Trump proposes cuts, Senate balks

[F3600]

So many here talk about reducing US presence and meddling in other countries affairs.  Trump puts forth actual cuts.  Both sides Dem/Repub balk saying we can't jeopardize our "Soft Power" around the globe.  

https://news.yahoo.com/senators-blast-insane-trump-plan-aid-cuts-seek-195845421--business.html 

[racer254]

38 minutes ago, F3600 said:

So many here talk about reducing US presence and meddling in other countries affairs.  Trump puts forth actual cuts.  Both sides Dem/Repub balk saying we can't jeopardize our "Soft Power" around the globe.  

https://news.yahoo.com/senators-blast-insane-trump-plan-aid-cuts-seek-195845421--business.html 

BOTH sides are against the cuts.   Everyone here should really look close and understand why Trump is in the WH.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Republican and Democratic U.S. senators blasted President Donald Trump's proposal for a 23 percent cut in the U.S. budget for foreign aid and diplomacy as "insane" and "short-sighted" on Tuesday, and said it would not pass.

"We're not going to approve this budget reduction. It's insane. It makes no sense," said Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, chairman of the Appropriations subcommittee that oversees the State Department and foreign aid budget.

"I don't know who writes these things over in the White House, but they clearly don't understand the value of soft power," the Republican senator, a close Trump ally on many issues, told a subcommittee hearing on the foreign aid budget.

Graham also called the plan "short-sighted" and said the Appropriations panel would restore funding to previous levels, rather than enacting the 23 percent cut Trump proposed earlier this year.

The Senate subcommittee's top Democrat, Senator Patrick Leahy, also opposed the cuts, citing the importance of "soft power" like foreign aid to U.S. influence around the world.

"Our soft power should not be a partisan issue, it should be an American issue and we're going to try to keep it that way," Leahy said at the hearing, at which Green testified on Trump's proposed budget.

[oleroule]

neither party has your best interests in mind...surprise!

[Anler]

So when someone bucks the system we see that really republicans are democrats are not that different after all. big surprise. not... 

[DriftBusta]

4 minutes ago, Anler said:

So when someone bucks the system we see that really republicans are democrats are not that different after all. big surprise. not... 

We all knew that years ago.  The proper takeaway should reflect positively for Trump, but we can’t have that now can we?!

[racer254]

1 hour ago, DriftBusta said:

We all knew that years ago.  The proper takeaway should reflect positively for Trump, but we can’t have that now can we?!

 

1 hour ago, Anler said:

So when someone bucks the system we see that really republicans are democrats are not that different after all. big surprise. not... 

Bingo, That's another reason trump was elected.

[xtralettucetomatoe580]

Gotta feed the machine.... Nice to see Trump actually trying to cut the obscene foreign spending. 

[f7ben]

1 hour ago, DriftBusta said:

We all knew that years ago.  The proper takeaway should reflect positively for Trump, but we can’t have that now can we?!

But then he puts a guy like John Bolton in place who hasnt seen an intervention since Nam that didnt get him hard.

Trump is a fucking moron

[DriftBusta]

16 minutes ago, f7ben said:

But then he puts a guy like John Bolton in place who hasnt seen an intervention since Nam that didnt get him hard.

Trump is a fucking moron

Actually you’re the moron.  He hired Bolton because of his experience and reputation of a tough negotiator, you can argue otherwise, but probably can’t articulate much more than “he’s a moron”.  Gifted debator you are not.

Edited May 1, 2019 by DriftBusta

[f7ben]

1 minute ago, DriftBusta said:

Actually you’re the moron.

Actually deep derp derp. Kill yourself you flip flopping dumbfuck. You're a partisan ball gargler masquerading as someone with a functioning brain. We all see right through it. 

Edited May 1, 2019 by f7ben

[Jimmy Snacks]

18 minutes ago, f7ben said:

But then he puts a guy like John Bolton in place who hasnt seen an intervention since Nam that didnt get him hard.

Trump is a fucking moron

 

2 minutes ago, DriftBusta said:

Actually you’re the moron.

Woolie loves Bolton....hahahaha!!! 

[DriftBusta]

Make that 2 gifted debators.  I never even gave my opinion of Bolton, but I at least understand why Trump hired him.  You’d think we would be in ww3against Russia or Iran, hearing you guys talk.

[f7ben]

Just now, DriftBusta said:

Make that 2 gifted debators.  I never even gave my opinion of Bolton, but I at least understand why Trump hired him.  You’d think we would be in ww3against Russia or Iran, hearing you guys talk.

Fuck you

[DriftBusta]

1 minute ago, f7ben said:

Fuck you

Must be tough going through life being such a mouthy dumb shit.   

[f7ben]

Just now, DriftBusta said:

Must be tough going through life being such a mouthy dumb shit.   

Nope....easy peasy

[Anler]

4 hours ago, DriftBusta said:

We all knew that years ago.  The proper takeaway should reflect positively for Trump, but we can’t have that now can we?!

Whats this we shit? 

[Anler]

3 hours ago, f7ben said:

But then he puts a guy like John Bolton in place who hasnt seen an intervention since Nam that didnt get him hard.

Trump is a fucking moron

 

2 hours ago, DriftBusta said:

Actually you’re the moron.  He hired Bolton because of his experience and reputation of a tough negotiator, you can argue otherwise, but probably can’t articulate much more than “he’s a moron”.  Gifted debator you are not.

 

2 hours ago, DriftBusta said:

Make that 2 gifted debators.  I never even gave my opinion of Bolton, but I at least understand why Trump hired him.  You’d think we would be in ww3against Russia or Iran, hearing you guys talk.

If you can read maybe you can educate yourself on some things before you put your foot in your mouth. 

The Fanatic Running Trump’s Foreign Policy

written by daniel larison

monday april 29, 2019

Dexter Filkins has written an extensive profile of John Bolton. The profile recounts many familiar stories from Bolton’s career, and it has a few interesting details I hadn’t read about before. Among many other things, it covers his ties to the MEK and the payment he has received from them for promoting their cause:

In Bolton’s financial disclosure, he listed a forty-thousand-dollar payment, for a speech that he gave, in 2016, to Mujahideen-e-Khalq, an Iranian exile group dedicated to overthrowing the government in Tehran. The M.E.K., which professes an eccentric variant of Islam, has been characterized by many experts as resembling a cult. From 1997 until 2012, the United States listed it as a terrorist group, owing to a campaign of bombings and assassinations that it led in Iran. Bolton’s association with the group apparently went back at least to that time. During the speech in 2016, he told the crowd, 'I just say again what I have been saying for ten years that I’ve been coming to this rally: the regime in Tehran needs to be overthrown at the earliest opportunity!'

Karim Sadjadpour, an Iran expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and a frequent critic of the regime, said that Bolton’s relationship with the group should have disqualified him from senior government jobs. 'Anyone who pimps himself out to the M.E.K. fails the litmus test for integrity,' he said.

As I have said before, Bolton’s long-running involvement with the MEK is one of the clearest indications we have that the National Security Advisor holds dangerous views and has appalling judgment. He was one of the earliest and most consistent supporters of the MEK even before they were removed from the government’s list of foreign terrorist organizations, and he remained one of their biggest American advocates right up until he joined the Trump administration. While I’m sure they have paid him handsomely for all of his tedious speeches in favor of regime change, his fanatical anti-Iranian views make him a perfect fit for the group. If we had a remotely sane Iran policy debate, Bolton’s MEK ties would discredit everything he has to say about Iran. The fact that he has a major role in making US policy towards Iran when he was very recently getting paid by a cultish group that seeks regime change should alarm everyone regardless of their views on what US policy should be.

Fair Use Excerpt. Read the rest at The American Conservative.

[Jimmy Snacks]

3 hours ago, DriftBusta said:

Actually you’re the moron.  He hired Bolton because of his experience and reputation of a tough negotiator, you can argue otherwise, but probably can’t articulate much more than “he’s a moron”.  Gifted debator you are not.

 

2 hours ago, DriftBusta said:

Make that 2 gifted debators.  I never even gave my opinion of Bolton, but I at least understand why Trump hired him.  You’d think we would be in ww3against Russia or Iran, hearing you guys talk.

Are you having a stroke or something? 

Woolie was for Bolton before he was for him but said he had no opinion...wait....wut?

 

Bolton is basically the keeper of the swamp yet Mr. Swamp Drainer gets a pass on him.

Edited May 1, 2019 by Jimmy Snacks

[DriftBusta]

7 minutes ago, Anler said:

Whats this we shit? 

Well I assumed that even a self proclaimed smart guy such as yourself has known for some time that the mainstream political parties both sucked.  I’ve been consistent on that point for years and assumed we could at least agree on that.  

2 minutes ago, Anler said:

 

 

If you can read maybe you can educate yourself on some things before you put your foot in your mouth. 

The Fanatic Running Trump’s Foreign Policy

written by daniel larison

monday april 29, 2019

Dexter Filkins has written an extensive profile of John Bolton. The profile recounts many familiar stories from Bolton’s career, and it has a few interesting details I hadn’t read about before. Among many other things, it covers his ties to the MEK and the payment he has received from them for promoting their cause:

In Bolton’s financial disclosure, he listed a forty-thousand-dollar payment, for a speech that he gave, in 2016, to Mujahideen-e-Khalq, an Iranian exile group dedicated to overthrowing the government in Tehran. The M.E.K., which professes an eccentric variant of Islam, has been characterized by many experts as resembling a cult. From 1997 until 2012, the United States listed it as a terrorist group, owing to a campaign of bombings and assassinations that it led in Iran. Bolton’s association with the group apparently went back at least to that time. During the speech in 2016, he told the crowd, 'I just say again what I have been saying for ten years that I’ve been coming to this rally: the regime in Tehran needs to be overthrown at the earliest opportunity!'

Karim Sadjadpour, an Iran expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and a frequent critic of the regime, said that Bolton’s relationship with the group should have disqualified him from senior government jobs. 'Anyone who pimps himself out to the M.E.K. fails the litmus test for integrity,' he said.

As I have said before, Bolton’s long-running involvement with the MEK is one of the clearest indications we have that the National Security Advisor holds dangerous views and has appalling judgment. He was one of the earliest and most consistent supporters of the MEK even before they were removed from the government’s list of foreign terrorist organizations, and he remained one of their biggest American advocates right up until he joined the Trump administration. While I’m sure they have paid him handsomely for all of his tedious speeches in favor of regime change, his fanatical anti-Iranian views make him a perfect fit for the group. If we had a remotely sane Iran policy debate, Bolton’s MEK ties would discredit everything he has to say about Iran. The fact that he has a major role in making US policy towards Iran when he was very recently getting paid by a cultish group that seeks regime change should alarm everyone regardless of their views on what US policy should be.

Fair Use Excerpt. Read the rest at The American Conservative.

You posted an opinion piece.  BFD.  Should I google one that supports him, or are you pretending that everyone feels the same as you, Smales and Ben?  My opinion on Bolton is fairly benign.  I don’t love the guy and I don’t hate the guy.  Ben hates everyone so his opinions are irrelevant.

1 minute ago, Jimmy Snacks said:

 

Are you having a stroke or something? 

Are you?  I didn’t say whether I supported him or not.  I just gave likely reasons why Trump hired him.  

[Anler]

More on Bolton... Iran is going to Fox news and Trump directly to AVOID war.

Saudi Arabia and Israel are strange bed fellows dont you think? 

 

Iran Appeals Directly To Trump: Your Advisers Dragging You Into War

written by robert wenzel

monday april 29, 2019

Iran appears to be attempting to go over the head of Trump's crazed war hawk advisors by talking to Fox News.

Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif told Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday that he believes President Trump's own advisers, as well as Middle East allies like Saudi Arabia and Israel, are “dragging the United States into a conflict” with Iran.

Zarif specifically named National Security Advisor John Bolton, Israel, Saudi Arabia, along with close Saudi ally the United Arab Emirates, as all seeking to escalate tensions leading toward a regime change war on Iran.

Wallace asked if they’re “all trying to exercise regime change?” and Zarif responded, “at least, at least.” He explained:

They have all shown an interest in dragging the United States into a conflict. I do not believe that President Trump wants to do that, I believe President Trump ran on a campaign promise of not bringing the United States into another war. But I believe President Trump’s intention to put pressure, the policy of maximum pressure on Iran in order to bring Iran to its knees so that we would succumb to pressure, is doomed to failure.

This comes just days after Zarif made similar statements about the possibility of US and Iranian ships clashing in the Persian Gulf, warning that a false flag "accident" scenario could "lure" Trump into war — something which he thinks Trump himself doesn't want to see happen.

An intriguing move by Iran to lower tensions and keep the peace.

UPDATE

Here is the bloodthirsty Bolton's response:

 

[Jimmy Snacks]

1 minute ago, DriftBusta said:

Well I assumed that even a self proclaimed smart guy such as yourself has known for some time that the mainstream political parties both sucked.  I’ve been consistent on that point for years and assumed we could at least agree on that.  

You posted an opinion piece.  BFD.  Should I google one that supports him, or are you pretending that everyone feels the same as you, Smales and Ben?  My opinion on Bolton is fairly benign.  I don’t love the guy and I don’t hate the guy.  Ben hates everyone so his opinions are irrelevant.

Are you?  I didn’t say whether I supported him or not.  I just gave likely reasons why Trump hired him.  

So saying he is a tough negotiator isn't an opinion...OK.

[Anler]

1 minute ago, DriftBusta said:

Well I assumed that even a self proclaimed smart guy such as yourself has known for some time that the mainstream political parties both sucked.  I’ve been consistent on that point for years and assumed we could at least agree on that.  

You posted an opinion piece.  BFD.  Should I google one that supports him, or are you pretending that everyone feels the same as you, Smales and Ben?  My opinion on Bolton is fairly benign.  I don’t love the guy and I don’t hate the guy.  Ben hates everyone so his opinions are irrelevant.

Are you?  I didn’t say whether I supported him or not.  I just gave likely reasons why Trump hired him.  

So Bolton didnt disclose a $40,000 payment from the MEK it was just somebody's opinion? Why do I bother?

[Jimmy Snacks]

4 minutes ago, Anler said:

So Bolton didnt disclose a $40,000 payment from the MEK it was just somebody's opinion? Why do I bother?

It really is pointless. 

[DriftBusta]

13 minutes ago, Jimmy Snacks said:

It really is pointless. 

 

17 minutes ago, Anler said:

So Bolton didnt disclose a $40,000 payment from the MEK it was just somebody's opinion? Why do I bother?

Wait.  So let me get this straight, because I have no interest in going down a rabbit hole with you over John Bolton. He did disclose the payment, Iran is our enemy in case you have forgotten, and MEK Apparently would like to overthrow the Iranian government.  He gave a speech to them, what exactly is your issue, and can you put it into context with other security advisors and who they give speeches to?  I’m thinking you can’t.  What would you like me to say exactly? Did he do something illegal?  Again I really don’t have an opinion one way or another about John Bolton, if you want to hate on the guy go right ahead. All I did was try and give the reasons why I think Trump hired him. You fucking morons want to play gotcha over that?