Flying Monkeys
By Nobody
11 Mar 2011 1:42 pm in No Holds Barred Political Forum
8 Jan 2020 8:59 pm
That was reported and nothing said since. All they hit was dirt if it actually happened.Misty » 08 Jan 2020 8:53 pm » wrote: You can't know that yet.
Iran has proxy groups all over the Middle East.
I just read that two rockets hit the green zone in Iraq today.
9 Jan 2020 6:43 pm
Breitbart.........Termin8tor » 09 Jan 2020 2:59 pm » wrote:The brownshirt will censor this like she does all information critical of her party.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020 ... e-iceberg/
Another one of your highly credible sources.......
Don't post that crap in my thread again.
10 Jan 2020 9:59 am
10 Jan 2020 12:18 pm
Not the sources that were correct.Termin8tor » 10 Jan 2020 11:37 am » wrote:
YOu are a BRAINWASHED MORON . I have shown OVER AND OVER that your sources are CRAP they use fake news conspiracy theories and have ZERO CREDIBILITY and you KNOW it. the FACTS is you are a PROVEN LIAR and a COWARD and you tell the LIES Russian Military Intelligence pushes BECAUSE you are a TRAITOR
You prefer crap sources that carried three years of Fake News, lies, propaganda and **** about Trump.
YOu are a LIAR they weren't LYING about Trump and FAKE NEWS is NOT FACTUAL REALITY you dont like TRAITOR. I have SHOWN you undeniable FACTS. FACTS not in dispute that PROVE you are LYING about the media and you are LYING about the Russian Investigation you are a LIAR and a TRAITOR
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... nks-russia
GCHQ first became aware in late 2015 of suspicious “interactions” between figures connected to Trump and known or suspected Russian agents, a source close to UK intelligence said. This intelligence was passed to the US as part of a routine exchange of information, they added.Over the next six months, until summer 2016, a number of western agencies shared further information on contacts between Trump’s inner circle and Russians, sources said.The European countries that passed on electronic intelligence – known as sigint – included Germany, Estonia and Poland.
Australia, a member of the “Five Eyes” spying alliance that also includes the US, UK, Canada and New Zealand, also relayed material, one source said.Another source suggested the Dutch and the French spy agency, the General Directorate for External Security or DGSE, were contributors.It is understood that GCHQ was at no point carrying out a targeted operation against Trump or his team or proactively seeking information. The alleged conversations were picked up by chance as part of routine surveillance of Russian intelligence assets. Over several months, different agencies targeting the same people began to see a pattern of connections that were flagged to intelligence officials in the US.
Trump was getting advance notice from wikileaks about their dumps wikileaks was called by Trumps own pick for head of the CIA a hostile intelligence agency but Trump touted them at LEAST 100 times
https://www.vox.com/2019/4/19/18507743/ ...
Trumps campaign manager repeatedly gave a man he KNEW was connected to Russian Military Intelligence INTERNAL polling data and Manafort discussed their strategy for the midwest with him
https://www.newsweek.com/paul-manafort- .
The report noted that Manafort instructed his longtime colleague Rick Gates to provide Kilimnik with internal Trump campaign polling data and briefings on the campaign's strategies. For years, Manafort and Kilimnik worked together closely on political campaigns in Ukraine. Manafort even nicknamed Kilimnik his "Russian brain." The FBI has determined that Kilimnik, who was once a Russian military translator, has links to Russian intelligence services.
Sessions, Page, Manafort, Papadopolous, Jared, Don jr, Gates, Mcfarland ALL had contacts with Russians then LIED about them. Either you can cough up an innocent explanation for all that LYING or that alone justifies the investigation
The Trump campaign had more than 140 contacts with Russians the normal presidential campaign has ZERO
ADDRESS the FACTS or STFU you TRAITOR and GUTLESS COWARD
10 Jan 2020 1:29 pm
10 Jan 2020 7:48 pm
Seems like Trump was pressured into killing Soleimani by some GOP Senators whose votes he will need in the upcoming impeachment trial.
Mr. Trump, after the strike, told associates he was under pressure to deal with Gen. Soleimani from GOP senators he views as important supporters in his coming impeachment trial in the Senate, associates said.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/trumps-new ... 1578619195
10 Jan 2020 7:56 pm
11 Jan 2020 11:18 am
11 Jan 2020 11:40 am
Trump: I left troops (in Syria) to take the oil. I took the oil. The only troops I have are taking the oil.
11 Jan 2020 11:42 am
11 Jan 2020 2:45 pm
12 Jan 2020 11:20 am
New Iran Revelations Suggest Trump’s Deceptions Were Deeper Than We Thought
Believe it or not, the Trump administration may not have been completely honest about its policy toward Iran and its rationale for the assassination of Qasem Soleimani.
Not that officials have offered a single explanation for why the assassination was carried out — their story has changed numerous times.
But the justification they keep returning to is that intelligence indicated an “imminent" threat, that Soleimani was planning specific attacks against American interests and personnel, attacks that were so imminent that he had to be killed to stop them.
But now we learn that much more appears to have been going on.
That’s one key takeaway from this blockbuster scoop in The Post:
On the day the U.S. military killed a top Iranian commander in Baghdad, U.S. forces carried out another top secret mission against a senior Iranian military official in Yemen, according to U.S. officials.
The strike targeting Abdul Reza Shahlai, a financier and key commander of Iran’s elite Quds Force who has been active in Yemen, did not result in his death, according to four U.S. officials familiar with the matter.
The unsuccessful operation may indicate that the Trump administration’s killing of Maj. Gen. Qasem Soleimani last week was part of a broader operation than previously explained, raising questions about whether the mission was designed to cripple the leadership of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps or solely to prevent an imminent attack on Americans as originally stated.
The attempt to take out Shahlai simultaneously with Soleimani suggests that this wasn’t an isolated, defensive operation but may have been part of a broader attack on the Quds Force.
Shahlai is operating in Yemen, meaning the conflict he is waging at the moment is less against the United States than against Saudi Arabia, which is engaged in a war in Yemen against Iran-backed rebels with our support.
In recent statements, administration officials have noted Shahlai’s role in a 2007 attack on American soldiers in Iraq, his support of Houthi rebels in Yemen and his “long history of involvement in attacks targeting the U.S. and our allies."
But if someone like Shahlai was planning to attack American forces — let’s say “imminently” — Yemen wouldn’t be the place to do it.
Which suggests this may have been part of a broader operation to kill Iranian military leaders.
Democrats Sound The Alarm
In an interview, Rep. Eliot L. Engel (D-N.Y.), the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, told us there’s “no doubt” in his mind that the assassination of Soleimani and the effort to target Shahlai are part of a wider effort that’s mostly being concealed from Congress.
“The more you hear, the more you realize that you’ve been fed a bunch of untruths,” Engel told us.
“Was Shahlai an imminent threat? I think not.”
Rep. Tom Malinowski (D-N.J.), a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, added that this news badly complicates the rationale offered for the Soleimani killing.
“This does make it harder for the administration to argue that the operations were solely designed to eliminate somebody who was plotting attacks on Americans,” Malinowski, a former State Department official, told us.
Malinowski also said this new report means Congress will have to orient itself toward asking broader and deeper questions about the administration’s secret military operations.
“If the objective was to weaken the Quds Force irrespective of any intelligence about imminent attacks on Americans, then where does that end?” Malinowski said. “And is it over?”
You’d think Congress could bring in administration officials to answer these questions.
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has been invited to testify next week to the Foreign Affairs Committee.
But Engel told us that Pompeo has not said whether he’ll appear.
“Right now it looks like he’s not coming,” Engel told us.
“We haven’t heard from him.”
If so, perhaps this is because Pompeo has not been faring well lately when asked tough questions about all this.
On Thursday, he seemed to undercut the administration’s public story by telling Fox News the following about the threats Soleimani posed: “We don’t know precisely when and we don’t know precisely where, but it was real."
Pompeo has also been struggling to clean up after Trump’s public statements. In extemporaneous remarks Thursday, Trump said Soleimani was about to blow up the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad — the first time it had been suggested by anyone.
That led Pompeo to tell reporters on Friday: “Soleimani was actively planning new attacks, and he was looking very seriously at our embassies and not just the embassy in Baghdad.”
Numerous Democratic senators are now saying that the threat to embassies was not part of the briefing given to members of Congress on Wednesday.
Which raises the possibility that it’s not actually true, but once the president said it, his national security team felt obligated to back him up.
All of which underscores the urgency of bringing in Pompeo. Will he show up? Who knows?
You’d think these new revelations would make it much harder for Republicans to resist asserting congressional authority over Trump’s war powers.
The House has passed a measure requiring Trump to seek congressional authorization for future hostilities against Iran, and the Senate is set to vote on a companion version next week.
The latest news "creates an additional reason for the Senate to follow suit,” Malinowski said, because “if the strategy goes beyond protecting Americans from imminent attack, it could include further strikes.”
If Congress were to assert its authority, it could use the ensuing debate over any future actions to probe more deeply into all the questions that remain unanswered.
It’s hard to imagine that four GOP senators — which is all the war powers measure would need to pass — would not be willing to assert congressional authority, given this latest news and all it indicates about how much we do not know about what the administration is secretly up to.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... OHh3GM3KpI
Believe it or not, the Trump administration may not have been completely honest about its policy toward Iran and its rationale for the assassination of Qasem Soleimani.
Not that officials have offered a single explanation for why the assassination was carried out — their story has changed numerous times.
But the justification they keep returning to is that intelligence indicated an “imminent" threat, that Soleimani was planning specific attacks against American interests and personnel, attacks that were so imminent that he had to be killed to stop them.
But now we learn that much more appears to have been going on.
That’s one key takeaway from this blockbuster scoop in The Post:
On the day the U.S. military killed a top Iranian commander in Baghdad, U.S. forces carried out another top secret mission against a senior Iranian military official in Yemen, according to U.S. officials.
The strike targeting Abdul Reza Shahlai, a financier and key commander of Iran’s elite Quds Force who has been active in Yemen, did not result in his death, according to four U.S. officials familiar with the matter.
The unsuccessful operation may indicate that the Trump administration’s killing of Maj. Gen. Qasem Soleimani last week was part of a broader operation than previously explained, raising questions about whether the mission was designed to cripple the leadership of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps or solely to prevent an imminent attack on Americans as originally stated.
The attempt to take out Shahlai simultaneously with Soleimani suggests that this wasn’t an isolated, defensive operation but may have been part of a broader attack on the Quds Force.
Shahlai is operating in Yemen, meaning the conflict he is waging at the moment is less against the United States than against Saudi Arabia, which is engaged in a war in Yemen against Iran-backed rebels with our support.
In recent statements, administration officials have noted Shahlai’s role in a 2007 attack on American soldiers in Iraq, his support of Houthi rebels in Yemen and his “long history of involvement in attacks targeting the U.S. and our allies."
But if someone like Shahlai was planning to attack American forces — let’s say “imminently” — Yemen wouldn’t be the place to do it.
Which suggests this may have been part of a broader operation to kill Iranian military leaders.
Democrats Sound The Alarm
In an interview, Rep. Eliot L. Engel (D-N.Y.), the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, told us there’s “no doubt” in his mind that the assassination of Soleimani and the effort to target Shahlai are part of a wider effort that’s mostly being concealed from Congress.
“The more you hear, the more you realize that you’ve been fed a bunch of untruths,” Engel told us.
“Was Shahlai an imminent threat? I think not.”
Rep. Tom Malinowski (D-N.J.), a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, added that this news badly complicates the rationale offered for the Soleimani killing.
“This does make it harder for the administration to argue that the operations were solely designed to eliminate somebody who was plotting attacks on Americans,” Malinowski, a former State Department official, told us.
Malinowski also said this new report means Congress will have to orient itself toward asking broader and deeper questions about the administration’s secret military operations.
“If the objective was to weaken the Quds Force irrespective of any intelligence about imminent attacks on Americans, then where does that end?” Malinowski said. “And is it over?”
You’d think Congress could bring in administration officials to answer these questions.
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has been invited to testify next week to the Foreign Affairs Committee.
But Engel told us that Pompeo has not said whether he’ll appear.
“Right now it looks like he’s not coming,” Engel told us.
“We haven’t heard from him.”
If so, perhaps this is because Pompeo has not been faring well lately when asked tough questions about all this.
On Thursday, he seemed to undercut the administration’s public story by telling Fox News the following about the threats Soleimani posed: “We don’t know precisely when and we don’t know precisely where, but it was real."
Pompeo has also been struggling to clean up after Trump’s public statements. In extemporaneous remarks Thursday, Trump said Soleimani was about to blow up the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad — the first time it had been suggested by anyone.
That led Pompeo to tell reporters on Friday: “Soleimani was actively planning new attacks, and he was looking very seriously at our embassies and not just the embassy in Baghdad.”
Numerous Democratic senators are now saying that the threat to embassies was not part of the briefing given to members of Congress on Wednesday.
Which raises the possibility that it’s not actually true, but once the president said it, his national security team felt obligated to back him up.
All of which underscores the urgency of bringing in Pompeo. Will he show up? Who knows?
You’d think these new revelations would make it much harder for Republicans to resist asserting congressional authority over Trump’s war powers.
The House has passed a measure requiring Trump to seek congressional authorization for future hostilities against Iran, and the Senate is set to vote on a companion version next week.
The latest news "creates an additional reason for the Senate to follow suit,” Malinowski said, because “if the strategy goes beyond protecting Americans from imminent attack, it could include further strikes.”
If Congress were to assert its authority, it could use the ensuing debate over any future actions to probe more deeply into all the questions that remain unanswered.
It’s hard to imagine that four GOP senators — which is all the war powers measure would need to pass — would not be willing to assert congressional authority, given this latest news and all it indicates about how much we do not know about what the administration is secretly up to.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... OHh3GM3KpI
12 Jan 2020 2:06 pm
Because they're dishonest corrupt liberal-left hacks, duuh.
You are a LIAR and a TRAITOR. You spew IGNORANT NONSENSE and LIES from ridiculous rightwing sources that NO ONE rational takes seriously just you Treason Monkeys who LOVE to be lied to like Sweizer who is a PROVEN HACK Clinton Cash was a JOKE which got DESTROYED by investigation and he is a LIAR pushing pure conspiracy theory NONSENSE now
https://www.mediamatters.org/peter-schweizer
https://www.mediamatters.org/peter-schweizer/clinton-cash-author-peter-schweizers-long-history-errors-retractions-and
The same ones who carried three years of Fake News, lies, propaganda and **** about the Russian Collusion Hoax and far, far more.
You are a LIAR a GUTLESS COWARD and a TRAITOR who keeps telling the LIES even after they have been PROVEN to be LIES because you are a LIAR and a TRAITOR and you NEVER even TRY to ADDRESS THE FACTS since everyone knows you are too STUPID to even understand them much less address them
You are a LIAR and a GUTLESS COWARD who KNOWS the Russia investigation was not a hoax. I have PROVEN it to you and you are always too much of a GUTLESS COWARD to ADDRESS THE FACTS the Horowitz report said DIRECTLY that it was a justified investigation not to mention all these FACTS which prove it was a NECESSARY counterintelligence investigation
https://www.factcheck.org/2017/06/timel ...
July 2016, the FBI began investigating the Russian government’s attempt to influence the 2016 presidential election, including whether President Donald Trump’s campaign associates were involved in those efforts.The START of the whole thing was a bunch of intelligence agencies like Estonia and Germany and Britian was telling OUR intelligence agencies that whenever they were spying on KNOWN and suspected Russian intelligence assets they kept hearing Trump campaign people
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... nks-russia
GCHQ first became aware in late 2015 of suspicious “interactions” between figures connected to Trump and known or suspected Russian agents, a source close to UK intelligence said. This intelligence was passed to the US as part of a routine exchange of information, they added.Over the next six months, until summer 2016, a number of western agencies shared further information on contacts between Trump’s inner circle and Russians, sources said.The European countries that passed on electronic intelligence – known as sigint – included Germany, Estonia and Poland.
Australia, a member of the “Five Eyes” spying alliance that also includes the US, UK, Canada and New Zealand, also relayed material, one source said.Another source suggested the Dutch and the French spy agency, the General Directorate for External Security or DGSE, were contributors.It is understood that GCHQ was at no point carrying out a targeted operation against Trump or his team or proactively seeking information. The alleged conversations were picked up by chance as part of routine surveillance of Russian intelligence assets. Over several months, different agencies targeting the same people began to see a pattern of connections that were flagged to intelligence officials in the US.
Trump was getting advance notice from wikileaks about their dumps wikileaks was called by Trumps own pick for head of the CIA a hostile intelligence agency but Trump touted them at LEAST 100 times
https://www.vox.com/2019/4/19/18507743/ ...
Trumps campaign manager repeatedly gave a man he KNEW was connected to Russian Military Intelligence INTERNAL polling data and Manafort discussed their strategy for the midwest with him
https://www.newsweek.com/paul-manafort- .
The report noted that Manafort instructed his longtime colleague Rick Gates to provide Kilimnik with internal Trump campaign polling data and briefings on the campaign's strategies. For years, Manafort and Kilimnik worked together closely on political campaigns in Ukraine. Manafort even nicknamed Kilimnik his "Russian brain." The FBI has determined that Kilimnik, who was once a Russian military translator, has links to Russian intelligence services.
Sessions, Page, Manafort, Papadopolous, Jared, Don jr, Gates, Mcfarland ALL had contacts with Russians then LIED about them. Either you can cough up an innocent explanation for all that LYING or that alone justifies the investigation
The Trump campaign had more than 140 contacts with Russians the normal presidential campaign has ZERO
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/201 ... e=REGIWALLJan 26, 2019 -
Donald J. Trump and 18 of his associates had at least 140 contacts with Russian nationals and WikiLeaks, or their intermediaries
ADDRESS the FACTS or STFU you TRAITOR and GUTLESS COWARD
13 Jan 2020 11:33 am
He never **** stops lying.
Trump pledges to support pre-existing conditions coverage even as his administration backs lawsuit to scrap it.
President Donald Trump's promise to protect pre-existing conditions coverage, perhaps the most popular Affordable Care Act provision, rings hollow.
That's because his administration is backing a lawsuit that would scrap it.
13 Jan 2020 11:49 am
Supposedly dishonest?Termin8tor » 13 Jan 2020 11:40 am » wrote:Shrieks the psychopath who for three long years has lied that Trump praised the neo-Nazis in Charlottesville.Misty » 13 Jan 2020 11:33 am » wrote:He never **** stops lying.
Among countless lies she has spread about him.
And isn't it amazing that the supposedly most dishonest president is the one keeping most of his campaign promises, not Clinton and Obama who broke most of theirs?
Is it true that he is the one who saved pre-existing conditions?
Is it true that Soleimani was an imminent threat and planned attacks on 4 U.S. Embassies?
He lies about everything, and you just shrug it off you sycophantic lickspittle.
As for that **** about him keeping his campaign promises, he has kept almost none of them.
1. Build a wall on the Southern border that Mexico would pay for.
2. Repeal and replace Obamacare with a much better plan that would cover everyone, with much better care, for a lot less money.
3. Rebuild the infrastructure.
4. Reduce crime in the inner cities.
5. Bring back coal and steel jobs.
6. Bring back manufacturing jobs from overseas.
7. Pay down the national debt.
8. Make great deals.
9. Drain the swamp.
10.Bring our troops home.
13 Jan 2020 12:07 pm
13 Jan 2020 12:18 pm
He said there were 'very fine people' on both sides.Termin8tor » 13 Jan 2020 11:52 am » wrote:Why don't you set a good example and admit that you lied when you accused him of praising the neo-Nazis in Charlottesville, psycho?
There were NO 'very fine people' marching with the Neo-Nazis.
Why don't you set a good example and admit that Sniffles The Clown lies about everything, you gaping asshole.
13 Jan 2020 12:21 pm
Not a LIE YOU are a LIAR he said there were MANY GOOD PEOPLE ON BOTH SIDES. One side was marching with NAZI signs and chanting NAZI SLOGANS. Good people do NOT stay and march with NAZIS. One side was NAZIS and KKK that is plain FACT. S;dp yjod esd s UNITE THE RIGHT rally. The NAZIS and KKK were who ORGANIZED the march. You can quibble and argue but to call it a LIE IS YOU LYING AGAIN for your GOD which is pretty much all you do. ALL LIES all the TIME well that and running from the FACTS like the GUTLESS COWARD you areTermin8tor » 13 Jan 2020 11:52 am » wrote:
13 Jan 2020 6:04 pm
13 Jan 2020 6:20 pm
That was the clean up quote.Termin8tor » 13 Jan 2020 12:21 pm » wrote:You're lying. Here's the full quote.Misty » 13 Jan 2020 12:18 pm » wrote:He said there were 'very fine people' on both sides.Termin8tor » 13 Jan 2020 11:52 am » wrote:Why don't you set a good example and admit that you lied when you accused him of praising the neo-Nazis in Charlottesville, psycho?
There were NO 'very fine people' marching with the Neo-Nazis.
TRUMP: OK. Good. Are we going to take down the statue? Because he was a major slave owner. Now, are we going to take down his statue? So you know what? It’s fine. You’re changing history. You’re changing culture. And you had people, and I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists, because they should be condemned totally. But you had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists. OK? And the press has treated them absolutely unfairly. Now, in the other group also, you had some fine people, but you also had troublemakers and you see them come with the black outfits and with the helmets and with the baseball bats. You’ve got — you had a lot of bad — you had a lot of bad people in the other group…
He said nothing about the statue in his original remarks.
And the majority of the country agrees with me.
Trump tries to re-write his own history on Charlottesville and ‘both sides’In the days after the rally, during which one self-professed white nationalist killed anti-racism protester Heather Heyer with his vehicle, Trump said:
"You had some very bad people in that group, but you also had people that were very fine people, on both sides."
Many Americans disagreed with the president’s apparent affirmation of some of the self-proclaimed white nationalists.
And he hit some of his lowest approval numbers after sympathizing with the self-professed white nationalists who marched to protect memorials built to honor Confederate soldiers who fought to keep black people enslaved.
Nearly 6 in 10 voters say Trump has encouraged white supremacists, according to a Quinnipiac poll.
Most Americans — 56 percent — viewed his response negatively, according to a Washington Post-ABC News survey.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... residency/
Who is online
In total there are 4173 users online :: 7 registered, 14 bots, and 4152 guests
Bots: LCC, ADmantX, CriteoBot, YandexBot, DuckDuckGo, Kinza, Bolt, proximic, Baiduspider, Applebot, curl/7, Mediapartners-Google, Googlebot, bingbot