Welcome to ECCIE, become a part of the fastest growing adult community. Take a minute & sign up!

Welcome to ECCIE - Sign up today!

Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!

Go Premium

Go Back   ECCIE Worldwide > General Interest > The Political Forum
test
The Political Forum Discuss anything related to politics in this forum. World politics, US Politics, State and Local.

Most Favorited Images
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
Most Liked Images
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
Top Reviewers
cockalatte 650
MoneyManMatt 490
Jon Bon 408
Still Looking 399
samcruz 399
Harley Diablo 377
honest_abe 362
George Spelvin 330
DFW_Ladies_Man 313
Starscream66 310
Chung Tran 288
lupegarland 287
nicemusic 285
You&Me 281
sharkman29 264
Top Posters
DallasRain71525
biomed170024
Yssup Rider63276
gman4455626
LexusLover51038
offshoredrilling50122
WTF48272
pyramider46452
bambino46174
The_Waco_Kid41261
CryptKicker37439
Dr-epg37286
Mokoa36516
Chung Tran36100
Still Looking35944

Thread Closed
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-24-2025, 07:25 PM   #91
Mort Watt
Valued Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 22, 2025
Location: USA
Posts: 221
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by txdot-guy View Post
I’ve been known to take an excerpt from another article or post on the internet without giving credit. It’s not common but as long as it’s accurate it doesn’t matter to me. I think a bigger problem is that people are starting to use AI to fill out their posts sometimes without knowing if the AI gave out accurate or even real information.
You are certainly more objective than most here, so I know you can generally weed out the crap. But still...if you looked at the source for what he copied, you might be a little more hesitant to engage around it.
Mort Watt is offline  
Old 11-24-2025, 09:11 PM   #92
txdot-guy
Lifetime Premium Access
 
txdot-guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1, 2010
Location: Austin Texas
Posts: 5,339
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mort Watt View Post
You are certainly more objective than most here, so I know you can generally weed out the crap. But still...if you looked at the source for what he copied, you might be a little more hesitant to engage around it.
So what. People post Trump’s crazy shithole social media posts all the time. Is this other person you reference any crazier than Trump is? I seriously doubt it.

The thing to remember in this case is that their views aren’t wrong. Creating a video asking the military and the intelligence community to disregard their orders is not a small thing. I understand why people can have strong opinions about it.

But that also doesn’t mean that the people in the video are seditious or traitorous.

Calmer heads need to prevail. Unfortunately you aren’t going to find them on an internet message board.
txdot-guy is online now  
Old 11-25-2025, 05:09 AM   #93
69in2it69
Valued Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 5, 2016
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 1,316
Encounters: 14
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by txdot-guy View Post
Calmer heads need to prevail. Unfortunately you aren’t going to find them on an internet message board.

Or in the White House or the Trump administration...
69in2it69 is offline  
Old 11-25-2025, 09:51 AM   #94
Yssup Rider
Valued Poster
 
Yssup Rider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 3, 2010
Location: Clarksville
Posts: 63,276
Encounters: 69
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by texassapper View Post
As if I gave two shits about your opinions… ������
Yeah, but at least they’re HIS opinions and not stolen from someone else.

But at least you took the opportunity to insult.

MAGAs don’t change. But the Congress will.

Then you can go back to calling everybody a POS again.

I never saw any answer from you on the biggest question raised by this thread. Do you support Trump’s threat of execution for sedition of these elected representatives ? Or are you , like him, just running your mouth?

LOLLING!
Yssup Rider is offline  
Old 11-26-2025, 09:12 AM   #95
Yssup Rider
Valued Poster
 
Yssup Rider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 3, 2010
Location: Clarksville
Posts: 63,276
Encounters: 69
Default

Crickets from our friendly neighborhood MAGAs. This comes as a tremendous shock.

Maybe as txdot said, they’re trying to cool their heads over this.
Yssup Rider is offline  
Old 11-26-2025, 11:34 AM   #96
lustylad
Lifetime Premium Access
 
lustylad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 8, 2010
Location: Steeler Nation
Posts: 19,752
Encounters: 10
Default Don't Abuse the UCMJ

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yssup Rider View Post
I never saw any answer from you on the biggest question raised by this thread...
That's because none of the six video participants will give us a clear answer to the big question. All they do is dissemble and obfuscate. If you watched any of last Sunday's talk shows, you would have noticed this.

Uh-oh! Looks like AZ Sen. Mark Kelly may be recalled to active duty for possible "court-martial proceedings or administrative measures".


The ‘Illegal Orders’ Controversy

Democrats initiate a dangerous debate.


By James Freeman
Nov. 24, 2025 3:25 pm ET

One doesn’t have to approve of the way President Donald Trump responded to several congressional Democrats to deplore their reckless suggestion that U.S. troops should disobey the president’s orders. A video published by the Democrats deserved widespread condemnation, not death threats.

Today the Defense Department posted on X about a Democratic senator from Arizona who appeared in the video urging resistance to illegal orders—without claiming that any particular Trump order is illegal. According to the Pentagon:

"The Department of War has received serious allegations of misconduct against Captain Mark Kelly, USN (Ret.). In accordance with the Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 688, and other applicable regulations, a thorough review of these allegations has been initiated to determine further actions, which may include recall to active duty for court-martial proceedings or administrative measures. This matter will be handled in compliance with military law, ensuring due process and impartiality. Further official comments will be limited, to preserve the integrity of the proceedings.

The Department of War reminds all individuals that military retirees remain subject to the UCMJ for applicable offenses, and federal laws such as 18 U.S.C. § 2387 prohibit actions intended to interfere with the loyalty, morale, or good order and discipline of the armed forces. Any violations will be addressed through appropriate legal channels.

All service members are reminded that they have a legal obligation under the UCMJ to obey lawful orders and that orders are presumed to be lawful. A service member’s personal philosophy does not justify or excuse the disobedience of an otherwise lawful order."



This message was rather tame compared with Mr. Trump’s online posts last week when he responded to news of the video that Sen. Kelly and his party colleagues had posted. Mr. Trump wrote:

"It’s called SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL. Each one of these traitors to our Country should be ARRESTED AND PUT ON TRIAL. Their words cannot be allowed to stand – We won’t have a Country anymore!!! An example MUST BE SET.
Mr. Trump later posted:

SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH!"


The next day, Mr. Trump told Brian Kilmeade of Fox News that he wasn’t threatening the lawmakers with death but that they were in “serious trouble.” So even Mr. Trump is acknowledging that he overreacted wildly, and the overreaction hasn’t necessarily ended. Better than court-martial proceedings would be a bipartisan censure of the video participants in the Congress, but Democratic leaders are rarely willing to cross party progressives.

A series of recent media appearances suggests that the video participants who started this poisonous controversy were acting out of partisanship, not patriotism. Members of the video gang keep showing up for TV interviews and refusing to name any illegal Trump order while pretending they were simply offering standard affirmations of the rules soldiers must follow. This is false, as the Democrats’ video clearly presented this moment as a crisis of lawbreaking that soldiers must resist.

Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D., Mich.) posted the video to X, adding:

"We want to speak directly to members of the Military and the Intelligence Community.

The American people need you to stand up for our laws and our Constitution.

Don’t give up the ship."


Speaking directly to members of the military and the intelligence community, Sen. Slotkin says in the video: “We know you are under enormous stress and pressure right now.” But why, if there is no law-breaking?

In the video the Democratic lawmakers go on to claim that Americans’ trust in their military is “at risk” and state: “This administration is pitting our uniformed military and intelligence community professionals against American citizens.”

The Democrats’ unsubtle message in the video continues: “Right now, the threats to our Constitution aren’t just coming from abroad, but from right here at home. Our laws are clear. You can refuse illegal orders. You can refuse illegal orders. You must refuse illegal orders.”

“We know this is hard,” says Rep. Jason Crow (D., Colo.) in the video, but ask him precisely why this would be a hard time for soldiers to act lawfully and he starts doing a rhetorical tap-dance.

Last week on Fox News, Mr. Crow couldn’t give Martha MacCallum an example of an illegal Trump order and under her questioning he suggested that he was simply conducting military training, which would seem to be a violation of the separation of powers. Managing U.S. troops is the job of the executive branch, not the legislative. This column will go out on a limb and guess that the executive branch didn’t request congressional help in the form of partisan videos on social media implying that the executive branch is violating the law.

Mr. Crow repeated his line with Margaret Brennan on CBS on Sunday. According to the CBS transcript he noted Mr. Trump’s history of harsh rhetoric and said that “if we wait until the moment that he gives a manifestly unlawful order to a young soldier, then we have failed them. We have to start that conversation now and get people thinking about the distinction, which is exactly what we did.”

So there’s still no specific allegation of illegal orders and Mr. Crow is still pretending that it’s the job of Congress to train soldiers and that the video was just standard rule-of-law stuff. He added on CBS that “it’s very telling that simply restating their obligation to the Constitution and the law, which we do constantly with our service members, gets this type of response from the president.”

Mr. Kelly followed him on the CBS program and was willing to call Trump targeting of alleged drug boats “questionable, at best” but suggested he needed to receive more briefings on the subject. He then made his case for the video based in part on disturbing comments Mr. Trump had made as a candidate prior to the 2016 election!

Sen. Slotkin appeared with ABC’s Martha Raddatz on Sunday and similarly avoided making any specific claim of an illegal order. Here’s an excerpt from the ABC transcript:

RADDATZ: ... Do you believe President Trump has issued any illegal orders?

SLOTKIN: To my knowledge, I — I am not aware of things that are illegal, but certainly there are some legal gymnastics that are going on with these Caribbean strikes and everything related to Venezuela.


But when pressed by the ABC host for specifics, the senator then moved on to sharing concerns about U.S. troops in U.S. cities, but again with no specific allegation of an illegal order. There are certainly arguments to be made against the use of federal troops in various situations from offshore drug interdiction to urban violence. But the Democratic video crew seems to lack either the competence or the confidence to make them.

This suggests their media stunt was about finding ways to win over progressives with anti-Trump ferocity instead of having to endorse the left’s latest politically toxic demands on issues like gender and climate.

The American people must always be on guard against presidents abusing their authority and also against members of Congress abusing their authority. This essential vigilance isn’t strengthened, but is significantly weakened, when people in positions of power launch partisan accusations of such abuses without specific claims.

James Freeman is the co-author of “The Cost: Trump, China and American Revival” and also the co-author of “Borrowed Time: Two Centuries of Booms, Busts and Bailouts at Citi.”

https://www.wsj.com/opinion/the-ille...versy-03740a7e
lustylad is offline  
Old 11-26-2025, 12:21 PM   #97
lustylad
Lifetime Premium Access
 
lustylad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 8, 2010
Location: Steeler Nation
Posts: 19,752
Encounters: 10
Default "They're All Graduates of the Adam Schiff School of Innuendo"

From the WSJ comments to the above column:

MOST LIKED: If many people keep warning me not to beat my wife, I am going to begin wondering what I did to get this warning. I am going to wonder why they tell me that when I didn't beat her.

We keep hearing Democrats tell us that Trump is breaking the law, but they don't mention what laws he broke. They tell us he wants to take away the Constitution, but don't show us what method he is using to do such an absurd thing.

So please don't tell me Trump is a liar without telling me specifically what lie he told. Please don't say he is a thief without telling me what he stole.

Every military recruit learns the UCMJ, which includes specifics on refusing illegal orders. However, soldiers are not lawyers, and they must follow orders.

That well-respected leaders would imply illegality when none occurred is very disturbing and should be examined. I believe it is wrong, even if these are only "half-allegations." These men and women should be ashamed of their cheap trick.



2. I am no fan of Trump, but these 6 are crazy in their incitement and clear suggestion that Trump's orders are unlawful. These 6 deserve condemnation. This is like my neighbor telling me in front of my spouse that I need to be faithful else she can walk away, without giving any evidence that I was unfaithful. Create suspicion, discontent deliberately - that's what these 6 crooks did.
lustylad is offline  
Old 11-26-2025, 01:00 PM   #98
txdot-guy
Lifetime Premium Access
 
txdot-guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1, 2010
Location: Austin Texas
Posts: 5,339
Default

Don’t you think that Trump and Hegseth weaken their own authority when they actively call out for prosecution of these individuals.

Why decry this as sedition and call for the death penalty if in fact there are no illegal orders.

The administration’s reaction to the video tells us that the president is actively worried about people perceiving his orders as unconstitutional to begin with.

At least that’s how I see it.

It seems that a quiet confidence might be the better choice.
txdot-guy is online now  
Old 11-26-2025, 01:14 PM   #99
bb1961
Valued Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 5, 2010
Location: houston
Posts: 7,375
Default

Why did these rabble rousers pull this stunt in the first place...the mice that roared
bb1961 is offline  
Old 11-26-2025, 02:17 PM   #100
Mort Watt
Valued Poster
 
Join Date: Sep 22, 2025
Location: USA
Posts: 221
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lustylad View Post
That's because none of the six video participants will give us a clear answer to the big question. All they do is dissemble and obfuscate....
Pray tell, exactly WHAT is that "big question."

I'm pretty sure I know. But I really want you to state it here.

Please. By all means. Maybe we can help answer it!


*************************

Quote:
Originally Posted by lustylad View Post

The ‘Illegal Orders’ Controversy

Democrats initiate a dangerous debate.


By James Freeman
Nov. 24, 2025 3:25 pm ET

....
Quote:
Originally Posted by lustylad View Post
From the WSJ comments to the above column....

Ahhh Christ...are we doin' this again?

Is it....more than "Zero-point-zero" percent this time?

(dude...for real, WSJ opinion columns are barely more than click-bait bullshit, playing to a miniscule crowd. Even the NY Times columns, which are often absurdly biased, are better than this)
Mort Watt is offline  
Old 11-26-2025, 05:08 PM   #101
texassapper
Valued Poster
 
texassapper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 19, 2017
Location: Dallas
Posts: 6,047
Encounters: 39
Default

Well, now we have an answer as to why the six Democrats made their little stunt. Implying that Trump is issuing illegal orders has given the crazies on the left to go ahead to start shooting National Guard troops because after all, they’re just acting on those questionable orders from Donald Trump. The left is so proud another action for the revolution.
texassapper is offline  
Old 11-26-2025, 06:25 PM   #102
Yssup Rider
Valued Poster
 
Yssup Rider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 3, 2010
Location: Clarksville
Posts: 63,276
Encounters: 69
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by texassapper View Post
Well, now we have an answer as to why the six Democrats made their little stunt. Implying that Trump is issuing illegal orders has given the crazies on the left to go ahead to start shooting National Guard troops because after all, they’re just acting on those questionable orders from Donald Trump. The left is so proud another action for the revolution.
That's deluded and a fucking lie.
Yssup Rider is offline  
Old 11-26-2025, 06:54 PM   #103
texassapper
Valued Poster
 
texassapper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 19, 2017
Location: Dallas
Posts: 6,047
Encounters: 39
Default

Yup. An Afghani illegal alien
texassapper is offline  
Old 11-26-2025, 10:24 PM   #104
Ducbutter
Valued Poster
 
Ducbutter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 25, 2012
Location: Ahead of you.
Posts: 963
Encounters: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by txdot-guy View Post
Don’t you think that Trump and Hegseth weaken their own authority when they actively call out for prosecution of these individuals. Authority? No that's a legal issue. Credibility? Maybe, though neither of them will ever gain any with their biggest critics nor lose it with their most staunch supporters.

Why decry this as sedition and call for the death penalty if in fact there are no illegal orders. Clearly, there are illegal orders. I don't think that's what Lusty's article is arguing. And Trump didn't exactly call for the execution of the six Dems in question either. He only exclaimed it a penalty applicable if convicted of sedition. Which it is. As are fines and jail time. To call it "ham fisted" would be more than charitable (he did walk it back,no?), but is anyone really surprised at this point?

The administration’s reaction to the video tells us that the president is actively worried about people perceiving his orders as unconstitutional to begin with.Not necessarily.

At least that’s how I see it.

It seems that a quiet confidence might be the better choice.
It most generally is a better choice but why would you think Trump would make it?
Happy Thanksgiving, you bunch of slobs!
At least, that's how I see it
Ducbutter is offline  
Old 11-26-2025, 10:39 PM   #105
jayjaychrome
Premium Access
 
jayjaychrome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 13, 2012
Location: Houston
Posts: 402
Encounters: 16
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lustylad View Post

This is like my neighbor telling me in front of my spouse that I need to be faithful else she can walk away, without giving any evidence that I was unfaithful. Create suspicion, discontent deliberately

So here's the thing...


If all it takes is someone saying "be faithful or she can leave" to make your wife suspect that you're unfaithful and want to leave, then her suspicions weren't caused by the guy saying to be faithful. If he's truly faithful and gave his wife no reason to think otherwise, she'll likely proudly respond "oh I know he is" because she's secure in her relationship. And you wouldn't need to freak out, or even care, because you already know you're faithful and you know that she knows you're faithful. But if she's cheating? Well that's a different story. Catch my drift?


Now relate this to your metaphor. Consider who the real cause of the suspicion might be.
jayjaychrome is offline  
Thread Closed



AMPReviews.net
Find Ladies
Hot Women

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright © 2009 - 2016, ECCIE Worldwide, All Rights Reserved