[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Pelosi says House will vote on Iran resolution this week to restrict Trump’s ability to attack Iran (Page 1 of 5)
Posted: 1/6/2020 8:41:21 AM EDT
|
Nancy Pelosi says House will vote on Iran resolution this week
The US House of Representatives will vote on a resolution this week to restrict President Donald Trump’s ability to attack Iran, according to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
The War Powers Resolution “reasserts Congress’s long-established oversight responsibilities by mandating that if no further Congressional action is taken, the Administration’s military hostilities with regard to Iran cease within 30 days,” the Democratic Speaker wrote in the letter. If she emboldens Iran with this nonsense and one American dies because of it she needs to go to gitmo for aiding and abetting a terrorist nation. |
|
Quoted: The 2977 humans who were murdered on 9/11 would suggest other priorities over those 52 held for less than a year and half and released. |
|
Quoted:
Attacking Iran would be Neocon stupidity. Don't give a shit who stops it. Fuck the war-mongers and as Ike said: "the military-industrial complex" that puts its "interests" over those of the American people and of our Constitution. |
|
Binding or non-binding resolution? I bet that it's non-binding.....They don't really what to make those decisions or they would have not ceded war powers to POTUS in the first place. If it's binding then that's a good thing for Trump. 
Trump: Hey Nancy, we need to push the Iranians shit in as they are going to kill Americans at point X,Y, & Z. Nancy: No....We need to carefully review your intelligence sources. Trump: OK, I'll be on FOX to make sure everyone knows about a clear and present danger. Thanks. |
|
Quoted:
Obama had to know what it would be used for.  This is an older tweet, but relevant:
|
|
Quoted:
Congress declares war not the Whitehouse. Never agreed with the war powers act. 8nBAIT can take to protect Americans and American interests. Pelosi can go to hell. |
|
LOL These people can't decide what they want.
Trump tries to leave Syria (part of it anyway) and he's "abandoning our allies." Trump kills a guy who's killing our people and now he's a dangerous warmonger. Involvement means occasionally killing people. Non-involvement means leaving people who were on our side. Can't have it both ways. Truth is, Democrats don't have a problem with war and killing as long as it's their war and killing, and any conversation with them is pointless because they're never negotiating in good faith. |
|
Quoted:
Attacking Iran would be Neocon stupidity. Don't give a shit who stops it. Fuck the war-mongers and as Ike said: "the military-industrial complex" that puts its "interests" over those of the American people and of our Constitution. |
|
@MarsRising
A United States embassy (U.S. soil) was attacked by a known entity which is funded and commanded by a nation other than the host nation of said embassy. What would you have our government do about such an attack? You may disagree with our having the embassy there at all, but it does not change the above facts. |
|
Quoted:
LOL These people can't decide what they want. Trump tries to leave Syria (part of it anyway) and he's "abandoning our allies." Trump kills a guy who's killing our people and now he's a dangerous warmonger. Involvement means occasionally killing people. Non-involvement means leaving people who were on our side. Can't have it both ways. Truth is, Democrats don't have a problem with war and killing as long as it's their war and killing, and any conversation with them is pointless because they're never negotiating in good faith. Cannot let trump do anything without undercutting him. |
|
Quoted:
Maybe We should send Iran a plane load of cash. How is that not criminal ? But the $1.7 BILLION in cargo-palletloads of physical, printed, cash currency (even the richest South American Drug Kingpins don't keep that much around in cash) would have been another matter. No single bank--even the largest international banks in Zurich, London, or New York--would ever keep that much physical cash laying around, therefore by definition uninvested and not "working," in its vaults. And certainly, no bank could ever, possibly, come up with that much currency to deliver on short notice. I'm sure it took a consortium of the largest banks, and some arm-twisting phone calls from Obama and his Secretary of the Treasury, to find, collect, compile, and deliver that huge mountain of currency in Euros and Swiss Francs, which he bought from them with direct electronic payment in U.S. Dollars taken from our own Treasury, and then converted into Euros and Swiss Francs to evade U.S. law--that is, from us, the citizens and taxpayers of the United States. I hope, at least, that he negotiated a good exchange rate. NO legitimate, innocent, law-abiding individual or company EVER needs anything close to that amount, for lawful purposes, in cash currency. We know, with absolute certainty, that that huge pile wasn't going to roads, schools, hospitals, or widows and orphans. It was going to TERRORISTS, as untraceable cash. Draw your own conclusions about what Obama's (and Kerry's) intentions were in "negotiating" this "deal." |
|
Quoted:
LOL These people can't decide what they want. Trump tries to leave Syria (part of it anyway) and he's "abandoning our allies." Trump kills a guy who's killing our people and now he's a dangerous warmonger. Involvement means occasionally killing people. Non-involvement means leaving people who were on our side. Can't have it both ways. Truth is, Democrats don't have a problem with war and killing as long as it's their war and killing, and any conversation with them is pointless because they're never negotiating in good faith. They only have crocodile tears for illegal immigrants and those that shout death to America. 
|
|
Quoted:
So, now the President has the dims voting to prevent him from defending U.S. Citizens? Iran and the mullahs must have some seriously juicy dirt on Pelosi.
What a time line... |
|
Quoted:
Taking out select terrorist leaders with a drone, that have killed many americans is not the same as going to war. Quoted:
Quoted:
Attacking Iran would be Neocon stupidity. Don't give a shit who stops it. Fuck the war-mongers and as Ike said: "the military-industrial complex" that puts its "interests" over those of the American people and of our Constitution. 8nBAIT |
|
Quoted:
No source, my brother sent me this from a small blog he reads. Supposedly from Daniel Greenfield. But the $1.7 BILLION in cargo-palletloads of physical, printed, cash currency (even the richest South American Drug Kingpins don't keep that much around in cash) would have been another matter. No single bank--even the largest international banks in Zurich, London, or New York--would ever keep that much physical cash laying around, therefore by definition uninvested and not "working," in its vaults. And certainly, no bank could ever, possibly, come up with that much currency to deliver on short notice. I'm sure it took a consortium of the largest banks, and some arm-twisting phone calls from Obama and his Secretary of the Treasury, to find, collect, compile, and deliver that huge mountain of currency in Euros and Swiss Francs, which he bought from them with direct electronic payment in U.S. Dollars taken from our own Treasury, and then converted into Euros and Swiss Francs to evade U.S. law--that is, from us, the citizens and taxpayers of the United States. I hope, at least, that he negotiated a good exchange rate. NO legitimate, innocent, law-abiding individual or company EVER needs anything close to that amount, for lawful purposes, in cash currency. We know, with absolute certainty, that that huge pile wasn't going to roads, schools, hospitals, or widows and orphans. It was going to TERRORISTS, as untraceable cash. Draw your own conclusions about what Obama's (and Kerry's) intentions were in "negotiating" this "deal." Quoted:
Quoted:
Maybe We should send Iran a plane load of cash. How is that not criminal ? But the $1.7 BILLION in cargo-palletloads of physical, printed, cash currency (even the richest South American Drug Kingpins don't keep that much around in cash) would have been another matter. No single bank--even the largest international banks in Zurich, London, or New York--would ever keep that much physical cash laying around, therefore by definition uninvested and not "working," in its vaults. And certainly, no bank could ever, possibly, come up with that much currency to deliver on short notice. I'm sure it took a consortium of the largest banks, and some arm-twisting phone calls from Obama and his Secretary of the Treasury, to find, collect, compile, and deliver that huge mountain of currency in Euros and Swiss Francs, which he bought from them with direct electronic payment in U.S. Dollars taken from our own Treasury, and then converted into Euros and Swiss Francs to evade U.S. law--that is, from us, the citizens and taxpayers of the United States. I hope, at least, that he negotiated a good exchange rate. NO legitimate, innocent, law-abiding individual or company EVER needs anything close to that amount, for lawful purposes, in cash currency. We know, with absolute certainty, that that huge pile wasn't going to roads, schools, hospitals, or widows and orphans. It was going to TERRORISTS, as untraceable cash. Draw your own conclusions about what Obama's (and Kerry's) intentions were in "negotiating" this "deal." |
|
Quoted:
These actions are not war. They are legitimate defense measures that the Commander in Chief can take to protect Americans and American interests. Pelosi can go to hell. Quoted:
Quoted:
Congress declares war not the Whitehouse. Never agreed with the war powers act. 8nBAIT can take to protect Americans and American interests. Pelosi can go to hell. |
|
Quoted:
So, now the President has the dims voting to prevent him from defending U.S. Citizens? Iran and the mullahs must have some seriously juicy dirt on Pelosi.
What a time line... "we must appease them with our blood sacrifices now. Because later they will want more blood sacrifices" |
|
Quoted: No source, my brother sent me this from a small blog he reads. Supposedly from Daniel Greenfield. But the $1.7 BILLION in cargo-palletloads of physical, printed, cash currency (even the richest South American Drug Kingpins don't keep that much around in cash) would have been another matter. No single bank--even the largest international banks in Zurich, London, or New York--would ever keep that much physical cash laying around, therefore by definition uninvested and not "working," in its vaults. And certainly, no bank could ever, possibly, come up with that much currency to deliver on short notice. I'm sure it took a consortium of the largest banks, and some arm-twisting phone calls from Obama and his Secretary of the Treasury, to find, collect, compile, and deliver that huge mountain of currency in Euros and Swiss Francs, which he bought from them with direct electronic payment in U.S. Dollars taken from our own Treasury, and then converted into Euros and Swiss Francs to evade U.S. law--that is, from us, the citizens and taxpayers of the United States. I hope, at least, that he negotiated a good exchange rate. NO legitimate, innocent, law-abiding individual or company EVER needs anything close to that amount, for lawful purposes, in cash currency. We know, with absolute certainty, that that huge pile wasn't going to roads, schools, hospitals, or widows and orphans. It was going to TERRORISTS, as untraceable cash. Draw your own conclusions about what Obama's (and Kerry's) intentions were in "negotiating" this "deal." |