Assange: Everyone wants Pence In and Trump Out

[nikcers]

Well...probably couldn't get worse and I don't know what is worse...Trump or his groupies. A woman I know asked why couldn't Trump just sign an executive order to impose term limits on Congress.

That would make it awkward, Trump is the one who campaigned to get some of these bastards re-elected.

 

[Ender]

Hillary was so polarizing and hated that I think they would have shown up to the polls to vote against her even if Trump's VP pick had been the exhumed corpse of Michael Jackson.

Hey- I'll take MJ any day!

 

[invisible]

Hey- I'll take MJ any day!

Not me. Even to this day, I'll still say:
pepsi? EWWWW...michael jackson drinks that stuff!

Here, this one is much more appropriate for the trumpettes:

 

[Mordan]

The anti-trumpers are just as bad as the pro-trumpers. Both sides are anti-truth, anti-facts, and pro-feelings.

Could Trump have selected Pence for VP because he is a clean-cut, impressive(ish), moderate conservative? Sure.

Could Trump have selected Pence for VP to get the Neocon #nevertrumpers and establishment Republicans in Congress on board? Definitely possible.

Could the Deep State try to overthrow the Trump/Bannon Regime and install Pence ala George HW? It's happened before (for less).

Does it look like Pence and Ryan are establishment globalist lackeys pushing Obamacare-Lite? Sure does.

Could Trump (using Pence) be purposefully giving Ryan enough rope to hang himself with Obamacare-Lite? I wouldn't rule it out.

Interesting times indeed.

I like this post. I want more.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

This is not true. The VP was elected. It's not like a cabinet position. He would need to be impeached by the House and convicted by Congress in order to get fired just like the President himself.

Well, how the VP is chosen has changed several times. At this point, the VP is selected by the POTUS, and the Electoral College basically votes for a ticket. The President can ask for the resignation of the VP, and most would comply. No impeachment necessary. A stubborn VP could refuse, but it wouldn't be likely, and would probably get ugly.

 

[oyarde]

Hillary was so polarizing and hated that I think they would have shown up to the polls to vote against her even if Trump's VP pick had been the exhumed corpse of Michael Jackson.

I would have been delighted to have a dead guy to vote for .

 

[nikcers]

yep

Does it look like Pence and Ryan are establishment globalist lackeys pushing Obamacare-Lite? Sure does.

"Obviously, the major components are staying intact, because this is something we wrote with President Trump, this is something we wrote with the Senate committee," Paul Ryan said.

"This is the plan we ran on all of last year."

 

[francisco]

Usually under scandal situations, but yes, POTUS can replace VP at will.

Uh, No.

Certainly pressure can be applied on a VP to resign (from any quarter, including public opinion or the media) ala Agnew. But once VP is elected, POTUS does not have the right to dismiss said VP at will.

At the next election, POTUS could elect to not choose the current VP as his running mate, ala FDR dumping Henry Wallace. But again, in a given term the VP is not subject to dismissal by POTUS.

 

[CPUd]

If Trump runs again in 2020, he should put Chuck Schumer on the ticket.

 

[specsaregood]

Uh, No.

Certainly pressure can be applied on a VP to resign (from any quarter, including public opinion or the media) ala Agnew. But once VP is elected, POTUS does not have the right to dismiss said VP at will.

At the next election, POTUS could elect to not choose the current VP as his running mate, ala FDR dumping Henry Wallace. But again, in a given term the VP is not subject to dismissal by POTUS.

One could argue that with the spy tools at hand, any President has enough power to dig up more than enough blackmail to force any VP to resign or get impeached. Hell, in a position such as trump, it might even be arguable to pick a VP that you already have the dirt on.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Uh, No.

Certainly pressure can be applied on a VP to resign (from any quarter, including public opinion or the media) ala Agnew. But once VP is elected, POTUS does not have the right to dismiss said VP at will.

At the next election, POTUS could elect to not choose the current VP as his running mate, ala FDR dumping Henry Wallace. But again, in a given term the VP is not subject to dismissal by POTUS.

Yes, "at will" is not exactly correct. As you said, POTUS can ask for resignation. Clarification was already posted above:

Well, how the VP is chosen has changed several times. At this point, the VP is selected by the POTUS, and the Electoral College basically votes for a ticket. The President can ask for the resignation of the VP, and most would comply. No impeachment necessary. A stubborn VP could refuse, but it wouldn't be likely, and would probably get ugly.

 

[TheCount]

Fighting Assad's army? Or Islamic extremists?

Who cares? Which of those are we at war with?

Innocent casualties from an attack planned by Obama?

Should Trump go ahead with everything else that Obama planned as well?

You guys were saying Trump was going to actively murder families of terrorists on purpose.... Has that happened yet?

Are they not dead?

Were they passively murdered, perhaps? Less dead somehow?

 

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

Who cares?

You. After Obama got out of office.

 

[Zippyjuan]

Fighting Assad's army? Or Islamic extremists?




Innocent casualties from an attack planned by Obama?

You guys were saying Trump was going to actively murder families of terrorists on purpose.... Has that happened yet?

Blame falls to the person who called for it. Or was Kennedy not to blame for the Bay of Pigs fiasco either?

http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/03/politics/yemen-raid-trump-obama/

"It wasn't something the President approved and said good to go," said a former Obama administration official. The plan was discussed at several levels, but never fully approved -- because such situations are remarkably fluid based on daily intelligence and conditions on the ground.

Ned Price, former Special Assistant to Obama and the National Security Council responded to Spicer's briefing by arguing his timeline of events was wrong.

"The specific operation in question was never presented to or considered by the Obama Admin for approval," he tweeted.

A separate senior government official involved in the Obama administration's NSC told CNN that the Defense Department worked up general proposals for an overall set of targets in Yemen that were then discussed among the agencies in the closing weeks of Obama's term.

"This particular raid was not discussed -- just the broad framework," said the former government official. "Moreover, no recommendation was made other than a recommendation to provide the next administration with the necessary information to make a decision after they had a chance to run their own deliberative interagency process."

After Mattis was sworn in to lead the Pentagon on January 20 -- the same day Trump took the oath of office -- the order was presented to the new secretary of defense for the first time, the White House official said. Mattis reviewed the plan for four days and sent it back to the National Security Council -- with two pages of notes -- on January 24.

After the dinner meeting, which many saw as the official go ahead for the plan, the group of deputies -- which now under the Trump administration included KT McFarland, Trump's deputy national security adviser - met again January 26 and approved the order.

Trump officially signed off on the plan January 26, kicking it into high gear given the next moonless night was a mere four days away, the White House official said.

 

[CPUd]

 

[Zippyjuan]

http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/03/09...emen-signals-more-aggressive-use-of-military/

Trump’s Ramped-Up Bombing in Yemen Signals More Aggressive Use of Military

After a week of punishing airstrikes loosed on al Qaeda in Yemen that saw 40 targets go up in flames and smoke, American pilots took a breather the past two nights, watching the dust settle.

The weeklong blitz in Yemen eclipsed the annual bombing total for any year during Obama’s presidency. Under the previous administration, approval for strikes came only after slow-moving policy discussions, with senior officials required to sign off on any action. The Trump administration has proven much quicker at green-lighting attacks.

More broadly, the expanded bombing in Yemen signals a more aggressive use of military force by the Trump administration against Islamist militants, from Syria to Afghanistan. The White House already has approved the deployment of Marines and special operations forces to Syria and a large-scale commando raid in Yemen. On Thursday, a top commander suggested more troops are headed to Afghanistan.

 

[Superfluous Man]

You guys were saying Trump was going to actively murder families of terrorists on purpose.... Has that happened yet?

Not just us, Trump was saying that too.

Has it happened yet? I assume so. If not, that surprises me. It's certainly not for lack of desire to murder innocent dark-skinned children on Trump's part. Give him some time.

 

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/03/09...emen-signals-more-aggressive-use-of-military/

 

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/03/politics/yemen-raid-trump-obama/

 

[Zippyjuan]

Thank you for your informative addition to the discussion.