Cancel 2020.1
Canceled
I need a little more convincing than you saying you're convinced.
CNN has nothing to do with it. If there was a deep state, we'd have more than your being convinced and the constant ominous repetition that there is one.
Anatta was right - NYT confirms Deep State White House coup attempt is real
- Thread starter Bigdog
- Start date
I need a little more convincing than you saying you're convinced.
CNN has nothing to do with it. If there was a deep state, we'd have more than your being convinced and the constant ominous repetition that there is one.
Irony you calling anyone stupid suggesting that one can fire and unnamed anonymous source. Dumbfuck.
What makes you think Trump hired the person you ignoramus? Were you born retarded, or do you work hard to remove any doubt you are a moron?
Will you be embarrassed when all of your moronic predictions prove false and Trump serves for eight years?
Leonthecat
Racism Watchdog
DEEP STATE
SHALLOW STATE
Sure, idiot.
Tell us how this one(1) single member of the "Deep State"
manage to get hired as an aide or Cabinet member?
Retard; the Deep State refers to entrenched bureaucrats who serve through successive administrations.
You can....anytime. Here's a waltz down memory lane for you:
Democrat quotes on WMDs
Saddam Hussein has spent the better part of this decade and much of his nation's wealth not on providing for the Iraqi people but on developing nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them."
-- President Bill Clinton (State of the Union Address), Jan. 27, 1998
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998
"No one has done what Saddam Hussein has done, or is thinking of doing. He is producing weapons of mass destruction, and he is qualitatively and quantitatively different from other dictators.""Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
--Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998
"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
--Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998
"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by:
-- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
-Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998
"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
-- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999
"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by:
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001
"I mean, we have three different countries that, while they all present serious problems for the United States -- they're dictatorships, they're involved in the development and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction -- you know, the most imminent, clear and present threat to our country is not the same from those three countries. I think Iraq is the most serious and imminent threat to our country."
-- Sen. John Edwards (D, NC) Feb. 24, 2002
"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them."
-- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power. We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." "
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed. We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Edward Kennedy (D, MA) Sep. 27, 2002
"Now let me be clear -- I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity. He's a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him."
-- State Senator Barack Obama (Democrat, Illinois) Oct. 2, 2002
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
-- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002
"My position is very clear: The time has come for decisive action to eliminate the threat posed by Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction."
-- Senator John Edwards (D, NC), Oct. 7, 2002
"We stopped the fighting [in 1991] on an agreement that Iraq would take steps to assure the world that it would not engage in further aggression and that it would destroy its weapons of mass destruction. It has refused to take those steps. That refusal constitutes a breach of the armistice which renders it void and justifies resumption of the armed conflict."
-- Sen. Harry Reid (D. NV) Oct. 9, 2002
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002
"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do"
-- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002
"I come to this debate, Mr. Speaker, as one at the end of 10 years in office on the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, where stopping the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction was one of my top priorities. I applaud the President on focusing on this issue and on taking the lead to disarm Saddam Hussein. ... Others have talked about this threat that is posed by Saddam Hussein. Yes, he has chemical weapons, he has biological weapons, he is trying to get nuclear weapons."
-- Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D. CA) Oct. 10, 2002
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
-- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002
"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
"People can quarrel with whether we should have more troops in Afghanistan or internationalize Iraq or whatever, but it is incontestable that on the day I left office, there were unaccounted for stocks of biological and chemical weapons."
-- Ex President Bill Clinton, Jul. 22, 2003 (Interview with CNN Larry King)
I asked very direct questions of the top people in the CIA and people who'd served in the Clinton administration. And they said they believed that Saddam Hussein either had weapons or had the components of weapons or the ability to quickly make weapons of mass destruction. What we're worried about is an A-bomb in a Ryder truck in New York, in Washington and St. Louis. It cannot happen. We have to prevent it from happening.
-- Rep. Richard Gephardt (D, MT) Nov. 2, 2003
This is your brain on MORON; don't be one. 
I don't see why not. If racist and Nazi swine are allowed, even encouraged, to write their racist screeds here, it seems eminently reasonable to be able to bump an old Iraq War thread.
you are being an idiot, everyone in the WH is his now
Says the blazing moron.
Even anatta seems to understand that there is no deep state in th WH.
Cancel 2020.1
Canceled
I've seen those a hundred times, and still can't find any calling for invasion.
And oh man, would it be great to have what you posted back in those days. I know exactly what it was - and you couldn't have possibly been more wrong.
There is definitive proof that Russia attacked us and was personally ordered by Putin.
Trump was shown this proof weeks before taking office.
Since then, he's been running interference for Russia by questioning American intelligence services.
He's a traitor. Everyone who ever voiced support for him will have their lifeboats burned. You won't be allowed to re-brand like we let you do after Bush .
Exactly.
The choice was to
1) continue inspections and sanctions (which were working).
or
2) To invade and occupy.
Bush and his supporters made the wrong choice.
As far as I am aware, every prominent liberal who has ever posted on jpp.com made the right choice.
They then VOTED FOR the invasion you dishonest dunce.
I can tell you if you want it. Unlike you, I don't hide what I believe behind a facade of lies and dishonesty. I was all FOR the war and still am. I saw the danger ignoring it after 3,000 innocent Americans were murdered.
I don't pretend or try to second guess what was argued and believed before we went in. I don't pretend that the ME was stable when the evidence suggests anything but. I don't pretend that Saddam wasn't a destabilizing influence in the region and brought his demise on himself. I don't pretend that Iraq and Afghanistan were connected when they were not. I don't pretend that Bush was alone in his thinking.
But the left and Democratic Party of the Jackass saw it as a political opportunity and as usual, shit on America in their desperate effort to make Bush a one term Presidency. How did that work for them snowflake?
"running interference"? WTF.
Trump isn't motivated to support Russia.
Why would he be selling JAVELIN to use against Russian armor in Donbass if he was?
there is no "definitive proof' either.
there is an IC assessment made by Clapper who has his own Russiaphobia to pander too.
There isn't any proof the DNC server was hacked either -the FBI never did forensics on it.
Assange wasn't interviewed etc.
the AUMF is authorization for Iraq.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Resolution
the Iraq Resolution (formally the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002, Pub.L. 107–243, 116 Stat. 1498, enacted October 16, 2002, H.J.Res. 114) is a joint resolution passed by the United States Congress in October 2002 as Public Law No: 107-243, authorizing military action against ...
The resolution authorized President Bush to use the Armed Forces of the United States "as he determines to be necessary and appropriate" in order to "defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council Resolutions regarding Iraq."
Wrong again; the choice was to enforce the resolutions Saddam had agreed to that were ignored after a decade of doing nothing about it. We were woken up by the attacks on 9-11 and the seriousness of doing nothing.
Of course, in liberal dumbfuck land, doing nothing is always preferable to REAL results.
The "Deep State" is no one in the WH or otherwise close to Trump. It's the imagined bogeymen in the federal agencies dreamed up all of three years ago by Right wing conspiracy theorists, but which in fact consists of the federal employees in the Civil Service System put in place in the 19th Century to remedy the corruption and incompetence of the wholesale political patronage that preceded it.