Political Posts

[Gregmal]

15 minutes ago, Parsad said:

 

73Reds, let me ask you something...as well as for Cubs, et al.  Would you let Trump molest your wife or daughter, as long as he pushes through with his policies and mandate?  I think we all know the answer to this question, unless your answer differs from mine...in that case, God help us!  Cheers!

lol wtf?!? This is in what way, shape or form related to having two candidates to pick from, with widely different policies, and no choice in their selection or personalities? 
 

I mean I’m sure amongst the deranged, obsessed, “other” “Trump followers”, you know, the ones that are obsessed with his every move and every gossip story or salacious rumor about him… I bet a bunch of them would blow DJT in exchange for having Gavin Newsome in office next term…but that doesn’t really have anymore relevance than folks letting Trump touch the woman in their lives. I did burst out laughing reading this question tho, it’s so absurd it’s funny. 

[Sweet]

16 minutes ago, cwericb said:

 

would agree with you - if you were not so factually wrong.

 

- Illegal immigrants are NOT citizens - they are law breakers.

Correction, I meant "residents"    Ever break a law Cubs?

 

- ICE agents - attacks on ICE agents are up 1000% because of DOXXING. Protecting your family from lunatics is not a crime.

 

- The first wave of deportees have been CRIMINALS and those with standing orders of removal. 

 

-A country has the RIGHT and the OBLIGATION to protect their CITIZENS from law breakers.

Ever break a law Cubs?

 

Give it another shot @cwericb - you are way too smart for this.

I think you kinda missed the point Cubs.

What is the point of your question about cubs breaking the law?

 

Are you really saying that if he got a speeding ticket once we shouldn’t police the border or remove illegals?

[LC]

What's really wild is people are only now just realizing little Donny-boy is a rapist and pedophile!

 

Here's some advice I read, I think it was in the bible:

When travelling for Mar-a-lago, pack your expedited depreciation schedule, but leave your daughter at home! 

[Parsad]

24 minutes ago, Gregmal said:

lol wtf?!? This is in what way, shape or form related to having two candidates to pick from, with widely different policies, and no choice in their selection or personalities? 
 

I mean I’m sure amongst the deranged, obsessed, “other” “Trump followers”, you know, the ones that are obsessed with his every move and every gossip story or salacious rumor about him… I bet a bunch of them would blow DJT in exchange for having Gavin Newsome in office next term…but that doesn’t really have anymore relevance than folks letting Trump touch the woman in their lives. I did burst out laughing reading this question tho, it’s so absurd it’s funny. 

 

I'm not saying that it is.  What I'm asking is at what point does his behavior become extreme enough to ask yourself that question?  Is it bypassing the Constitution?  Is it bypassing due process?  Is it alienating global partners and allies?  Is it tearing down our institutions rather than simply invoking policy changes?  Is it when he starts locking up or exiling media personalities/owners he doesn't like?  Is it when he militarizes states and cities?  Is it when he starts to control and develop his own oligarchy?  Or is it when he comes and knocks on your neighbor's house and imprisons him/her?  Cheers!

[Sweet]

5 minutes ago, Parsad said:

 

I'm not saying that it is.  What I'm asking is at what point does his behavior become extreme enough to ask yourself that question?  Is it bypassing the Constitution?  Is it bypassing due process?  Is it alienating global partners and allies?  Is it tearing down our institutions rather than simply invoking policy changes?  Is it when he starts locking up or exiling media personalities/owners he doesn't like?  Is it when he militarizes states and cities?  Is it when he starts to control and develop his own oligarchy?  Or is it when he comes and knocks on your neighbor's house and imprisons him/her?  Cheers!

I hear what you are saying, but fundamentally, parents will tolerate a lot from politicians when the alternative is their daughter get hacked to death on the subway.  Sure it’s an extreme counter narrative, but no more extreme than what you’re suggesting.

[Parsad]

3 minutes ago, Sweet said:

I hear what you are saying, but fundamentally, parents will tolerate a lot from politicians when the alternative is their daughter get hacked to death on the subway.  Sure it’s an extreme counter narrative, but no more extreme than what you’re suggesting.

 

Yes, I agree with that.  But that's why the Constitution, Bill of Rights, Supreme Court and laws in general are there.  Equitable, fair enforcement.  

 

What do we do when a President starts to walk the boundaries of those safeguards?  Cheers!

[Sweet]

4 minutes ago, Parsad said:

 

Yes, I agree with that.  But that's why the Constitution, Bill of Rights, Supreme Court and laws in general are there.  Equitable, fair enforcement.  

 

What do we do when a President starts to walk the boundaries of those safeguards?  Cheers!

Congress has to the power to reign him in.  Regarding boundaries and safeguards, Trump is somewhat unleashed.  In a large part because the opposition spent his first term trying to bring him down with Russia bs, and the four years in between trying to ruin his businesses and even get him jailed.  That was a gross misuse of power and the legal system IMO and few on the left called it out.  And it’s radicalised (not using that word as a pejorative) his MAGA base such that they are willing to tolerate a lot more from him this time around - somewhat understandably.

Edited September 9, 2025 by Sweet

[cwericb]

7 minutes ago, Sweet said:

What is the point of your question about cubs breaking the law?

 

Are you really saying that if he got a speeding ticket once we shouldn’t police the border or remove illegals?

 

It is just that it seems the penalty in many cases doesn't fit the crime. Many of these people who are being deported are not the hardened criminals they are made out to be. Their only crime has been staying in the US illegally - and that does not necessarily mean they entered illegally. And, a certain number of these "criminals" have otherwise been law abiding residents who have paid their taxes, worked hard and contributed to US society for many years. Yet they are portrayed as violent, vicious, hardened criminals.

 

However, it will be interesting to see who fills the shoes of those deported workers who have been working for minimum wage in the fields, in the factories and cleaning the rooms in the accomdation industry.  It hasn't been my experience that local people are lining up for minimum wage jobs.

[cubsfan]

51 minutes ago, Parsad said:

What do we do when a President starts to walk the boundaries of those safeguards?  Cheers!

 

Simple - he can't do that because the courts will not allow it.

There has been more temporary injunctions, etc against Trump.

 

The President of the United States has broad executive powers - and he was elected to use them within the law.

[cubsfan]

1 minute ago, cwericb said:

 

It is just that it seems the penalty in many cases doesn't fit the crime. Many of these people who are being deported are not the hardened criminals they are made out to be. Their only crime has been staying in the US illegally - and that does not necessarily mean they entered illegally. And, a certain number of these "criminals" have otherwise been law abiding residents who have paid their taxes, worked hard and contributed to US society for many years. Yet they are portrayed as violent, vicious, hardened criminals.

 

However, it will be interesting to see who fills the shoes of those deported workers who have been working for minimum wage in the fields, in the factories and cleaning the rooms in the accomdation industry.  It hasn't been my experience that local people are lining up for minimum wage jobs.

 

No - now you are just making shit up @cwericb

 

The administration has given great clarity on this. 70% of the forced removals have convicted criminals that were released in sanctuary cities by radical mayors/DA's.

ICE has to hunt them down. Meanwhile, if they happen to be hanging around illegal aliens - then those get removed as well.

 

All of this is within the laws that the US Congress has enacted.

[cwericb]

12 minutes ago, cubsfan said:

 

No - now you are just making shit up @cwericb

 

The administration has given great clarity on this. 70% of the forced removals have convicted criminals that were released in sanctuary cities by radical mayors/DA's.

ICE has to hunt them down. Meanwhile, if they happen to be hanging around illegal aliens - then those get removed as well.

 

All of this is within the laws that the US Congress has enacted.

 

And what you have just said is that 30% are NOT convicted criminals - AND - that is assuming you believe everything the administration tells you - which would be a stretch. And how is that making things up? 

For the record I have absolutely no sympathy for people who enter the country and then commit crimes. They should be kicked out the minute they are found guilty. No jail, turf them out immediately.

Edited September 10, 2025 by cwericb

[cubsfan]

46 minutes ago, cwericb said:

 

And what you have just said is that 30% are NOT convicted criminals - AND - that is assuming you believe everything the administration tells you - which would be a stretch. And how is that making things up? 

For the record I have absolutely no sympathy for people who enter the country and then commit crimes. They should be kicked out the minute they are found guilty. No jail, turf them out immediately.

 

30% here illegally get removed.  Why doesn't Canada offer to take them?

[cwericb]

4 minutes ago, cubsfan said:

 

30% here illegally get removed.  Why doesn't Canada offer to take them?

 

We may well do that if their only 'crime' is an immigration infraction in a foreign country and they meet our other criteria. Why wouldn't we? We have been taking in a million immigrants a year for the past several years - not counting the illegals crossing over from the USA.

[cubsfan]

10 minutes ago, cwericb said:

We may well do that if their only 'crime' is an immigration infraction in a foreign country and they meet our other criteria. Why wouldn't we? We have been taking in a million immigrants a year for the past several years - not counting the illegals crossing over from the USA.

 

Oh, so now you are going to evaluate them on "your criteria" - and NOT let them in if they don't qualify.

 

What the hell do you think the USA is doing?

 

 

[cwericb]

2 minutes ago, cubsfan said:

 

Oh, so now you are going to evaluate them on "your criteria" - and NOT let them in if they don't qualify.

 

What the hell do you think the USA is doing?

 

 

Well, you asked the question. I answered.

 

But I have a couple of questions....

 

1. Can you explain why ICE is grabbing people when they show up for their appointments at government offices where they are in the process of legally filing for permanent residency? 

 

2. Since there are so many illegals in the US, roughly how many might you know personally?

 

3. Countries are responsible for our own borders, right? An American drives across the border and they only get questioned by the Canadian side. Canadians drive past Canadian immigration and stop at the US side to get questioned. Obviously the US has a duty to defend their side of border and keep drugs and unwanted people out. And Canada polices the Canadian side and keep drugs and unwanteds out, and Mexico polices their side as well. I've crossed a lot of borders and in general this is the way it works. But where does the US get off demanding that Canada and Mexico the police the American side of the border to keep drugs, illegals, etc out? 

 

4. I assume you know that the crackdown on US illegals puts pressure on the Canadian border from US illegals trying to to escape into Canada? So what resources does the US have protecting the Canadian border from illegals coming over from the US?

[Sweet]

6 hours ago, cwericb said:

 

It is just that it seems the penalty in many cases doesn't fit the crime. Many of these people who are being deported are not the hardened criminals they are made out to be. Their only crime has been staying in the US illegally - and that does not necessarily mean they entered illegally. And, a certain number of these "criminals" have otherwise been law abiding residents who have paid their taxes, worked hard and contributed to US society for many years. Yet they are portrayed as violent, vicious, hardened criminals.

 

However, it will be interesting to see who fills the shoes of those deported workers who have been working for minimum wage in the fields, in the factories and cleaning the rooms in the accomdation industry.  It hasn't been my experience that local people are lining up for minimum wage jobs.

I agree many / most aren’t violent etc.  But they are breaking the law.
 

If I entered a country illegally, or stayed beyond my permitted time, I’d expect to be deported.

 

I don’t get why anyone expects anything different. 
 

Likewise if I speed, and I’m caught, I expect to get a ticket.

Edited September 10, 2025 by Sweet

[changegonnacome]

I suppose the big question for MAGA - is why did the President double down and triple down on the lie about birthday card not being real???........and why is he also stonewalling his own supporters & indeed party and the American public by holding back the Epstein files.

 

The answer - as per above - is not because he's peado!

 

But him and Epstein we're buddies for a decade plus. Epstein, to the extent we know, made his money by advising rich people how and where to hide their money and restructure their business in a way that would avoid (& likely evade taxes). Everybody knows the game....PWC, Eisnar Amper sell the standard issue for the plebs tax avoidance solutions likely to get shut down in time cause everybody ends being sold them.....Jeffrey it seems.....sold avoidance schemes that would only be sold to a select few UUHNW....and evasion schemes so secret/robust they might as well be avoidance scheme.

 

Its not inconceivable to think he helped Donald (his best friend) with some very shady financial shenanigans in that period especialy a period where Donald was constantly going bankrupt and looking no doubt to stuff a few hundred million under the mattress.....indeed Jeffrey as Donald's best friend finance guy in the 80's and 90's was probably quite intimately knowledgeable of Donald's finances and that might be reflected in files the Government has.

 

The simplest explanation is likely the best here.......contained in the Epstein files are breadcrumbs around Donald Trump's aggressive tax evasion history aided and abetted by Epstein....everything from plain vanilla schemes.....to really shady defacto money laundering ones for sanctioned OFAC folks....see Mar-a-Lago Russian Oligarch property deal that just doesn't pass the smell test even a little bit.

 

Edited September 10, 2025 by changegonnacome

[whiskybravo]

https://open.substack.com/pub/doomberg/p/mosaic-theory?r=9iue0&utm_medium=ios

 

Here’s a summary I wrote based on the second half of a subscriber only post from Doomberg. The first part is free to read in the above link.  The piece explores a potential strategic pivot in U.S. foreign policy, particularly under a second Trump term. I’m sharing this in my own words, not quoting directly, and I encourage others to subscribe if you’re interested in deep energy/geopolitical analysis.

 

The U.S. appears to be undergoing a major strategic pivot under Trump, shifting focus away from distant allies like Ukraine, Europe, Japan, and South Korea, and toward consolidating power closer to home. With military stockpiles depleted and a potential Russian offensive looming, Trump may be abandoning support for Ukraine, leaving Europe to handle the consequences. Sanctions against Russia are increasingly seen as symbolic, while U.S. attention turns southward. In Latin America, upcoming conflicts may center more on control of oil and gas than on drugs, with cartels deeply entrenched in Mexico and Colombia’s energy sectors. The U.S. is also maneuvering in Argentina to support pro-American President Javier Milei amid political setbacks, and in Guyana, where stable elections secured ExxonMobil’s interests. Meanwhile, Brazil, the only BRICS member in the Western Hemisphere, could become a geopolitical flashpoint as the U.S. escalates tensions with the BRICS bloc. The question now is whether a broader confrontation with Brazil is on the horizon.

[John Hjorth]

The Kyiv Independent - News Feed [September 10^th 2025] : Poland asks NATO to activate Article 4 over Russian drone incursion.

 

- - - o 0 o - - -

 

This is to me personally very bad, Russian President is showing totally reckless and gamling behavior, provoking, testing limits, over and over again.

 

- - - o 0 o - - -

 

Edit :

 

YouTube - NATO News [September 10^th 2025] : NATO Secretary General statement on violation of Polish airspace by Russian drones, 10  Sep 2025. [About 8:30 long, action starts at around 4:20].

Edited September 10, 2025 by John Hjorth

[73 Reds]

13 hours ago, Parsad said:

 

73Reds, let me ask you something...as well as for Cubs, et al.  Would you let Trump molest your wife or daughter, as long as he pushes through with his policies and mandate?  I think we all know the answer to this question, unless your answer differs from mine...in that case, God help us!  Cheers!

Sanjeev, the question is irrelevant and you know it.  There are posters in this thread who use very chance they can to deride the POS.   My question is why?  You all either were asleep from the time he ran for his first term or you have nothing better to do with your time.  My comments here on this thread are entirely in response to the nonsense posted here daily by people who let Trump run their lives.     

[73 Reds]

12 hours ago, Parsad said:

 

I'm not saying that it is.  What I'm asking is at what point does his behavior become extreme enough to ask yourself that question?  Is it bypassing the Constitution?  Is it bypassing due process?  Is it alienating global partners and allies?  Is it tearing down our institutions rather than simply invoking policy changes?  Is it when he starts locking up or exiling media personalities/owners he doesn't like?  Is it when he militarizes states and cities?  Is it when he starts to control and develop his own oligarchy?  Or is it when he comes and knocks on your neighbor's house and imprisons him/her?  Cheers!

Again, you're putting yourself in the position of Constitutional scholar of a country you don't even live in?   Maybe alienating other countries is precisely the point for now in order to alter behavior and perhaps the military is exactly what is needed to stem the tidal wave of crime.  I just don't understand your obsession and persistent whining.  Move here and vote if it is that important to you; that is the effective way to voice your opinion.  Repeating stale talking points from a sorry MSM does not help the cause. 

[cwericb]

1 hour ago, 73 Reds said:

Again, you're putting yourself in the position of Constitutional scholar of a country you don't even live in?   Maybe alienating other countries is precisely the point for now in order to alter behavior and perhaps the military is exactly what is needed to stem the tidal wave of crime.  I just don't understand your obsession and persistent whining.  Move here and vote if it is that important to you; that is the effective way to voice your opinion.  Repeating stale talking points from a sorry MSM does not help the cause. 

 

This is the attitude that pisses off Canadians. Like it or not we are tied at the hip with the US. Typically, you have little or no awareness of how much almost everything that happens in the US effects Canada, and yet we obviously have no say in US policy. Furthermore, we have trusted the US and Americans in a partnership that dates back almost forever. Well, except for that little skirmish when we burned down the White House in 1814, the last time you pissed us off. It is funny that you criticize some of us for being knowledgeable about commenting your politics when the average American would be hard pressed to name three Canadian cities, let alone any one of our provinces. 

 

But now your President tells Americans these outrageous lies about our country in attempts to divert attention from his own errors and the results thereof. Unfortunately, his supporters are susceptible to believing these made up lies and this stir up animosity against Canadians from our former friends. Now we can get over that, but the Trump administration's threat to annex both Greenland and Canada is obviously is taken very, very seriously on this side of the border and only people delusional would expect otherwise. Where is the outcry on your side of the border about your country threatening to annex other countries? Not a word. But let's go warm up by invading some South American countries first ...

 

Sorry for the rambling rant.

[73 Reds]

17 minutes ago, cwericb said:

 

This is the attitude that pisses off Canadians. Like it or not we are tied at the hip with the US. Typically, you have little or no awareness of how much almost everything that happens in the US effects Canada, and yet we obviously have no say in US policy. Furthermore, we have trusted the US and Americans in a partnership that dates back almost forever. Well, except for that little skirmish when we burned down the White House in 1814, the last time you pissed us off. It is funny that you criticize some of us for being knowledgeable about commenting your politics when the average American would be hard pressed to name three Canadian cities, let alone any one of our provinces. 

 

But now your President tells Americans these outrageous lies about our country in attempts to divert attention from his own errors and the results thereof. Unfortunately, his supporters are susceptible to believing these made up lies and this stir up animosity against Canadians from our former friends. Now we can get over that, but the Trump administration's threat to annex both Greenland and Canada is obviously is taken very, very seriously on this side of the border and only people delusional would expect otherwise. Where is the outcry on your side of the border about your country threatening to annex other countries? Not a word. But let's go warm up by invading some South American countries first ...

 

Sorry for the rambling rant.

Objective folks here see this as Trump being Trump.  We don't have to like or agree with everything he says or does.  Why should his comments about annexing Canada be an issue if most Canadians would vote against it anyway?   People who haven't yet figured out that Trump often talks just to make a point or merely to get under someone's skin don't understand Trump at all.  But those of us who want a stronger, safer US free from many left-wing policies that were leading us over a cliff will take the bad with the good.  Anyone judging the results of his presidency now are allowing ideology to stand in the way of fact.  Many of his policies are in fact new, bold and controversial.  Yet those of us who voted for him voted for substantial change.  The results will speak for themselves.  And oh by the way, who said life is always fair?

[cubsfan]

11 hours ago, cwericb said:

Well, you asked the question. I answered.

 

But I have a couple of questions....

 

1. Can you explain why ICE is grabbing people when they show up for their appointments at government offices where they are in the process of legally filing for permanent residency? 

 

2. Since there are so many illegals in the US, roughly how many might you know personally?

 

3. Countries are responsible for our own borders, right? An American drives across the border and they only get questioned by the Canadian side. Canadians drive past Canadian immigration and stop at the US side to get questioned. Obviously the US has a duty to defend their side of border and keep drugs and unwanted people out. And Canada polices the Canadian side and keep drugs and unwanteds out, and Mexico polices their side as well. I've crossed a lot of borders and in general this is the way it works. But where does the US get off demanding that Canada and Mexico the police the American side of the border to keep drugs, illegals, etc out? 

 

4. I assume you know that the crackdown on US illegals puts pressure on the Canadian border from US illegals trying to to escape into Canada? So what resources does the US have protecting the Canadian border from illegals coming over from the US?

 

1)  I have no idea what you are talking about.

 

2)  I think I know a few, but not certain, as I don't inquire. Very good people. 2 in fact returned to Mexico willingly. Which is great, since they are trying to obtain the proper visa stay, since they have relatives here. Good for them.

 

3) I see no problem at all demanding that Mexico/Canada stop illegals from entering the USA. 100,000 drug deaths a year are plenty. The rapists & child molesters & human traffickers have been an obvious problem. Feel free to take them off our hands.

 

4) I thought you were all about immigration freedom? Make up your mind already.

[cwericb]

1 hour ago, cubsfan said:

 

1)  I have no idea what you are talking about.

 

2)  I think I know a few, but not certain, as I don't inquire. Very good people. 2 in fact returned to Mexico willingly. Which is great, since they are trying to obtain the proper visa stay, since they have relatives here. Good for them.

 

3) I see no problem at all demanding that Mexico/Canada stop illegals from entering the USA. 100,000 drug deaths a year are plenty. The rapists & child molesters & human traffickers have been an obvious problem. Feel free to take them off our hands.

 

4) I thought you were all about immigration freedom? Make up your mind already.

 

1)  I have no idea what you are talking about. 

 

Here is an example: "There was no explanation, no warning. One minute, I was in an immigration office talking to an officer about my work visa, which had been approved months before and allowed me, a Canadian, to work in the US. The next, I was told to put my hands against the wall, and patted down like a criminal before being sent to an Ice detention center without the chance to talk to a lawyer."  https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/mar/19/canadian-detained-us-immigration-jasmine-mooney

 

This is far from an isolated incident as I have personal knowledge of a similar incident.  

 

2)  I think I know a few, but not certain, as I don't inquire. Very good people. 2 in fact returned to Mexico willingly. Which is great, since they are trying to obtain the proper visa stay, since they have relatives here. Good for them. 

 

But while they are good people you would be quite comfortable to see them kicked out of the country because of something that may have occured years ago? I am not being critical here, but guess I would have more empathy because I don't see the advantage of getting rid of good people who broke a law perhaps years ago. 

 

3) I see no problem at all demanding that Mexico/Canada stop illegals from entering the USA. 100,000 drug deaths a year are plenty. The rapists & child molesters & human traffickers have been an obvious problem. Feel free to take them off our hands. 

 

Oh, that is interesting. Okay, so what have American border guards done about all the illegal guns and drugs coming into Canada from the US?  Do you stop and search all the cars and trucks leaving the US? 

 

4) I thought you were all about immigration freedom? Make up your mind already. 

 

Now I think you are making things up. What do you mean by "immigration freedom". We guard our borders as best we can from illegals. That, includes those crossing the US border into Canada. We have always worked jointly with the US in patrolling the the US/Canadian border but we have never assumed nor expected that the US be held responsible for stopping illegals crossing into Canada. We have always assumed that responsibility and I believe this is a universal concept.

As above, what has the United States done to stop the flow of drugs and weapons crossing the border into Canada? And, should Canada retaliate because the US has not stopped guns coming into Canada? 

Edited September 10, 2025 by cwericb