Trump 2nd Impeachment- 2 opposing views

[Jito463]

Whoo boy, this is going to require some time.

Originally Posted by Esaias

"If it were truly as scripted as you say, there'd be no way they could keep it from getting out eventually. Someone, somewhere would let it slip, or would feel guilt and draw back the curtain.

Where are the individuals revealing this? Can you name even one?"

Benjamin Disraeli, former Prime Minster of Great Britain.

Eisenhower, former President of the USA.

Cecil Rhodes, former Prime Minister of Cape Colony, owner of DeBeers diamond company, establisher of the Rhodes Scholarship for aspiring politicians, helped found the country of Rhodesia (named after him).

Carrol Quigly, former Princeton, Harvard, and Georgetown University Foreign Service professor, teacher, and mentor to politicians.

Henry Kissinger (bio unnecessary).

Aldous Huxley, philosopher, and his brother Julian Huxley who was first president of the British Humanist Association and ran UNESCO when it was first created.

H. G. Wells (oh you thought he only wrote science fiction? Scifi was a hobby, not his actual life's work)

FDR.

Senator Joe McCarthy.

Edith K. Roosevelt (Teddy Roosevelt's granddaughter).

Pat Buchanan.

Nigel Farage.

Manly P. Hall.

Sir Francis Bacon.

Would you like more suggested authors and speakers? JFK, perhaps? Mayer Amschel Rothschild? John Dewey?

I see names, but I'm not aware of any of them actually claiming what you are. Even a warning of what's happening behind the scenes, doesn't equal a warning that the whole thing is scripted.

Originally Posted by Esaias

Greed and avarice? But of course, that's part of the eligibility requirements for being in the Club That Runs Things. All one has to do is simply observe the policies that are put in place, the agendas that never change regardless of which party is supposedly in power. Read the statements by the politicians themselves when they tell you they don't actually run things, that very wealthy influential combinations and syndicates operating behind the scenes are the real makers of policy.

Okay, so you're talking about the "deep state", but that doesn't automatically equate to a script.

Originally Posted by Esaias

Just ask yourself, how is it that in 2008 the bankers were able to tell Congress they WILL sign off on the massive bailout (theft of American wealth) or else they would see tanks in the streets within a month or so? And Congress signed off on it?

Huh? Tanks on the street? What I remember from 2008, is that the banks didn't WANT the bailout. The government told them they had to take it.

Originally Posted by Esaias

How is it that liberals and conservatives always agree to expand the surveillance state, continue the sovietised public education system, send tribute money to Israel, and expand federal governmental control over everything?

Because it's all about control. That's not a script, that just goes back to what I discussed previously.

Originally Posted by Esaias

Why are modern conservatives the disciples of Bill Kristol the Trotskyite communist? Why did we bomb Germany into the stone age but saved all their top scientists and arranged for many of their High Command to escape? Why did we CONTINUOUSLY prop up the USSR and save it from collapsing during the 20s, 30s, 40s, 50s, and 60s? Why did we install Mao in mainland China?

You seem to have the answers, you tell me.

Originally Posted by Esaias

Why was bin Laden a CIA asset? Why was Al Qaeda the group WE set up to manage the mujahideen in Afghanistan?

To combat the USSR regime in the region. It was part of the tactic in the cold war.

Originally Posted by Esaias

Why is wahabbi Islam the seedbed of Arabic Sunni terrorism when Sir Laurence himself set it up as a tool to distract the Ottoman Turks in WW1? And why is Saudi Arabia's royal dynasty actually Jewish in origin and bankrolled by the Crown in London?

Who financed the Mensheviks and Bolsheviks? Who financed the Nazis? Why would western industrialists, capitalists, and investment bankers finance BOTH groups?

Again, why don't you tell me.

Originally Posted by Esaias

Who is Dick Cheney? What is Shell Oil Company? What happened to the British East India Company? What is the UCC?

Uh, what? Now you're just rattling off names.

Originally Posted by Esaias

Have you ever asked yourself why exactly we have "Social Security"? Where'd that come from and why do we pay SS taxes to Great Britain? Have you actually read the Treaty of Paris that ended our War of Independence?

Why did Ronnie Raygunz grant amnesty to illegals, gut our RKBA, and have Ollie North (super conservative guy?) run cocaine for the contras, weapons for Iran, and draft plans to suspend the Constitution and institute Continuity of Government aka MARTIAL LAW?

Why was Obama the son of a British citizen and Marxist anticolonialist and his mother a CIA spook while he was mentored by literal communist terrorists like Bill Ayers yet he himself appears to be well connected to the intel community going back GENERATIONS?

Why was the antiestablishment leftist punk rock scene in the US created in DC of all places by the children of several military intelligence officers and key defense industry contractors? What is Laurel Canyon? Why was the supposedly anticommunist CIA the ones creating the LSD supply for the hippie movement in the 60s?

Honestly, I have no idea what you're trying to say here.

Originally Posted by Esaias

Why did my dad serve as security for a military incursion into Laos in 1968 to arrange a meeting between who knows who and an American in a suit and tie bringing briefcases of who knows what not too far from Kham Duc? Why exactly were we over there to begin with?

Why was heroin being shipped from Vietnam to the US by military and diplomatic aircraft? Why was a Cessna filled with cocaine that crashed in Mexico claimed by the CIA as a matter of US national security?

Why in 1990 I believe it was, why was a ship busted in the Port of Houston with several TONS of cocaine, the largest DEA bust of it's kind up to that point, and within a week the Houston market was FLOODED with extremely high grade cocaine (the BEST) going at literally PENNIES ON THE DOLLAR compared to prices just a few days before?

Who is Gary Webb? Why have several DEA agents publicly stated the crack epidemic was literally created by the US government, intentionally? What were the "Opium Wars" and the Boxer Rebellion all about?

Why did we drive out the Taliban and keep them from burning down the Afghan opium fields?

Why did Building 7 collapse? And why was it announced on BBC live television several minutes BEFORE it collapsed? Who is Bill Gates? What is Event 201? What is Operation Warp Speed? Why was this election blatantly ALLOWED to be stolen?

Why did Scalia die with a pillow on his head?

And how can anybody over the age of 25 even remotely not be aware of this stuff?

And on and on and on you go.

[Esaias]

I'm only going to zero in on this one part, because it serves as a microcosm of this whole discussion.

Originally Posted by Jito463

Huh? Tanks on the street? What I remember from 2008, is that the banks didn't WANT the bailout. The government told them they had to take it.

I find it interesting is that you actually believe the banks didn't want the bailout. I find that indicative of a complete lack of investigation on your part coupled with a lack of critical thinking skills. I mean I honestly don't know how else to put it. Here's a little blurb from wikipedia:

"U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson proposed a plan under which the U.S. Treasury would acquire up to $700 billion worth of mortgage-backed securities. The plan was immediately backed by President George W. Bush and negotiations began with leaders in the U.S. Congress to draft appropriate legislation.

Consultations among Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, Chairman of the Federal Reserve Ben Bernanke, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission chairman Christopher Cox, congressional leaders, and President Bush, moved forward efforts to draft a proposal for a comprehensive solution to the problems created by illiquid assets.
...
A key part of the proposal is the federal government's plan to buy up to $700 billion of illiquid mortgage-backed securities (MBS) with the intent to increase the liquidity of the secondary mortgage markets and reduce potential losses encountered by financial institutions owning the securities.
...
There was concern that the current plan created a conflict of interest for Paulson. Paulson was a former CEO of Goldman Sachs, which stood to benefit from the bailout. Paulson had hired Goldman executives as advisors and Paulson's former advisors had joined banks that were also to benefit from the bailout. Furthermore, the original proposal exempted Paulson from judicial oversight. Thus, there was concern that former illegal activity by a financial institution or its executives might be hidden.

The Treasury staff member responsible for administering the bailout funds was Neel Kashkari, a former vice-president at Goldman Sachs.

In the Senate, Senator Judd Gregg (R-NH) was the leading Republican author of the TARP program while he had a multimillion-dollar investment in the Bank of America.
(end of quotes from https://en.www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Em...on_Act_of_2008 )

Now, the fact you are of the belief that "the banks didn't want the bailout" just literally blows my mind. I honestly don't see how any kind of rational two-way conversation can take place. I mean, think about it: Goldman-Sachs and other key investment banks support a government banker bailout program whereby banks are literally just given 800-plus BILLION dollars to pay off their bad investments...and here you are thinking the banks were against that? Maybe the banks who weren't eligible for the bailout were against it. But to just say "the banks were against it"? Seriously?

I mean, that's like spitting in someone's face and saying that it's raining.

You asked for names, I gave you names. Then you shift the goalposts. Seriously, this is why I asked you earlier how old you were. I just cannot wrap my head around how oblivious you seem to be to basic history 101.

I'm certain you are a nice guy. I like you. I like many of the things you post. But when it comes to history and politics, you simply don't have a clue. You haven't done any research and so you really don't seem to know anything about what's going on. Again, please don't take this as a flame or an insult, I'm just saying this subject is one in which you are sorely deficient.

As for tanks on the street. You said "Huh?" See, you are literally clueless about recent history. You don't remember this? This is just one video, a nice sanitized version of the events of those days.

[Pressing-On]

BREAKING: Pres. Trump announces his legal team for the impeachment trial:

David Schoen: “It is an honor to represent the 45th President, Donald J Trump, and the United States Constitution.”

Bruce Castor Jr.: “I consider it a privilege to represent the 45th President. The strength of our constitution is about to be tested like never before in history.”

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EtGJ6CIVoAA-hNl.jpg

[Esaias]

How do you impeach someone who holds no public office?

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Esaias

How do you impeach someone who holds no public office?

Exactly! If it was Constitutional, John Roberts would be presiding.

Esaias, You can appreciate Larry Arnn’s, President of Hillsdale College, words - “America is the most deliberate nation in history - it was built for reasons that are stated in the legal documents that form its founding. The reasons are given in abstract and universal terms, and without good scholarship they can be turned astray.”

I am afraid we have lost good scholarship.

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

Exactly! If it was Constitutional, John Roberts would be presiding.

Esaias, You can appreciate Larry Arnn’s, President of Hillsdale College, words - “America is the most deliberate nation in history - it was built for reasons that are stated in the legal documents that form its founding. The reasons are given in abstract and universal terms, and without good scholarship they can be turned astray.”

I am afraid we have lost good scholarship.

The Union will dissolve. It is a historical trend that will not be stopped. Sadly, Pacific coast socialist states will likely allow Chinese military bases on their soil.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Originalist

The Union will dissolve. It is a historical trend that will not be stopped. Sadly, Pacific coast socialist states will likely allow Chinese military bases on their soil.

While I was reading your post, the scripture came to me - If God be for us, who can be against us?

We are in an everlasting Kingdom. Amen!

[Pressing-On]

New York Times ginning up the emotional appeal for the fake impeachment trial.

Hours after the United States voted, the president declared the election a fraud — a lie that unleashed a movement that would shatter democratic norms and upend the peaceful transfer of power.

Yet as the suits failed in court after court across the country, leaving Mr. Trump without credible options to reverse his loss before the Electoral College vote on Dec. 14, ...

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/31/u...gtype=Homepage

Total lie. Majority of cases were not heard on merit. They didn’t want to see or hear the facts.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Originalist

The Union will dissolve. It is a historical trend that will not be stopped. Sadly, Pacific coast socialist states will likely allow Chinese military bases on their soil.

Not if Texas upholds the Monroe Doctrine.

What needs to happen is the states need to secede from DC and establish a new federal government. The Constitution which establishes the federal government did not create the Union. It simply established a new charter for the federal government. The Committee of the States could simply fire DC and institute new government.

But before that could happen, the states have to get on board. Most if not all states are currently run by swamp creatures. Therefore Christians have to retake their states.

We didn't get here overnight and we won't get where we need to be overnight, either.

[jfrog]

https://www.hartfordbusiness.com/art...-bailout-money

Originally Posted by Esaias

I'm only going to zero in on this one part, because it serves as a microcosm of this whole discussion.



I find it interesting is that you actually believe the banks didn't want the bailout. I find that indicative of a complete lack of investigation on your part coupled with a lack of critical thinking skills. I mean I honestly don't know how else to put it. Here's a little blurb from wikipedia:

"U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson proposed a plan under which the U.S. Treasury would acquire up to $700 billion worth of mortgage-backed securities. The plan was immediately backed by President George W. Bush and negotiations began with leaders in the U.S. Congress to draft appropriate legislation.

Consultations among Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, Chairman of the Federal Reserve Ben Bernanke, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission chairman Christopher Cox, congressional leaders, and President Bush, moved forward efforts to draft a proposal for a comprehensive solution to the problems created by illiquid assets.
...
A key part of the proposal is the federal government's plan to buy up to $700 billion of illiquid mortgage-backed securities (MBS) with the intent to increase the liquidity of the secondary mortgage markets and reduce potential losses encountered by financial institutions owning the securities.
...
There was concern that the current plan created a conflict of interest for Paulson. Paulson was a former CEO of Goldman Sachs, which stood to benefit from the bailout. Paulson had hired Goldman executives as advisors and Paulson's former advisors had joined banks that were also to benefit from the bailout. Furthermore, the original proposal exempted Paulson from judicial oversight. Thus, there was concern that former illegal activity by a financial institution or its executives might be hidden.

The Treasury staff member responsible for administering the bailout funds was Neel Kashkari, a former vice-president at Goldman Sachs.

In the Senate, Senator Judd Gregg (R-NH) was the leading Republican author of the TARP program while he had a multimillion-dollar investment in the Bank of America.
(end of quotes from https://en.www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Em...on_Act_of_2008 )

Now, the fact you are of the belief that "the banks didn't want the bailout" just literally blows my mind. I honestly don't see how any kind of rational two-way conversation can take place. I mean, think about it: Goldman-Sachs and other key investment banks support a government banker bailout program whereby banks are literally just given 800-plus BILLION dollars to pay off their bad investments...and here you are thinking the banks were against that? Maybe the banks who weren't eligible for the bailout were against it. But to just say "the banks were against it"? Seriously?

I mean, that's like spitting in someone's face and saying that it's raining.

You asked for names, I gave you names. Then you shift the goalposts. Seriously, this is why I asked you earlier how old you were. I just cannot wrap my head around how oblivious you seem to be to basic history 101.

I'm certain you are a nice guy. I like you. I like many of the things you post. But when it comes to history and politics, you simply don't have a clue. You haven't done any research and so you really don't seem to know anything about what's going on. Again, please don't take this as a flame or an insult, I'm just saying this subject is one in which you are sorely deficient.

As for tanks on the street. You said "Huh?" See, you are literally clueless about recent history. You don't remember this? This is just one video, a nice sanitized version of the events of those days.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/citigro...bailout-money/

You are wrong.