Politics

It's interesting that Mike Flynn became a "suspect" in 2016 because he stated that Russia was not as big a concern as China. China was the biggest problem for the US. The start of the Russian collusion issue.

Now in 2020, US politicians are waking up to the China threat.


The top Republican and Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee on Friday warned of Chinese national security threats due to Chinese government efforts to “exert its global dominance.”

The joint statement from Acting Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) and Vice Chairman Mark Warner (D-Va.) came a day after Director of National Intelligence (DNI) John Ratcliffe penned an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal describing China as the “greatest threat” to the U.S. since World War II.

The senators' remarks also came a day after House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) put out a similarly strong statement warning of Chinese threats.

“We agree with DNI Ratcliffe that China poses the greatest national security threat to the United States,” Rubio and Warner said. “Our intelligence is clear: the Chinese Communist Party will stop at nothing to exert its global dominance. Beijing’s infiltration of U.S. society has been deliberate and insidious as they use every instrument of influence available to accelerate their rise at America’s expense.”

The committee leaders accused China of threatening U.S. “democratic values” through the Chinese Communist Party’s alleged targeting of “our free speech, politics, technology, economy, military, and even our drive to counter the COVID-19 pandemic.”

They said the U.S. must stand its ground in the face of threats against allies.

“We will not stand idly by as the Chinese Communist Party attempts to undermine our economic and national security,” Rubio and Warner said. “The message to Beijing and the world is that China’s behavior will not be tolerated and will be contested by democratic values, in close partnership with our allies and partners.”

Relations between Washington and Beijing have become more adversarial over the past four years, as the Trump administration has increasingly sought to push back against Chinese threats to U.S. technology and intellectual property, along with imposing tariffs.

Schiff, in his Thursday statement, said “it’s imperative the Intelligence Community rebalance its focus and funding to more effectively address the vast array of challenges that China poses to our national security.”

The House Intelligence Committee put out a report in September warning that the U.S. intelligence community is not equipped to handle evolving threats from China in the fields of technology and geopolitics.

Schiff this week emphasized that while threats from China were important to the committee, it was “critical not to lose sight of challenges posed by other actors, including Russia, Iran, North Korea, and transnational issues, such as terrorism, global health, and climate change.”

China is considered among the four nations that pose the biggest threat to the U.S., alongside Russia, Iran and North Korea.

The 2019 Worldwide Threat Assessment compiled by former Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats listed China as one of the top global threats to the U.S. in fields such as cybersecurity, election interference, weapons program, space and counterintelligence.

Fkn hell I could have told them that long time ago....and I would have been cheaper.... :E Shrug:
 
Thank you both. That is a logical and I believe correct assessment of the SCOTUS action. In fact, assuming for the moment the court would have decided against Texas in any case (a 99.99999% certainty), they at least did not establish a precedent.

The Biden story broke now because the Biden transition team released a statement that Hunter had been subpoenaed in a federal money laundering and tax evasion investigation. Hard for even the MSM to totally ignore that source. To date, like any AG, Barr has refrained from commenting meaningfully on any active investigation (unlike a former FBI Director).

The timing of the subpoena is probably worth mulling over.

I am a conservative, then a Republican, and then Trump supporter. The true believer right demanding Trump or nothing better wake up about Georgia. Lose the senate, and we will not recognize our country in two years, and it likely won’t matter who is on the ticket in 24.

I’ll take a small herd of RINO’s over a Schumer with a majority of one.

Yes the Biden team released a statement. I can't find it now, but yesterday, I read the statement was in response to CNN asking the Biden's about an investigation into Hunter. Perhaps that information is wrong but I did read it.

As I recall, when the FBI gave the receipt to the computer store owner for Hunter's laptop/information, there was an FBI case number on the receipt or another piece of information left with the computer store owner. Imbedded in the case number, was the classification code used for money laundering. This information was known prior to the election, yet no one reported on it.
 
Yes the Biden team released a statement. I can't find it now, but yesterday, I read the statement was in response to CNN asking the Biden's about an investigation into Hunter. Perhaps that information is wrong but I did read it.

As I recall, when the FBI gave the receipt to the computer store owner for Hunter's laptop/information, there was an FBI case number on the receipt or another piece of information left with the computer store owner. Imbedded in the case number, was the classification code used for money laundering. This information was known prior to the election, yet no one reported on it.
That is true. But until the Biden transition team release, it could, however unreasonably, be construed as contrived misinformation. (And no, I don't agree it reasonably should have, but both the MSM and big Tech did and got away with it).

I think the real ethical challenge facing the AG was when the former "intelligence community officials" fired off their their opinion piece that the Hunter Biden story had the "hallmarks" of Russian disinformation. That was prior to the final debate, and they used their former official standing to undermine the President's campaign effort and the reporting at the Post and Fox. At that point, I personally believe Barr was relieved of his ethical responsibility to remain silent about on-going investigations; that the greater ethical harm was in allowing those officials, employing the standing of their former positions, to make such an assertion while he knew that the opposite was true. It is a question that I would like to hear him answer once he is out of office. I hope and suspect he struggled with it.

I have always thought Andrew McCarthy is one of the smarter "opinionists" out there. His take on the SCOTUS decision is worth reading. I think he was exactly right when he notes neither Alito nor Thomas indicated that they saw the slightest merit in the facts of Texas's case - rather that Texas merely had the right to bring it and the court the responsibility to review it under "original jurisdiction."

 
Trump arriving at the Army Navy game today (at West Point). God love those kids. Also note the Army's new class A uniform - almost identical to WWII - best uniform we ever had. Wish I could have had the opportunity to wear it. :cool:

 
Did they include the Eisenhower jacket option?
Regrettably no. But the belted "pinks and greens" are very cool.

I am also rather proud of the black three-star walking next to the President. Darryl Williams, the Superintendent of USMA, was one of my protégés back when he was a young captain and battery commander, and I was battalion XO. He has achieved my every expectation. Great soldier and patriot.
 
Trump arriving at the Army Navy game today (at West Point). God love those kids. Also note the Army's new class A uniform - almost identical to WWII - best uniform we ever had. Wish I could have had the opportunity to wear it. :cool:


Careful what you ask for, if I am not mistaken aren't you technically still subject to recall from retirement?
 
What part dont you like? :ROFLMAO:
I feel it is beneath anyone past grade 7 to engage in name calling of that sort. It's just plain juvenile. If someone wants to be critical of someone, they should do so with some sort of intelligent reference. Otherwise you cheapen your opinion and views to the point they no longer are worth considering. If you want to see how it is done, read posts by @Red Leg .
 
I feel it is beneath anyone past grade 7 to engage in name calling of that sort. It's just plain juvenile. If someone wants to be critical of someone, they should do so with some sort of intelligent reference. Otherwise you cheapen your opinion and views to the point they no longer are worth considering. If you want to see how it is done, read posts by @Red Leg .
Well hoop de do man, good for you! I just calls em like I sees em. I hope you like Cameltoe Hairyass because she will likely be President inside a year and the most anti gun twit around. Name calling? BFD!
 
So is referring to someone with words that describe them or their behavior juvenile if the behaviors described are considered degrading? For example, if an ambitious young woman wants to get ahead and part of her plan is to participate in an extra-marital carnal relationship with her boss and as a result gets promoted faster and higher than she would have without the activities, and then someone points to that behavior and its clash with societal morality norms. Along that line, I suppose someone could point out that we've already had a president that had homosexual relationships and usage of highest schedule illegal drugs. It must be considered juvenile to reference that because the MSM has avoided the topic like the plague.
 
I agree with you on SCOTUS. None of us want California suing Texas in 2024 because they disagree with who Texas voted for. This doesn't mean I am not extremely disappointed in the SCOTUS decision.

The leak regarding the Biden investigations didn't come from DOJ. Barr didn't want a repeat of 2016,(Hillary emails) to affect the election, so by not letting America know there was a Biden investigation he affected the election. :A Bonk:

My guess is the leak to CNN regarding the Biden's can be traced back to Valerie Jarrett. Look for Obama to have a surrogate for his third term.
The case was not about who the states voted for--if was about unconstitutional change of voting laws. Are we really to believe that scotus now doesn't care by what method voting laws are changed when the constitution clearly states that the legislatures are to do so. What they have in effect done is legitimize Governors, courts, and election boards doing the changes, thus marginalizing the constitutional provision--where will that end?
 
I have a friend that on occasion actually perceives the future. There are two aspects of his perceptions that are always present: 1. the events will be nearby and 2. they will be in the very near future. Now I do not claim to have any of his gift, but I will make a prediction so you might want to write this down and see if it comes true. Once the electoral college has cast ballots and the Bidet has been confirmed to be president effective Jan 20 the media outage will break loose and it will be clear that there are charges pending for several members of the Bidet family. This will result in a plea bargain of which some of the terms will be no charges filed against Joe, some small charges brought against his brother and the filings against Hunter will be limited to errors on his taxes, for which he will need to pay the back taxes and some penalties and interest. No jail time for anyone. In exchange for this agreement Joe will claim that due to ill health he is stepping down from the presidency and allowing his vice president Ms Horrible to become president. I would bet the farm that this will occur within 90 days of Jan 20. So check back on April 20.
 
The case was not about who the states voted for--if was about unconstitutional change of voting laws. Are we really to believe that scotus now doesn't care by what method voting laws are changed when the constitution clearly states that the legislatures are to do so. What they have in effect done is legitimize Governors, courts, and election boards doing the changes, thus marginalizing the constitutional provision--where will that end?
This seems to be a point missed by a whole lot of people..
 
If I am not mistaken, Texas Gov Abbott did this also when by executive action he only allowed one absentee ballot drop box in each county. The Texas AG did not have any thing to say about this. Oh, but Trump won in Texas so it is okay.
 
Screenshot_20201212-185938_Instagram.jpg
 
If I am not mistaken, Texas Gov Abbott did this also when by executive action he only allowed one absentee ballot drop box in each county. The Texas AG did not have any thing to say about this. Oh, but Trump won in Texas so it is okay.
You are leaving out a critical element of the entire story which is that this order was challenged in the Texas courts in the form of several lawsuits which were ultimately rejected in appellate court. They had their day in court and lost. Court rulings work BOTH ways....
 

Forum statistics

Threads
59,325
Messages
1,285,989
Members
107,553
Latest member
TeraSowers
 

 

 

Latest profile posts

CamoManJ wrote on dchum's profile.
Hello there. I’ve been wanting to introduce myself personally & chat with you about hunting Nilgai. Give me a call sometime…

Best,

Jason Coryell
[redacted]
VonJager wrote on Mauser3000's profile.
+1 Great to deal with. I purchased custom rifle. No issues.
ghay wrote on Buckums's profile.
I saw you were looking for some Swift A-Frames for your 9.3. I just bought a bulk supply of them in the 285g. version. If Toby's are gone, I could let 100 go for $200 shipped you are interested.
Thanks,
Gary
Ferhipo wrote on Bowhuntr64's profile.
I am really fan of you
Bighorn191 wrote on Mtn_Infantry's profile.
Booked with Harold Grinde - Gana River - they sure kill some good ones - who'd you get set up with?
 
Top