Locksteady
Member
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2012
- Messages
- 707
And short of them actually passing something like the ETHICS Act, which would be a clear conflict of interest for many of them, I don't see any obvious offramp from the insider trading issue.
The Trump Presidency 2.0
- Thread starter Box
- Start date
Whoa whoa....whoa... I just started investing with Pelosi on Autopilot about a month ago. With her dropping out of congress I already have to find another genius investor to shadow...
Box
Verified SOF
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2018
- Messages
- 2,593
Cant help but wonder why she is bailing.
Entrenched critters like her NEVER leave of their own accord - they would rather wither away and die in the pubic eye before they seperate themselves from the meal ticket of influence and power.
Maybe she has made "enough" money and is ready to retire and enjoy it?
Bullshit.
That woman doesn't have any intention of sitting in a rocking chair, drinking a cup of herb tea and watching the sun come up with that half wit spouse of hers.
To an entrenched politician from Permanent District of Columbia, "it" is never enough.
...thats WHY they stay there in the first place.
...it isn't about the money
...its about control and influence and power
Just like that line from "Heat"
Well ya know, for me, the action IS the juice
Thats the question I want answered - why is she REALLY leaving?
Entrenched critters like her NEVER leave of their own accord - they would rather wither away and die in the pubic eye before they seperate themselves from the meal ticket of influence and power.
Maybe she has made "enough" money and is ready to retire and enjoy it?
Bullshit.
That woman doesn't have any intention of sitting in a rocking chair, drinking a cup of herb tea and watching the sun come up with that half wit spouse of hers.
To an entrenched politician from Permanent District of Columbia, "it" is never enough.
...thats WHY they stay there in the first place.
...it isn't about the money
...its about control and influence and power
Just like that line from "Heat"
Well ya know, for me, the action IS the juice
Thats the question I want answered - why is she REALLY leaving?
Box
Verified SOF
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2018
- Messages
- 2,593
I would suspect being told by her campaign donors that "you're out Nancy" would be the only thing that would make her leave of her own accord. Leaving because of "threats" becaus of some snot nosed newcomer?
Nope.
Nancy ain't afraid of them.
Nancy is only afraid of her campaign donors.
Nobody like her wants to suffer the public humiliation of being dethroned because the campaign donors pulled out..
Sick or dying?
Pfft - these parasites die in office all the time.
...its almost part of their legacy to "die serving"
Avoiding the shame of defeat by retiring??
I'd accept that as a valid escape strategy.
Nope.
Nancy ain't afraid of them.
Nancy is only afraid of her campaign donors.
Nobody like her wants to suffer the public humiliation of being dethroned because the campaign donors pulled out..
Sick or dying?
Pfft - these parasites die in office all the time.
...its almost part of their legacy to "die serving"
Avoiding the shame of defeat by retiring??
I'd accept that as a valid escape strategy.
Topkick
Verified Military
Box
Verified SOF
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2018
- Messages
- 2,593
I'm just too jaded and cynical - politicians never quit while they're ahead. They are like people with a gambling addiction.
If I can use insider trading to make 100 million - how long before I can make 200?
If your face taxpayers - I'm just "enjoying the benefits of capitalism"
...while I pass legislation that JAILS the rest of you fuckers for making money in the stock market
If she is leaving, its because her donors have had enough and now that the "Pelosi Tracker" is every bit as much meme as it is finanical planning tool - they don't want to be outed as the ones feeding her the millions of dollars that she puts in her off shore accounts.
Either that - or she has done something shifty and she knows the other shoe is about to drop - so she is getting out before she gets thrown out...
...rats never leave a house while its still full of cheese.
If I can use insider trading to make 100 million - how long before I can make 200?
If your face taxpayers - I'm just "enjoying the benefits of capitalism"
...while I pass legislation that JAILS the rest of you fuckers for making money in the stock market
If she is leaving, its because her donors have had enough and now that the "Pelosi Tracker" is every bit as much meme as it is finanical planning tool - they don't want to be outed as the ones feeding her the millions of dollars that she puts in her off shore accounts.
Either that - or she has done something shifty and she knows the other shoe is about to drop - so she is getting out before she gets thrown out...
...rats never leave a house while its still full of cheese.
Topkick
Verified Military
I think MTG is being a quitter, should stay and complete her term. But OTOH she's smart enough to take her 20 million in scams and go enjoy it outside of DC while she's young.
The democrat "illegal orders" video is the democrat tactic of "tweedle dee tweedle dumb".
When the entire liberal media for years labels everyone nazi, fascist, racist, and a threat to democracy- that's protected free speech. No incitement there, right? Well then, you have the other half of the folks shouting "DEATH TO ALL NAZIS! KILL YOUR LOCAL FASCIST TODAY!" That's also protected free speech. Imagine two people standing on a street corner; the first goes "We should kill all Nazis!", and immediately, the second guy goes "Hey! There's a Nazi!"... that's incitement. But tweedle dee and tweedle dumb can play stupid when the statements are separated.
That's what the democrat video is. For weeks/months/years, the liberal media has been talking about how Trump is burning the Constitution, violating the law, issuing all these "illegal" orders. They never say what, exactly, and usually cite a federal court judge without standing or authority to call it illegal. Anyway, now the democrats get to make their little video "just reminding people that they don't have to follow illegal orders" after being conditioned for a year that "everything he does is illegal."
When the entire liberal media for years labels everyone nazi, fascist, racist, and a threat to democracy- that's protected free speech. No incitement there, right? Well then, you have the other half of the folks shouting "DEATH TO ALL NAZIS! KILL YOUR LOCAL FASCIST TODAY!" That's also protected free speech. Imagine two people standing on a street corner; the first goes "We should kill all Nazis!", and immediately, the second guy goes "Hey! There's a Nazi!"... that's incitement. But tweedle dee and tweedle dumb can play stupid when the statements are separated.
That's what the democrat video is. For weeks/months/years, the liberal media has been talking about how Trump is burning the Constitution, violating the law, issuing all these "illegal" orders. They never say what, exactly, and usually cite a federal court judge without standing or authority to call it illegal. Anyway, now the democrats get to make their little video "just reminding people that they don't have to follow illegal orders" after being conditioned for a year that "everything he does is illegal."
Stochastic terrorism didn't work the way they hoped (despite at least two assassination attempts, numerous political murders, and countless riots, assaults, imprisonments, and other infringements on individual rights). So now they have to try stochastic coups.
Last edited:
Dude, I'm 100% convinced the purpose of that video was just to get an overreaction from the President.
Idk what has happened since Truth Social was created, but Trump has gotten thinner skin and less controlled at crafting a narrative.
A competent WH communication team would have responded by saying something like:
"We have no problem with senators/representatives xyz reminding Troops of their Constitutional Duties. Luckily, no such orders have been issued. If these members of Congress are aware of something, we ask that they provide that information."
That's clear, runs counter to the narrative, and puts the ball in their court to provide specific examples.
Truthing "SEDITION PUNISHABLE BY DEATH; PUT THEM IN JAIL!" is literally leaning into what the WH is being accused of.
Meh. What do you mean “being accused of”? It’s not the truth social post, that’s on wax. The WH (Trump) is being *accused of* calling directly for the death of individual politicians. That’s what the left is actually accusing and fundraising off of.
Per my usual agreement here- it’s Trump. Acting brand new like he doesn’t tweet hyperbolically while simultaneously ignoring the impetus for the tweet/truth is just stupid, and I don’t feel like playing that game.
Trump tweets wild shit. He did this *in response to a thing* and you’re ignoring the thing to talk about the response.
This is falling on deaf ears, but do me a favor and pretend for 2 seconds like this happened during Covid and it was Gaetz, Jordan, MTG and Kennedy in the exact same video.
You and others would be calling for the gallows, not dissecting Biden’s teams response to the issue.
The WH is constantly accused of becoming/being fascist and calling for extreme actions/violence against dissenters and opposition.
So are the Dems inciting, or hyperbolic like Trump? I wanna make sure I understand where the difference is.
I'm not ignoring the thing; the thing is stupid. You wanna know what I had to hear everytime we did shit as guardsmen? "Here are your legal limits, you are required to ignore illegal orders."
The Dems in the video aren't doing anything "seditious" by stating a truth. Call them out for trying to imply shit, make them point out what orders they "think" are illegal, etc.
I'd probably call them stupid and ask them to show were the illegal orders are occurring, not accuse them of being traitors.
‐------------
The whole thing is stupid, I just think Trump is taking bait that he wouldn't have previously.
The Quartermaster
Verified Military
- Joined
- May 3, 2020
- Messages
- 1,694
I just came here to say that the best of Mark Kelly was over after he retired from both NASA and the USN. His wife getting shot by that lolbert was a means to use it to push his own agenda. And his TDS is an embarrassment for AZ.
Box
Verified SOF
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2018
- Messages
- 2,593
fuck that guy - the only card up his sleeve is national pity for the tragic injustice done to his wife...
...by a violent liberal democrat run amok
If his wife hadn't gotten fucked up by a crazed liberal democratic shit bag military officer nobody would even know that assholes name.
Asstrownut or not
...again, fuck that guy
...by a violent liberal democrat run amok
If his wife hadn't gotten fucked up by a crazed liberal democratic shit bag military officer nobody would even know that assholes name.
Asstrownut or not
...again, fuck that guy
Which in this case they clearly didn't do, just like the rest. If we are going to play these semantic games, the president let everyone know what the penalty is for sedition. He got the penalty wrong (max 20 years, not death); he wasn't the one who said "hang them". So, unfortunately, thanks to your own logic here, he's clean.
Also, the crime that was committed wasn't sedition or seditious conspiracy. Since there was no illegality defined, and given my earlier contention that "everything he does is illegal", I would say the folks in question violate-
- 18 U.S.C. § 2387 is a U.S. law that prohibits actions intended to interfere with the U.S. armed forces. It makes it a federal crime to urge or attempt to cause insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty within the military, as well as to obstruct recruiting or enlistment. Penalties include fines, imprisonment for up to ten years, and a five-year ban on U.S. government employment.
- Prohibited activities: This law makes it illegal to intentionally:
- Advise, counsel, or urge insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty.
- Distribute written or printed material that advocates for these actions.
- Obstruct or attempt to obstruct recruiting, enlistment, or general military operations.
- Penalties: A conviction under this statute can result in:
- A fine.
- Imprisonment for not more than ten years.
- A five-year ban on employment by the U.S. government.
- Prohibited activities: This law makes it illegal to intentionally:
Little pickle you got yourself in here. You tell me.
To your first, I think you might be the only person on the board who believes that statement.
To your second, Trump has "taken" every bait since the beginning of time. Since he was calling into newspapers pretending to be his own publicist and taking interviews, there isn't a single issue the guy doesn't address, and t's a 110% chance he addresses something from the dems aimed right at him going into mid terms. He said he was right about Shedeur Sanders you think he isn't going to have 40 truths about democrats "simply reminding the American military they can deny illegal orders (wink wink)?
It's almost like your framing here suggests heavy apologia for anything against the admin, sight unseen. I am sure that isn't your intent, despite the hundreds of posts (all in replies to me, weird) that support that suspicion.
Last edited:
I am sure he is just being hyperbolic, or reminding service members about accountability (happens all the time) and not leveling a direct threat to intimidate those who would engage lawfully where a crime may have been committed. Also, this is entirely unrelated to anything else going on, certainly not a party tactic, and 100% not indicative of who is really "inciting" anything.
Ruben Gallego warns military 'there will be consequences' going after congressmembers once Trump is gone
From the piece:
"Donald Trump is going to be gone in a couple of years," Gallego said. "And if you’re part of the military that is going after sitting senators, sitting members of Congress, and part of the weaponization of government, there will be consequences, without a doubt."
He added, "I think there’s going to be a lot of officers that will be part of this potential tribunal, if they want to call it that, that will be looking over their shoulders. Because they know that Donald Trump will be gone and they will not have that protection. They’re going to have to do the safest thing possible, which is follow the Constitution of the United States, and you’ll be fine."
Ruben Gallego warns military 'there will be consequences' going after congressmembers once Trump is gone
From the piece:
"Donald Trump is going to be gone in a couple of years," Gallego said. "And if you’re part of the military that is going after sitting senators, sitting members of Congress, and part of the weaponization of government, there will be consequences, without a doubt."
He added, "I think there’s going to be a lot of officers that will be part of this potential tribunal, if they want to call it that, that will be looking over their shoulders. Because they know that Donald Trump will be gone and they will not have that protection. They’re going to have to do the safest thing possible, which is follow the Constitution of the United States, and you’ll be fine."
Funny...what's being lost in all of the discussion is how troops are taught in the first week of training, "still shitting civilian chow" early in training, about a duty to disobey illegal orders. Nuremberg, My Lai, "just following orders" isn't a defense (though sadly used all too often), et. al. are cited in training.
Obeying the Constitution isn't just cool or safe, it is in the oath you take when enlisting or commissioning.
Civilians? Same thing!!!! Little know fact that USG civilians have an oath of office.
And Democrats had to virtual signal with their little video? GTFO. My dachshund shit out something smarter than those idiots.
Obeying the Constitution isn't just cool or safe, it is in the oath you take when enlisting or commissioning.
Civilians? Same thing!!!! Little know fact that USG civilians have an oath of office.
And Democrats had to virtual signal with their little video? GTFO. My dachshund shit out something smarter than those idiots.
We don't need politicians to remind us of our oaths.
They need to remember theirs.
They need to remember theirs.
Similar threads
