Play online chess!

FromMessage
zorroloco
06-Dec-24, 16:46

Pardons
Why on Earth would anyone think anyone has any reason to expect persecution and targeting by the tRump administration? It unfathomable....It's not like he has ever threatened to do exactly that.

Oh... wait....


U.S. President-elect Donald Trump has vowed to investigate or prosecute political rivals, former intelligence officials, the country's former military chief, prosecutors, tech moguls, and left-wing Americans if he becomes president again.
Here is a list of some of his potential targets:

POLITICAL ADVERSARIES
Trump has called for investigations into Vice President Kamala Harris, President Joe Biden, former President Barack Obama and Liz Cheney, a former U.S. representative who is one of the most high-profile Republicans to turn against Trump.
At a September rally in Pennsylvania, Trump said Harris was responsible for the "biggest crime story of our time," referring to illegal border crossings, which occurred under both his first administration and the Biden administration. "She should be impeached and prosecuted for her actions," Trump said.
Trump has also shared posts on his Truth Social media platform calling for military tribunals to try Cheney and Obama.

During his first White House bid in 2016, Trump regularly called for opponent Democrat Hillary Clinton to be prosecuted. He said in an October radio interview that once he won office, however, he made sure she was not prosecuted, because "it would look terrible."

FORMER INTELLIGENCE OFFICIALS

Trump harbors anger at former intelligence officials who were involved in the investigation into alleged ties between his first presidential campaign and Russia. Trump still rails against what he calls the Russia "hoax" and has called former senior intelligence officials who were involved in the investigation "corrupt."
They include John Brennan, the former CIA director, and James Clapper, the former director of national intelligence. Trump reposted an image on his Truth Social platform in January 2023 showing Brennan, Clapper and others behind bars, under a headline: 'Now that Russia collusion is a proven lie, when do trials for treason begin?'

Another target of Trump's anger over the Russia investigation is Andrew McCabe, the FBI's former deputy director. In June, Trump posted quotes by his former White House adviser Steve Bannon about McCabe, that if Trump reenters the White House, McCabe should be worried about being targeted.

Adam Schiff, a Democrat and the former chair of the House of Representatives Intelligence Committee, frequently claimed during Trump's first term that his campaign had colluded with Russia. Trump loathes Schiff and often decried him in campaign speeches this year.
In January 2023 Trump wrote: "Schiff is a sleazebag and traitor, and should be prosecuted for the damage he has done to our Country!"

FORMER JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF CHAIRMAN
Trump has said retired U.S. Army General Mark Milley, the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, should be tried for treason. He even suggested in 2023 that Milley should be executed after it emerged in the waning, chaotic days of Trump's first term that Milley had held two back-channel calls with China's top general to reassure them that Trump was not planning to attack China.

TECH SECTOR
Trump has also warned Meta Platforms CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Google over what he claims is potential election interference on their tech platforms.
Trump has accused Meta of suppressing content that would have hurt Biden in the 2020 election, and has also criticized Zuckerberg's donations to bolster election infrastructure.
"We are watching him closely, and if he does anything illegal this time, he will spend the rest of his life in prison," Trump wrote in his recently published "Save America" coffee table book, according to media reviews of the book.
Zuckerberg has not responded publicly to Trump's threat, but did say Trump's reaction to the July 13 assassination attempt was "one of the most badass things I've ever seen in my life."
Trump has also threatened to instruct the Department of Justice to criminally investigate Google for "only revealing and displaying bad stories about Donald J. Trump," according to a Truth Social post in September.
"I will request their prosecution, at the maximum levels, when I win the Election," Trump wrote. He provided no evidence for his assertion about Google.
Google has not responded to requests for comment about Trump's statement.

PROSECUTORS
Trump and his allies have called for prosecuting, firing or jailing prosecutors who defy him or have investigated him.
In an April interview with Time, Trump said that if U.S. attorneys refused orders to prosecute someone, he would be open to firing them. "It would depend on the situation," Trump said.
Trump has also said that if elected, he would fire Jack Smith, the federal prosecutor leading the criminal probes into his attempts to overturn his 2020 election defeat and alleged mishandling of classified documents after leaving office.
That follows an April 2023 speech by Trump - after Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg convinced a New York grand jury to bring the first criminal charges ever against a former U.S. president, in which he said Bragg was "the criminal."
"He should be prosecuted or at a minimum he should resign," Trump said. Trump's ally, Steve Bannon, an influential voice in Trump's Make America Great Again movement, has said Bragg should be jailed.

NEW YORK ATTORNEY GENERAL AND JUDGE
Trump has called for the prosecution of New York Attorney General Letitia James, who sued Trump and his real estate business for committing fraud. Trump was ordered by Justice Arthur Engoron to pay $454 million in penalties in that case. Trump said in a Truth Social post in November 2023 that James and Engoron "should be sanctioned and prosecuted over this complete and very obvious MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE!!!"

PROTESTERS

Following pro-Palestinian protests on college campuses across the U.S. this year, Trump told Fox News in July that anyone who desecrates the American flag should get a one-year jail sentence.
"Now, people will say: 'Oh it's unconstitutional.' Those are stupid people who say that," Trump said, adding that he wants to work with Congress to allow the jail sentences.
Trump has also said he would arrest "pro-Hamas thugs" who engage in vandalism, an apparent reference to the college student protesters.


apatzer
06-Dec-24, 19:25

Exactly!



Nothing to see there
zorroloco
08-Dec-24, 09:59

Nothing to see here
Tge fat boy told “Meet the Press” that members of the January 6 committee that investigated the Capitol insurrection members of the January 6 committee that investigated the Capitol insurrection should “go to jail.”

“(Committee Vice Chair then-Rep. Liz) Cheney was behind it and so was (Committee Chair Rep. Bennie Thompson), and so was everyone on that committee. For what they did, they should go to jail,” Trump told NBC’s Kristen Welker on “Meet the Press.”
zorroloco
08-Dec-24, 10:00

Former GOP Rep. Adam Kinzinger, who served on the House Select Committee on January 6, said he is “not worried” about President-elect Donald Trump’s recent comments that members of the committee should be sent to jail for their investigation into the 2021 Capitol insurrection.

“The executive branch can’t go after the legislative branch because we embarrassed him,” Kinzinger told CNN’s Manu Raju Sunday morning on “Inside Politics.” “That’s not a sin, that’s not against the law.”

Kinzinger noted that the majority of people who testified before the committee were members of the president-elect’s own party, saying Trump is upset because he was embarrassed.

“He’s not going to come after us, and I’m not worried about it at all, in the least,” Kinzinger said.
bobspringett
08-Dec-24, 13:46

Zorro 10:00
<“He’s not going to come after us, and I’m not worried about it at all, in the least,” Kinzinger said.>

He should be careful. Ernst Roehm said the same.
apatzer
08-Dec-24, 13:59

I have often wondered if the elimination of Ernst Roehm and the brown shirts. Were the results of a lovers quarrel and information that could never be allowed to get out. Or was it simply for power and elimination of a potential rival. Or both. However that is simply suppositions that probably can never be verified.
bobspringett
08-Dec-24, 14:16

Hitler and Roehm had been friends for a long time. Roehm felt free to put his own opinion to Hitler from time to time. Hitler was prepared to hear a friendly disagreement, so long as Roehm supported him.

But as Hitler took power, the idea of anyone knowing better than der Fuehrer was not a good look. And Roehm was pushing for ever more power as well as running the Brownshirts. This provided the possibility of a Party coup. He was a possible focus for an alternative Leader. Hitler couldn't tolerate that.

So anyone who wants to provide any criticism of Der Orange, any dissent, or any possible hint that perhaps he could be anything more than a useful tool, BEWARE!! When Hitler plays chess, there is only one King, no capital pieces, and expendable pawns.
apatzer
08-Dec-24, 17:38

Well said







zorroloco
08-Dec-24, 20:03

Bob
He said it. Not me. I think tRump will everything in his power to persecute his political enemies. A serpent is a serpent.
lord_shiva
09-Dec-24, 12:37

Blanket Pardons
Many are unhappy about the pardon of Hunter, and I sympathize with them—but must note Hunter had agreed to a plea deal Republicans kaiboshed to smear Joe, no other reason why.

Groper promises to pardon the J6 insurrectionists in retaliation. And of course, Kash Patel is eager to prosecute Pelosi, Schiff, Fauci, and others without evidence of criminal conduct. Space Laser Greene asserts Fauci is guilty of crimes against humanity. She is an idiot, but stating that belabors the obvious.

I don’t think Biden should issue blanket pardons. Let Groper launch his phony investigations and waste the people’s money. Funny how Republicans squandered fifty million dollars (1990s value) investigating Whitewater, only to impeach Clinton over lying about a blowjob. (Break out your smelling salts, Andrew!)

The fallout is that presidents are now free to lie about oral sex. Bush was not impeached for lying us into unprovoked war. No one has issues bombing foreign nations. But God forbid someone denies having his knob polished.

When it was Trump’s turn, Republicans chose to agree treason, insurrection, and election interference extortion were also insufficient reasons to justify removal from office. Apparently no crime meets the necessary standard. If insurrection treason doesn’t, impeachment becomes pointless. Why would any president ever be removed, for anything?

Let them play their silly little games, just like they did with the phony Smirnoff documents. The only downside is Kash Patel is not as honest as the notorious liar Jim Corsi. So he will conceal evidence exonerating Groper’s victims, but widely promulgate all groundless accusations.

So many Fox zealots continue believing Saddam was involved in the 9/11 plot. Lies take root and become impossible to dislodge, while actual evidence never gets aired. Fox viewers don’t get the sunlight exposure the rest of the world receives. And most of Groper’s base gets their information from X, Russian troll bait, or other social media—not from any remotely legitimate source. MAGA.

Certainly not from any “lame stream” fake news.

apatzer
09-Dec-24, 14:56

Lord Shiva
When we defended Kuwait and Saudi Arabia the first time. Our analyst had predicted that we set Iraq back military by 10 years. That's how long we surmised it would take them to rebuild their military. 10 years later we went back in and finished the job it would have happened under any pretext that was just a lie to Garner public support for something that was already going to happen.

As for Afghanistan they had terrorist training camps they've refused to disband them they refused to cooperate in any type of way and Osama bin laden was hiding in Afghanistan so now that's better than the Iraq version but we lumped that in there because we were going to do it anyway.
lord_shiva
09-Dec-24, 19:21

Afghanistan
made sense. Analysts I follow indicated we could actually have succeeded there had we not diverted resources into Iraq. I read an article in the Onion six months before 9/11 in which Bush was quoted as saying you better believe we are going to mix it up with someone, and Iraq was at the top of the list. “I just need an excuse.”

The article went on to predict most of what ultimately transpired, minus the Twin Tower attack.

But Iraq never truly made any sense. That was as wicked as Putler’s invasion of Ukraine, save that we stole oil instead of land. We killed about as many innocent civilians.
zorroloco
09-Dec-24, 19:24

Shiva
Yeah. Afghanistan made sense. Iraq was a bloody war crime
bobspringett
09-Dec-24, 20:52

Shiva 19:21
Not much in America's Middle Eastern policy over that last half-century makes sense.

1. America was dead-set against the Iranian revolution because they kicked out the Shah, an American puppet. Not better reason than that. A more intelligent policy would have been to tell the Shah to set up a proper liberal-democratic regime and retire with his billions to a safe haven like Hawaii. If he was reluctant, then Am,erica could have championed the liberal-modern wing of the Revolution led by the students instead of surrendering leadership to the Ayatollahs. Iran had a liberal-democratic, western-oriented government before the CIA overthrew it and installed the Shah, so they knew how to run a modern secular state.

Think what a difference it would make, to have Iran as an ally instead of an enemy in the Middle East! But no; so they backed Saddam against Iran instead. Think what a difference that would have made, if Sadam had not gained the power he did with USA backing!

2. Flowing from the first blunder of backing the dictator Shah, America decided to back another dictator in Iraq. Same highway to hell soon resulted.

3. Now America is backing Israel to the hilt, despite Israel being manifestly a terrorist state. It is effectively committing ethnic cleansing in Gaza; not through direct deaths, though there are plenty of them, but by making it impossible to live there. Israel is doing to Lebanon what Putin is doing to the Ukraine, and America is providing the weapons. Sure, Am erica is 'asking for restraint', but when Israel ignores these requests America just shrugs and provides more weapons. So what private words are being delivered along with the public requests?

The end result of this, if it continues, can be only one of two alternatives:-

a) Israel collapses because it gathers too many enemies. America under Trump might decide saving Israel is not worth the continuing price in money, equipment and international leverage, or it might finally try to bring Israel to heel by depriving it of support but under-calculating the impact. In this scenario, America is without a friend in the Middle East; not even Egypt will back a horse with no stamina left.

b) Israel somehow succeeds in establishing a 'Greater Israel, from river to sea' and well into southern Syria and Lebanon. The problem is that the same Israel that didn't bother following orders when America had real leverage is even less likely to follow orders once the locals are subdued. America will have an 'ally' that doesn't do anything it doesn't want to do.

Either option is useless or worse. So why is it being done? A good question, that!
lord_shiva
10-Dec-24, 11:24

We are America
not fun king Competentland. If we had any real clue what we were doing don’t you think we would have fixed problems instead of continuously exacerbating them?

We cannot have universal health care, for example. If we did manage to implement a workable solution we would elect idiots to quickly destroy it, because we pride ourselves on ignorance. It is remarkable we got anywhere near as far as we did. It won’t last.

bobspringett
10-Dec-24, 12:30

Shiva 11:24
There is some truth in the Capitalist maxim that "If you're smart, competent and a hard worker, you can get anywhere!"

Because the average American isn't.
lord_shiva
10-Dec-24, 17:00

My Boss
called me in one day after he drove up in a decked out Ferrari. He said if I really dedicated myself to my work, put in extra effort, and the company profits were maintained, by the end of the year he would be able to afford a second Ferrari.

When I first entered to the work force I was young and poor, but after many years of diligent labor I’m now old.

bobspringett
10-Dec-24, 18:54

Shiva 17:00
You passed the 'hard worker' component, but missed out on the 'smart' and 'competent' sections.

You have to be smart enough to figure out some way to divert other people's money into your own pocket. This usually involves being not completely legal at one or more stages, or at least not completely truthful. The you have to be competent enough to do it without leaving enough evidence to convict you.



GameKnot: play chess online, Internet chess league, chess clubs, monthly chess tournaments, chess teams, online chess puzzles, free online chess games database and more.