Place your bets now!
Site Information
About Us
- RonPaulForums.com is an independent grassroots outfit not officially connected to Ron Paul but dedicated to his mission. For more information see our Mission Statement.
Place your bets now!
__________________________________________________ ________________
"A politician will do almost anything to keep their job, even become a patriot" - Hearst
No
Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.
Robert Heinlein
Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler
Groucho Marx
I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.
Linus, from the Peanuts comic
You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith
Alexis de Torqueville
Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it
A Zero Hedge comment
More interesting question would be how many calls to Trump and Haspel he will make before he flips.
I highly doubt he will.
yes he will. He read a fake news story about how she participated in torture and destroyed tapes. Both claims have been retracted.
I just want objectivity on this forum and will point out flawed sources or points of view at my leisure.
Originally Posted by spudea on 01/15/24Originally Posted by spudea on 04/20/16Originally Posted by spudea on 05/30/17
Zero percent chance he votes for her and I am sure Matt knows this.
If it follows some other recent votes he'll talk to her, she'll promise never to do it again, and that will be enough.
Oh she already has said that "Gina Haspel Vows She Won’t Allow Torture if She’s Confirmed to Run the C.I.A."
I think he'll vote for her
“…let us teach them that all who draw breath are of equal worth, and that those who seek to press heel upon the throat of liberty, will fall to the cry of FREEDOM!!!” – Spartacus, War of the Damned
BTC: 1AFbCLYU3G1dkbsSJnk3spWeEwpqYVC2Pq
__________________________________________________ ________________
"A politician will do almost anything to keep their job, even become a patriot" - Hearst
In wasn't clear to me at all that he would vote against Pompeo despite what he was saying publicly. Here is what I said (in a thread you made about Rand) five days before the vote when Rand was making the rounds in the press. There were a lot of political reasons to vote for Pompeo with no basically no political upside in voting against him. Haspel is a much easier no and that vote is actually close.
Just like Pompeo - if they need his vote, they will offer him something to get his vote.
We'll never know what it was with Pompeo, but I'm sure there was something that Rand was given. Not a personal thing, but some assurance that something he wants would get through.
I doubt they'd offer very much for Haspel - so I'm saying Rand is a "no" vote. Unfortunately, Rand is a double-edged sword. Unlike his father, Rand is willing to bend his principles on one matter if can get a return on another matter. That's a bad thing and a good thing, depending on how you look at it.
"And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works." - Bastiat
"It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere." - Voltaire
This will be used to try to convince Rand...
Rand Paul Explains His Surprise Vote For Chuck Hagel
"The president gets to choose political appointees," Paul says.
February 26, 2013
WASHINGTON — Kentucky Senator Rand Paul said his support for a filibuster against Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel never meant that he would vote against Hagel's confirmation.
"I voted no because I wanted more information and I think that part of what the Senate does is try to get information about the nominees," Paul told reporters in the basement of the Capitol after Hagel's confirmation Tuesday. "I've said all along that I give the president some prerogative in choosing his political appointees."
"There are many things I disagree with Chuck Hagel on, there are many things I disagree with John Kerry on, there are very few things I agree with the president on, but the president gets to choose political appointees," Paul said.
...
https://www.buzzfeed.com/rosiegray/r...or-chuck-hagel
"Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
"Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Pharma-Corporate-Internet-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
"Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
"Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul
Proponent of real science.
The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.
They didn't need the vote on Pompeo. That was one of the easier confirms that Trump has had. They actually didn't even need it in committee. I think completely opposite. Had they needed his vote Rand would have almost certainly voted against Pompeo.
I doubt he was given anything. I think it was a simple as Trump made an issue of it in the press and really wanted Rand's vote. He didn't want the embarrassment of the guy having to bypass going through committee. Rand didn't want to be on the outs with Trump with only an inconsequential vote that no one will appreciate to show for it.
Last edited by Krugminator2; 05-10-2018 at 06:22 PM.
I say there is an 80% chance Rand will vote no. It should be 100% though.
I didn't really care if Rand voted for Pompeo; my problem was the spectacle he made over it. Rand is increasingly being seen as someone who pulls stunts instead of standing on principles. So relatively speaking, it wasn't that big of a deal even though I didn't like it.
In this case though, I don't see how Rand can justify it just listening to her testimony. It will fundamentally change my opinion of him if he votes to confirm her.
Last edited by EBounding; 05-10-2018 at 01:02 PM.
"He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
"dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
"You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
"When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q
"Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul
"Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."
Probably not.
MAGA Allies: 'Bully Israel with undeclared nukes steals land'
Dangerous conspiracy theories on Right claim MAGA fake frontgroup
Poll: Should US apologize for financing radicalization of Afghan children in 80s?
Obama-Clinton Years: A Violent Chapter in World History
Trump: If (Neocon) Adelson Backs Rubio "He'll Have Total Control" Over Him
Delta variant, death of 9 Chinese engineers in terror attack led to airport chaos & quick Kabul fall?
"And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works." - Bastiat
"It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere." - Voltaire
It would be very shocking to me if Rand votes to confirm.
Why Isn’t Gina Haspel Coming Clean About Torture?
Why Isn’t Gina Haspel Coming Clean About Torture?
By SEN. RAND PAUL
May 11, 2018
We know that in the early 2000s, Gina Haspel’s CIA was rendering accused terrorists to unfathomable torture in Syria, as well as Egypt and Jordan. And we know that in 2005, Haspel herself was busy ordering the destruction of evidence of her involvement in the waterboarding of prisoners.
What we don’t know is if she was involved in sending Maher Arar, a Canadian engineer, to Syria, where he was tortured by Bashar Assad—the same Assad now condemned for gassing his own people; the same Assad the CIA has been trying to depose for the past six years.
Did Haspel participate or even order Arar and others to be sent to Syria to be tortured? We will likely never know: Haspel, whose nomination for director of the CIA is currently being considered by the Senate, refuses to declassify the dark underbelly of her involvement in extreme rendition and torture-by-proxy.
Jane Mayer recounted Arar’s story in 2005 after interviewing him for The New Yorker:
Ten hours after landing in Jordan, Arar … was driven to Syria, where interrogators … “just began beating on me.” They whipped his hands repeatedly with two-inch-thick electrical cables, and kept him in a windowless underground cell that he likened to a grave. “Not even animals could withstand it,” he said. Although he initially tried to assert his innocence, he eventually confessed to anything his tormentors wanted him to say. “You just give up, he said. “You become like an animal.”
A year later, in October, 2003, Arar was released without charges. … Imad Moustapha, the Syrian Ambassador in Washington, announced that his country had found no links between Arar and terrorism. Arar, it turned out, had been sent to Syria on orders from the U.S. government, under a secretive program known as “extraordinary rendition.” This program had been devised as a means of extraditing terrorism suspects from one foreign state to another for interrogation and prosecution. Critics contend that the unstated purpose of such renditions is to subject the suspects to aggressive methods of persuasion that are illegal in America—including torture.
Was Haspel simply a loyal dupe, unable to protest an accused man being sent to certain barbaric torture? Or was she an eager participant in this dark chapter in our history?
If she had any criticisms at the time, Haspel, who is currently the acting head of the CIA, has the power to declassify them. And yet all we’ve gotten are select records that don’t address her participation in extraordinary rendition.
Know this: That fact alone should be enough to cause the Senate to reject her nomination.
Connect With Us