Posted on 02/11/2018 11:00:13 AM PST by Kid Shelleen
Yeah, I think you have described our tactical situation pretty well.
And Nixon championed affirmative action.
I wonder, can Flynn ever regain the money and reputation the criminal bastard Mueller has stripped from him?
Except for one thing W & B...
Donald Trump ain’t Richard Nixon.
Oh, yes and then there was the blow back from the
Checkers speech and the fact that the news media
knew that Nixon got jobbed in the 1960 election but
stayed silent. For national unity Nixon stayed
pretty quiet tho he had a gripe. Compared to Kennedy he
was socially awkward.
Bkmk
Bkmk
That’s the script that was put into place but Trump’s not sticking to it, much to their chagrin. He was supposed to be a pompous blowhard who can’t control his impulses and roll in with the “You’re Fired” ringing down the hallways left and right. They have a cartoon image of Trump and he’s using that to his advantage.
Why a “special prosecutor”? There’s no constitutional support for such.
The HOUSE is the ONLY body constitutionally assigned to impeach (formal charges) a high government official (US Const. Art. I, Sec. 2, Cl. 5). Thus, it should be the HOUSE that hires investigators and prosecutors for impeachment issues. If there is reasonable suspicion that FBI officials are corrupt, then the HOUSE should investigate and charge if/when probable cause is found.
After impeachment, the SENATE, which is the ONLY body constitutionally assigned to try impeachments (Art. I, Sec. 3, Cl. 6), will have prosecutors lined up and if necessary, investigators.
If it’s for federal crimes done by lower government officials or those not currently in office, then the FBI/CIA should investigate and indict if probable cause is found. The first step in this case is cleaning up the FBI’s own house.
The whole concept of a “special prosecutor” is convoluted. The DOJ is part of the Executive Branch reporting to the President. There is an obvious conflict of interest with a “special prosecutor” assigned by the Executive Branch to investigate the executive Branch.
MAGA means RESTORING our Free Constitutional Republic. We MUST get back to the Rule of Law of the Constitution over the feds. It is precisely the relentless attacks and tyranny of the Delusional Lying Left that we must just as relentlessly pursue reestablishing the Constitution as the Supreme Law of the Land - the ONLY legal protection against the tyranny of the whims of the Rule of Man.
Well, I didn't even know that but it makes sense.
"Conservatives" and the Left both have their pet political fantasies. Neither JFK nor Nixon were good Presidents.
“I don’t give a sh#t what the Delusional Lying Leftist says about anything. If you’ve read my posts, you should know that by now.”
Yes, I do know that - I’m not saying you are leftist or agree with any leftists. I’m just saying that the Left’s total domination of academia and the media makes it very hard to avoid their spin.
If you use Google, Wikipedia, or even a well-regarded history book or university professor as a source, it’s almost certain to contain an extreme leftist spin. If you quote a classic novel or movie like All The President’s Men, then you have been “spun”.
If you use adjectives like “secretive” or “power-loving” to describe Nixon, you have been spun. If you copy and paste a photo captioned with “Nixon’s Palace Guards”, you have been spun.
If we use the Left’s language, then we are letting the Left control the conversation. The problem is, so much of what is published and what is politically correct is from the Left, so avoiding their language requires constant vigilance, fierce independence and creativity (we need to find our own way of saying things so they don’t put words in our mouths).
Go ahead and criticize Nixon - he was far from perfect - but don’t borrow 45 year old Leftist talking points and photo captions to do it.
In 1972, the Left dominated the media even more thoroughly than they do now. The portrayal of Nixon as “secretive” and “power-loving” was an invention of the Left - I was there, I saw it happening, just like it’s happening now with Trump.
Yes, every lie has a grain of truth to make it easier to swallow. Trump really did say last week that he’d like a military parade - so there’s your grain of truth to paint Trump as being no different than a NK or Chicom dictator.
How is that any different than your photo with the caption “Nixon’s Palace Guards”? A photo of Trump appearing to give a nazi salute? A photo of Nixon looking guilty? A photo of Trump appearing to mock a cripple? It’s all fake with a small grain of truth.
The fake news of yesterday has become the fake history of today, and if we are not careful, the fake news of today will become the fake history for our grandchildren.
It will be sad (but not surprising) if the Left’s portrayal of Trump - a xenophobic, pussy-grabbing, white supremacist, reckless, impulsive, attention-seekng, reality-show-actor-in-chief - is the portrayal that gets codified in history.
I don't use those. Fact is, I was in my 20's through the Nixon years and was aware of what was going on. "Power loving" is an accurate description of Nixon regardless of who uses the phrase. And the Lord showed me back then that Nixon listened to lies which is why "All The President's Men" were corrupt (Prov. 29:12)
I copied and pasted a photo that I captioned “Nixon’s Palace Guards” and I am not "borrowing" any talking points from anyone. I call 'em as I see 'em.
If you contest the truth about what I've said about Nixon including his uniformed guards around the WH, let's see your rebuttal. So far all you've said nothing to refute what I've said about Nixon except that according to you it simulates what the Left says. But that is no argument. You don't use the Lying Left as a source to support or deny an assertion. You don't use the Lying Left for anything. The Lying Left are very good at HALF-TRUTH's (which are also lies).
IMO, you display a lock-step adherence to "conservative" talking points without a well-thought-out rationale of your own.
BTW, the Lord gave me Proverbs 29:12 BEFORE the book, “All The President’s Men” or the movie came out. The title is a very accurate reflection of that scripture.
You know, sometimes the Left stumbles across the truth, especially when the Right - this time Nixon - hands it to them on a silver platter. The Left is similar to the Pharisees who accused the woman of adultery to Jesus. Jesus didn’t say they were lying about her adultery. But he did say they were liars (lots of half truths) and hypocrites, like today’s Left.
In 1972, Nixon won the greatest landslide in US history, yet within a couple years, most of those voters had thrown him under the bus, based on the constant drumbeat of the Left’s Watergate propaganda smear - which YOU are buying into.
The same thing can happen to Trump. Everyone likes a winner, but if the Left can successfully brand him as a crook, like they did Nixon, his weaker supporters will vanish into the night.
You said it yourself: Obama was a power-loving crook. He was caught lying, Clinton was caught lying, but the Left owns the printing press, so nobody will ever see that NYT front page headline, “OBAMA LIED”, or CLINTON LIED, above the fold, in a font bigger and bolder than has ever been used, before or since.
That’s what they did to Nixon - that’s what they’ll try to do to Trump. They won’t do it to Democrats. If you defend that double standard and let the Left
convince you Nixon is what they say he is, I don’t know what to say to you.
You have yet to refute anything I’ve said about Nixon. Your anti-Leftist rant is irrelevant.
.
Woodward and Bernstein need to be headed to a padded cell.
.
.
There must be a pub somewhere northwest of the Berzerkeley campus where these two would fit in.
.
“You have yet to refute anything I’ve said about Nixon. Your anti-Leftist rant is irrelevant.”
Everything you have said about Nixon is Leftist jargon taken straight out of their boiler plate Watergate narrative, and I refute it all on the basis that it is pure hypocrisy.
There was indeed wrongdoing in the Nixon administration.
But there have been far worse administrations, both before and after. The righteous media turned a blind eye simply because they were fellow Democrats.
How can you defend that double standard?
The Ben Ghazi scandal and coverup was about keeping a foriegn policy embarrassment from blowing up in Obama’s face on the eve of his reelection. His entire administration was complicit in covering up an embarrassing terrorist attack - lying to the American people in order to win reelection. That level of abuse of power makes Watergate look like tinker toys.
Yet, nothing but crickets from the MSM.
So yes, I’m very tired of hearing people recount the glory days of Watergate, when brave Woodward and Bernstien went up against the evil Tyrant Nixon.
Maybe if they would tell the truth about their fellow leftists once in a while, I’d listen - but they are hypocrites - I have no time for Nixon slaying stories, no matter who is telling them.
Well, you’re shooting a lot of arrows, but you’re not close to any targets.
See ya.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.