Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 172: The Cohen Bothers

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://mobile.twitter.com/LeanneNaramore/status/994626363675103234?s=19

Must. Insult. Dying. Senator.
---

Corrik posted...

lordloki12 posted...

Corrik posted...

You seriously make zero sense.

To you perhaps.

Surely don't. Continue your supposed crusade despite being utterly wrong.

Yes I am totally defeated by your rebuttal of 0 counter arguments or defenses.
---

TheRock1525 posted...

https://mobile.twitter.com/LeanneNaramore/status/994626363675103234?s=19

Must. Insult. Dying. Senator.

"Tom McInerney is noted for insisting on Fox News that terrorists had flown the disappeared Malaysia Airlines 370 to Pakistan, that later appeared to be a conspiracy theory as dug out by British firm Inmarsat."

"In 2010, McInerney provided his support against the court martial of Terrence Lakin who refused to deploy to Afghanistan due to his suspicion of President Barack Obama's birthplace."

"In an August, 2017 interview with Sean Hannity on Fox News, the following exchange occurred:

SEAN HANNITY (HOST): Well, when I say no good option -- if we have to strike, we're going to incinerate that place. The nuclear fallout, correct me if I'm wrong -- the fallout potential is dramatic. I mean, potentially -- am I right, or overstating the fact that millions could potentially die here?

MCINERNEY: Yeah, but they'll be mostly North Koreans."
---

You have to appreciate the guys that make Hannity look like the sane one in the room.
---

Corrik posted...

lordloki12 posted...

Corrik posted...

You seriously make zero sense.

To you perhaps.

Surely don't. Continue your supposed crusade despite being utterly wrong.

stop blatantly lying when you know we have archives of everything
---

TheRock1525 posted...

https://mobile.twitter.com/LeanneNaramore/status/994626363675103234?s=19

Must. Insult. Dying. Senator.

https://twitter.com/cvpayne/status/994653341346095104?s=21
https://twitter.com/cvpayne/status/994653342117789696?s=21

My Apology to Senator McCain and his Family
This morning on a show I was hosting, a guest made a very false and derogatory remark about Senator John McCain. At the time, I had the control room in my ear telling me to wrap the segment, and did not hear the comment.

I regret I did not catch this remark, as it should have been challenged. As a proud military veteran and son of a Vietnam Vet these words neither reflect my or the networks feelings about Senator McCain, or his remarkable service and sacrifice to this country.
Charles V. Payne

I dont buy it
---

https://mobile.twitter.com/AFP/status/994634200652402688

LMAO
---

LordoftheMorons posted...

https://mobile.twitter.com/AFP/status/994634200652402688

LMAO

I mean we kinda knew that right? Our allies are gonna cover our ass on this one.
---

lordloki12 posted...

Corrik posted...

lordloki12 posted...

Corrik posted...

You seriously make zero sense.

To you perhaps.

Surely don't. Continue your supposed crusade despite being utterly wrong.

Yes I am totally defeated by your rebuttal of 0 counter arguments or defenses.

There is nothing to counter. You are just 100% wrong. Someone has even told you that you are wrong already. Done arguing. Clearly trolling at this point.
---

I mean, I very much hope that they do continue to allow inspections due to he actions of our European allies, but the concept of breaking your half of a deal and then demanding that the other side hold up theirs is just beyond ridiculous
---

Jakyl25 posted...

LordoftheMorons posted...

https://mobile.twitter.com/AFP/status/994634200652402688

LMAO

I mean we kinda knew that right? Our allies are gonna cover our ass on this one.

Of course THEY will, and if it were any other country saying "let us in", that'd be fine, but this is the US, who's backing out of the deal, demanding it.
---

Corrik posted...

lordloki12 posted...

Corrik posted...

lordloki12 posted...

Corrik posted...

You seriously make zero sense.

To you perhaps.

Surely don't. Continue your supposed crusade despite being utterly wrong.

Yes I am totally defeated by your rebuttal of 0 counter arguments or defenses.

There is nothing to counter. You are just 100% wrong. Someone has even told you that you are wrong already. Done arguing. Clearly trolling at this point.

Then surely you could point out what about your history I got wrong there?
---

LordoftheMorons posted...

I mean, I very much hope that they do continue to allow inspections due to he actions of our European allies, but the concept of breaking your half of a deal and then demanding that the other side hold up theirs is just beyond ridiculous

Oh okay, I get why its funny now
---

If they're going to stick to the deal without us, with only the Europeans in it, great! And that means, we didn't need to be in the deal in the first place.
---

red sox 777 posted...

If they're going to stick to the deal without us, with only the Europeans in it, great! And that means, we didn't need to be in the deal in the first place.

Yeah, what's the harm in having another generation grow up to hate America?
---

TheRock1525 posted...

red sox 777 posted...

If they're going to stick to the deal without us, with only the Europeans in it, great! And that means, we didn't need to be in the deal in the first place.

Yeah, what's the harm in having another generation grow up to hate America?

For no particular reason
---

Even if they do stay in the deal the US's actions will have squandered our credibility on the world stage and empowered hardliners in Iran (and that's the best case scenario; it's quite possible that the Europeans aren't able to salvage the deal).
---

LordoftheMorons posted...

Even if they do stay in the deal the US's actions will have squandered our credibility on the world stage and empowered hardliners in Iran (and that's the best case scenario; it's quite possible that the Europeans aren't able to salvage the deal).

Did the Iran deal itself not squander our credibility?
---

LordoftheMorons posted...

Even if they do stay in the deal the US's actions will have squandered our credibility on the world stage and empowered hardliners in Iran (and that's the best case scenario; it's quite possible that the Europeans aren't able to salvage the deal).

Empowering the hardliners is very possibly the goal. Their hardliners and ours have a sort of symbiotic relationship.
---

Corrik posted...

Did the Iran deal itself not squander our credibility?

No? How do you figure that?
---

red sox 777 posted...

Empowering the hardliners is very possibly the goal. Their hardliners and ours have a sort of symbiotic relationship.

I mean yeah, I guess if you're John Bolton and literally get off on the thought of war with Iran

I don't see how that's in the best interests of the overwhelming majority of Americans, though
---

Corrik posted...

LordoftheMorons posted...

Even if they do stay in the deal the US's actions will have squandered our credibility on the world stage and empowered hardliners in Iran (and that's the best case scenario; it's quite possible that the Europeans aren't able to salvage the deal).

Did the Iran deal itself not squander our credibility?

Really makes you think.
---

LotM half your questions could be answered by remembering who the people you're replying to are.
---

The deal had no credibility from the start. Everyone knew the United States never agreed to it. The Iranian government bet on the Democrats winning the 2016 election and they lost. Except, I doubt they were as surprised as most Americans were. They are not stupid and not naive about politics.

That they seem to be willing to continue the deal without the US proves that US participation was never an essential component in the first place, but more of a bonus Iran got.
---

LordoftheMorons posted...

red sox 777 posted...

Empowering the hardliners is very possibly the goal. Their hardliners and ours have a sort of symbiotic relationship.

I mean yeah, I guess if you're John Bolton and literally get off on the thought of war with Iran

I don't see how that's in the best interests of the overwhelming majority of Americans, though

It puts Republicans in power who will cut their taxes, keep guns legal, stop immigration, ban abortion, etc. Much like how the hardliners in Iran can only achieve their domestic goals if they have political power.
---

LordoftheMorons posted...

red sox 777 posted...

Empowering the hardliners is very possibly the goal. Their hardliners and ours have a sort of symbiotic relationship.

I mean yeah, I guess if you're John Bolton and literally get off on the thought of war with Iran

I don't see how that's in the best interests of the overwhelming majority of Americans, though

Well, THERE'S your problem!
---

A "normal" Republican would not have pulled out of the deal due to the reality of the situation (that all of the complaints about the deal are about things like sunset clauses or "weak" inspection schemes that get strictly worse if there's no deal at all) and the formerly existent norm that the US keeps its promises.
---

LordoftheMorons posted...

Corrik posted...

Did the Iran deal itself not squander our credibility?

No? How do you figure that?

It was widely stated that Obama agreed to not take action on Syria, Iran's ally, in order to achieve the agreement.

http://dc.medill.northwestern.edu/blog/2018/03/21/did-the-iran-nuclear-deal-prevent-obama-from-entering-the-syrian-conflict/#sthash.qhBLy4Mb.dpbs

http://www.businessinsider.com/obama-red-line-syria-iran-2016-8

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/04/how-obamas-chemical-weapons-deal-fell-apart/522549/

I mean, if true, Obama basically paid for the Iran deal with the lives of Syrians that he made a red line on Assad in regards to.

And if making a hard red line and not enforcing it when crossed doesn't squander our credibility then... I dunno what it even means anymore.
---

Corrik posted...

lordloki12 posted...

Corrik posted...

lordloki12 posted...

CelesMyUserName posted...

Corrik posted...

This Warren quip is literally not even a story on CNNs front page at all because it is such a nonstory even from the liberal perspective but here we are... Listening to liberals here trying their hardest to make it some racism issue because that is all they know how to argue.

We're here because of you you stupid fuck. Remove Corrik from the conversation and there's no more Pocahontas debate because everyone else is on the same page. See: The real poli topic lacking in Pocahontas discussion.

Also the topic shows up twice on CNN's frontpage.

Just triple checked. Not a single headline. North Korea is first. 5 headlines dedicated to that.

Tampa killer is 2nd with 4 headlines.

Tax reform is 3rd and empty chair photo op with 6 headlines.

Protester dragged out of Senate meeting
Bannon campaigns with Moore
Black leaders trying to get Conyers to resign
Air Force on firearm database
Taliban living good in pakistan
Secretary of State hits back
Congressmen not rerunning for election

CFPB is last
Three headlines

That is the front page. CNN has literally nothing on Warren on the front page. FoxNews has an article highlighting lefts hypocrisy and Warren's faking her minority status.

That is it from the 2 major news sites. Even CNN realized it was dumb and dropped it and FoxNews is still criticizing it because of how dumb it was.

Links from the front page:

http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/28/us/navajo-code-talkers-trump-who/index.html

http://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2017/11/28/elizabeth-warren-trump-response-sot-ac360.cnn

The Warren response video is literally a picture of her face Corrik. You didnt even have to read a headline.

Do you need literal screenshots? That is NOT on their front page right now. (At least on mobile)

---

Hey look at the top story on CNN mobile site
---

Corrik posted...

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Corrik I just gave you a literal screenshot of the front page having multiple headlines about it?

Not the CNN front page.

Corrik posted...

charmander6000 posted...

I can also confirm it is on the front page of CNN

It isn't but nice try. It is a headline in their world section.

Anywho. Going to sleep. Carry on with your nonsense til 500. We will get a new topic ready for ya.

Stop doing "CNN's front page" conversations. It's a stupid gimmick Corrik.
---

I hate you jakyl
---

CelesMyUserName posted...

Corrik posted...

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Corrik I just gave you a literal screenshot of the front page having multiple headlines about it?

Not the CNN front page.

Corrik posted...

charmander6000 posted...

I can also confirm it is on the front page of CNN

It isn't but nice try. It is a headline in their world section.

Anywho. Going to sleep. Carry on with your nonsense til 500. We will get a new topic ready for ya.

Stop doing "CNN's front page" conversations. It's a stupid gimmick Corrik.

Thanks for again proving I was correct. World headline section is not their front page news on their mobile. Unless you count literally hundreds upon hundreds of articles as front page which no sane person would ever do.
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Hey look at the top story on CNN mobile site

About time.
---

LordoftheMorons posted...

A "normal" Republican would not have pulled out of the deal due to the reality of the situation (that all of the complaints about the deal are about things like sunset clauses or "weak" inspection schemes that get strictly worse if there's no deal at all) and the formerly existent norm that the US keeps its promises.

You can't compare a deal only against an alternative of nothing. You have to compare it against the best deal we could have gotten. And to do that, you have to consider the same questions for Iran. And, you should consider the long term impact on your credibility - including the credibility of your threats.
---

red sox 777 posted...

You can't compare a deal only against an alternative of nothing. You have to compare it against the best deal we could have gotten. And to do that, you have to consider the same questions for Iran. And, you should consider the long term impact on your credibility - including the credibility of your threats.

When you're considering pulling out of the deal with absolutely no plan to replace it you do (because your alternative is exactly that: nothing (or war I guess...!)). In addition, pulling out of the deal is exactly what's shattering the US's credibility here.

And given how difficult it was to get the deal that we did get it seems quite unlikely that Iran would have agreed to even more stringent conditions.
---

LordoftheMorons posted...

red sox 777 posted...

You can't compare a deal only against an alternative of nothing. You have to compare it against the best deal we could have gotten. And to do that, you have to consider the same questions for Iran. And, you should consider the long term impact on your credibility - including the credibility of your threats.

When you're considering pulling out of the deal with absolutely no plan to replace it you do (because your alternative is exactly that: nothing (or war I guess...!)). In addition, pulling out of the deal is exactly what's shattering the US's credibility here.

And given how difficult it was to get the deal that we did get it seems quite unlikely that Iran would have agreed to even more stringent conditions.

Do you have any comment on what I posted?
---

So, uh.

I don't know what I actually expected from the new NRA president.

But this wasn't it.

https://twitter.com/shannonrwatts/status/994565340154621952
---

Iran won't agree to anything better for us unless they feel it's in their best interest to do so. Under Obama, who seemed desperate to make a deal, they knew they didn't have to give a lot. Now they know that Trump is a hardliner or at least will bargain like one.
---

SupremeZero posted...

So, uh.

I don't know what I actually expected from the new NRA president.

But this wasn't it.

https://twitter.com/shannonrwatts/status/994565340154621952

Lol NRA is nuts.
---

I cannot beleive you people are engaging him on this mobile shit.

Look at how many posts that took up of absolutely worthless back and forths.
---

Corrik posted...

Do you have any comment on what I posted?

Obama admits that he made mistakes in Syria (though I think even with the benefit of hindsight it's not clear what the optimal course of action would have been there; it was a really difficult problem to solve). Even if the Iran deal did factor in to his decision making (which, it seems, is disputed) I wouldn't say that that squandered our credibility; Assad's use of chemical weapons and Iran obtaining nuclear weapons are both terrible things and if it really was a binary choice (and I don't think it was; many factors were relevant to each) then stopping a nuclear Iran isn't the clearly "wrong" decision.
---

red sox 777 posted...

Iran won't agree to anything better for us unless they feel it's in their best interest to do so. Under Obama, who seemed desperate to make a deal, they knew they didn't have to give a lot. Now they know that Trump is a hardliner or at least will bargain like one.

Trump's negotiation tactic in a hostage rescue situation would be to shoot the hostages he was supposed to save

He is the shittiest dealmaker of all time
---

SupremeZero posted...

So, uh.

I don't know what I actually expected from the new NRA president.

But this wasn't it.

https://twitter.com/shannonrwatts/status/994565340154621952

Please do not believe anything Shannon Watts tweets. She literally claimed Dana Loesch and the NRA interrupted a gun violence demonstration at a church when she was literally eating at a diner in another state. And then refused to acknowledge it.

She is basically the Alex Jones of the left.
---

The mistake was drawing the red line in the first place. He could escape that situation with credibility intact by not drawing a red line. It was probably also a mistake to give the moderate Syrian rebels false hope of US help which was never coming in sufficient force to change the outcome.
---

LordoftheMorons posted...

red sox 777 posted...

Iran won't agree to anything better for us unless they feel it's in their best interest to do so. Under Obama, who seemed desperate to make a deal, they knew they didn't have to give a lot. Now they know that Trump is a hardliner or at least will bargain like one.

Trump's negotiation tactic in a hostage rescue situation would be to shoot the hostages he was supposed to save

He is the shittiest dealmaker of all time

And if you were dealing with such a man, would you take hostages?
---

Nelson_Mandela posted...

SupremeZero posted...

So, uh.

I don't know what I actually expected from the new NRA president.

But this wasn't it.

https://twitter.com/shannonrwatts/status/994565340154621952

Please do not believe anything Shannon Watts tweets. She literally claimed Dana Loesch and the NRA interrupted a gun violence demonstration at a church when she was literally eating at a diner in another state. And then refused to acknowledge it.

She is basically the Alex Jones of the left.

You could click on the link to the interview if you want context.

Mr. North said the NRA is now the victim of civil terrorism after vandals splashed fake blood on the Virginia home of a top NRA official and other opponents aimed personal threats at NRA leaders and members.

They call them activists. Thats what theyre calling themselves. Theyre not activists this is civil terrorism. This is the kind of thing thats never been seen against a civil rights organization in America, he said.

You go back to the terrible days of Jim Crow and those kinds of things even there you didnt have this kind of thing, he said. We didnt have the cyberwar kind of thing that weve got today.

---

CYBERWAR!!!!

caps
---

LordoftheMorons posted...

Corrik posted...

Do you have any comment on what I posted?

Obama admits that he made mistakes in Syria (though I think even with the benefit of hindsight it's not clear what the optimal course of action would have been there; it was a really difficult problem to solve). Even if the Iran deal did factor in to his decision making (which, it seems, is disputed) I wouldn't say that that squandered our credibility; Assad's use of chemical weapons and Iran obtaining nuclear weapons are both terrible things and if it really was a binary choice (and I don't think it was; many factors were relevant to each) then stopping a nuclear Iran isn't the clearly "wrong" decision.

Do you see how making the Iran deal itself could have cost our credibility if he indeed did not take action on the red line and chemical attacks that he vowed to in order to make this deal?
---

Also no one is the Alex Jones of the left. No one is the Alex Jones of the anything, honestly.

Misreporting one story and then refusing to acknowledge she was wrong would make her the Sean Hannity of the left, if anything.
---