Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
-
Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses
Conservative National Review: Don't Vote for Trump
- Thread starter Uncle J
- Start date
Uncle J
Member
NATO leader says Trump puts allies at risk by saying Russia can ‘do whatever the hell they want’
WARSAW, Poland (AP) — The head of the NATO military alliance warned Sunday that Donald Trump was putting the safety of U.S. troops and their allies at risk after the Republican presidential front-runner said Russia should be able to do “whatever the hell they want” to NATO members who don’t meet their defense spending targets.
“Any suggestion that allies will not defend each other undermines all of our security, including that of the U.S., and puts American and European soldiers at increased risk,” NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said in a statement.
Trump’s remarks caused deep concern in Poland, which was under Russian control in past centuries, and where anxieties are high over the war Russia is waging just across the Polish border in Ukraine.
“We have a hot war at our border,” Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said Sunday, voicing concerns about whether the United States will show “full solidarity with other NATO countries in this confrontation that promises to last for a long time with Russia.”
WARSAW, Poland (AP) — The head of the NATO military alliance warned Sunday that Donald Trump was putting the safety of U.S. troops and their allies at risk after the Republican presidential front-runner said Russia should be able to do “whatever the hell they want” to NATO members who don’t meet their defense spending targets.
“Any suggestion that allies will not defend each other undermines all of our security, including that of the U.S., and puts American and European soldiers at increased risk,” NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said in a statement.
Trump’s remarks caused deep concern in Poland, which was under Russian control in past centuries, and where anxieties are high over the war Russia is waging just across the Polish border in Ukraine.
“We have a hot war at our border,” Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said Sunday, voicing concerns about whether the United States will show “full solidarity with other NATO countries in this confrontation that promises to last for a long time with Russia.”
Are we supposed to give military assistance for free? If we are, then we are supposed to be suckah's.
Uncle J
Member
Well, that's one Donald supporter who also wants Russia to attack our allies.
And BTW, Donald's framing of the situation is quite wrong. NATO members don't pay each other anything, nor do they pay for assistance from other member countries. They instead strive to dedicate 2% of their GDP to defense spending (and 20% of that on equipment).
So either Donald never learned those basic facts during his term, or he's deliberately lying to you. Ignorant or a liar....you pick.
Allies who don't pay us for defending them. Oh, and I am not a fan of Putin the globalist like Tucker Carlson.
Or perhaps you are another intellectual prostitute who wants to make a big deal about nothing? I think the opposite is being proposed. Pay us, and we will send you the weapons. Everything NATO we don't need to be involved in.
But should we defending the Ukraine before Taiwan?
Uncle J
Member
Geez dude, at least try and get the basic facts straight.
NATO members don't pay each other for protection. NATO is a treaty organization...a military alliance whereby all member states agree to come to each others' defense should any be attacked. Only one time in its history has NATO come to the defense of a member state after an attack, and that was when the rest of NATO joined us in Afghanistan after 9/11. And no, they didn't send us a bill for their assistance either. It simply does not work that way.
Further, since NATO is by definition a treaty organization, under Article VI of the US Constitution the NATO treaty is part of the "supreme law of the land" and it would be unconstitutional to not abide by it.
IOW, Donald is once again advocating for violating the US Constitution.
Pathetic
Uncle J
Member
Wisconsin ethics commission refers Trump fundraising arm for prosecution
MADISON, Wis. — Bipartisan ethics regulators in Wisconsin have recommended felony charges against one of Donald Trump’s fundraising arms and other Republicans in a scheme that they say was meant to circumvent campaign finance laws to take out a powerful GOP lawmaker who has turned against Trump...
...The Wisconsin Ethics Commission this week found probable cause that Trump’s Save America committee and several state and local Republican officials committed felonies and recommended several district attorneys investigate and prosecute them, according to records released Friday. The commission’s investigation centers on the 2022 primary race between Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, one of the most powerful Republicans in Wisconsin, and Adam Steen, a political newcomer who embraced Trump.
MADISON, Wis. — Bipartisan ethics regulators in Wisconsin have recommended felony charges against one of Donald Trump’s fundraising arms and other Republicans in a scheme that they say was meant to circumvent campaign finance laws to take out a powerful GOP lawmaker who has turned against Trump...
...The Wisconsin Ethics Commission this week found probable cause that Trump’s Save America committee and several state and local Republican officials committed felonies and recommended several district attorneys investigate and prosecute them, according to records released Friday. The commission’s investigation centers on the 2022 primary race between Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, one of the most powerful Republicans in Wisconsin, and Adam Steen, a political newcomer who embraced Trump.
Uncle J
Member
The RNC Has a Money Problem. Republicans Fear Lara Trump Will Make It Worse.
The Republican National Committee’s new leadership isn’t official yet — but Lara Trump’s vision for the party is already raising serious unease that the GOP’s coffers could be drained for Donald Trump’s legal fees.
“There is a lot of concern — from donors, state parties and campaigns that important funding could be sucked away by Trump’s mounting legal bills and that there’s nothing they can do about it,” former RNC Communications Director Doug Heye said.
Since gaining Donald Trump’s endorsement for the job — alongside North Carolina state party Chair Michael Whatley — Lara Trump has said she believes paying her father-in-law’s legal bills is of “big interest” to Republican voters. She’s also said that “every penny” of the RNC would go toward securing Trump’s presidency and securing control of Congress.
The RNC reported its worst fundraising year since 2013 in 2023 and is starting the election cycle at a substantial deficit compared to the Democratic National Committee. Meanwhile, several swing state parties are in disarray, dealing with debt and legal problems surrounding 2020 fake-electors schemes.
“He’s trying to hijack the RNC before he’s even the nominee. And it’s because he’s broke,” Katon Dawson, former chair of the South Carolina Republican Party, told NOTUS. “He has already spent millions worth of PAC money and he’s running out. So he needs another place to go raise money to pay his personal legal bills.”
The frustration extends to those supportive of Trump’s dominance in the party.
“As much as I want Trump to be reelected, I think the RNC’s job is to support not only our political candidates at the federal level, but also our state GOP,” Georgia GOP Treasurer Laurie McClain said.
Trump is estimated to run his own war chest dry over legal fees by July, Bloomberg reported, noting that the former president will then likely need to turn to donors or the RNC for help.
The Republican National Committee’s new leadership isn’t official yet — but Lara Trump’s vision for the party is already raising serious unease that the GOP’s coffers could be drained for Donald Trump’s legal fees.
“There is a lot of concern — from donors, state parties and campaigns that important funding could be sucked away by Trump’s mounting legal bills and that there’s nothing they can do about it,” former RNC Communications Director Doug Heye said.
Since gaining Donald Trump’s endorsement for the job — alongside North Carolina state party Chair Michael Whatley — Lara Trump has said she believes paying her father-in-law’s legal bills is of “big interest” to Republican voters. She’s also said that “every penny” of the RNC would go toward securing Trump’s presidency and securing control of Congress.
The RNC reported its worst fundraising year since 2013 in 2023 and is starting the election cycle at a substantial deficit compared to the Democratic National Committee. Meanwhile, several swing state parties are in disarray, dealing with debt and legal problems surrounding 2020 fake-electors schemes.
“He’s trying to hijack the RNC before he’s even the nominee. And it’s because he’s broke,” Katon Dawson, former chair of the South Carolina Republican Party, told NOTUS. “He has already spent millions worth of PAC money and he’s running out. So he needs another place to go raise money to pay his personal legal bills.”
The frustration extends to those supportive of Trump’s dominance in the party.
“As much as I want Trump to be reelected, I think the RNC’s job is to support not only our political candidates at the federal level, but also our state GOP,” Georgia GOP Treasurer Laurie McClain said.
Trump is estimated to run his own war chest dry over legal fees by July, Bloomberg reported, noting that the former president will then likely need to turn to donors or the RNC for help.
Barabbas
Member
There are two realities living in the USA today.
On the left the globalists, and on the right the nationalist.
The wee lefties want a star trek world. The right wants to remain the USA.
Why do you think the media has demonized the word nationalist. To them it have a pronoun problem.
So they added WHITE in front of it. This is how you know whom is on what side.
I am with the side that will make me think its the 1960 election again. Where peopled TALKED their difference out and after the election, went right back to the bowling leagues where they all came form and laughed the night away.
Voting machines that had no wiring or electronics. Picture ID is required. everyone has it. This is how we make sure the million of so illegals dont vote like the they is 2020.
I wish to remain an American, and not to have a civil war to usher in a whole new set of rules.
This is where we are headed
On the left the globalists, and on the right the nationalist.
The wee lefties want a star trek world. The right wants to remain the USA.
Why do you think the media has demonized the word nationalist. To them it have a pronoun problem.
So they added WHITE in front of it. This is how you know whom is on what side.
I am with the side that will make me think its the 1960 election again. Where peopled TALKED their difference out and after the election, went right back to the bowling leagues where they all came form and laughed the night away.
Voting machines that had no wiring or electronics. Picture ID is required. everyone has it. This is how we make sure the million of so illegals dont vote like the they is 2020.
I wish to remain an American, and not to have a civil war to usher in a whole new set of rules.
This is where we are headed
Uncle J
Member
Do you have any actual evidence for these claims?
Regarding the conspiracies about the 2020 election, I refer you to the OP in this thread:
Trump's Big Lie: The 2020 Election
I'm creating this thread as a placeholder so that whenever someone starts talking about how the 2020 Presidential election was stolen and/or fraudulent, I can refer them here and have them answer a simple question.... Name the specific court filing where Trump's legal team presented evidence to...
christianforums.net
Maybe you can be the first to answer the question.
Why, are you planning to start shooting people?
Uncle J
Member
Simply put, if Don the Con wins we'll all see massive price increases. Oh, and yet again he's either lying or has no clue what he's talking about....
Trumponomics? He would impose the equivalent of a huge tax hike
So much for "America first".
Trumponomics? He would impose the equivalent of a huge tax hike
Trump hasn't outlined much of an economic program, but he has promised to impose a massive increase in tariffs on imports from almost all foreign countries — everything from bananas and baby formula to computer chips and machine parts.
And that’s the equivalent of a tax hike, because the costs of tariffs are paid almost entirely by the buyers of imported goods, whether they are Walmart shoppers or U.S. businesses that rely on foreign components.
Trump boasts that the tariffs he imposed in 2018 and 2019 brought billions of dollars into the Treasury, and promises a similar revenue increase in a second term. “The United States will make an absolute FORTUNE,” his campaign website says.
Here’s the problem: Contrary to what the former president seems to think, tariffs aren’t paid by foreign companies or governments. They’re initially paid by the U.S. companies that import the goods, but those importers almost always pass the cost on to consumers in the form of higher prices.
This time, Trump is proposing a “universal” tariff of 10% on goods from every country in the world. He has also mused about megatariffs of more than 60% that he wants to slap on China in hopes of forcing Beijing to lower its tariffs and treat U.S. companies fairly.
Economists say that either of those proposed tariffs would produce price increases and push inflation upward.
That’s why traditional free-trade Republicans like Nikki Haley and Mike Pence think Trump’s proposal is a bad idea, as does almost every practicing economist.
“It’s lunacy,” said Adam Posen, president of the Peterson Institute for International Economics...
...And when the United States imposes tariffs, the targeted country almost always reciprocates.
“They’re not just going to roll over,” Posen said. “And they’re going to be strategic; they’ll pick industries where the U.S. will lose huge market share, because the retaliatory tariffs will drive the price of American products up.”
We have recent experience with all of these problems, thanks to Trump’s earlier tariffs. Take California almonds, the state’s most valuable export crop.
Until 2018, China bought almost all its almonds from California. But after Trump slapped tariffs on a range of Chinese products that year, China retaliated with tariffs on U.S. agricultural exports, including nuts.
California almond sales plummeted, and Australian growers rushed in to fill the gap.
And that’s the equivalent of a tax hike, because the costs of tariffs are paid almost entirely by the buyers of imported goods, whether they are Walmart shoppers or U.S. businesses that rely on foreign components.
Trump boasts that the tariffs he imposed in 2018 and 2019 brought billions of dollars into the Treasury, and promises a similar revenue increase in a second term. “The United States will make an absolute FORTUNE,” his campaign website says.
Here’s the problem: Contrary to what the former president seems to think, tariffs aren’t paid by foreign companies or governments. They’re initially paid by the U.S. companies that import the goods, but those importers almost always pass the cost on to consumers in the form of higher prices.
This time, Trump is proposing a “universal” tariff of 10% on goods from every country in the world. He has also mused about megatariffs of more than 60% that he wants to slap on China in hopes of forcing Beijing to lower its tariffs and treat U.S. companies fairly.
Economists say that either of those proposed tariffs would produce price increases and push inflation upward.
That’s why traditional free-trade Republicans like Nikki Haley and Mike Pence think Trump’s proposal is a bad idea, as does almost every practicing economist.
“It’s lunacy,” said Adam Posen, president of the Peterson Institute for International Economics...
...And when the United States imposes tariffs, the targeted country almost always reciprocates.
“They’re not just going to roll over,” Posen said. “And they’re going to be strategic; they’ll pick industries where the U.S. will lose huge market share, because the retaliatory tariffs will drive the price of American products up.”
We have recent experience with all of these problems, thanks to Trump’s earlier tariffs. Take California almonds, the state’s most valuable export crop.
Until 2018, China bought almost all its almonds from California. But after Trump slapped tariffs on a range of Chinese products that year, China retaliated with tariffs on U.S. agricultural exports, including nuts.
California almond sales plummeted, and Australian growers rushed in to fill the gap.
So much for "America first".
Did you need to read an article to know that Mitt Romney was not voting for DJT ? Seriously ?
Uncle J
Member
Of course not, but I did find his reasoning to be compelling.Did you need to read an article to know that Mitt Romney was not voting for DJT ? Seriously ?
What do you think? Do you agree that character matters in a President? Does it matter what sort of image a President gives American kids about what a US President should be like?