Trump: You'd Have to be President to Understand Threats to America.

[TheCount]

To justify his stance, Trump cited looming threats to the homeland that he refused to discuss in detail.

“While I've been president, which is just for a very short period of time, I've learned tremendous things that you could only learn, frankly, if you were in a certain position, namely president,” he said. “And there are tremendous threats to our country. We will not allow that to happen, I can tell you that right now.”

http://thehill.com/policy/national-s...ming-next-week



Well, in that case I guess let's trust him?

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

Well, in that case I guess let's trust him?

It's funny how you--a "supporting member" of RPF--never really criticized your candidate Obama, but now all the sudden big government is problem for you. You supported big government for 8 years, but NOW that big government is a problem for you. Congratulations for supporting the creation of a monster, "supporting member."

Sounds like that needs two of these:

[rpfocus]

Yep, start by getting your bioscan entered into the national database. For your safety of course.

[Ender]

If that were true, then the answer would be to pull the troops home, surround the country to protect it and stop bombing the ME.

When W didn't do anything close to this after 911, I knew it was a ruse. And I was a kid.

[devil21]

If that were true, why so vague? Seems it would be in the general best interest to let every American know what the specific threats are.

[CaptUSA]

It's funny how you--a "supporting member" of RPF--never really criticized your candidate Obama, but now all the sudden big government is problem for you. You supported big government for 8 years, but NOW that big government is a problem for you. Congratulations for supporting the creation of a monster, "supporting member."

Sounds like that needs two of these:

What the hell is wrong with you?! Someone goes after your cult of personality so you go after the OP?!

How about trying to hold your man to the same standard? What if Bush said that? Or Romney?

[TheCount]

If that were true, then the answer would be to pull the troops home, surround the country to protect it and stop bombing the ME.

Oh, but Syria says we can put troops there now! I mean, why the $#@! not? It's what we've always wanted!

[Ender]

Oh, but Syria says we can put troops there now! I mean, why the $#@! not? It's what we've always wanted!

Well, you know- we bomb them for our freedom.

[TheCount]

Well, you know- we bomb them for our freedom.

Now we can bomb them for THEIR freedom.

[Ender]

Now we can bomb them for THEIR freedom.

'Zackly.

Win/win all around.

[tod evans]

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

What the hell is wrong with you?!

A few memory lapses and not being able to run as fast I used to. Other than that--not bad.

Someone goes after your cult of personality so you go after the OP?!

I was the one warning of Donny long before people jumped on the bandwagon.

As far as the OP. He is not the "supporting member" that he claims in his avatar. In fact, he is the exact opposite. He is posting to be disruptive. People here are at each others' throats, and people like the OP are laughing it up. The enemy of your enemy is not your friend.

[69360]

BS, potus is in a bubble. He has advisors constantly telling him this is a threat and that is a threat. If he steps back and looks at why this and that are threats, he would see that we caused most of them. Just pulling back all the troops and shuttering the bases all over the world would eliminate 90% of the threat I think. Then it would be manageable.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

[ ]

[Ender]

A few memory lapses and not being able to run as fast I used to. Other than that--not bad.






I was the one warning of Donny long before people jumped on the bandwagon.

As far as the OP. He is not the "supporting member" that he claims in his avatar. In fact, he is the exact opposite. He is posting to be disruptive. People here are at each others' throats, and people like the OP are laughing it up. The enemy of your enemy is not your friend.

Disagree.
@TheCount's post are usually sarcasm and I have found him hilarious in the past.

Right now he is posting stuff that we should all be aware of and I have no problem with that.

I do not understand why you troll his, Zip's and CPUd's continually. Yeah I get that you don't like them but you are keeping posts you supposedly hate on the front page for a long time. Seems counter productive to your aims.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

I do not understand why you troll his, Zip's and CPUd's continually.

I don't understand why they continually troll this site. Do you know?

Right now he is posting stuff that we should all be aware of and I have no problem with that.

You count on trolls to keep you informed?

[Ender]

I don't understand why they continually troll this site. Do you know?

I DON'T CONSIDER THEM TROLLS.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

I DON'T CONSIDER THEM TROLLS.

Then why are they here?

[Ender]

Then why are they here?

Same reason you and I are.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

Same reason you and I are.

I don't follow you.

[CPUd]

https://twitter.com/pollreport/statu...59885385363456

[Zippyjuan]

If that were true, then the answer would be to pull the troops home, surround the country to protect it and stop bombing the ME.

When W didn't do anything close to this after 911, I knew it was a ruse. And I was a kid.

During Bush's re-election campaign, when the race got close some mysterious "terror attack alert" was issued. He moved back up in the polls. After the election, a miracle happened. There were no more terror attack warnings issued. The world was saved!


http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/08/..._s=PM:POLITICS

Ridge: Bush officials sought to raise terror alert before '04 vote


"An election-eve drama was being played out at the highest levels of our government" after Osama bin Laden released a pre-election message critical of President George W. Bush, writes Ridge in his new book, "The Test of Our Times."

Attorney General John Ashcroft and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld strongly advocated raising the security threat level to "orange," even though Ridge believed a threatening message "should not be the sole reason to elevate the threat level."

The former Pennsylvania governor also writes that he saw no reason for the move, which he now calls a bad idea, because additional security precautions had already been taken in advance of the election.

"We certainly didn't believe the tape alone warranted action, and we weren't seeing any additional intelligence that justified it. In fact, we were incredulous," Ridge said of the push. "... I wondered, 'Is this about security or politics?' "

According to 2004 exit polls, one in five voters said terrorism was the most important issue to them. Of those, 86 percent voted for Bush, 14 percent for Democratic candidate John Kerry.

Ridge said that he had mixed emotions about the incident at the time, and that after it ended, he knew he had to follow through on his plans to leave the government.

[LibertyEagle]

What the hell is wrong with you?! Someone goes after your cult of personality so you go after the OP?!

How about trying to hold your man to the same standard? What if Bush said that? Or Romney?

WTH was wrong with what he said??? Do you doubt that he is briefed on issues that we are not told about? That's only common sense.

[LibertyEagle]

I don't understand why they continually troll this site. Do you know?

Confucius says not to ask trolls about other trolls.

[Zippyjuan]

As far as the OP. He is not the "supporting member" that he claims in his avatar. In fact, he is the exact opposite. He is posting to be disruptive. People here are at each others' throats, and people like the OP are laughing it up. The enemy of your enemy is not your friend.

You can't claim to be a "supporting member". It is a title you earn by contributing financially to the website. The admins add it to your avatar space.

[CPUd]

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

You can't claim to be a "supporting member". It is a title you earn by contributing financially to the website. The admins add it to your avatar space.

No, that is false. I just edited my profile and added "supporting member" to my avatar. I have never donated money to this site.

[Zippyjuan]

No, that is false. I just edited my profile and added "supporting member" to my avatar. I have never donated money to this site.

Guess I was wrong. Thought there was some sort of qualification to be able to claim that. Anybody have the details?

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

Guess I was wrong. Thought there was some sort of qualification to be able to claim that. Anybody have the details?

You go to your settings, edit your profile, and then check a box. TheCount did that to purposely deceive people on here. It's against the rules, but I would not even ban somebody for that. They should however, take their lumps without complaining.

[Zippyjuan]

You go to your settings, edit your profile, and then check a box. TheCount did that to purposely deceive people on here. It's against the rules, but I would not even ban somebody for that. They should however, take their lumps without complaining.

Thanks for the info. If it is against the rules, I guess the mods could change it.