Matt Allison Posted January 13, 2023 Author Share Posted January 13, 2023 The ruse that people will believe this new committee has anything in common with Frank Church won't work because the only people dumb enough to believe such a thing have no idea who Frank Church was lol. This is about seditionists who asked for 1/6 pardons like Scott Perry and MTG hoping they can defund the police before they're arrested. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Cole Posted January 13, 2023 Share Posted January 13, 2023 20 minutes ago, Matt Allison said: The ruse that people will believe this new committee has anything in common with Frank Church won't work because the only people dumb enough to believe such a thing have no idea who Frank Church was lol. This is about seditionists who asked for 1/6 pardons like Scott Perry and MTG hoping they can defund the police before they're arrested. Well, if expectations are very low, then we won't be disappointed by 1/6 Committee II. Still, it is sometimes the gadflies and outcasts who raise a question, the answer to which is revealing. The Donks should be ashamed they did not set up a Church Committee II in nearly 50 years. The 'Phants are asking for powerful investigative powers under House rules, and they got 'em (see the Greenwald commentary). The Donks should have done this every 10 years or so. So should have the 'Phants. Why does it outsider lulus to do the right thing? Well, I am keeping an open mind...but it will take a lot of luck for this to not devolve into rank partisan debauchery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Ness Posted January 13, 2023 Share Posted January 13, 2023 6 hours ago, Matthew Koch said: They wouldn't let Jim Jordan on the committee.. It was hyper partisan. Gym Jordan was a potential witness! Do you think they should have those people on the committee? That's partisan? They were given a list of republicans that would likely not have a conflict after trying to add several potential witnesses, claimed it was partisan and walked. And you bought it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Koch Posted January 13, 2023 Share Posted January 13, 2023 (edited) 2 hours ago, Bob Ness said: Gym Jordan was a potential witness! Do you think they should have those people on the committee? That's partisan? They were given a list of republicans that would likely not have a conflict after trying to add several potential witnesses, claimed it was partisan and walked. And you bought it. Bob you should stick to AA meetings because you're so bias you couldn't watch this video because you said I didn't make it. I'm going to share it again for the Van Jones part in the middle. I don't take someone serious who is going to write "Gym" Jordan over a George Clooney they've never seen. But thanks for Parroting MSNPC I'm sure there are some people who don't watch.. Edited January 13, 2023 by Matthew Koch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Brancato Posted January 13, 2023 Share Posted January 13, 2023 10 hours ago, Matt Allison said: Not sure if you're referring to me, but I own and have read Brothers and The Devil's Chessboard. I was sure you had. Is there anyone more clued in and trustworthy than David Talbot? Far from being applauded by MSM he is completely ignored. NYT wouldn’t even review Devil’s Chessboard. Is he Left? Who cares. He’s smart, honest, and a heck of a researcher. I asked that question of Ben and Matt because Talbot would not be on board with their recent posts, and I was hoping they might respond on that level. He is well aware of the deficiencies of the so-called left in American politics, of the Democratic Party, and of liberal media outlets. But he would never equate that with today’s Trump loyalists in the Republican Party, who are far more interested in their own power than in righting any perceived wrongs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Ness Posted January 13, 2023 Share Posted January 13, 2023 9 hours ago, Matthew Koch said: Bob you should stick to AA meetings because you're so bias you couldn't watch this video because you said I didn't make it. I'm going to share it again for the Van Jones part in the middle. I don't take someone serious who is going to write "Gym" Jordan over a George Clooney they've never seen. But thanks for Parroting MSNPC I'm sure there are some people who don't watch.. Thanks, Matt, for being completely unable to a) speak for yourself and b) completely ignore what I asserted. Genius. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Koch Posted January 13, 2023 Share Posted January 13, 2023 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W. Niederhut Posted January 14, 2023 Share Posted January 14, 2023 1 hour ago, Matthew Koch said: I see, Mathew. So, you still haven't read the Mueller Report or the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee Report on Russian interference in our 2016 election, eh? Incidentally, that Senate Intel Committee was chaired by Trump ally, Senator Richard Burr (R-NC.) Nor have you studied the facts uncovered by the 2022 Congressional J6 Committee investigation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Brancato Posted January 14, 2023 Share Posted January 14, 2023 Republicans, especially the Trump loyalists, are not the antidote to what is herein being defined as a poisonous deep state connected Democratic Party. If I ever read anything from a number of posters here unequivocally condemning the Republicans I’d be more open. We are being played. Money and Power corrupt. George Carlin said something like - the big shots from everywhere have more in common with each other than they do with us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Cole Posted January 14, 2023 Share Posted January 14, 2023 10 hours ago, Paul Brancato said: I was sure you had. Is there anyone more clued in and trustworthy than David Talbot? Far from being applauded by MSM he is completely ignored. NYT wouldn’t even review Devil’s Chessboard. Is he Left? Who cares. He’s smart, honest, and a heck of a researcher. I asked that question of Ben and Matt because Talbot would not be on board with their recent posts, and I was hoping they might respond on that level. He is well aware of the deficiencies of the so-called left in American politics, of the Democratic Party, and of liberal media outlets. But he would never equate that with today’s Trump loyalists in the Republican Party, who are far more interested in their own power than in righting any perceived wrongs. Paul- I am not enamored of the populist wing of the 'Phants, although I like their positions on trade and immigration, and non-interventionism, when they are able to speak coherently, which is not often. Like the Donks, the 'Phants are more interested in fanning partisan enmity than governance. It would be great if someone hosted a talk with Talbot re current events. Meanwhile, here is an op-ed from WaPo: Opinion | The U.S. should arm Ukraine — and beef up our ... https://www.washingtonpost.com › 2022/12/18 › us-sh... Dec 18, 2565 BE — A $847 billion defense budget is not “whopping." The U.S. Navy, Marines and Army are underfunded. ---30--- Note: The writer does not acknowledge the additional $304 billion spent on the VA, or another $100 billion in the black budget or $200 billion in pro-rated interest on the national debt. ---30--- Did you know that to even discuss cuts in national defense spending is a dishonorable activity? Opinion | MAGA House members' defense cuts encourage ... https://www.washingtonpost.com › 2023/01/09 › mccar... 4 days ago — MAGA House members' defense cuts encourage America's enemies ... you take McCarthy at his word, he intends to cut $75 billion from defense. You've visited this page 2 times. Last visit: 1/14/23 According to this, even discussion of defense cuts recklessly endangers US troops in harm's way, and encourages America's enemies. It get worse. ---30--- Really, I have long believed in a smaller, more simple, national defense, based on a honest draft (no mercenaries) and much less interventionism. If the US had five aircraft carrier groups instead of 11, I do not believe anyone would militarily invade the US. So why does the US have 11? So now, the MAGA guys are calling for defense cuts. The Donks are saying the MAGA guys are treasonous for calling for defense cuts. You can see why I am non-aligned. I enjoy your commentary Paul, even if we disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Allison Posted January 14, 2023 Author Share Posted January 14, 2023 Asking for defense budget cuts when a Hitler-level madman like Putin is recklessly invading sovereign countries unprovoked? Ain't gonna happen, dude. Definitely not in the cards as long as Putin is alive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Cole Posted January 14, 2023 Share Posted January 14, 2023 14 minutes ago, Matt Allison said: Asking for defense budget cuts when a Hitler-level madman like Putin is recklessly invading sovereign countries unprovoked? Ain't gonna happen, dude. Definitely not in the cards as long as Putin is alive. Matt: Yes...but the US is almost always in a war somewhere, or entangled in a foreign hostilities, and calls for cutting defense are framed as "putting troops at risk who are defending your freedom." A single terrorist attack (9/11) on the US is grounds for two multigenerational wars of occupation.... All through history, governments and troops (usually monarchies, or churches, combined with militaries) have been parasites upon productive people. You are taxed, and not only that, you pay for the troops and police that keep you quiescent. OK, let's say Putin withdraws. Then what? How long until the US involved in another foreign entanglement? Reluctantly, I support the US effort in Ukraine, but only for humanitarian reasons. But does the US really need 11 aircraft carrier strike forces to prevent a military invasion of the US? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted January 14, 2023 Share Posted January 14, 2023 10 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said: But does the US really need 11 aircraft carrier strike forces to prevent a military invasion of the US? If Putin decides to go nuclear with his tactical weapons, I'd say it would be nice to have those eleven aircraft carriers. Especially if it leads to another world war. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Cole Posted January 14, 2023 Share Posted January 14, 2023 1 minute ago, Sandy Larsen said: If Putin decides to go nuclear with his tactical weapons, I'd say it would be nice to have those eleven aircraft carriers. Especially if it leads to another world war. Russia does not have a single operational aircraft carrier. Maybe five is enough to counter Putin? Besides all that, large slow-moving surface ships are essentially sitting ducks. Another topic.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy Larsen Posted January 14, 2023 Share Posted January 14, 2023 1 minute ago, Benjamin Cole said: Russia does not have a single operational aircraft carrier. Maybe five is enough to counter Putin? Besides all that, large slow-moving surface ships are essentially sitting ducks. Another topic.... You need aircraft carriers when fighting wars where you have no friendly landing strips... which is most places around the globe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now