U.S. Politics

[Joe Elliott]

Well, apparently, the Trump administration is going to start investigations into Bill Clinton and other Democrats. That way, he can argue the Epstein Files cannot be released because of ongoing investigations.

Question:

Would it not have been smarter to announce investigations into Bill Clinton and others last July? That way, he would have had a good excuse for not releasing the Epstein Files. And avoid the political fall out of blocking the release of the Epstein documents without a good excuse. Causing even some in MAGA to turn against him.

 * * * * * * * *

Clearly, Trump and his administration are not very smart. It took them four full months to think of a good excuse for doing what Trump wanted all along, to not release the Epstein Files.

It is a disgrace for an American to support a Dictator-Want-To-Be. It is pathetic for an American to support a Dictator-Want-To-Be who is clearly too stupid to succeed. I believe it would take a fairly clever leader with a smart administration to succeed at a task like this. And they do not have it.

[Royell Storing]

 There's no getting around Bill Clinton being on Epstein Island numerous times. The people now running the Dem Party have thrown Bill Clinton under the bus. He's extremely old news. Same goes for Obama. He has absolutely no pull, no star power, nothing. He's merely "tolerated" by the people running the Dem Party. Obama is like that old Hollywood Star that refuses to exit the stage. Basically, Obama is a political version of George Clooney. "Days gone down", applies to both. 

[Tom Graves]

There's no getting around Bill Clinton being on Epstein Island numerous times. The people now running the Dem Party have thrown Bill Clinton under the bus. He's extremely old news. Same goes for Obama. He has absolutely no pull, no star power, nothing. He's merely "tolerated" by the people running the Dem Party. Obama is like that old Hollywood Star that refuses to exit the stage. Basically, Obama is a political version of George Clooney. "Days gone down", applies to both.

Dear Comrade Storing,

Your hero, The Traitorous Orange Bird (rhymes with "Xxxx"), has probably already directed Bondo Bondi to release, after The House passes the Discharge Petition tomorrow with a veto-proof majority and the Senate follows suit, only those files which incriminate "Dems."

-- Tom

Either that, or to reopen the investigation and "leak" only those Democrat-incriminating documents and make all of those that implicate "Republicans" and billionaire donors untouchable due to said "ongoing investigation" and/or "national security concerns." 

[Royell Storing]

  The New Dems are throwing the dirt on the grave of Bill Clinton with the Epstein Files. Hillary too. Out with the old and in with the new. Such is Dem politics. This is what we are seeing. A very common thing in the Dem ranks. Eating your own.

[Tom Graves]

The New Democrats are throwing the dirt on the grave of Bill Clinton with the Epstein files. Hillary too. Out with the old and in with the new. Such is Democratic politics. This is what we are seeing. A very common thing in the Democrat ranks. Eating your own.

Dear Comrade Storing,

Your hero, The Traitorous Orange Bird (rhymes with "Xxxx"), aka The Pedo In Charge, has probably already directed Bondo Bondi to release, after The House passes the Discharge Petition tomorrow with a veto-proof majority and the Senate follows suit, only those files which incriminate "Dems." Either that, or to reopen the investigation and "leak" only those Democrat-incriminating documents and make all of those that implicate "Republicans," billionaire donors, and himself untouchable due to said "ongoing investigation" and/or "national security concerns."

-- Tom

[Joe Elliott]

The shooting of the two National Guardsmen is a horrendous shooting and I do not seriously doubt that the man captured is guilty and should spend the rest of his life in prison.

But what should be done with the 70,000 Afghans who came over on Operation Allies Welcome? Well, before we go running amok, consider: In America, for every 100,000 people, 6 or more murders take place. Your average American has, in fifty years of adult life, has about a 3/10 of percent chance of murdering someone. Well, somewhat less, since some end up killing more than one person.

So, if these 70,000 Afghans acted like ordinary Americans, I would expect that they would have committed around 16 murders since 2021.

Question: Have these 70,000 Afghans committed 16 murders since 2021?

I know of no such evidence, but I would like to hear it.

If Biden refused entry of these people, I don't think we would have two murders. I think we would have over 10,000 murders, maybe 70,000 murders. So before we deport these 70,000 back to Afghanistan, I would like to see some argument that they have committed more murders than your typical group of 70,000 Americans.

It should also be noted that Trump's calls for them to all be deported has historical parallels with the Night of Broken Glass. In 1938 a young Jewish man murdered a minor German official in the German embassy in France. It has been reported that the young man was seduced and/or raped by the older German and shot him in retaliation. Goebbels used this as an excuse to do what he wanted to do anyway, attack Jews. For this one murder, over 91 Jews were murdered, many more beaten up and much property destroyed.
For this shooting in Washington D. C., Trump wants to do what he wants to do anyway, deport 70,000 Afghans, even if that results in the deaths of thousands sent back to Afghanistan.

So before we do that, I would like to hear of any evidence about the number of murders these 70,000 Afghans have carried out since 2021.

[Royell Storing]

  This has Nothing to do with any of the above. It has Everything to do with the vetting process. NOBODY associated with the China Joe administration will specifically spell out what that process entailed. This is the same thing we see with the CDL Licensing of Illegal Aliens who can Not read English. ALL of this is about the lack of serious vetting during 4 yrs of The Biden Crime Family. "10% For The Big Guy" is also applicable here.

[Joe Elliott]

Admiral Bradley and Commander Eck of U 852 and Radios

Admiral Bradley and Commander Eck of U 852 have a lot in common. Ordering the killing of survivors in the water from a sunk boat. And using the possibility of the survivors using radios as their justification. They could call in boats that could send down divers to recover the sunken drugs, which probably would probably be no worse from wear of being soaked in salt water for several hours Or maybe they were stored in water proof bags that even high explosives could not cause a leak..

On March 13, 1944, U-852 torpedoed and sank the Greek steamer SS Peleus. Afterwards, U-boat commander Eck ordered the boats and survivors clinging to wreckage to be killed by gunfire. Only 3 of the crew of 35 survived and were later picked up by another ship.

On April 30, 1944, due to damage from air attack, the U-boat had to run aground on the coast of Somalia. The German crew were tracked down by the Somaliland Camel Corps mostly consisting of Somalians commanded by British officers. I wonder if any of their descendants are now threatened by Trump's deportation orders. But I digress.

The British boarded the U-boat wreck and found the Captain's log. This log, along with the 3 survivors, put the captain in serious trouble.

In his trial in Hamburg in November 1945, Commander Eck claimed the attack on the survivors was justified because they might have had a radio that could be used to communicate with others. On this basis, he argued his decision was justified.

The British disagreed and on November 30, 1944 Eck and two accomplices were executed by firing squad. Eck was the only U-boat commander to be executed by the British.

So, the legal precedent is that survivors in the water are not to be killed. Indeed, I strongly suspect that it was this incident with Commander Eck and U 852 which caused our instructions to specifically list killing survivors in the water as a classic example of a war crime.

Even if survivors might have a functioning radio (from a blown up boat?), or an anti-matter device that might be used to blow up the planet, they cannot be attacked. Our instructions to the military list no exceptions.

This kind of defense that Bradley and Eck use is absurd. The German massacres of Russian villages, the My Lai massacres could be justified on what the victims might later do if they are not killed. All military crimes could be justified on this basis. If this defense is accepted then the Nazis did not commit any war crimes during World War II. It is impossible for the military to ever commit a war crime. Even killing children or babies can be justified because you never know what they might do once they grow up. They might even become another Commander Eck or Admiral Bradley.

What Commander Eck and Admiral Bradley have in common is that they ordered the killing of survivors in the water of a boat sinking. And both justified this on the basis that the survivors might have functioning radios. That is a pretty strong resemblance.

Questions:

Why should we have any higher regard for Admiral Bradley than we have for Commander Eck?

Can anyone think of a good reason why Commander Eck and Admiral Bradley's names should not be forever linked?

Should one ever mention one without the other?