Article

2016-02-24 Home Front: Politix

Why won't GOP candidates call out Trump on Iraq?

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by ryuge 2016-02-24 00:00|| || Front Page|| [11131 views ] Top

#1 Because they know no one will have shit on him for his role in WWIII

Posted by newc 2016-02-24 02:02|| 2016-02-24 02:02|| Front Page Top

#2 My wife just ranted on Trump winning Nevada. She is very concerned that a) he's a dangerous looney-tune and b) his nomination would insure that Shrillary or Bern would win.

I'm sorta in agreement with her on him but I have a hard time believing that all his bombast and blather are real. Additionally I think that even if they are he will be reined in by the system to a less destructive level.

IMHO Bern or Shrill will destroy the country forever.

Posted by AlanC 2016-02-24 07:56|| 2016-02-24 07:56|| Front Page Top

#3 Yeah, a choice between an egotistical bombastic pro-American crony capitalist and a anti-American socialists/progressive/marxist. Real hard choice there boys.

BTW, you might have noticed that the Trunks in Congress just said no hearing on the O's court nominee. Do you really think that would have happened if Jeb was in the position Mr.Trump is now in?

As for Iraq. A lot of Americans having seen the waste of lives and resources squandered by the incompetent ruling class probably feel the same way. Either win it and hold it or 'why the hell did we do it in the first place?'.

Posted by Procopius2k 2016-02-24 08:39|| 2016-02-24 08:39|| Front Page Top

#4 Here is 'why'....

In October 2002, President Bush asked for the consent of Congress — unlike the Clinton resort to force in the Balkans and the later Obama bombing in Libya, both by executive action — before using arms to reify existing American policy. Both the Senate (with a majority of Democrats voting in favor) and the House overwhelmingly approved 23 writs calling for Saddam’s forced removal.

Excerpt from the article.

Posted by Besoeker 2016-02-24 08:46|| 2016-02-24 08:46|| Front Page Top

#5 Yeah, I know the technical reasons for the execution. It's the 'return on investment' that sucked. To paraphrase Animal House, "you f****d up, you trusted us."

Posted by Procopius2k 2016-02-24 09:04|| 2016-02-24 09:04|| Front Page Top

#6 Trump was asked to clarify his declaration that Bush lied about Iraqi WMD. His response;
"I don't know if he lied or not. He could have lied. Maybe he did. Maybe he didn't. I guess you'd have to ask him."
There's your answer. Trump is a weasel and the media doesn't challenge him. Moreover, Trump can say or do damn near anything and the Trumpbots will still support him. Bottom line, his challengers have been advised blow it off as just another foolish Trump comment.

Posted by DepotGuy 2016-02-24 12:33|| 2016-02-24 12:33|| Front Page Top

#7 And how did Bush help his cause by not going after those who lied about 'no WMD'? The O administration demonstrated how to deal with an 'uppity' party organ (and they were on his side). Pull credentials, call them out (and their owners), sic the alphabet soup departments on them, et al. By allowing it to be repeated time and again and not forcibly challenging it, he and his administration allowed it to be sold. Problem with being a nice guy.

Posted by Procopius2k 2016-02-24 12:42|| 2016-02-24 12:42|| Front Page Top

#8 Why doesn't Rubio face considerable heat regarding amnesty?

Trump would destroy either Sanders or Shrillary. Neither of them think fast enough on their feet to hold up in an election cycle if their opponent is Trump.

But if Trump bothers you, then Cruz is your answer, not Rubio. Rubio is just more of the same shit we've despised all along, with policies that promote the establishment rather than the people.

Posted by Crusader 2016-02-24 13:04|| 2016-02-24 13:04|| Front Page Top

#9 Crusader, I hope to hell you're right on the first statement.

I agree with your second. I'm supporting Ted but wonder if he is the real deal sometimes.

Posted by AlanC 2016-02-24 13:09|| 2016-02-24 13:09|| Front Page Top

#10 The way turnout at the primaries (Republican turnout setting records, Democrat turnout way down) it looks the Republicans are going to destroy the Democrats no matter who is the Republican rep. Its a matter of how much.

If Trump is elected at least we'll see the Congress (both parties) doing their job and balancing the executive branch with every fiber of their being.

If Trump is elected I imagine both parties will feverishly study the Constitution and determining what the executive branch can and can't do.

Posted by rjschwarz 2016-02-24 14:18|| 2016-02-24 14:18|| Front Page Top

#11 If Trump is elected I imagine both parties will feverishly study the Constitution and determining what the executive branch can and can't do.

Think the federal bureaucracy will cooperate with Trump?

Posted by g(r)omgoru 2016-02-24 15:36|| 2016-02-24 15:36|| Front Page Top

#12 I don't think the history of junior senators going to the White House is good. Rubio is Bush lite. I like Cruz's positions but he's a bit abrasive and that CanadianCuban thing is worrisome. Sorry.

But remember that schlong comment? Trump knew what he was doing. He set a trap for the Beest and she walked right into it. He wants you to think he's a buffoon but he's manipulating the media like nobody else knows how.

Posted by Ebbang Uluque6305 2016-02-24 15:53|| 2016-02-24 15:53|| Front Page Top

#13 Think the federal bureaucracy will cooperate with Trump?

I hope he cans their asses.

Posted by Ebbang Uluque6305 2016-02-24 15:55|| 2016-02-24 15:55|| Front Page Top

#14 I hope he cans their asses.

What I meant: POTUS executive power = cooperation of Civil Service.

Posted by g(r)omgoru 2016-02-24 16:01|| 2016-02-24 16:01|| Front Page Top

#15 Well, Senior Executive Service serves at his discretion. Bush made the fundamental mistake not to purge the lot and paid a long and painful price for Clintonistas in the ranks. Those SES's can shut down bonuses, assignments, reassignments, consolidate offices, and report to Congress what they think the funding level for the Departments should be (Ah, poor babies, we've been cut like DoD). Yep, you can influence the lower ranks if you're ruthless enough and I think we have someone who can be.

Posted by Procopius2k 2016-02-24 16:12|| 2016-02-24 16:12|| Front Page Top

#16 The republicans in both Congress and the executive branch have failed to take on the bloated federal bureaucracy. Hint: why are conservative voters angry? Nothing changes.

In the words of Ronald Reagan, "I am from the government and I am here to help."

Chilling words indeed.

Posted by Sven the pelter 2016-02-24 16:28|| 2016-02-24 16:28|| Front Page Top

#17 It is possible that an outsider is required to clear out the bureaucratic stables.

Posted by rjschwarz 2016-02-24 16:31|| 2016-02-24 16:31|| Front Page Top

#18 Trump says outrageous things to keep him in the press. A lot cheaper than buying the air time.

Listening to Trump, I am reminded of the move National Security:

Hank: Do you actually believe the crap that comes out of your mouth?

Earl: I'm not really sure until I'm finished talkin'.

I have almost convinced myself that Trump would make a good president; almost.

Posted by Sven the pelter 2016-02-24 16:44|| 2016-02-24 16:44|| Front Page Top

#19 It is increasingly clear that Rubio has been promised some role in the next administration in exchange for staying in the race. He has no path to victory. His only role is to prevent Cruz from overtaking Trump.

Posted by Iblis 2016-02-24 16:47|| 2016-02-24 16:47|| Front Page Top

#20 To answer VDH's question -- because they are too busy getting their asses kicked on issues that matter to American's today.

No point in investing more blood and treasure into sunk costs: the Iraqis have made their bed and Obama has shit in it.

Posted by regular joe 2016-02-24 16:50|| 2016-02-24 16:50|| Front Page Top

#21 Perhaps not now, R-Joe, but are we supposed to believe he's gonna fight Iran effectively if he keeps regurgitating the propaganda used by the pro-Iranian side in the US (and by the Iranians abroad?)

Posted by Thing From Snowy Mountain 2016-02-24 17:14|| 2016-02-24 17:14|| Front Page Top

#22 I hope he cans their asses.

With most civil servant this would be impossible without an act of Congress.

Posted by Iblis 2016-02-24 18:07|| 2016-02-24 18:07|| Front Page Top

#23 I hope so Snowy. Do you think he'd cut as bad a deal with Iran as Obozo? Oh hell no.

Posted by regular joe 2016-02-24 19:09|| 2016-02-24 19:09|| Front Page Top

#24 Trump is a dead man walking - the liberal press has a ton of dirt and smear ready for him, they are simply waiting until the general to blow him out of the water as the dishonest authoritarian con-man that he is. That way Hitlery or Bern-in win by default. Trumpanzee voters are being conned and are remarkably dim to not recognize it.

Posted by Large de Medici5592 2016-02-24 23:24|| 2016-02-24 23:24|| Front Page Top

#25 Well, yes they all have dirt. You think his followers don't expect a scorched earth campaign to be wages by the 'establishment'? I expect Mr. Trump to play the game right back. He's demonstrated he won't pull punches. Meanwhile, go ahead, demonize those who are tired of that establishment and their anger. Welcome to 1860.

Posted by Procopius2k 2016-02-24 23:36|| 2016-02-24 23:36|| Front Page Top

23:57 Nguard
23:36 Procopius2k
23:34 Whiskey Mike
23:33 Sven the pelter
23:27 JosephMendiola
23:27 gorb
23:26 Theamble McCoy3234
23:24 Large de Medici5592
23:15 JosephMendiola
22:58 JosephMendiola
22:53 SteveS
22:27 JosephMendiola
22:24 Procopius2k
22:24 JosephMendiola
21:42 Skidmark
20:45 DarthVader
20:36 Sven the pelter
20:34 Lionel Thoth9784
20:33 Sven the pelter
20:31 Lionel Thoth9784
20:26 Glenmore
19:55 Blossom Unains5562
19:25 Crusader
19:10 DarthVader