Quote:Hillary Clinton emerges as top choice of Democratic voters in Harvard-Harris presidential poll

Quote:Mrs. Clinton drew 21%, followed by former Vice President Joseph R. Biden with 20%, when registered Democrats were asked whom they would support for the 2020 party presidential nod if she and former Secretary of State John Kerry were added to the mix.

Placing third in the hypothetical race was Vermont Sen. Bernard Sanders at 12%, followed by Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren at 9% and ex-New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg at 7%.

Quote:The 2016 Democratic presidential candidate, Mrs. Clinton told BBC last month that she had no plans to enter the 2020 contest, although she added, “I never say never to anything.”

“I will certainly tell you, I’m under enormous pressure from many, many, many people to think about it,” she said. “But as of this moment, sitting here in this studio talking to you, that is absolutely not in my plans.”
Source

(12-10-2019, 02:36 PM)Mystic Wanderer Wrote: Wouldn't you love President Trump to debate her and bring out all the things we've learned now?  I sort of hope she does run so we can expose her... with FACTS. When the Anons get done, she'll just  be a greasy spot on the bottom of someone's shoe.  

We have "the goods" on all of them, it doesn't matter who their choice is; they're all corrupt, and will be exposed.

Quote:US House to vote on limiting Trump war powers against Iran.

'The US House of Representatives is set to vote on a resolution that aims to limit President Donald Trump's ability
to make war on Iran. The largely symbolic measure seeks to mandate congressional approval for any conflict with
Iran, except in cases of an imminent attack against the US.



It is expected to pass the Democratic-held House, but faces tougher prospects in the Republican-controlled Senate.
Neither the US nor Iran have declared plans for further military action.

Iran this week fired missiles at Iraqi bases housing American forces, injuring no-one, after the US last week killed a
senior Iranian commander in a Baghdad drone strike. Thursday's measure directs the president to "terminate the use
of United States Armed Forces" against Iran unless granted congressional authorisation.
It offers an exception when necessary to "defend against an imminent armed attack".

Even if the measure clears Congress, it would not reach the president's desk for a potential veto because it is a
concurrent resolution and lacks the force of law. The measure cites the 1973 War Powers Act, which granted Congress
the ability to check the president's power to commit the US to armed conflict.

But the legal questions remain unresolved over whether Congress can use a concurrent resolution to bind the president.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said on Thursday she did not believe Mr Trump had made the US safer after last week's
drone strike that killed Iranian commander Qasem Soleimani.

Mr Trump, a Republican, meanwhile tweeted that he hoped "all House Republicans will vote against Crazy Nancy Pelosi's
War Powers Resolution". He also made a new claim about the intelligence behind the air raid, telling reporters at the
White House later that the Iranians were "looking to blow up our embassy" in Iraq.

The war powers resolution gathered momentum after a congressional briefing on Wednesday by administration officials
seeking to justify the attack. Following the briefing by the secretary of state, defence secretary and CIA director, two
Republicans senators broke ranks.

Mike Lee of Utah and Rand Paul of Kentucky said they might back a similar resolution in the Senate seeking to limit the
president's war powers. Their potential defection raises the chances for the measure in the upper chamber, where
Republicans hold a 53-47 majority.

Mr Lee told reporters it was "the worst briefing I've seen at least on a military issue in the nine years I've served".
Lee said the administration officials had warned them against even debating the president's authority to strike Iran,
describing such an approach as "un-American" and "insane".
But most Republicans lawmakers stood by the president.

Doug Collins of Georgia claimed Democrats were "in love with terrorists" and grieving more for Soleimani than for US
service personnel killed by the Iranian commander. "They mourn Soleimani more than they mourn our Gold Star families
who are the ones who suffered under Soleimani," he told Fox News...'

(01-10-2020, 05:07 PM)guohua Wrote: They act all Gangster and tough and think they can intimidate older citizens like me and my husband and they have been knocked on that Smelly Ass of their more than once by my husband.

Quote:Many are a disgrace and need to be drafted.

(01-11-2020, 02:19 PM)Wallfire Wrote: If the war with Iran kicks off it will be done with high tec, there is no need for "boots on the ground". But there is a mind set in the higher leadership that thinks you must always have boots on the ground, because if you dont then they lose the point of there job. This was very well seen in WW1, Tanks have no place on the battlefield, only men and carvery. 
If the high tec road is taken then both Europe and the USA must use Internment and mass deportation to control the muslims, but I cant see the governments at the moment having the balls to do that. But times are changing, so who knows