MR

Trump falsely denied that he ever promised that Mexico would "write out a check" for his border wall, except he did: at least 212 times during the campaign and more since taking office. In a March 2016 memo, Trump outlined that Mexico would "make a one-time payment of $5-10 billion" for the wall. Trump has more recently resorted to a baseless claim that Mexico will now indirectly pay for the wall through the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, which has not been ratified by Congress, and contains no provisions earmarking money for the wall. (Washington Post / New York Times)

poll/ 74% of Americans call the shutdown "embarrassing," with 72% saying the shutdown is going to hurt the country. (NPR)

poll/ 51% of adults believe Trump "deserves most of the blame" for the shutdown. (Reuters)

poll/ 39% of Americans favor building a wall, while 59.1% oppose it. Among Republicans, 74.1% favor a wall, while 85.4% of Democrats oppose it. (Washington Post)

Whoops.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/fbi-opened-inquiry-into-whether-trump-was-secretly-working-on-behalf-of-russia/ar-BBS83LZ?&ocid=spartanntp

Andrew wrote:His ratings would disagree.

If ratings denote quality, then you must be a big fan of Fox News as well? Let's be consistent please.

I think he’s great...

Once upon a time Colbert was great (strangers with candy etc). Now he's just a sell-out establishment punk.

but that opinion aside, it’s hard to argue with Trump himself talking. Barely able to string 3 words together correctly.

Actions speak louder than words. Case in point: Obama spoke about ending stupid wars like Afghanistan & Syria, Trump is actually doing it.

verslibre wrote:Whoops.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/fbi-opened-inquiry-into-whether-trump-was-secretly-working-on-behalf-of-russia/ar-BBS83LZ?&ocid=spartanntp

Further proof that entrenched government bureaucrats hate his guts. I'd much rather have somebody carrying out the orders of Putin than, say, Halliburton. Wake up guy.

Is either better/worse than the other?

The_Noble_Cause wrote:

verslibre wrote:Whoops.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/fbi-opened-inquiry-into-whether-trump-was-secretly-working-on-behalf-of-russia/ar-BBS83LZ?&ocid=spartanntp

I'd much rather have somebody carrying out the orders of Putin than, say, Halliburton.

The_Noble_Cause wrote:

Andrew wrote:Moron.

https://youtu.be/KmfKgW2KW0Y

Colbert sucks now. I agree. He could learn a thing or two from past late night hosts, like Leno, who refused to let their shows become partisan hatefests.

He came from a successful late night show, "The Colbert Report". Colbert and Jon Stewart (and Bill Maher) have influenced the current late night shows much more than Jay Leno. All of the current political banter in late night is a direct result of those three's influence and popularity. Colbert is essentially doing the exact same type of comedy in his monologue that he was doing in that entire show...minus the parody of being a conservative.

Monker wrote:He came from a successful late night show, "The Colbert Report".

The Colbert Report was a satire of O'Reilly and Fox News. The only similarity to late nite shows like Carson or Leno is that it had guests.

Monker wrote:Colbert and Jon Stewart (and Bill Maher) have influenced the current late night shows much more than Jay Leno.

Leno was carrying on a tradition of non-partisan or equal opportunity late nite humor. Nobody knew what Johnny Carson's politics were (or cared).

As Leno has said:

"Late-night has always been pretty topical. The only trouble is now everyone has the same topic. (Laughs.) It's all depressing Trump stuff. And they all do a great job. Seth Meyers is a great writer; Jimmy Kimmel does a good job; Jimmy Fallon does a great job. I like Stephen Colbert, Trevor Noah [on Comedy Central] and Samantha Bee [on TBS]. The trouble is that there's such negativity now. When I did the show, Bush was dumb and Clinton was horny and it was human problems. Now it's all anti-women, anti-LGBT, anti-Muslim, anti-Mexican, anti-Salvadoran; it's such a negative thing. God bless all the late-night hosts, they make it funny, but ultimately, it's depressing. You don't really watch late-night TV to get away from reality anymore; now it's more in your face. You laugh but then you go to bed going, "Oh man, the world is really pretty rough." And it's not, it's one man that causes all these problems!"

Monker wrote:All of the current political banter in late night is a direct result of those three's influence and popularity. Colbert is essentially doing the exact same type of comedy in his monologue that he was doing in that entire show...minus the parody of being a conservative.

It's the result of the network TV model circling the drain. Networks are now emulating the niche programming of cable TV. While Colbert preaches to a dedicated Trump-hating choir, the vast majority of Americans have tuned him (and others) out.

Andrew wrote:

The_Noble_Cause wrote:

verslibre wrote:Whoops.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/fbi-opened-inquiry-into-whether-trump-was-secretly-working-on-behalf-of-russia/ar-BBS83LZ?&ocid=spartanntp

I'd much rather have somebody carrying out the orders of Putin than, say, Halliburton.

I don't go to bed fearing the Russkies, Drew. Sorry. I live in a country where average people go bankrupt over healthcare. Why should I care about Putin trying to reunify with Crimea? What's the worst possible outcome? That he someday invades and makes the US become an oligarchic capitalism country? Oh wait - we already are.

If Trump's alleged ties with Putin result in a less militarist stance then I'm all for it.

The_Noble_Cause wrote:

Monker wrote:He came from a successful late night show, "The Colbert Report".

The Colbert Report was a satire of O'Reilly and Fox News. The only similarity to late nite shows like Carson or Leno is that it had guests.

I said nothing about Carson. I said it was a successful late night show. That is fact. When he moved to CBS, all he did was remove his (fake) conservative personality and kept the same jokes. You could take that same clip above and put it in the Colbert Report and Colbert would have spun it as a conservative voice saying how brilliant Trump is for making up his own words and such. Also, Colbert keeps his political humor to his monologue...very rarely have I seen him take it into the interviews.

Monker wrote:Colbert and Jon Stewart (and Bill Maher) have influenced the current late night shows much more than Jay Leno.

Leno was carrying on a tradition of non-partisan or equal opportunity late nite humor. Nobody knew what Johnny Carson's politics were (or cared).

The days of Leno and Carson are over. The Daily Show is far more influential to today's late shows. Trevor Noah, John Oliver, Samantha Bee, Colbert, Lawrence Willmoore, Jordan Klepper...all have had shows over the past few years, some more successful than others. But, that influence is undeniable. The Daily Show's influence is essentially DOMINATING late night.

As Leno has said

Leno doesn't have his show any longer. And, the Tonight Show has LOST ground to Late Night. Carson/Leno is NOT as popular among today's audience.

It's the result of the network TV model circling the drain. Networks are now emulating the niche programming of cable TV. While Colbert preaches to a dedicated Trump-hating choir, the vast majority of Americans have tuned him (and others) out.

Partially. But, in 2017 Colbert's viewership went up 20%. Seems to me a vast number of viewers flocked to his show to hear his Trump humor. In 2018, viewers were down across the board....in ALL network TV. The Tonight Show, with Fallon following the Leno model - as you want, lost 10 percent of its viewers, while Colbert lost only 1%...putting him ahead of Fallon over all in the ratings. Seems to me that people are flocking away from the Carson/Leno model in MUCH higher numbers.

The_Noble_Cause wrote:I don't go to bed fearing the Russkies, Drew. Sorry. I live in a country where average people go bankrupt over healthcare. Why should I care about Putin trying to reunify with Crimea? What's the worst possible outcome?

That Putin feels emboldened and takes over other eastern European countries, while he tries to reestablish the dominance of the former Soviet Union. While Trump is "under orders" from Putin to not get involved, the rest of NATO and western Europe feels threatened. At some point Putin goes too far and NATO declares war, sparking WW3.

Monker wrote:That Putin feels emboldened and takes over other eastern European countries, while he tries to reestablish the dominance of the former Soviet Union. While Trump is "under orders" from Putin to not get involved, the rest of NATO and western Europe feels threatened. At some point Putin goes too far and NATO declares war, sparking WW3.

So much wrong here. Bush Sr. pledged not to move NATO into the east. Instead, NATO has been trying to spark WW3 for awhile by creeping into the eastern Baltic and the Black Sea. We bombed Russia's ally Serbia. The US-led NATO annexed Kosovo (then part of Serbia). The US-led attack on Libya killed Russia's ally, Gaddafi. We've put thousands of NATO troops on Russia's border. It goes on and on.

Monker wrote:I said nothing about Carson. I said it was a successful late night show. That is fact.

You were replying to me.
I said that Colbert "could learn a thing or two from past late night hosts, like Leno, who refused to let their shows become partisan hatefests."
By past hosts I am including Carson.

Monker wrote:When he moved to CBS, all he did was remove his (fake) conservative personality and kept the same jokes. You could take that same clip above and put it in the Colbert Report and Colbert would have spun it as a conservative voice saying how brilliant Trump is for making up his own words and such. Also, Colbert keeps his political humor to his monologue...very rarely have I seen him take it into the interviews.

Two completely different shows. The Colbert Report was a Fox News satire with Colbert in character similar to Martin Short in the Jiminy Glicky show. No comparison.

Monker wrote:The days of Leno and Carson are over. The Daily Show is far more influential to today's late shows. Trevor Noah, John Oliver, Samantha Bee, Colbert, Lawrence Willmoore, Jordan Klepper...all have had shows over the past few years, some more successful than others. But, that influence is undeniable. The Daily Show's influence is essentially DOMINATING late night.

Nobody is watching any of the shows you just mentioned. In fact, Wilmore has already been cancelled.

Monker wrote:Leno doesn't have his show any longer. And, the Tonight Show has LOST ground to Late Night. Carson/Leno is NOT as popular among today's audience.

This is a different topic completely.

Monker wrote:Partially. But, in 2017 Colbert's viewership went up 20%. Seems to me a vast number of viewers flocked to his show to hear his Trump humor. In 2018, viewers were down across the board....in ALL network TV. The Tonight Show, with Fallon following the Leno model - as you want, lost 10 percent of its viewers, while Colbert lost only 1%...putting him ahead of Fallon over all in the ratings. Seems to me that people are flocking away from the Carson/Leno model in MUCH higher numbers.

I don't care about ratings. I'm talking about tradition. Leno had class. Meanwhile Colbert is quipping about "cock holsters."

The_Noble_Cause wrote:

Monker wrote:That Putin feels emboldened and takes over other eastern European countries, while he tries to reestablish the dominance of the former Soviet Union. While Trump is "under orders" from Putin to not get involved, the rest of NATO and western Europe feels threatened. At some point Putin goes too far and NATO declares war, sparking WW3.

So much wrong here. Bush Sr. pledged not to move NATO into the east. Instead, NATO has been trying to spark WW3 for awhile by creeping into the eastern Baltic and the Black Sea. We bombed Russia's ally Serbia. The US-led NATO annexed Kosovo (then part of Serbia). The US-led attack on Libya killed Russia's ally, Gaddafi. We've put thousands of NATO troops on Russia's border. It goes on and on.

I'm beginning to wonder if you're another Putin asset? If my government was being controlled by any other power, I'd be raising hell about it.

The bottom line is that The Colbert Report was a successful late night show. That success is why he replaced Letterman. He is doing the same type of humor that got him the gig, the same type of humor he has been doing for well over 10yrs. True, it is not under a fake conservative character...but it is the same political banter he has always done that has made him successful in late night TV, dating all the way back to his time with John Stewart on the Daily Show. The Colbert Report was not very comparable to Jiminy Gilicky (or whatever). What Marin Short did was essentially a complete farce of a show...Colbert did not take it nearly that far. He had on some very serious guests for good interviews...not every single thing said and done was a joke.

You said, "While Colbert preaches to a dedicated Trump-hating choir, the vast majority of Americans have tuned him (and others) out." That is why I brought up ratings and popularity. That sentence is simply not true. The one who has been 'tuned out" is Jimmy Fallon on the Tonight Show. Fallon is following the same tradition as Leno and Carson...and it is falling behind the current trend of essentially every other late night show. Colbert would be foolish to stop doing what he has been doing for years and do what is on the Tonight Show. Also, I'll point out that he replaced David Letterman who himself was a sorta alternative to the Leno/Carson style. I doubt very much CBS wants that to emulate what is on NBC.

Monker wrote:

The_Noble_Cause wrote:

Monker wrote:He came from a successful late night show, "The Colbert Report".

The Colbert Report was a satire of O'Reilly and Fox News. The only similarity to late nite shows like Carson or Leno is that it had guests.

I said nothing about Carson. I said it was a successful late night show. That is fact. When he moved to CBS, all he did was remove his (fake) conservative personality and kept the same jokes. You could take that same clip above and put it in the Colbert Report and Colbert would have spun it as a conservative voice saying how brilliant Trump is for making up his own words and such. Also, Colbert keeps his political humor to his monologue...very rarely have I seen him take it into the interviews.

Monker wrote:Colbert and Jon Stewart (and Bill Maher) have influenced the current late night shows much more than Jay Leno.

Leno was carrying on a tradition of non-partisan or equal opportunity late nite humor. Nobody knew what Johnny Carson's politics were (or cared).

The days of Leno and Carson are over. The Daily Show is far more influential to today's late shows. Trevor Noah, John Oliver, Samantha Bee, Colbert, Lawrence Willmoore, Jordan Klepper...all have had shows over the past few years, some more successful than others. But, that influence is undeniable. The Daily Show's influence is essentially DOMINATING late night.

As Leno has said

Leno doesn't have his show any longer. And, the Tonight Show has LOST ground to Late Night. Carson/Leno is NOT as popular among today's audience.

It's the result of the network TV model circling the drain. Networks are now emulating the niche programming of cable TV. While Colbert preaches to a dedicated Trump-hating choir, the vast majority of Americans have tuned him (and others) out.

Partially. But, in 2017 Colbert's viewership went up 20%. Seems to me a vast number of viewers flocked to his show to hear his Trump humor. In 2018, viewers were down across the board....in ALL network TV. The Tonight Show, with Fallon following the Leno model - as you want, lost 10 percent of its viewers, while Colbert lost only 1%...putting him ahead of Fallon over all in the ratings. Seems to me that people are flocking away from the Carson/Leno model in MUCH higher numbers.

The_Noble_Cause wrote:

Monker wrote:That Putin feels emboldened and takes over other eastern European countries, while he tries to reestablish the dominance of the former Soviet Union. While Trump is "under orders" from Putin to not get involved, the rest of NATO and western Europe feels threatened. At some point Putin goes too far and NATO declares war, sparking WW3.

So much wrong here. Bush Sr. pledged not to move NATO into the east. Instead, NATO has been trying to spark WW3 for awhile by creeping into the eastern Baltic and the Black Sea. We bombed Russia's ally Serbia. The US-led NATO annexed Kosovo (then part of Serbia). The US-led attack on Libya killed Russia's ally, Gaddafi. We've put thousands of NATO troops on Russia's border. It goes on and on.

You asked for a worst case scenario...that is what I see as the worst case scenario.

You want to treat Russia like a trustworthy country full of good intentions. I don't think it is. I don't think Putin is a trustworthy leader...and he should be scrutinized and held in check at every opportunity. And, if Trump is proven to be taking orders from Putin, or any other leader of an enemy nation, then Trump should be put on trial for treason and executed if found guilty. I do not see how that is OK under any circumstances, regardless of what party or political beliefs he has. I find it incredible that any American would defend the idea of our government being run by the leader of Russia.

Monker wrote:The bottom line is that The Colbert Report was a successful late night show. That success is why he replaced Letterman. He is doing the same type of humor that got him the gig, the same type of humor he has been doing for well over 10yrs. True, it is not under a fake conservative character...but it is the same political banter he has always done that has made him successful in late night TV, dating all the way back to his time with John Stewart on the Daily Show. The Colbert Report was not very comparable to Jiminy Gilicky (or whatever). What Marin Short did was essentially a complete farce of a show...Colbert did not take it nearly that far. He had on some very serious guests for good interviews...not every single thing said and done was a joke.

I agree that The Colbert Report was on late and was successful. Was it a late night show in the style of Steve Allen, Carson, Leno etc? The answer is no. It was a parody of The O'Reilly Factor.

Monker wrote:You said, "While Colbert preaches to a dedicated Trump-hating choir, the vast majority of Americans have tuned him (and others) out." That is why I brought up ratings and popularity. That sentence is simply not true. The one who has been 'tuned out" is Jimmy Fallon on the Tonight Show. Fallon is following the same tradition as Leno and Carson...and it is falling behind the current trend of essentially every other late night show. Colbert would be foolish to stop doing what he has been doing for years and do what is on the Tonight Show. Also, I'll point out that he replaced David Letterman who himself was a sorta alternative to the Leno/Carson style. I doubt very much CBS wants that to emulate what is on NBC.

Of course, the sentence is true. Nobody is watching these shows anymore.

Monker wrote:You want to treat Russia like a trustworthy country full of good intentions.

Not sure how one ascribes intentions or emotions toward a country. I'm simply viewing Russia through the lens of realpolitik. In many cases, the US has engaged in aggressive behavior.

Monker wrote: I don't think it is. I don't think Putin is a trustworthy leader...and he should be scrutinized and held in check at every opportunity.

So stop talking and go enlist.

Monker wrote:And, if Trump is proven to be taking orders from Putin, or any other leader of an enemy nation, then Trump should be put on trial for treason and executed if found guilty. I do not see how that is OK under any circumstances, regardless of what party or political beliefs he has.

Yeah, you sound sane.

Monker wrote:I find it incredible that any American would defend the idea of our government being run by the leader of Russia.

Your candidate of choice was swimming in foreign dark money so the idea that you remotely care about foreign influence is bogus.

Andrew wrote:I'm beginning to wonder if you're another Putin asset?

I am proud to be subject to McCarthyite-style insults. It say way more about the defamer than the person being defamed.

Andrew wrote:If my government was being controlled by any other power, I'd be raising hell about it.

Governments ARE controlled by other powers. Big pharma and the military industrial complex, to name a few. Y'know, actual REAL threats to humanity. Personally, I could give a hot shit was Putin does with a few former Soviet provinces.

The_Noble_Cause wrote:I agree that The Colbert Report was on late and was successful. Was it a late night show in the style of Steve Allen, Carson, Leno etc? The answer is no. It was a parody of The O'Reilly Factor.

The Colbert Report was NOT a parody of the O'Reilly Factor. It is The Daily Show with a fake conservative host. That is all.

I get the feeling that you never even watched the show.

Monker wrote:You said, "While Colbert preaches to a dedicated Trump-hating choir, the vast majority of Americans have tuned him (and others) out." That is why I brought up ratings and popularity. That sentence is simply not true. The one who has been 'tuned out" is Jimmy Fallon on the Tonight Show. Fallon is following the same tradition as Leno and Carson...and it is falling behind the current trend of essentially every other late night show. Colbert would be foolish to stop doing what he has been doing for years and do what is on the Tonight Show. Also, I'll point out that he replaced David Letterman who himself was a sorta alternative to the Leno/Carson style. I doubt very much CBS wants that to emulate what is on NBC.

Of course, the sentence is true. Nobody is watching these shows anymore.

The FACTS completely prove you wrong. Colbert has over three million viewers each daily episode. Trevor Noah gets around two million viewers per episode. People watch these shows or they wouldn't be renewed...over and over again. It's no different than if nobody was going to a ___________ concert, they wouldn't be able to afford to tour.

The_Noble_Cause wrote:[

Monker wrote:And, if Trump is proven to be taking orders from Putin, or any other leader of an enemy nation, then Trump should be put on trial for treason and executed if found guilty. I do not see how that is OK under any circumstances, regardless of what party or political beliefs he has.

Yeah, you sound sane.

Execution is the penalty for treason. It's the law.

Monker wrote:I find it incredible that any American would defend the idea of our government being run by the leader of Russia.

Your candidate of choice was swimming in foreign dark money so the idea that you remotely care about foreign influence is bogus.[/quote]

Then she should be charged and sent to trial. If she is found guilty of treason, she should be executed. As I said above, in what YOU quoted, it does not matter what party or political beliefs the person has.

We are not talking only "foreign influence" but the President of the United States following the orders of our enemy. THAT IS TREASON. That is an indefensible crime.

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

adhere - to be devoted in support or allegiance; be attached as a follower or upholder (usually followed by to):

Monker wrote:The Colbert Report was NOT a parody of the O'Reilly Factor. It is The Daily Show with a fake conservative host. That is all.

Sorry. You're just uninformed. Even Colbert's opening "The Word" was a direct parody of O'Reilly's opening "Talking Points Memo" right down to the graphics.

As Colbert himself has said: "I owe a lot to Bill O'Reilly," Colbert said Wednesday. "I spent over nine years playing a character based largely on him — and then 12 months in therapy, to de-bloviate myself."

From the book Satire TV by Professor Jonathan Gray: "Although the aesthetic of The Colbert Report has changed drastically since its first conception on The Daily Show, it’s central premise remains Colbert’s parody of O’Reilly."

Rolling Stone discussing The Colbert Report: " Plenty of Colbert fans probably never knew the segment was a spoof of Bill O'Reilly's 'The Most Ridiculous Item of the Day.' "

From The New Yorker: "The Colbert Report, on Comedy Central, broadcasts what is essentially a full-dress parody of The O’Reilly Factor. Stephen Colbert has obviously made a close study of O’Reilly’s mannerisms and opinions, just as Colbert’s producers have made a close study of the overblown red-white-and-blue swirled graphics that open The O’Reilly Factor."

NYTimes: "When The Colbert Report debuted in 2005, a nightly show satirizing Bill O’Reilly seemed like it would eventually be a dead end."

WaPo: "Whereas Stephen Colbert was a nightly send-up of Fox News’s Bill O’Reilly, Jordan Klepper channels Alex Jones and the conspiratorial ethos of Infowars on Comedy Central’s The Opposition.

Talking to you is a waste of time. You're wrong on pretty much everything.

Monker wrote:I get the feeling that you never even watched the show.

And I get the feeling you never understood what the hell you were even watching.

Monker wrote:The FACTS completely prove you wrong. Colbert has over three million viewers each daily episode. Trevor Noah gets around two million viewers per episode. People watch these shows or they wouldn't be renewed...over and over again. It's no different than if nobody was going to a ___________ concert, they wouldn't be able to afford to tour.

Umm, Carson used to pull in 9 million viewers. Those ratings just prove what I said from the beginning. Broadcast TV has cratered and most Americans have cut the chord.

Monker wrote:Execution is the penalty for treason. It's the law.

Oh sure. And Henry Kissinger and Dick Cheney will be swinging at the Hague any day now. Get real.

Monker wrote:We are not talking only "foreign influence" but the President of the United States following the orders of our enemy. THAT IS TREASON. That is an indefensible crime.

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

adhere - to be devoted in support or allegiance; be attached as a follower or upholder (usually followed by to):

This is just you spreading conspiracy theories again and being a hypocrite. The (fake) Left has gone full-blown-retard and posts like this demonstrate it every day.

The_Noble_Cause wrote:

Monker wrote:Execution is the penalty for treason. It's the law.

Oh sure. And Henry Kissinger and Dick Cheney will be swinging at the Hague any day now. Get real.

Monker wrote:We are not talking only "foreign influence" but the President of the United States following the orders of our enemy. THAT IS TREASON. That is an indefensible crime.

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

adhere - to be devoted in support or allegiance; be attached as a follower or upholder (usually followed by to):

This is just you spreading conspiracy theories again and being a hypocrite. The (fake) Left has gone full-blown-retard and posts like this demonstrate it every day.

I find it quite amazing that one President could cause so many people to go full on retard. Says a lot about the mental maturity of those constituents. Man, it must be a miserable existence for them. Emotional maturity of 5 year olds, the lot of them.

steveo777 wrote:I find it quite amazing that one President could cause so many people to go full on retard. Says a lot about the mental maturity of those constituents. Man, it must be a miserable existence for them. Emotional maturity of 5 year olds, the lot of them.

Glad you finally outed youself. I'm sure it wasn't easy.

The_Noble_Cause wrote:

Monker wrote:Execution is the penalty for treason. It's the law.

Oh sure. And Henry Kissinger and Dick Cheney will be swinging at the Hague any day now. Get real.

YES. If they were taking orders from our enemies, they should be put on trial and executed if found guilty.

Are you actually saying it is OK for our leaders to commit treason?

Monker wrote:We are not talking only "foreign influence" but the President of the United States following the orders of our enemy. THAT IS TREASON. That is an indefensible crime.

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

adhere - to be devoted in support or allegiance; be attached as a follower or upholder (usually followed by to):

This is just you spreading conspiracy theories again and being a hypocrite. The (fake) Left has gone full-blown-retard and posts like this demonstrate it every day.[/quote]

YOU are the one who said you would rather have the President of this country under the influence of Putin, than Haliburton, or whatever. If it is a conspiracy theory, it is one that you bought into and wrote on this forum for me to reply to. Posting the Constitutional definition of treason is NOT a conspiracy theory...that is bizarre talk from you.

Monker wrote:

The_Noble_Cause wrote:

Monker wrote:Execution is the penalty for treason. It's the law.

Oh sure. And Henry Kissinger and Dick Cheney will be swinging at the Hague any day now. Get real.

YES. If they were taking orders from our enemies, they should be put on trial and executed if found guilty.

Are you actually saying it is OK for our leaders to commit treason?

Monker wrote:We are not talking only "foreign influence" but the President of the United States following the orders of our enemy. THAT IS TREASON. That is an indefensible crime.

Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

adhere - to be devoted in support or allegiance; be attached as a follower or upholder (usually followed by to):

This is just you spreading conspiracy theories again and being a hypocrite. The (fake) Left has gone full-blown-retard and posts like this demonstrate it every day.

YOU are the one who said you would rather have the President of this country under the influence of Putin, than Haliburton, or whatever. If it is a conspiracy theory, it is one that you bought into and wrote on this forum for me to reply to. Posting the Constitutional definition of treason is NOT a conspiracy theory...that is bizarre talk from you.[/quote]




You and Andrew come off like you would prefer to be under George Soros rule, I for one do not. Pick your poison wisely.

Monker wrote:Are you actually saying it is OK for our leaders to commit treason?

History points to yes (Nixon undermining Vietnam peace talks, Reagan's October Surprise). Additionally, in US history, treason charges have been brought less than fifty times. So this is all meaningless. When Kennedy wrote secret letters to Khrushchev at the height of the Cold War was that treason? I wonder what his top generals thought...

Monker wrote:YOU are the one who said you would rather have the President of this country under the influence of Putin, than Haliburton, or whatever.

Absolutely.

Monker wrote:If it is a conspiracy theory, it is one that you bought into and wrote on this forum for me to reply to. Posting the Constitutional definition of treason is NOT a conspiracy theory...that is bizarre talk from you.

Of course it's a conspiracy theory. Anyone entertaining the idea that Trump and Russia somehow swung the election with FB ads like this is an idiot.

There is zero point debating you TNC. Utterly pointless. Therefore I shall cease.

Andrew wrote:There is zero point debating you TNC. Utterly pointless. Therefore I shall cease.

Sorry you feel that way. I am happy to share my views with anyone at anytime.

For the record - Manafort's three passports have been reviewed. No sign of him ever entering London in 2013, 2015, and 2016 to meet with Julian Assange.
Just more fake news.