Well there you have it. Pay up or die. Doing Putins bidding. The USA will probably be attacked by Russia before any other state if trump is POTUS again. Putin saw that it takes trump nearly five hours to take action in a violent insurrection. USA Easy Pickens.
A life is not important except in the impact it has on other lives. – Jackie Robinson
I saw this on the news. How can anyone support such a disgusting human being? He just sent a message straight to Putin that he doesn't value NATO. Between the GOP trying to block funding for Ukraine and now this, how much more clear can they make it that they support Russian aggression?
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
Trump asks about whereabouts of Nikki Haley’s husband, who’s serving overseas
Feb. 10, 2024, 5:58 PM EST / Updated Feb. 10, 2024, 6:16 PM EST By Sarah Dean, Jake Traylor and Emma Barnett link
Michael Haley deployed with the South Carolina National Guard last year.
CONWAY, South Carolina — Former President Donald Trump made a fresh jab at his GOP opponent Nikki Haley’s husband during a rally Saturday afternoon, questioning his whereabouts as he’s deployed overseas.
While telling a story about Haley previously meeting Trump at his residence in Mar-a-Lago, he lobbed rhetorical and prodding questions to the rowdy crowd referencing Haley’s husband, who is currently on military deployment.
“Then she comes over to see me at Mar-a-Lago. ‘Sir, I will never run against you.’ She brought her husband. Where’s your husband? Oh, he’s away. He’s away. What happened to her husband? What happened to her husband? Where is he? He’s gone! He knew. He knew,” Trump said.
Shortly after Trump’s remarks, Haley said at a rally in Gilbert, South Carolina, that she was proud of her husband’s service.
“I am proud of Michael’s service. Every military spouse knows it’s a family sacrifice. … If you mock the service of a combat veteran, you don’t deserve a driver’s license, let alone being president of the United States,” Haley said.
The former South Carolina governor issued a challenge directly to Trump.
"Donald, if you have something to say, don’t say it behind my back. Get on a debate stage and say it to my face," she said.
Haley also blasted Trump’s comments in a post on X.
“Michael is deployed serving our country, something you know nothing about,” Haley wrote in response to Trump’s comments Saturday. “Someone who continually disrespects the sacrifices of military families has no business being commander in chief.”
Haley did not offer a theory of what Trump meant when he said, “He knew.”
Michael Haley also seemingly responded to Trump in a post on X, tagging him alongside a meme saying, “The difference between humans and animals? Animals would never allow the dumbest ones to lead the pack.”
The commissioned officer left for a yearlong deployment in Africa with the South Carolina National Guard last June, something Nikki Haley mentions at every campaign event during her stump speech.
In a speech last month, Trump referenced the state of the Haleys’ marriage to suggest that if the former South Carolina governor held a commanding lead in the GOP primary, Democrats would indict her and say she was having an affair.
“They’ll be indicted, because they’ll say she was having an affair or something, you know. That doesn’t mean it’s lying. But she’ll be indicted for something,” Trump said.
Haley has gone after Trump with new force since the primary’s focus moved to her home state of South Carolina. Earlier Saturday, the Haley campaign debuted a mobile billboard featuring photos of Trump and Biden as “Grumpy Old Men,” which was driven around Trump’s rally in Conway.
While debuting her brand-new campaign bus at its first stop in Newberry, South Carolina, on Saturday afternoon, Haley spoke of both Biden’s and Trump’s confusion.
“Why can’t they let go of the power and let a new generational leader come in there?” she said.
An audience member yelled out, “No grumpy old men!”
Haley responded by saying, “They are grumpy old men. But I’ll tell you: We can do better.”
Trump, the front-runner for the nomination, is polling well ahead of Haley in the South Carolina primary.
NATO leader says Trump puts allies at risk by saying Russia can 'do whatever the hell they want’ VANESSA GERA and LORNE COOK Updated Sun, February 11, 2024 at 12:47 PM EST·4 min read
WARSAW, Poland (AP) — The head of the NATO military alliance warned Sunday that Donald Trump was putting the safety of U.S. troops and their allies at risk after the Republican presidential front-runner said Russia should be able to do "whatever the hell they want" to NATO members who don't meet their defense spending targets.
“Any suggestion that allies will not defend each other undermines all of our security, including that of the U.S., and puts American and European soldiers at increased risk,” NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said in a statement.
Speaking Saturday at a rally in Conway, South Carolina, Trump recalled how as president he told an unidentified NATO member that he would “encourage” Russia to do as it wishes in cases of NATO allies who are “delinquent.”
“‘You didn’t pay? You’re delinquent?’” Trump recounted saying. “‘No I would not protect you. In fact, I would encourage them to do whatever the hell they want. You gotta pay. You gotta pay your bills.’”
Trump’s remarks caused deep concern in Poland, which was under Russian control in past centuries, and where anxieties are high over the war Russia is waging just across the Polish border in Ukraine.
“We have a hot war at our border," Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said Sunday, voicing concerns about whether the United States will show “full solidarity with other NATO countries in this confrontation that promises to last for a long time with Russia.”
“We must realize that the EU cannot be an economic and civilizational giant and a dwarf when it comes to defense, because the world has changed,” he argued in a town hall speech marking the start of his party’s campaign for local elections this spring.
In 2014, NATO allies pledged to move toward spending 2% of GDP on defense by 2024. According to NATO estimates in early 2023, 10 of its 30 member states at the time were close to or above the 2% mark, while 13 were spending 1.5% or less.
No country is in debt to any other, or to NATO.
Stoltenberg said he expects that, “regardless of who wins the presidential election, the U.S. will remain a strong and committed NATO ally.”
The German government did not officially comment on Trump’s remarks, but its foreign office pointed out NATO's solidarity principle in a statement on X, formerly Twitter.
“‘One for all and all for one.’ This NATO creed keeps more than 950 million people safe," it said.
Trump's comments were of particular concern to NATO's front-line countries, like Poland and the Baltic states of Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia, which were either under the control of Moscow or fully incorporated into the Soviet Union during the Cold War. Fears there run especially high given Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
Polish President Andrzej Duda, who is allied with the right-wing opposition, and who was seen as friendly to Trump during his presidency, tweeted that the Polish-U.S. alliance must be strong “regardless of who is currently in power in Poland and the USA.”
He warned: “Offending half of the American political scene serves neither our economic interests nor Poland’s security.”
In an editorial Sunday, German daily Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung also called for European nations to spend more on defense.
It said that if Trump wins the presidency again, statements like the one he made on Saturday night "will increase the risk of Putin expanding his war. Europeans can only do one thing to counter this: finally invest in their military security in line with the seriousness of the situation.”
Trump’s tenure, which was marked by his open admiration for Russian President Vladimir Putin, became a near-existential challenge for NATO, an organization largely controlled by the United States. The prospect that Trump might return to power remains a deep concern among allies.
Stoltenberg was praised for his diplomatic skills in keeping NATO together during the Trump years, but the former Norwegian prime minister is stepping down. His successor is likely to be announced by the time allied leaders meet in Washington for NATO’s 75th anniversary summit in July.
Under NATO’s mutual defense clause, Article 5 of its founding treaty, all allies commit to help any member who comes under attack. The article has only ever been activated once – by the U.S. in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
NATO has undertaken its biggest military buildup since the Cold War since Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022.
It's totally fine to call out countries that need to meet their obligations. Doing what he did, though, is inexcusable. There is no valid apologist stance for it.
It's also just another data point out of seemingly hundreds at this point that point toward a very concerning dynamic in how he treats/refers to Russia and Putin.
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
We all know he would let Russia invade even if NATO “paid their bills”
The gaslighting from Trump is only rivaled by his zombie like supporters.
“To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public.”
Obviously trump bought into the crazy "Swift will endorse Biden at the SB" BS. Has he ever seen a right wing conspiracy he didn't love? "People are saying."........
Trump to Taylor Swift: Don’t be ungrateful
Endorsing Joe Biden would “be disloyal to the man who made her so much money,” Trump posted.
Hours before the kickoff of Super Bowl LVIII, Donald Trump had a message for Taylor Swift: Don’t endorse Joe Biden.
In a post on social media Sunday, the former president made a backhanded plea to the pop star, who is expected to be featured prominently on TV during the game, which her boyfriend, Kansas City Chiefs tight end Travis Kelce, is playing in.
Trump claimed credit for Swift’s financial success, calling a possible endorsement of Biden “disloyal to the man who made her so much money.”
“I signed and was responsible for the Music Modernization Act for Taylor Swift and all other Musical Artists. Joe Biden didn’t do anything for Taylor, and never will,” Trump wrote on Truth Social, referencing legislation he signed in 2018 meant to modernize copyright laws.
“There’s no way she could endorse Crooked Joe Biden, the worst and most corrupt President in the History of our Country, and be disloyal to the man who made her so much money. Besides that, I like her boyfriend, Travis, even though he may be a Liberal, and probably can’t stand me!”
Late last month, a New York Times report that Biden’s campaign was looking to court Swift’s endorsement fueled a chain of conspiracies, including one that the NFL postseason was rigged to favor the Chiefs so Swift could deliver the endorsement in front of a massive TV audience at the game.
Swift endorsed Biden over Trump in 2020, but has not given any indication that she’ll weigh in again.
I''m sorry Pit, but I'm having a hard time actually believing that ANYONE can be that freaking stupid.. This has to be a set up.. NO WAY is anyone that stupid. Are you sure it wasn't a video comedy thing from the Comedy channel? Geez.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.” Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe." Damanshot
This is what happens when you put a man in charge who has no idea about history and what the importance of what such an alliance means.
It's not about history Pit, it's about what Putin wants. Dictators want to rule the world and Trump has the mentality of a Dictator so doing the biding of someone he respects is part of the method to his madness.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.” Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe." Damanshot
“During my four years nothing happened,” Trump said. “And there was great pressure on me, having to do with guns. We did nothing. We didn’t yield.”
From Jan. 20, 2017, to Jan. 19, 2021 – Trump's time as president – the country saw 1,714 mass shootings in which four or more people were killed or wounded, with 1,679 deaths and 7,355 injuries.
What a proud record. Really something to brag about donnie.
If republicans can get Trump back into office, ish will hit the fan from all directions anyway. If Trump and his GOPer cohorts don’t end the country, there will be a huge mess dems will need to fix when moderates and independents voting for Trump wake up. The SOB shouldn’t even be on a ballot.
Your feelings and opinions do not add up to facts.
Amen. I'm again struck by how unbelievably stupid some of our current leaders are---and what they've publicly stated and are not held accountable for-- Trump has thousands- Greene, her endless conspiracies- school schoolings, pentagon not hit by terrorist airliner, space lasers,....the one I've just read about Senator Tommy Tuberville- got elected by hiding away before election and he stated our three branches of government were- House, Senate, and Executive----dear God- a SENATOR who couldn't get basic government question right----HOLY MOSES.
And Trump wants to get us out of NATO- only wants one day as a dictator-----DAMN, ain't our country great we even consider the idiot AGAIN. Pray and vote.
Last edited by hitt; 02/13/2408:10 PM. Reason: spelling
"You've never lived till you've almost died, life has a flavor the protected will never know" A vet or cop
Tucker Carlson Defends Putin, Says ‘Leadership Requires Killing’ | Video Sharon Knolle Mon, February 12, 2024 at 8:20 PM CST·2 min read 2.2k
Tucker Carlson had a curious defense of Vladimir Putin in his first interview since interviewing the Russian autocrat, saying “Every leader kills people, leadership requires killing.”
Carlson’s remarks were made at the 2024 World Government Summit in Dubai, where he was interviewed by Egyptian journalist Emad Eldin Adeeb.
Adeeb asked Carlson why he neglected to ask Putin about such pressing topics as the poisoning of Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny. “I’m not going to lecture you, but you should challenge some ideas,” said Adeeb. “You did not talk about freedom of speech, you did not talk about Navlny…”
Carlson replied that other journalists had already posed such questions to Putin, adding, essentially, that it’s not news that Putin has ordered hits on his enemies. “Every leader kills people, leadership requires killing,” said the former Fox News anchor. (Carlson’s comments that “leadership requires killing” appear about 17 minutes into the 26-minute segment.)
Although Carlson did ask Putin about the potential release of detained Wall Street Journal reporter Evan Gershkovich during the interview that took place in Moscow, he told Adeeb that his primary goal was to “let Putin talk” and “hear his thoughts.” Carlson said that positioning himself as the “good guy” to Putin’s “bad guy” would “not be fruitful.”
When Adeeb asked about Carlson’s response to the criticism leveled at him over his Putin interview, Carlson responded,”I don’t like the internet and I haven’t seen any of the reactions.” Adeeb asked specifically if Carlson had heard Hillary Clinton’s summation that he had proved “a useful idiot” to the Russian dictator and he claimed not to have heard about it.
“She’s a child, I don’t listen to her,” he said of the former Secretary of State.
While Carlson insisted several times that he is “not flakking for Putin,” he did praise Moscow for being better than any current U.S. city. “Moscow is so much nicer than any city in my country, cleaner and safer and prettier. I grew up in a country that had cities like Moscow and Abu Dhabi, and Singapore and Tokyo, and we no longer have them.”
Decrying the “filth and graffiti” found in American cities and people “begging for drugs” in London, Carlson seemed to be saying that if he were in charge, those kinds of things would not happen: “My children don’t smoke marijuana at the breakfast table because I don’t allow them.”
Carlson also has a long history of supporting pro-Putin and pro-Russia talking points on issues like the unprovoked invasion of Ukraine or U.S.-Russia relations, and criticizing Putin’s enemies and people arrested and imprisoned by Russia.
The post Tucker Carlson Defends Putin, Says ‘Leadership Requires Killing’ | Video appeared first on TheWrap.
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
A certain type of leadership certainly requires killing.
There is no level of sucking we haven't seen; in fact, I'm pretty sure we hold the patents on a few levels of sucking NOBODY had seen until the past few years.
Because people are not going to watch the video and simply read the chopped up comments......Full quote after being asked why (paparphrasing) he didn't ask questions pertaining to burnings, killings, restrictions on opposition...etc:
I didn't talk about the things every other media outlet talks about because those are covered and because I have spent my life talking to people who run countries and have concluded the following.....That every leader kills people, including my leader. Every leader kills people, some more than others. Leadership requires killing. Sorry. It's why I wouldn't want to become a leader. That press restriction is universal in the United States because I've lived it...ask my former employer. I've had a lot of jobs and I've done this for 34 years and I know how it works. And there is more censorship in Russia than there is in the United States but there is a great deal in the United States. And so, at a certain point, people can decide whether they think what countries are better than others and what systems they think are better. I just wanted to know what he thinks, which was the whole point
To suggest he was 'excusing', 'defending" Putin or "stanning his boy" is ridiculous. And this article, like so many others in the world of journalism, cuts and dices up what they want in a narrative knowing people aren't going to watch the clip. I agree with the interviewer that he SHOULD have asked those direct questions, but to claim (which is being broadly propped up here in the last few posts) that he is defending Putin or idea of killing, is stupid to put it as its mildest. Sorry, dawglover05, I didn't think this would have been something you would post.
Added note and it is sad I need to put there here: I am not a Carlson fan. Just this narrative is worse.
Nope. It is not ridiculous. Not even in the least. I feel like I'm taking crazy pills that he has these apologists. It makes no sense to me. What about that quote absolves him?
If you cannot see the pattern of his Putin/Russia apologism, including where his segments have been re-aired on Russian media airwaves, then there is nothing I can do to help you.
I have followed Tucker for a long time and I cannot stand him. I watched the entire Putin interview and already put my commentary on that thread. Did you watch the whole thing? Have you seen how many times he has undermined and thrown crap at a leader whose country was invaded and has experienced blatant human rights abuses at the hand of a clear authoritarian dictator? Did you not think that Putin went off the rails in that interview? How many times could he have stepped in and asked 1,000 different questions that needed to be asked?
The guy is scum.
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
Haha...I'm an apologist now? Because I have come to Carlson's rescue here so many times here! Clearly, your emotions about Carlson are leading you to make this claim so I won't hold you to it.
Calling out a slanted article (which it is) chopping up a quote (that will be blindly accepted by people here because they will never see the clip) that he is 'defending' and 'excusing' Putin is ridiculous. There are things I wished I would have seen differently from that interview. One of the biggest takeaways I took from him interviewing was that Tucker seemed scared or nervous. Scared about what the way he was asking questions. And I think it was that reason why the gently skipped over the hard questions...and the censorship element he made reference to in his clip. That's just a small take among many but it is one.
You insinuate with your comments that he is on Team Putin. That's your opinion but this tone feels like 2016 all over again with past accusations about someone's loyalty that ended up being worth less than the Charmin Ultra I wipe my ass with.
I don't know if you're an apologist or not, but your defense of him, and some others as well, constitute apologism in these instances. I don't think that's arguable.
Like I said, I don't think his interview did much to take away from the point of that article. He has defended Putin on multiple occasions, and did he not, in that same interview talk about Moscow's superiority to U.S. cities. If this instance had been one in isolation, I might be able to see your point, but as I mentioned earlier, when you put Carlson's entire body of work together, and doing things like calling Zelensky "rat-like" (you know, the guy whose country was unjustifiably invaded and whose people were tortured mercilessly and summarily executed), you see a very disturbing pattern. But yeah, Bucha is fine, you know, because being a leader requires killing......
I do have emotions on this topic. That's true. I think they are warranted. People like Carlson and JD Vance are incredibly intelligent. Nobody should say otherwise. But they have painted this whole thing in such an untrue light with so many twists, turns and abundant misframing and misinterpretation that they have dog-whistled to people who really don't know any better at all. THAT is what triggers my anger.
I don't understand your 2016 reference, but if you feel like he hasn't come to Putin's aid, as evidenced by him playing on Russian media, then I don't know what to tell you. It's been a pattern of years now, both with the likes of Putin and Orban. It's not an opinion by the way. It's pretty much out there for everyone to see. Chris Wallace - a former Fox colleague of Carlson - put it correctly when he stated that referring to Tucker Carlson as a useful idiot is insulting...to useful idiots.
I also laugh a little bit at your disappointment in my posts. Should I perhaps resort to things like posting GIFs and memes, and use phrases like "Lolz" instead, to avoid disappointment?
Last edited by dawglover05; 02/14/2401:18 PM.
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
You are 100% correct. What Carslon is basically saying is "I didn't call him out or ask him any tough questions". You know, because other people have brought these things up? And people buy that backtracking. But it does help me to understand why we're where we are.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
Then there is no need to call me one. Just because once I refute an article's description of one of his responses, doesn't mean one is an apologist of someone...except for maybe better journalism. Feel free to call me a better journalism apologist.
Originally Posted by dawglover05
I do have emotions on this topic. That's true. I think they are warranted. People like Carlson and JD Vance are incredibly intelligent. Nobody should say otherwise. But they have painted this whole thing in such an untrue light with so many twists, turns and abundant misframing and misinterpretation that they have dog-whistled to people who really don't know any better at all. THAT is what triggers my anger.
Yes, clearly you do. Politics are more emotional than ever and don't disagree that people make many twists and turns and misframing based on their leanings. I just think the article you posted did the very same thing.
Originally Posted by dawglover05
Chris Wallace - a former Fox colleague of Carlson - put it correctly when he stated that referring to Tucker Carlson as a useful idiot is insulting...to useful idiots.
Seems a bit contradictory to an earlier comment. Besides, I'm not really concerned with what Chris Wallace says or doesn't say. I can come up with my own opinions on topics, thank you very much, without needing to have the thoughts of someone else when coming up with my take.
Originally Posted by dawglover05
I also laugh a little bit at your disappointment in my posts. Should I perhaps resort to things like posting GIFs and memes, and use phrases like "Lolz" instead, to avoid disappointment?
Not disappointed in your posts (plural), just disappointed in your post of the article because I find you to be a reasonable, fair poster on political topics on this board in a group of maybe 2-3 other people. But seeing the emotion re: Carlson, I can now see why you did.
1. When did I call you one? You committed an act of apologism. I stated I don't know if you are a Carlson apologist or not.
2. I don't see that in the article. Like I said before, when you extrapolate out that quote, I don't think it helped him at all.
3. I don't see the contradiction you are referring to. I also don't care what your opinion of Chris Wallace is either. I found his quote to be on point. He is worse than useful idiots because he's intelligent and he pretty much controls hoardes of useful idiots. Your point also seems contradictory to me, considering the plethora of tweets, memes, resources and articles you post. Hell, this whole thread is concerning the thoughts of a media personality. So I introduce the viewpoints of another one and it's "I'm not really concerned with what he has to say." Doesn't make sense.
4. The emotion I have on Carlson is based on a set of facts. The frustration comes from the fact that I feel like I need to repeatedly point out something that is obvious in regard to someone who blatantly displays red flags. Feel free to be disappointed. Your disappointment does not sway me, nor should it. This, to me, is a topic that merits passion.
I frequently am disappointed by the rhetoric on these forums that involve mindless meme-sharing and a plethora of phrases such as "Lolz", "your tears taste so good", "Pffft..." and whatnot, which happen constantly, so much that I took a rather extended hiatus from this board, but I guess I try to move on, at the end of the day.
Last edited by dawglover05; 02/14/2402:19 PM.
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
You are 100% correct. What Carslon is basically saying is "I didn't call him out or ask him any tough questions". You know, because other people have brought these things up? And people buy that backtracking. But it does help me to understand why we're where we are.
Not to mention, too, by the way, that he opened up his interview preview, IIRC, by mentioning that nobody has tried to get Putin's point of view or interview him, which is a lie that has been dispelled six ways from Sunday. Thinking about this more, I think I have seen what Tucker Carlson has done to the minds of my own family, who blatantly and parrot parrot the mistruths to me, a person who is far closer to the situation in Ukraine than I let on in here, and I think that triggers me even further.
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
