Posted on 06/14/2015 2:48:41 PM PDT by Isara
We heard the news about Hillary's fake Twitter and Facebook followers and her operatives pretending to be her regular supporters. Is it possible that it also is happening right here on Free Republic Web site?
Free Republic is a premier Conservative site. Most of us know who, among the presidential candidates, is the most Conservative. Our candidate happens to be effective in his campaigning also. Our enemies know that and fear him the most. Naturally, Free Republic is turning into a battleground.
We don't know who they are: other Republican campaign operatives, GOPe, Hillary's camp, Democratic operatives, union thugs, Castro brothers, ISIS, LGBT, ACLU, etc. But they all share one common goal - to take Ted Cruz out. Since trust is Ted Cruz's strong point, they are trying to erode our trust of him.
You may notice that they came in the threads about Ted Cruz in teams, 2 or more at the same time. No matter how much we gave them the facts, these same people went to the next thread and repeated the same misinformation over and over again. This is why I think we are under attack.
Their strategies are:
I've detected that some patterns of their posting were shared among these operatives. Is it possible that there are a few of them pretending to be a lot more, just like Hillary's Twitter and Facebook followers?
Yep, I posted to him when I was a n00b, thinking he was being clever, and he chewed my butt off.
I see you’re another “recount” sign up. Cheers Bro.
I remember standing in front of the West Capitol steps for the Impeachment rally thinking about how I was going to troll Ted Cruz in 2015.
You Dastard!
Thank you for chiming in. I agree 100%. Those are my issues with Cruz as well.
First of all not one person up there understands more about International Rulings and how they could affect US law...Ted Cruz does and here’s why....
Cruz not only gave oral arguments in a most famous Heller case where he defended the 2nd amendment ‘before the Supreme Court and won’........ He fought the Medelin v Texas case ...is the DEFINITIVE CASE against the UNITED NATIONS ... The BUSH administration and the World Court in the Supreme Court of the USA and won........ That ruling against all the above agreed with him, that (now listen up)..”no ruling or litigation of any international body changes or alters US law... They have no authority whatsoever in the USA....
So Cruz above all up in Washington, knows what he is saying.
3 WAYS TO MAKE AGREEMENTS
Since the days of George Washington, the Constitution and courts have recognized that the President can do what George Washington did.... Negotiate without input from congress..... He can even make executive agreements that are short lived.... but CANNOT change US law.
TREATY:
Which is what Jeff Sessions wanted.... I like Jeff and am glad he is there to bring up anything he thinks needs to be discussed, but you will see why his way is not the best...... To do a treaty, it is STILL legal for the President to negotiate without the Senate..... It always has been because Washington and a long history of experience proved that you cannot allow 100 people to argue for the agreement or to even change them at will,..... IF YOU WANT other nations to ever agree with you...... So a Smart President gets with the Senate on a treaty to make sure that it is something they will pass.... That way when it is made they can decide to say, either Yes OR NO. with 2/3rds of the Senate having to agree.
THE WHOLE CONGRESS.
But unlike ‘Treaties’ which are only voted on by the Senate, the Constitution ‘requires all laws that have to do with tax and revenue to BEGIN in the House of Representatives’.....So what we have here is something different from a Treaty. Now if you want to make an agreement with other nations you have double trouble.
THE MIX UP about TPA,
So they came up over the last 80 years with something called Fast Track; Trade Promotion Authority (TPA)...It has been used for 80 years up and until Harry Reid killed it in 2009.....TPA, is the ‘CONTROL on a president’, when tell the president, this is what you can agree to and what you cannot agree to..... This is what we will accept and these other things will not be accepted.....It sets the goals to be achieved and the limits of what he can negotiate.... This way he is not making a bunch of short term, out of control executive agreements when he is allowed to do BY HIMSELF as head of foreign policy.
Tis has been before SCOTUS and has been long upheld and used since Washington. Thus this is NOT a giving of power to the President but a way to keep him in check!!!!
It does not allow anything to be done in US law about immigration... The TPA REQUIRES that once an agreement is negotiated (the TPP) ...It MUST be put out to the public and the people’s representatives for at least 60 days to even be legal.....Once all the representatives and people who want to read it all, it can be voted on. Up or down.. No amendments for the reasons I stated above. It is nothing new.
TAA (Trade adjustment assistance) failed. It was and attempt to get unions of US companies worldwide a little control of monies to bail out their members when the unions failed to compete with others and loss market share. It failed badly and Obama and many democrats were stopped in their bid for control in a way that could affect US law adversely to the rest of the population.
The Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP), trade agreement, which they have been working on since 2009. has NOT even been agreed to yet. When it is it MUST by TPA control over the President be shown to the public, at least 60 days. Then after all have read it and are satisfied that all the rules laid down by TPA were followed, they can vote for or against it, with just a majority vote in both houses. Nothing in it can change or over come US law as Ted Cruz has fought and won.
WHY NOT 2/3RDS TREATY VOTE?
Treaties are between the President and Senate Only. That takes 2/3rds vote of Senate. They are in the CONSTITUTION and it would take 2/3rds of the senate and president to agree. ...It has the force of Constitutional law.... Check out Federalist #64 to see what the discussion of the seriousness of treaties and their intended binding nature......This is a trade agreement with revenue and tax involved and must involve both houses, beginning according to the Constitution in the House.....So the process of making law is the same and regular law. If Republicans had agreed to a 2/3rds vote in the TPA authorization, they would have been giving power to the Democrats. This way Republicans can control the passage without being blackmailed by Democrats.
****Today China is forming its own trade associations, attempting ‘to take over world commerce’...... There are 11 countries negotiating to be in the Trans Pacific Partnership.......This includes Canada and Australia. China is not a party..... They intend to remove the Dollar as the world’s currency..... We need to get a set of easy rules that allows free and fair trade for all out partners and any one who wants to become i involved. This is Important. We should keep watch but these are the same concerns spoken about in the federalist papers. At the same time it is imperative that in order to make agreement with other nations that they can count on you keeping the agreement as agreed to the length of the agreement. So, since hundreds of Senators and Representatives cannot be a party to negotiating foreign policy. Not if anything is ever hoped to be finalized, since Washington they have not been open agreements, but voted on later....
....Still to get the Senate and sometimes the house to agree, Presidents found that they had to work with them or they would not sign it. Fast track was developed formally about 80 years ago, to allow congress and the senate to write the prescription that they would sign up front; putting all the limits they think is fit to protect the interest of the people and nation.
http://www.examiner.com/article/tpa-taa-tpp-ted-cruz-jeff-sessions-and-you-pt2
“Sorry to hear that. God expects us to do something, even if it is wrong.”
God expects us to be as meek as lambs and as wise as serpents. I’ve got the serpent thing down I reckon. Gotta work on the meek as a lamb part. :-)
He also sent down his Son who admonished us to give to caesar that which is caesar’s, and to give God that which is God’s.
Elections are a game where caesar makes the rules, where caesar decides the qualifications, where caesar vets the two carefully screened candidates, and where caesar ultimately counts the votes. Caesar already effectively dictates the outcome whether I participate or not. I’m all about doing something usefull. Voting doesn’t appear to meet that standard.
Thank you for the explanation. Cruz in one of his speeches mentions some of that - or the gist of it. So the President can negotiate with other countries, and the other countries can deal in good faith, knowing that Congress can’t knock it out from under them.
And one of the “cons” that conservatives are saying is “but it doesn’t allow Congress to change the bill”. But the Congress has already stipulated what it will allow. And this avoids all of the other pork and crap that they add in.
The idea that some of these bills are “secret” from the public was an issue for Thomas Jefferson - he thought all new bills should be public. Do you have any information on how many bills are secret? Are most of them? Just a few? Regardless - this is nothing new. Not that I agree with the secrecy - but I think it is an issue that is being raised to split Conservatives.
Sen. Jeff Sessions blasts Obamatrade
http://obamatrade.com/sen-jeff-sessions-blasts-obamatrade/
Mark Levin Opposes Fast Track – and Congress should, too!
http://obamatrade.com/mark-levin-opposes-fast-track-and-congress-should-too/
Eagle Forum: No Fast Track for Obamatrade
http://obamatrade.com/eagle-forum-no-fast-track-for-obamatrade/
TheTeaParty.net: No Fast Track for Obamatrade
http://obamatrade.com/theteaparty-net-no-fast-track-for-obamatrade/
American Family Association: No Fast Track for Obamatrade
http://obamatrade.com/american-family-association-no-fast-track-for-obamatrade/
Obamatrade: A gift for Sharia regimes
http://obamatrade.com/obamatrade-a-gift-for-sharia-regimes/
Alan Keyes blasts Obamatrade and those who love it
http://obamatrade.com/alan-keyes-blasts-obamatrade-and-those-who-love-it/
Allen West: Obamatrade is a disaster
http://obamatrade.com/allen-west-obamatrade-is-a-disaster/
Center for Security Policy: No Fast Track for Obamatrade
http://obamatrade.com/center-for-security-policy-no-fast-track-for-obamatrade/
Americans for Limited Government: No Fast Track for Obamatrade
http://obamatrade.com/americans-for-limited-government-no-fast-track-for-obamatrade-2/
More Power for Obama !?!?
http://obamatrade.com/more-power-for-obama/
Lou Dobbs & Ed Rollins blast Obamatrade
http://obamatrade.com/lou-dobbs-blasts-obamatrade/
Sen. Jeff Sessions slams “trade” deals promoting immigration
http://obamatrade.com/sen-jeff-sessions-slams-trade-deals-promoting-immigration/
Obamatrade = Unrestricted Immigration
http://obamatrade.com/obamatrade-unlimited-immigration/
Obamatrade weakens rule of law, encourages outsourcing: CATO
http://obamatrade.com/obamatrade-weakens-rule-of-law-encourages-outsourcing-cato/
Obamatrade destroys national sovereignty – as planned
http://obamatrade.com/obamatrade-destroys-national-sovereignty-as-planned/
About all we can do is get & keep a good “firewall” that resists any such asininity.
OOH! YUK! If I dared vote for Herr, my right hand (the one I’d use to vote with) would leap up and attempt to choke me to death! (The “Herr” spelling is intentional!) - The hand *might* just be successful once I got too tired to fight it off any longer. :O) - Not joking!
.
Do you honestly think any Republican candidate can gather enough financial support to win an election if he doesn’t offer a few plums and cherries to the corporate world?
Walker, Bush and Rubio are shooting through the Amnesty window. Cruz has stayed clear of that insult.
The money has to come from somewhere.
.
.
Just exactly how much total money do you think all of those orgs you mention will put into the coffers of our candidate?
$ 20,000? 30,000? $50,000?
Probably nowhere near, and it could take a Billion to win the 2016 election.
This is how the party of Stupid knows how to lose the big one.
.
Is that permissible?
caww, have you read the Wikileak documents? Under TPP, the US has ONE vote, the other nations each have one vote. They can make changes. Suppose they go after our guns? Our water rights? What about that “free movement of people?” This is akin to the EU. Fast track will pass it with 50+1. That 1 would be Joe Biden. We know where he will go.
I don’t trust the politicians to make favorable changes. They are saying “trust us.” Why? They’ve proven themselves to be completely untrustworthy by the citizens. They are owned by the COC, international Corporations and Bankers. They do their bidding.
We are submitting our sovereignty to an international body that can make changes. We have ONE VOTE. TPA, TAA, etc. are all steps towards the TPP which will be enabled by our ceding of the 2/3rds vote via TPA.
If any of these tentacles pass, TPP will be our demise. Do we want to be Europe? I don’t think so.
Show me where I’m wrong.
With respect to drawing conclusions, I find that Jim considers all logical arguments presented. He weighs them carefully even when it might seem like he isn't interested. That is the mark of a conservative thinker. Jumping on bandwagons before all of the evidence is in is not his way, in my experience. Sure, he leans one way or the other in the beginning stages of discussion, but we all do. Leaning doesn't equal decided.
The point is, if he believes someone has logical arguments to present, even if slightly annoying or contentious or contrary to his own inclinations, he is open to discussion.
Nope. I don’t think that any politician for either wing of the uniparty is going to be able to get into power at the Federal level unless they sell themselves in order to do so. We don’t generally recognize how much time these people spend fundraising; its a majority of their time. Nor should we be surprised when those who are successful at that level are the biggest hustlers. We could save ourselves a whole lot of grief if we had auctions instead of elections. But that would allow more uncertsinty than the current system, so we get elections.
So why does a system that relies almost entirely on quid pro quo need your or my participation? The meaningful decisions regarding policy are already set. There are some subtle differences regarding personality and style, and those are left to us to decide. And each of us get one one in a hundred millionth say in that decision. Whoop de do.
But its not even that direct. With the electoral college we in effect get a very minor voice in who will decide on our behalf. See tagline.
In 2012 they offered me a department manager job there and some damned good money.
I told 'em to stick it, I'll keep up my freelance trolling from Texas, thank you very much.
Feh. Chicago, indeed!
I also object to his approval of Bob Corker’s bypass of the treaty clause of the US Constitution regarding the secret Iran-deal with Obama That’s 3 negatives in his column right now. That doesn’t mean he still won’t end up being the best choice out of more-flawed candidates, but he has to survive through the Florida primary, and I think he might have hurt himself that badly with this stuff.
Did you vote for Fiorini over Boxer in California?
or is it possible that not everyone here feels cruz is the best candidate???
i for one do not...
i back walker...
am i now a troll???
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.