Biden Tracker (1 Viewer)

[Farb]

For all the things related to the Biden/Harris Administration and their latest hits and misses

https://www.dailywire.com/news/whit...gedly-sexually-harassing-threatening-reporter

Interesting story, looks like 'only the best people' didn't stop with the new administration.

 

[Farb]

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/democrats-biden-rescind-sole-nuclear-capabilities


About three dozen House Democrats have signed a letter asking President Biden to renounce his sole authority to launch nuclear weapons, according to reports.

A promise from the president to give up his nuclear capabilities as commander in chief could take the same power away from future presidents.

"Vesting one person with this authority entails real risks," the letter from Rep. Jimmy Panetta, D-Calif., and obtained by Politico reads. "Past presidents have threatened to attack other countries with nuclear weapons or exhibited behavior that caused other officials to express concern about the president’s judgment."

Either they are also aware that they elected a half dead sniffer in chief or the congress is setting the stage for more power or to remove Sniffer in Chief and replace him with a senator that bailed out of the election race because she was about to lose her home state in a primary. Not sure which one yet.

 

[brandon]

Either they are also aware that they elected a half dead sniffer in chief or the congress is setting the stage for more power or to remove Sniffer in Chief and replace him with a senator that bailed out of the election race because she was about to lose her home state in a primary. Not sure which one yet.

Or they realized how bad it was that Trump had the sole authority to launch nukes and are using the moment where we have a sane president with some foresight to realize that there might be a problem with that situation to maybe have a shot at protecting the country from the next worse version of a Republican president.

 

[Bolo]

Interesting, a little over 12 hours ago, The Biden admin gives the go ahead to bomb Syria and this forum is crickets on all fronts. Meanwhile, when dumb Trump opens his dumb mouth, full meltdown ensues.

 

[brandon]

Interesting, a little over 12 hours ago, The Biden admin gives the go ahead to bomb Syria and this forum is crickets on all fronts. Meanwhile, when dumb Trump opens his dumb mouth, full meltdown ensues.

Might be worth starting a thread.

 

[DaveXA]

Interesting, a little over 12 hours ago, The Biden admin gives the go ahead to bomb Syria and this forum is crickets on all fronts. Meanwhile, when dumb Trump opens his dumb mouth, full meltdown ensues.

While I'm not a fan of our presence in Iraq/Syria, if our troops are taking rocket fire, I'd fully expect the troops to respond to that.

 

[Farb]

Interesting, a little over 12 hours ago, The Biden admin gives the go ahead to bomb Syria and this forum is crickets on all fronts. Meanwhile, when dumb Trump opens his dumb mouth, full meltdown ensues.

[Mod edit ](Biden's) backers love them some WAR! For 4 years they had to wait but they got their boy in office now.

 

[Complex Kid]

[Mod edit ](Bidens) backers love them some WAR! For 4 years they had to wait but they got their boy in office now.

Yeah sure. The US has been totally peaceful for the past 4 years...

Donald Trump Is Dropping Bombs at Unprecedented Levels

The candidate who once warned America about Hillary Clinton's hawkishness is turning into a war machine.

foreignpolicy.com

Trump may have bombed Yemen more than all previous US presidents combined, new report finds

In his first year in office, President Trump loosened rules of engagement and oversaw a dramatic escalation of US attacks in Yemen.

www.businessinsider.com

Trump Didn’t Shrink U.S. Military Commitments Abroad—He Expanded Them

President Donald Trump hasn’t meaningfully altered the U.S. global military footprint he inherited from his predecessor but rather loaded even greater military responsibilities on the United States.

www.foreignaffairs.com

 

[bdb13]

[Mod edit ](Bidens) backers love them some WAR! For 4 years they had to wait but they got their boy in office now.

It's another place where I didn't criticize Trump.. for instance the assassination of the Iranian general..

At this point I don't see this as an escalation beyond anything that Trump did with Iran.

 

[Devildog]

Seems like someone is trying to create controversy where there is none.

I don't think we should be anywhere near the ME, but we are and I fully expect the government/military to protect themselves and retaliate for any attacks that kill our people.

 

[Farb]

https://nypost.com/2021/02/17/biden-says-uighur-genocide-is-part-of-chinas-different-norms/

"President Biden continued in his response that he is “not going to speak out against” the Chinese Communist Party’s belligerent actions in Hong Kong, against the Uighurs, or in Taiwan.

“I point out to him no American president can be sustained as a president, if he doesn’t reflect the values of the United States,” the US president continued. “And so the idea that I am not going to speak out against what he’s doing in Hong Kong, what he’s doing with the Uighurs in western mountains of China and Taiwan — trying to end the one China policy by making it forceful … [Xi] gets it.”

“Culturally there are different norms that each country and their leaders are expected to follow,” he continued.

The “norms” in China, as shown in a recent BBC News exposé, include systemic torture and rape occurring in Uighur concentration camps."

I am curious on this one. I know it is a week or so ago (ages in todays media so apologies) but I was reading this and was wondering if anyone can explain what he meant by this.
I know he is doddering old fool but there is no way he meant that is OK for what the CCP is doing. Maybe he does think that because he is beholden to China and Xi (only rational excuse for his weird executive orders and actions).

 

[bdb13]

https://nypost.com/2021/02/17/biden-says-uighur-genocide-is-part-of-chinas-different-norms/

"President Biden continued in his response that he is “not going to speak out against” the Chinese Communist Party’s belligerent actions in Hong Kong, against the Uighurs, or in Taiwan.

“I point out to him no American president can be sustained as a president, if he doesn’t reflect the values of the United States,” the US president continued. “And so the idea that I am not going to speak out against what he’s doing in Hong Kong, what he’s doing with the Uighurs in western mountains of China and Taiwan — trying to end the one China policy by making it forceful … [Xi] gets it.”

“Culturally there are different norms that each country and their leaders are expected to follow,” he continued.

The “norms” in China, as shown in a recent BBC News exposé, include systemic torture and rape occurring in Uighur concentration camps."

I am curious on this one. I know it is a week or so ago (ages in todays media so apologies) but I was reading this and was wondering if anyone can explain what he meant by this.
I know he is doddering old fool but there is no way he meant that is OK for what the CCP is doing. Maybe he does think that because he is beholden to China and Xi (only rational excuse for his weird executive orders and actions).

He's saying that he's not going to do the right thing..

What are the weird executive orders and actions that show that he must be beholden to China and Xi?

Edit: Hell I'll go further.. geopolitical ramifications and all.. it's cowardice from Biden..

I'm not sure that any candidate would have taken this on, but it's still cowardice.

 

[SaulGoodmanEsq]

But if he's so beholden to Xi then why is he currently leaving Trump's tariffs in place? (For the record, I think the tariffs are a dumb idea in the first place).

 

[SaulGoodmanEsq]

He's saying that he's not going to do the right thing..

What are the weird executive orders and actions that show that he must be beholden to China and Xi?

Edit: Hell I'll go further.. geopolitical ramifications and all.. it's cowardice from Biden..

I'm not sure that any candidate would have taken this on, but it's still cowardice.

Indeed. It reminds me of...

 

[UncleTrvlingJim]

https://nypost.com/2021/02/17/biden-says-uighur-genocide-is-part-of-chinas-different-norms/

"President Biden continued in his response that he is “not going to speak out against” the Chinese Communist Party’s belligerent actions in Hong Kong, against the Uighurs, or in Taiwan.

“I point out to him no American president can be sustained as a president, if he doesn’t reflect the values of the United States,” the US president continued. “And so the idea that I am not going to speak out against what he’s doing in Hong Kong, what he’s doing with the Uighurs in western mountains of China and Taiwan — trying to end the one China policy by making it forceful … [Xi] gets it.”

“Culturally there are different norms that each country and their leaders are expected to follow,” he continued.

The “norms” in China, as shown in a recent BBC News exposé, include systemic torture and rape occurring in Uighur concentration camps."

I am curious on this one. I know it is a week or so ago (ages in todays media so apologies) but I was reading this and was wondering if anyone can explain what he meant by this.
I know he is doddering old fool but there is no way he meant that is OK for what the CCP is doing. Maybe he does think that because he is beholden to China and Xi (only rational excuse for his weird executive orders and actions).

It's a lack of imagination and moral courage on Biden's part. I can speculate on the reasons why - ie, maybe he believes that putting public pressure on China is an ineffective strategy (the idea that China cares about saving face, so it's best to do things behind the scenes), or so on. The problem is that sort of strategy has not worked in the past, so I have little reason to believe it will work in the future.

 

[samiam5211]

The president should not be authorizing any military action without congressional approval unless it is to prevent imminent loss of life.

Congress should pass a resolution condemning the recent strikes, and we need legislation that makes clear the role of congressional war powers in decision making.

 

[SaulGoodmanEsq]

The president should not be authorizing any military action without congressional approval unless it is to prevent imminent loss of life.

Congress should pass a resolution condemning the recent strikes, and we need legislation that makes clear the role of congressional war powers in decision making.

The Constitutional mandate that only Congress can declare war sailed out the window decades ago, unfortunately.

 

[DaveXA]

The Constitutional mandate that only Congress can declare war sailed out the window decades ago, unfortunately.

Yeah, there no putting that back in the box now. But, I'd argue that Congress dragging their feet on a number of occasions didn't help matters in some situations, so I wouldn't necessarily lay it all on the executive branch.

That said, the executive branch has too much power right now and I'd like some of that shifted back to Congress and/or the states.

 

[SaulGoodmanEsq]

Yeah, there no putting that back in the box now. But, I'd argue that Congress dragging their feet on a number of occasions didn't help matters in some situations, so I wouldn't necessarily lay it all on the executive branch.

That said, the executive branch has too much power right now and I'd like some of that shifted back to Congress and/or the states.

That's the great irony. The GOP is supposed to be the party of Federalism and the supremacy of the legislature (there is a reason Congress is established in Article I of the Constitution and the executive not until Article II) but they want to push more and more power into the hands of the executive or... at least... Trump.