a Congress that has the power of the purse strings. And If you're serious about the catastrophe in Gaza. Blaming it all on Biden is silly because the support of Israel is widespread in the U.S.! There's a number of people here who don't even agree with you about this! I generally like Mother Jones, but the current policy didn't just happen because of Joe Biden!. Imagine Trump as President ,who merely said the hostilities have to "play out! " The current situation would have been completely unleashed with very little Presidential calls for humanitarian action, and the Palestinians fed to the dogs, with a nothing more than shrieking from a handful of lefties! Yesterday, Bernie Sanders tried to pass a resolution to force the State Department to report on Israeli human rights violations in Gaza. It was backed by all of 11 Senators out of 100! Of those who voted for it, 10 were Democrats!, the one Republican out of 49 was Rand Paul! That should tell you what and who you're up against! Knowing Kennedy politics, JFK would probably be somewhere between Bernie and RK Jr., heh heh heh Ok probably like Biden, with about as much call for humanitarian efforts. I don't think JFK would be threatening to cut off aid to Israel at all, (Ask yourself, did he ever in all of his Presidency cross Congress!) and the U.S.is not going to bring in troops! Any JFK-as-saint conjecture would be as realistic as Jim's JFK Nasser plan of socializing the Mideast,solving the Palestinian issue forever, and then all of us living happily ever after! Call it a conspiracy, or call it dealing with political reality as it is. What changes the equation, are events that effect U.S. political sentiments in an election year. How mundane huh? https://www.businessinsider.com/which-senators-voted-bernie-sanders-resolution-israel-human-rights-violations-2024-1
  11. Prankster gives Ron DeSantis a participation trophy for his campaign in Iowa before being taken away by guards! heh heh heh
  12. To me this is honestly a sort of back door tribute to race relations in America among a certain strata of our population. Of which I'm one. 2 cool back dudes, review Louis CK roasting blacks. Laughter can bridge the world. I believe that!
  13. I hope she does make a race of it. Of course, Matt you're not from New Hampshire so all your conjecture as to Haley having a chance at all is from polling, or from the talking heads that use polling. I'd say barring any watershed event, Trump is the nominee for the Republican Party. Outside of health, the watershed event could be a conviction of one of the major crimes, as a quarter of Republicans have said that would persuade them to not vote for Trump. Of course that's if you think that those polls have any validity. That seems reasonable to me, but right now it doesn't look like any verdicts are going to come by November, though I ' hope I'm wrong, but that doesn't preclude considerable damage being done to Trump in the ongoing trials. Trump could gut the federal cases if he was to become President, except in Georgia, with the most open and shut case with a smoking gun recording, but the prosecutors decided to cast a wide blanket with 19 different indictments of individuals, so that will prolong that case, though some have already turned. Let's hope!
  14. Agreed W.! Add to that, wealth inequality and taxation, climate change, universal health care, But in another world, Little Marco endorses Trump!
  15. Sandy, I don't think it's your place as a moderator to start a thread to be an advocate on this issue, or give permission to direct or thwart conversation in either direction,.Or to declare shame and single out other forum members. I personally think some of these fringe issues are discrediting to the forum as well. But I see no point in arguing with advocates for the 1000th time. You can find many such arguments here if you look at past threads. But I don't find these advocates are overbearing and you can usually see from the titles of their threads what their views are and choose to ignore or get involved. There's a certain give and take on a forum like this and everyone must be willing to grant directions of research that are not mainstream. If you don't like these pursuits you can just blow it off if you don't agree or get involved and challenge it. If you hold these beliefs, time has told you, you're going to somewhere along the line have to defend them. And that comes with the territory. It needn't be a traumatic event.
  16. Good article, W.! Of course the question comes up : 1)How can a President remove critical intelligence files? Aren't there backups on everything? 2. ) How can our NSS, which is feared throughout the world not even be aware such files are missing.? 3) In an unrelated matter. How can a President abort an ongoing investigation and turn over most of 91 counts against himself when he reaches office? A potential conviction in court should not be able to be overturned with a vote.That's what separation of powers is all about! There's a lot of BS that's needs to be straightened out when this is all over! Regarding Putin, I've now heard Trump told an EU official in 2020 at the Davos Economic Conference not to expect the U.S. to defend European NATO members from attack, and said that the U.S. will get out of NATO. He could have gotten this by edict from Putin in Helsinki. This is the end all, (keep it simple stupid.) Trump can appear to have his own agenda opposing Putin in smaller matters but when push comes to shove. And say, Putin invaded the Baltics, Trump would use his Presidency and his MAGA following to oppose any U.S. intervention. To be clear, I'm not at all sure if after this embarrassment at getting bogged down in a 2 year war with Ukraine that Putin is ambitious as he once might have been and is more content to just hold on to his present territory seized in Ukraine and declare that victory, and use it to attain re election, and continue his funding and support proxy wars in the Middle East and other possible regions. Which of course, in fairness, we've done as well. Still there should be no doubt, if there was one simple easy command for Putin to direct Trump, promising no intervention in Europe, would be it.
  17. Here's Tony Lyons Leslie, Anybody who runs for President has to devise a campaign strategy. In this interview Lyons keeps being asked what states in the electoral college does RK intend to win, and he's completely evasive 3 straight times! They're just sort of shooting in the dark.
  18. Just to be clear, Leslie, these are 2 separate events. This doesn't support W's article about RK being a VP for Trump, right? Boy RK would be a permanent political pariah if he did that. Still I think some of more MAGA like RK supporters here would go for that while maybe not saying so. So far I notice one who has seen now that RK is a hard core pro Israel, which he doesn't like. Still I don't see any defections in them. It's a blood cult. i really have a hard time believing it. Still he's done about every politically stupid thing he could do. Does he have any idea of the scope of moral revulsion by a solid majority of people he would get for doing that? Allying with Trump is such a cynical move it goes counter to everything the Kennedy's stood for in the public mind.
  19. There's a quiet movement going on in Israel to never let Gazans resettle and pawn them off on the rest of the world, never to return! https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/07/opinion/israel-gaza-war.html?smid=url-share
  20. Paul: lest you think that the omissions I'm talking about refer solely to Sperling and Jim Di make no mention of the JFK's sale of Hawk missiles to Israel. Let's deal with more omissions and maybe some fallacies.. Let's go to Jim's Gaza and JFK. It's cool. He has me on ignore anyway. ***** Jim Di: Kennedy also made it clear that he did not like having to deal with the dissolute Saud and his extremist monarchy. For him, Nasser represented the hopes and aspirations of Arab nationalism. He was the reformer who could lead into a new and different future. Consequently, JFK wanted to disconnect America from the relic of the past, namely the Saud family. Yes JFK made it so clear, he ended up betraying Nasser and supplying military assistance to the Saudis against Nasser in their War in Yemen. This is what I mean by a "glaring omission." And as I said, I looked into this 5 minutes and I found out about the JFK/Nasser relationship concerning the War in Yemen just prior to JFK's death. Perspectives on power -Summit: This left the Kennedy Administration with a decision: support Nasser or support alliances with the conservative Arab countries. Kennedy ultimately chose to defend the conservatives and break with Nasser. And you contributed Paul! Paul Rigby:Nasser was the alternative to the Saudi’s, and the US chose the latter with ongoing devastating effect, And then from Paul Rigby's text: Despite concurrent Cold War tensions, Americans and Soviets appeared on the same side of the Yemeni conflict and acted mutually to confine Nasser to the borders of South Arabia. ------- Now Jim's misunderstanding of the true conflict between Nasser and the Sauds. Jim Di,--- Gaza and JFK: Kennedy understood that Nasser stood in opposition to Saudi Arabia. Not just the fact that the Saudis practiced an extreme form of Islam promoted by the terrorist group the Muslim Brotherhood, but also because it was an oligarchy and a monarchy. Nasser was a socialist who thought that the oil in the Middle East belonged to all the Arabs. This is why he decided to fight a war against the Saudis for control of Yemen, Jim:Nasser was a socialist who thought that the oil in the Middle East belonged to all the Arabs. Yes, Jim, the Socialist. Easy for Jim to say. But this is precisely why Jim's dream of JFK and Nasser unifying the Middle East would never have gotten off the ground. A factor that's seldom taken account on this forum is economics. Egypt has no oil! I don't care if you're a Secularist , Religious fundamentalist or a Monarch, no country gives away their national treasures, to in this case be Santa Claus to Egypt, a country with 5 times their population! And the oil rich gulf states didn't, and have enjoyed many generations of wealth since, whether we like them or not! I assume everyone here no matter what country they're from, no longer likes colonialism. But why in the world would the West want a revolution in oil country? With those goals, an eventual JFK betrayal was inevitable! Never once in Jim's piece does he address the oil in his piece!. The elephant in the room! That Nasser was a very popular figure in Egypt, as Jim pointed out is obvious, because 1) what Egyptian wouldn't want the Arabs oil? and 2)why wouldn't they want a Pan Arab league lead by their own countryman? While Jim has played up the potential of the JFK Nasser relationship. Here's what eventually happened! , Paul Rigby's text: Despite concurrent Cold War tensions, Americans and Soviets appeared on the same side of the Yemeni conflict and acted mutually to confine Nasser to the borders of South Arabia. Of course the U.S.primary goal was 1) to keep a presence in the Middle East for their oil. and 2) to keep the Soviet's out. So if Rigby's text is true here, the Americans temporarily allied with their ideological enemies together against Nasser, which is an even greater double cross! But it doesn't stop there! Jim omits that JFK sold Israel Hawk missiles, which is even a triple cross of Nasser by JFK! Perspectives on power - Summit: Why Kennedy decided to sell HAWK missiles to Israel is frequently debated. It is clear that the President hoped to use the missile to gain Israeli cooperation on the refugees and the Dimona reactor. In both cases, this policy failed. His willingness to sell the missiles before Israel signed any agreements, however, leads one to believe that he would have sold the missiles anyway Ok, the situation involving the Missiles is complicated. But actions speak louder than words. So when push came to shove, JFK chose to ally with the oil rich interests and Israel over Nasser. (Please don't tell me that JFK had no free will, and was again the victim of the CIA, MI6, or the Dulles Brothers. He is the POTUS , and makes his own decisions,) and it's based on economics! Mission of omission Forget it Jake! It's Chinatown!, heh heh
×
×
  • Create New...