On 3/12/2015 3:08 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/12/2015 2:02 PM, wrote:
On Thursday, March 12, 2015 at 12:18:47 PM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/12/2015 12:03 PM, John H. wrote:
On Wed, 11 Mar 2015 18:28:12 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...


It appeared her computer knowledge came from watching CSI on TV where
the police geek can recover everything ever typed on the bad guy's
PC.

Apparently "they" want HRC's personal emails now.
"They" being the GOP, Hillary-haters, and muckrakers.
She will tell them to pound sand.
And pound sand they will.

Another moronic left-wing opinion.

Into which category do the Democrats fall?

http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolit...illary-clinton




I think any chance the GOP had of defeating Hillary (or any other
Democratic nominee) in 2016 was just blown to hell by the 37 year old,
newly hatched Senator Cotton and the other 46 imbeciles who signed the
letter to Iran that he drafted.

I think many of you are being led by the nose by the Dems and the media.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/03/10/7-times-democrats-advised-americas-enemies-to-oppose-the-president/


Just some of that story:

"Senator John Kerry (D-MA). Kerry jumped into the pro-Sandanista pool
himself in 1985, when he traveled to Nicaragua to negotiate with the
regime. He wasn't alone; Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) joined him. The
Christian Science Monitor reported that the two senators "brought back
word that Mr. Ortega would be willing to accept a cease-fire if
Congress rejected aid to the rebels...That week the House initially
voted down aid to the contras, and Mr. Ortega made an immediate trip
to Moscow." Kerry then shilled on behalf of the Ortega government:


We are still trying to overthrow the politics of another country in
contravention of international law, against the Organization of
American States charter. We negotiated with North Vietnam. Why can we
not negotiate with a country smaller than North Carolina and with half
the population of Massachusetts? It's beyond me. And the reason is
that they just want to get rid of them [the Sandinistas], they want to
throw them out, they don't want to talk to them.

Representatives Jim McDermott (D-WA), David Bonior (D-MI), and Mike
Thompson (D-CA). In 2002, the three Congressmen visited Baghdad to
play defense for Saddam Hussein's regime. There, McDermott laid the
groundwork for the Democratic Party's later rip on President George W.
Bush, stating, "the president of the United States will lie to the
American people in order to get us into this war." McDermott, along
with his colleagues, suggested that the American administration give
the Iraqi regime "due process" and "take the Iraqis on their face
value." Bonior said openly he was acting on behalf of the government:


The purpose of our trip was to make it very clear, as I said in my
opening statement, to the officials in Iraq how serious we-the United
States is about going to war and that they will have war unless these
inspections are allowed to go unconditionally and unfettered and open.
And that was our point. And that was in the best interest of not only
Iraq, but the American citizens and our troops. And that's what we
were emphasizing. That was our primary concern-that and looking at the
humanitarian situation.

Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV). In 2002, Rockefeller told Fox News'
Chris Wallace, "I took a trip by myself in January of 2002 to Saudi
Arabia, Jordan and Syria, and I told each of the heads of state that
it was my view that George Bush had already made up his mind to go to
war against Iraq, that that was a predetermined set course which had
taken shape shortly after 9/11." That would have given Saddam Hussein
fourteen months in which to prepare for war.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA). In April 2007, as the Bush
administration pursued pressure against Syrian dictator Bashar Assad,
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi went to visit him. There, according to The
New York Times, the two "discussed a variety of Middle Eastern issues,
including the situations in Iraq and Lebanon and the prospect of peace
talks between Syria and Israel." Pelosi was accompanied by Reps. Henry
Waxman (D-CA), Tom Lantos (D-CA), Louise M. Slaughter (D-NY), Nick J.
Rahall II (D-WV), and Keith Ellison (D-MN). Zaid Haider, Damascus
bureau chief for Al Safir, reportedly said, 'There is a feeling now
that change is going on in American policy - even if it's being led by
the opposition."

The Constitution of the United States delegates commander-in-chief
power to the president of the United States. Section 2 clearly states,
"He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the
Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present
concur..." As Professor Jack Goldsmith of Harvard Law School writes,
Senators have a good argument that "the President lacks the authority
under the U.S. Constitution to negotiate a pure Executive agreement in
this context. Almost all major arms control agreements have been made
as treaties that needed Senate consent, and the one major exception,
the Salt I treaty, was a congressional-executive agreement."

One who might agree: former Senator Joe Biden, whose White House
profile explains, "then-Senator Biden played a pivotal role in shaping
US foreign policy." Among other elements of that role: decrying
President George W. Bush's surge in Iraq as "a tragic mistake" and
vowing, "I will do everything in my power to stop it." As Tom Cotton
said this morning, "If Joe Biden respects the dignity of the
institution of the Senate, he should be insisting that the President
submit any deal to approval of the Senate, which is exactly what he
did on numerous deals during his time in Senate."

course of action

There is no comparison of the examples you set forth and what Cotton and
the band of idiots just did. Furthermore, I am not in any way reacting
to any liberal or Democratic media hype. I came to this opinion all by
myself.

No sitting senator or House member should attempt to undermine
negotiations by directly addressing the party with whom discussions are
being held and basically threaten that
any progress or agreements will be voided once the current POTUS leaves
office.

Treason in my book. Sorry if you disagree.




Impeachment for a long list of unauthorized acts culminating with
attempts to make unauthorized deals with Iran would have been a better
course of action. But this Congress doesn't have the balls to rein him
in properly.

--

Respectfully submitted by Justan

Laugh of the day from Krause

"I'm not to blame anymore for the atmosphere in here.
I've been "born again" as a nice guy."