SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - US Politics Thread 2021-24

SUBSIM Radio Room Forums (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/index.php)

- General Topics (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/forumdisplay.php?f=175)

- - US Politics Thread 2021-24 (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=248184)

Democratic House member accuses Biden of supporting Palestinian ‘genocide’

Story by Maegan Vazquez

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...de/ar-AA1jmosT

Quote:

Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) accused President Biden of supporting the “genocide” of Palestinians amid Israel’s war with Hamas in Gaza, saying that Americans will remember his actions when he’s up for reelection in 2024.

Tlaib, the only Palestinian American in the House, posted a video on X, formerly Twitter, on Friday seemingly to pressure Biden to support a cease-fire in the conflict.

In the video, which begins with apparent footage of bombings and bloody scenes from the conflict, Tlaib says, “Mr. President, the American people are not with you on this one. … We will remember in 2024.”

“Joe Biden supported the genocide of the Palestinian people,” text at the end of the video states. “The American people won’t forget. … Biden, support a cease-fire now … or don’t count on us in 2024.”

The Genocide Convention of 1948 codified genocide as an international crime, defining it as “acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group.” Those acts include killings, inflicting serious harm on a group, making its living conditions impossible, preventing births within the group or forcibly transferring children to another group.

As the war rages, thousands of Gazans have been killed and the U.N. agency for Palestinian refugees estimates that about 1.4 million people in Gaza are now internally displaced.

Biden, who has said the United States will stand with Israel in its fight against Hamas, last week stressed that Israel must minimize civilian casualties regardless of whether it poses a “burden.” He’s also called for a humanitarian “pause” in the war.

A spokesperson for the National Security Council reiterated that stance on Saturday morning.

"As you’ve heard us say, we support humanitarian pauses in the fighting in order to get life-saving humanitarian aid in and distributed to those in need in Gaza, and to get hostages out. What we do not support are calls for Israel to stop defending itself from Hamas terrorists, which is what a permanent ceasefire would be,” the spokesperson said.

Tlaib’s office didn’t respond to a request for comment Friday evening. Tlaib on Friday also posted to social media her defense of the phrase “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free,” which has often been interpreted as a call for the eradication of Israel.

“From the river to the sea is an aspirational call for freedom, human rights, and peaceful coexistence, not death, destruction, or hate,” Tlaib wrote in the post. “My work and advocacy is always centered in justice and dignity for all people no matter faith or ethnicity.”

Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), who told CNN Friday night that he agreed with Biden on the need for a humanitarian pause of Israeli bombing in Gaza, said Tlaib’s claim of genocide was “shocking.”

“I don’t agree with that at all,” Merkley said.

Polls show that Americans are not in broad agreement over America’s role in the Israel-Gaza war or Biden’s handling of the conflict.

A poll by the Economist and YouGov found this week that 22 percent of Democrats want to increase military aid to Israel, compared with 48 percent of Republicans. In contrast, 45 percent of Democrats want to increase humanitarian aid to Palestinians, compared with 8 percent of Republicans. Biden has proposed more than $14 billion in emergency aid to Israel, a move that is broadly supported within the House Democratic caucus.

A separate national poll by Quinnipiac University found that 26 percent of Democrats disapprove of Biden’s response to the war between Israel and Hamas, slightly higher than the 17 percent of Democrats who disapprove of his job performance overall. Among all voters, 42 percent approve of Biden’s response to the conflict and 46 percent disapprove.

Tlaib’s social media posts come days after the House voted to table an effort to censure her over her comments and actions related to the Israel-Gaza war. More than 20 House Republicans voted to table the measure along with every Democratic lawmaker present in the chamber.

In other news. We’ve gone from Democrats chanting “as long as it takes” to little anonymous Democrat birds inside the beltway now changing their tune and suggesting Ukraine make concessions to put an end the war in. Considering Biden slow walking of military hardware, the lack of the word "win" or any stated plan. Then refusing to use the 35 billion dollars authorized by Democrats and Republicans in the house last year, the fact that Biden has not fired clueless Jake Sullivan.... all points to something bad coming for Ukraine.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/u...ces-rcna123628

Meanwhile some on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee have some advice and ask why Biden has been so wishy washy.

PUBLISHED: NOVEMBER 02, 2023

Risch, Wicker, Rogers, McCaul to Biden: “Finish the Job on ATACMS”

https://www.foreign.senate.gov/press...-job-on-atacms

Quote:

WASHINGTON?– U.S. Senators Jim Risch (R-Idaho), ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, and U.S. Representatives Mike Rogers (R-Ala.), chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, and Michael McCaul (R-Texas), chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, yesterday sent a letter to President Biden demanding that he send long-range Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS) to Ukraine in addition to the full inventory of the shorter range anti-personnel variants of the same munition.

The legislators noted that ATACMS missiles featuring a unitary warhead have a capability to strike deeper at Russian targets in Crimea, including Black Sea fleet assets. Furthermore, the lawmakers pressed the president to send the remainder of U.S. stocks of the Anti-Personnel/Anti-Materiel (APAM) variant of the missile, which has no current use in the U.S. military and which has already been sent in limited quantities to Ukraine.

The full provisioning of these capabilities, the legislators argued, would help alter the balance in Ukraine’s counteroffensive.
“The job on ATACMS is only half-done,” the legislators wrote. “We urge you to provide the unitary warhead variant of ATACMS which has a substantially longer range than the APAMS…Ukraine's requirement for deep-strike capability remains urgent, particularly to range targets throughout Crimea. Recent successful strikes on Russian targets in Crimea, including on Black Sea Fleet assets, demonstrate the strategic significance of long-range strike options and the relevance of the longer range ATACMS.

Risch, Wicker, Rogers, and McCaul also requested an immediate update on domestic ATACMS inventory and our own military’s requirements.

“The bottom line is this: Ukraine has requested long-range ATACMS,” the legislators wrote. “The United States has an arsenal of long-range unitary warhead ATACMS, a hot production line to backfill them, and affordable and executable paths to speed up delivery of the Precision Strike Missile follow-on capability. Clearly, it is time for you to finish the job on ATACMS.”
Full text of the letter can be found here or below:

Dear President Biden:

We welcome reports that your administration has finally provided some limited range Army Tactical Missile Systems (ATACMS) to Ukraine. We remain concerned that the transfers of these shorter-range ATACMS occurred more than a year after Ukraine's public request for this capability, and we believe it demonstrates that your administration's reticence toward arming Ukraine continues.

Although this transfer is a positive step, the job on ATACMS is only half-done: the United States has only provided a small number of the Anti-Personnel/Anti-Materiel (APAM) variant of ATACMS and these have a shorter range. We urge you to provide the unitary warhead variant of ATACMS which has a substantially longer range than the APAMS. In addition, we call on you to deliver the balance of U.S. APAMs given the Department of Defense's repeated inability to articulate a clear, current requirement for this weapon.

Ukraine's requirement for deep-strike capability remains urgent, particularly to range targets throughout Crimea. Recent successful strikes on Russian targets in Crimea, including on Black Sea Fleet assets, demonstrate the strategic significance of long-range strike options and the relevance of the longer range ATACMS. It is a sad reflection that Ukraine had to rely, in part, on long-range missiles provided by allies to reach these targets in the face of your administration's continued self-deterrence. Ukraine must have the ability to break Russia's logistics network for Ukraine's offensive operations to truly be successful.

We also regret that the administration has yet to provide Congress with the definitive status of the ATACMS inventory and warfighting requirements. We have received at least three documents from the Pentagon with substantively different numbers. Given the bipartisan congressional support for providing long-range ATACMS, we cannot understand the Department of Defense's inability to articulate ATACMS requirements.

The bottom line is this: Ukraine has requested long-range ATACMS. Ukraine has demonstrated the ability to employ long-range missiles in a responsible and effective manner. Allies have already provided Ukraine with these capabilities, and Russia has clearly declined to escalate upon usage of deep-strike missiles. The United States has an arsenal of long-range unitary warhead ATACMS, a hot production line to backfill them, and affordable and executable paths to speed up delivery of the Precision Strike Missile follow-on capability. Clearly, it is time for you to finish the job on ATACMS. The costs of failing to do so not only risks stalemate on the battlefield and the further protraction of this war, but also threatens further global instability as our adversaries conduct influence operations around the globe.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Otto Harkaman (Post 2890809)

The destruction of the Democratic Party
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ington-DC.html
https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2023/11...9130292340.jpg

Some fine folks the democrat party has populated what was our country with. Yes sir, fine folks indeed. :o

Donald Trump's tactic for dealing with the numerous criminal charges he faces has largely been to rely on the fact that the Supreme Court will ultimately save him, but that prospect is uncertain and faces steep odds, a report showed on Saturday.

Trump, whom legal experts say has directed legal filings specifically with the conservative Supreme Court in mind, is facing criminal charges in D.C., Georgia, and in New York. With a conservative court including numerous Trump appointees, many have said they understand why the ex-president would take that route.

But his path through the Supreme Court may not be smooth sailing, the Messenger reports.

"Although he nominated one-third of its justices, former President Donald Trump faces uncertain prospects as he looks to the Supreme Court for help in his ongoing criminal cases," the outlet reported Saturday.
It continued:

"The Supreme Court’s conservative majority includes three jurists nominated by Trump: Justices Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett. But they are still not shoe-ins to side with him. The high court has sided against Trump or failed to take up his arguments in recent cases involving Congressional efforts to obtain his tax returns, the 2020 election, and other topics. The Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear a case brought by his former 2020 election attorney, John Eastman stemming from a dispute with the Congressional panel investigating the Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol."

The article further notes that legal experts have expressed doubt that Trump can win at the Supreme Court on the current issue he's litigating, which might reach the high court before others: his federal gag order.

"Former Trump White House lawyer Ty Cobb said he does not expect the gag order issue to get to the Supreme Court," the Messenger reported.

“I don't see the Supreme Court ever taking that up, as gag orders are routine and Trump’s status as a presidential candidate is not a legal defense to a gag order any more than if Jeffrey Dahmer had decided to run for president,” he said, according to the news report.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world...b69751011&ei=8

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jimbuna (Post 2890452)

Johnson 'surprised' GOP plan to defund IRS could cost US taxpayers up to $90 billion.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world...e2f0cf67&ei=11

I'm shocked that these people call themselves "Christians.". They just seem to want to make obscenely wealthy people wealthier at everyone else's expense. If there's a choice between a poor person's necessity, or a rich guy getting more money, I think we can guess who'd they choose, every time. Just like Jesus intended.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Torvald Von Mansee (Post 2890884)

Same here in the UK unfortunately.

The Islamic Resistance group launched its first tactical ballistic missiles at U.S. military bases.

They cause much more powerful explosions than what has previously been launched against U.S. troops.

Count on the U.S. striking back?

Clueless Jake Sullivan says since Biden took office the Middle East is more peaceful than it’s ever been. :har:

Section 3 provides that:No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector for President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States … who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States … to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same … . But Congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.Because Trump allegedly engaged in an insurrection, according to the challengers, he is disqualified by Section 3.
There are three major legal problems with that claim, however.
First of all, Section 3 only applies to individuals who were previously a “member of Congress,” an “officer of the United States,” or a state official. Trump has never been any of those. He has never held state office or been a U.S. senator or representative, and the U.S. Supreme Court held in 1888 in U.S. v. Mouat that “officers” are only those individuals who are appointed to positions within the federal government.Effort to bar Trump under 14th Amendment gains steamIndividuals who are elected—such as the president and vice president—are not officers within the meaning of Section 3. The Supreme Court reiterated that view in 2010 in Free Enterprise Fund v. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, in which Chief Justice John Roberts concluded “the people do not vote for ‘Officers of the United States.’” They are appointed under Article II of the Constitution.It must also be noted that while Section 3 applies to an “elector for President or Vice President,” it does not specify that it applies to the president or vice president. This supports the argument that the drafters did not mean for Section 3 to apply to the president and vice president, which, again, is not surprising, since they are not “Officers of the United States.”Second, no federal court has convicted Trump of engaging in “insurrection or rebellion” in violation of 18 U.S.C. §2383, which makes it a crime to engage in “any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States.”More importantly, in the second impeachment resolution of Trump on Jan. 11, 2021, he was charged by the House of Representatives in Article I with “Incitement of Insurrection.” Yet, he was acquitted by the Senate.Given our federal constitutional system, state and federal courts should not gainsay the findings of Congress on this issue. The risk of inconsistent rulings from state and county election officials, as well as from the many different courts hearing these challenges, could cause electoral chaos.Further, Congress has never passed a federal statute providing any type of enforcement mechanism in the courts for Section 3. While some argue that this provision is self-executing and no legislation is required, legal scholars such as Josh Blackman and Sett Tillman point to an 1869 decision of a federal circuit court presided over by U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase, which held that “legislation by Congress is necessary to give effect to” Section 3.Under that holding, in the absence of such legislation, states do not have the ability to throw accused insurrectionists off a federal ballot, whether they are running for Congress or the presidency.Third, there is an argument that can be made—and which was already adopted by one federal court—that Section 3 doesn’t even exist anymore as a constitutional matter.Keep in mind that the 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868 after the end of the Civil War. It was aimed at the former members of the Confederate government and military who had previously been in Congress or held executive posts.All of the challengers filing lawsuits to try to remove Trump from their state ballots are ignoring the final sentence in Section 3, which is a unique provision found in no other amendment to the Constitution. It allows Congress to remove the disqualification clause “by a vote of two-thirds of each House.”Congress voted to remove the disqualification twice. The Amnesty Act of 1872 stated that the “political disabilities” imposed by Section 3 “are hereby removed from all persons whomsoever” except for members of the 36th and 37th Congresses and certain other military and foreign officials.Note that there is no time limit in this language.Congress even got rid of these remaining exceptions in the Amnesty Act of 1898, which stated that “the disability imposed by section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States heretofore incurred is hereby removed.” There was no language preserving any of the disqualifications for future cases.In short, these anti-Trump ballot challenges are lawfare at its worst, trying to use the law and the courts as a political weapon. All of these lawsuits should be dismissed.sorry for such a long post

I don't think Trump is doing himself any favours atm.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3IMocu5ccY

Clueless Jake said it’s been the greatest time of peace in middle east since the “big guy” took office.

Like Obama, Biden keeps making empty threats and drawing more lines in the sand and Iran and Hamas just keep crossing them

Number of troops injured in Middle East drone attacks now at 46

By Meghann Myers
Nov 6 at 01:28 PM

https://www.militarytimes.com/news/y...-climbs-to-46/

Quote:

Dozens of American troops sustained injuries following drone attacks on bases in Iraq and Syria on Oct. 17 and 18, a Pentagon spokesperson told reporters Monday.
The total number of injuries is now 46, Air Force Brig. Gen. Pat Ryder said, more than double the 21 the Pentagon initially reported on Oct. 25.

While the injuries are considered minor and the troops returned to duty soon after, according to Ryder, reports of traumatic brain injury tend to trickle in after a blast, as symptoms can sometimes take days or weeks to surface.

Though the Oct. 17 and 18 attacks are still the only incidents resulting in U.S. casualties, Ryder said the number of total attacks since Oct. 17 has risen to 38, with eight of those coming over the weekend.

Defense Department officials have warned of increasing attacks on troops in the Middle East amid the Israel-Hamas war, though officials have stopped short of saying the increase in attacks is directly related to U.S. support of Israel.

“I think that we are all sensitive to the fact that there are tensions in the region ... you are seeing, and we probably will continue to see, groups that may try to exploit the situation to benefit their own interests, to include Iranian proxy groups,” Ryder said during a briefing Nov. 2.

The Pentagon ordered two strikes on Iran-backed militia facilities in Syria on Oct. 26 in retaliation for the attacks.
In response to overall security concerns in the Middle East, including force protection of U.S. troops, the U.S. has positioned two carrier strike groups in the eastern Mediterranean, along with an amphibious ready group with an embarked Marine Expeditionary Unit, several Air Force fighter squadrons and multiple Army air defense units.

On Oct. 31, the Pentagon announced 300 U.S.-based support troops would deploy to an undisclosed location.

“These additional troops will provide capabilities and explosive ordnance disposal, communications and other support enablers for forces already in the region,” Ryder said.

I can't believe republicans like to tie themselves to the great big anchor that is abortion, and then throw themselves into the deep end. So odd that it's mostly future democrats who are being aborted, and yet republicans are willing to let themselves sink for this one issue. Democrats are flooding over the southern border, let them reduce their own numbers in some manner if they're so inclined. :hmmm:

I still think they're cheating though.

Did republican’s win anything anywhere?

Democrat Andy Beshear easily wins re-election in deep-red Kentucky

Quote:

Democrat Andy Beshear delivered the first piece of good news for his party on election night 2023 as he was swept back into office by voters in a state long considered a Republican stronghold.

Mr Beshear campaigned on his opponent’s support for abortion restrictions, a key theme that played out in many races Tuesday evening, as well as on his own record as governor. The Democrat has enjoyed a healthy state economy boosted by private investments under his term in office, which also saw him earn credit for his response to several natural disasters in the state.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world...566b5e65&ei=14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buddahaid (Post 2891168)

Did republican’s win anything anywhere?

They kept Mississippi and censured Democrat Rep. Rashida Tlaib over her traitorous and inciteful remarks and actions in support of Hamas terrorist attack on Israel