Donald Trump

No Comfort In Trump Foreign Policy

Trump's shameful wimping out under firm questioning about Iraq may reflect troubles in the polls.

|

cornstalker/Flickr

Alas, Donald Trump has backed off from his charge that the Bush administration lied the country into war against Iraq, telling a CNN town-hall broadcast Thursday night that he doesn't know why Bush invaded. "I'm not talking about lying. I'm not talking about not lying," he said. "No one knows why we went into Iraq."

But Trump restated the obvious: that Saddam Hussein and Iraq did not fly planes into the World Trade Center. And he again, to his credit, said the war "may have been the worst decision any president has made in the history of this country…. Whether [George W. Bush] lied or not, it was a horrible decision." (See video.)

Trump's shameful wimping out under firm questioning from a voter may reflect troubles in the polls—he was campaigning in South Carolina, where George W. Bush and anything military are popular—but it's a blow to the badly needed public discussion of the disastrous war, which has destabilized the Middle East by boosting the bin Ladenites and helping to give rise to the Islamic State, first in Iraq, then in Syria, and now far beyond.

As for Trump, who seems willing to take whatever position serves his purpose at the moment, we now know that he told radio host Howard Stern on September, 11, 2002, six months before Bush started the war, that he favored the mission. (Audio here.) Asked by Stern if he approved of the coming invasion, Trump said, "Yeah, I guess so," adding, "I wish the first time it was done correctly."

But before he was reminded of that piece of Trumpiana, he told the town-hall audience, "I said don't go into Iraq. It's going to ruin the balance of the Middle East…. It may have been the worst decision anybody has made, any president has made in the history of this country."

Asked by town-hall host Anderson Cooper about his opposite remark to Stern, Trump conceded that he "may have" said it (again, here's the audio), chalking the statement up to his not being a politician and its being the first time he was asked the question—rather peculiar excuses. "By the time the war started, I was against the war," Trump told Cooper. "And shortly thereafter, I was really against it."

We have no evidence of this. The public record shows that Trump did not express opposition until 2004, over a year after the invasion, when the occupation of Iraq had obviously gone sour.

Trump has repeatedly said he was an early opponent of the invasion and even that the Bush administration asked him to keep quiet about the war. Again, he has not proved this.

All of this is really too bad. The Bush team did indeed lie its way into war with Iraq, and the war has had horrible consequences. If you doubt that dishonesty was at the core of the push for war, see this reading list compiled by Scott Horton, the best antiwar radio host around. (Also see this summary of accurate reporting during the run-up to the war and Justin Raimondo's "Were We Lied into War?") It doesn't take much Googling to learn that the administration was lying big time and that he was called out at the time.

So where does that leave us? Trump's reversal enables anyone who refuses to even consider that the U.S. government would lie its way into a war to say, "See? Even Trump doesn't say that anymore." That's too bad.

The reversal and revelation from the Stern show also demonstrate what we already knew: that Trump can't be trusted. Some have grasped onto a few isolated flashes of foreign-policy realism in Trump's statements, such as his criticism (at least now) of the bombing and regime change in Libya, of regime change in Syria, and his apparent reluctance to confront Russia in Syria. But what reason has he given us to think he really believes anything he says? He's been on all sides of issues over the years. Moreover, his alleged realism must be judged against his promise to make the military so powerful that "no one will mess with us." How does he define "mess with us"? Considering the size of his ego and his thin skin, I shudder to think what he as "commander in chief" would regard as an adequate reason to use military force.

I see no way for advocates of a pacifist foreign policy to find comfort in Trump. The fit just is not there. Of course, no Republican rival is any better, and rhetorically they are all far worse.

And the Democrats? Hillary Clinton's foreign policy would be just as much at home on the Republican side. The war party is really a unified entity, despite some surface differences. And yes, Bernie Sanders's record is terrible, even allowing for his vote against the Iraq war resolution. He favors U.S. bombing in Syria and elsewhere, and he wants to get Saudi Arabia and other Arab governments to fight the same jihadis they've encouraged for so long in their campaign against Iran. Moreover, Sanders has shown little interest in foreign policy during the campaign.

Still I can't help but think that Sanders's disposition is more consistent with a noninterventionist foreign policy. Maybe it's no more than a gut feeling, but it's something. I generally see no good reason to vote, and I certainly wouldn't give money to a candidate. But I confess that I sometimes root against a particular candidate. If Sanders gets the nomination, I expect I'll be rooting for the Republican to lose.

Advertisement

NEXT: What You Think You Know Is Wrong

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. “”””Trump said, “Yeah, I guess so,””””

    Good work, we have finally found the person guilty of pushing the US into war in Iraq. It was that “Yeah, I guess so” that got the war started.

    Trump was not like Reason Magazine in 2003 when it put up cover article after cover article against the invasion of Iraq, Ooops, so maybe not I guess they were busy that year.

    https://reason.com/covers/all

    1. Yeah, I hate Trump and will never vote for him…but that answer hardly qualifies him as a “liar”. If that’s the best the “Trump is a liar” folks can come up with, they’re not trying at all.

      1. In our modern life various Today TechSpot and many technologies we are used, which helps to improve our life and easy going. Use of technology has a kind of the gift, which we can see in our society as well as our life also …
        http://todaytechspot.com/

    2. Richman drools the following:

      ” If Sanders gets the nomination, I expect I’ll be rooting for the Republican to lose.”

      As I’ve been saying for months here, LIBERTARIANS ARE NOTHING MORE THAN A TOOL OF THE SOCIALISTS.

      Richman’s statement coupled with the insane libertarian platform of open borders and unlimited immigration only confirm this fact.

      This is the reason that 45 years after the beginning of the party they still can’t get anyone elected to dogcatcher much less a higher office.

      1. Richman is no libertarian.

        1. You cannot be a libertarian and root for Bernie, who is a Marxist in all but name. It’s simply a contradiction.

          1. He’s a socialist, and that is a form of Marxist; ergo, he is a Marxist.

      2. LIBERTARIANS PROGRESSITARIANS ARE NOTHING MORE THAN A TOOL OF THE SOCIALISTS.

        Fixed that for ya.

        But I confess that I sometimes root against a particular candidate. If Sanders gets the nomination, I expect I’ll be rooting for the Republican to lose.

        I note in passing Sheldon’s usual incoherence.

        Rooting for Sanders against any Republican nominee sounds a lot more like rooting *for* a particular candidate than *against* a particular candidate.

        Finally, there is a self professed Socialist for Sheldon to cheer on to the Presidency! Hallelujah!

        Not that he would ever actually vote – that would require taking responsibility for a real choice available in reality, and Sheldon doesn’t play that.

        By the way, if Bernie does get the nomination, I’m just all atingle in anticipation of the article “The Libertarian Case for Bernie”.

        Reason did a “Who’s Getting Our Votes: Reason Writers’ 2012 Presidential Picks”. It was all Gary Johnson, or no vote. If Bernie gets the nomination, I expect a few Bernie votes from the new Progressitarian Reason, and no chance of a Repub vote.

        1. buy — I noticed you conveniently did not address my comment concerning the Libertarian/Socialist plank of each of the party’s platforms of open borders and unlimited immigration.

          You didn’t FIX anything for me (you sound like Jeb). I stand by my assertion that Libertarians are nothing more than a tool of the socialists.

          And that’s why none of you can even get elected to dog catcher.

          1. Unlimited immigration and open borders are pretty ridiculous if you do indeed like democracies. Of course, democracies all violate NAP.

            Therefore, the real problem with open borders is the same as the problem without it, that people think it’s legitimate to vote for aggression against other people. You’ve only proven that government is an intolerable evil.

            Ergo, the An-Cap position, aka following NAP to it’s logical conclusion, is the only logically and ethically consistent one. Then it wouldn’t matter if the “borders” were open because anyone travelling over them couldn’t oppress you any more than any native-born could.

            1. ace — First of all, I don’t care if democracies violate NAP, CCR, ABB, CAA, YOU, WAS, CAT, ZAY or TTA. Ergo, democracies are not the least bit ridiculous.

              Therefore there is no problem with closed borders. Further more, building a wall is NOT an aggressive act (who is harmed by this?). Do you on a daily basis perform the “aggressive ” act of actually locking your doors? You’re just plain mean!

              Of course an outsider could cross the border and oppress me just as much as “any native-born could” but I believe we are too busy with the business of shooting the aggressive natives to actually take on the full-time prospect of having to kill the illegal aliens too.

    3. DJ,

      Sheldon missed more than the Reason covers. We all saw Don backtrack and back off of the Code Pink plank, “Bush lied, people died.” Somebody may have got to him and told him it could be a conservo vote depressor for him. I doubt it was because he had a coincidental “Road to Damascus” sea-change on that point.

      But apart from the mass of PC Libs that Donald grew up and matured to very late middle age, or early old age in, anyone conversant in the issue knows that Bill and Hillary’s co-Presidency gave them the same wrong intel about Saddam’s Nuke weapons program as “W” touted. Also that the Brits and our Euro allies did as well. We all got snookered by Saddam, who did have the beginnings of one (Isreal destroyed a Nuke power plant he was building years before the first Bush Iraq war, he obviously was trying to by “yellow cake,” and we found detailed plans for the program) and lied to his Generals about a secret program he had.

      This was a smart move for a bully who had been largely disarmed and shrunk by us during the first Bush Iraq war. It was believed, as I noted, by all leading western spies, so probably also by near eastern country spies. A hand misdirection for a weakened local bully. So no, those of you who bought into the “Bush Lied” song, it just aint so.

  2. Bush lied.
    Hillary complied.
    They died.
    Trump denied.

    1. Bill got fried.

      1. and reason died.

        The end.

    2. I come here for the entertaining comments like these. Good show, sir.

  3. Trump’s reversal enables anyone who refuses to even consider that the U.S. government would lie its way into a war to say, “See? Even Trump doesn’t say that anymore.”

    Let’s ponder this sentence for a moment.

    1. Seems perfectly cromulent to me.

  4. It is just as stupid to hold the Iraq war as some kind of holy relic that can never be debated or questioned as it is to blame it for every problem in the world and all of those in the future. Since we can’t live the counter factual of not invading, we will never know for sure if the Iraq war was a mistake or not. Our sorry ass political class, however, owes themselves and the country an honest assessment of it and at least trying to understand how it affects our situation now and what lessons are to be learned from it.

    The Republican bed wetting over Trump daring to question the war is just another in the endless stream of examples of how stupid our political class is.

    1. Since we can’t live the counter factual of not invading, we will never know for sure if the Iraq war was a mistake or not.

      There’s two aspects which are conflated.

      1. Knocking off Saddam’s government. Whether or not this was a good idea is debatable.
      2. Occupying the country and “nation-building”- not even close to debatable, a disaster from top to bottom.

      1. Yes and no. Saying the two can be separated is assuming that it would have been possible to invade and then just leave the place in chaos. I don’t think that was any kind of a viable option.

        The key mistake Bush made in Iraq was believing the con men expats who said we could just roll in and replace Saddam with our own cronies. And that was just not true. Iraq was a completely broken society. Once we took out Saddam the entire civic culture collapsed like a house of cards. There were no more police forces or government of any kind outside of the Kurdish areas. . There was never going to be any way to just remove Saddam, put in our guy and go home.

        1. I don’t think that was any kind of a viable option.

          And right there is the error. Of course it’s an option. Of course it was possible. And IF one comes down on the side of eliminating the Baathist government (or analogously, the Taliban government in 2002 Afghanistan), it’s the only sensible one unless your goal is to continue the chaos and get sunk into a Forever War. Which, oddly enough, is exactly what happened.

          1. Since going home would have left a failed state and nothing but a home for every terrorist in the world, I don’t see how that was any kind of a realistic option. Could you do it? Sure. But they could drop a nuke on New York too if they wanted to. That doesn’t make doing that a viable option.

            1. Drop a nuke on New York? You’re hallucinating.

              1. Do you not understand the post or are you being sarcastic? I honestly can’t tell.

                1. Just quoting your words. A bunch of 15th century camel jockeys (because that’s the terrorists) will gather in Iraq and then nuke New York. That’s totally fucking nuts.

                  1. But my words were not meant literally. They were meant to illustrate a larger point. My point is that just because it is physically possible to do something, doesn’t make it a realistic option. It is possible for the US air force to nuke New York. That however is utterly insane and in no way a “viable option” available to the President. So when you say “sure we could have left” that while strictly true, doesn’t mean leaving was any kind of a viable option, since just deposing Saddam and leaving would have made things much worse than even the worst counter factual of doing nothing at all.

                    I don’t know what else to tell you. I can’t tell if you are joking or really have issues understanding writing that is not completely straight forward, concrete and literal.

                    1. just deposing Saddam and leaving would have made things much worse than even the worst counter factual of doing nothing at all.

                      Not our problem. Ditto Afghanistan and all the other places where we’re killing people and accomplishing nothing.

                    2. When Iraq ended up being another base to attack us, it would have been our problem. I am sympathetic to the idea of launching a punitive expedition and just going full Gangus on these assholes and then telling them they had better never give us a reason to come back. The reality, however, is that in 2001 at least, there was no political will do that.

                      I will say this, however, the aspect of Iraq that no one ever talks about is that it is likely the last time the United States ever deals with a Middle Eastern Country in anything approaching a humane way. If there ever is another big terrorist attack an it is traced back to the Middle East. the American public will not tolerate anything other than revenge.

                    3. “When Iraq ended up being another base to attack us”

                      We could have dealt with it then and much more cheaply than with nation building.

                    4. OMWC thought you were saying the terrorist could drop the bomb not the US government.

        2. If Bremer had not been allowed, or instructed, to disband the Iraqi Army it might have been a completely different situation.

          Having hundreds of thousand Iraqi men on our payroll for about $20 each per month could have been a very stabilizing force.

          Maybe, maybe not. Like John says we can never know but I thought it was stupid at the time and haven’t changed my opinion.

          1. I was in Iraq when that happened and i can tell you that would have never worked. First, the Army was the major means of oppression used by Saddam. The country hated the army and had the US used the Army as it was, the country would have immediately rose in revolt. Second, the Army was a complete mess. It was falling apart and completely corrupt and undisciplined. At the same time they disbanded the Army, they tried to keep the police forces in tact. And it was a complete failure. It was only after they disbanded the police and started from scratch, did they make any progress. The same would have been true with the Army.

            It all goes back to the fundamental misconception the US government and still to this day a lot of people had about Iraq. You have to understand Saddam destroyed the entire civil and government structure of Iraq. As soon as he was out of power, the whole thing collapsed and there there was nothing to do but start over.

        3. ‘Saying the two can be separated is assuming that it would have been possible to invade and then just leave the place in chaos. I don’t think that was any kind of a viable option.”

          Yes it was.

          1. No it wasn’t. I was there. And the idea is absurd and anyone who saw Iraq in 2003 knows it.

      2. Really good comment. Knocking of Saddam seems like a pretty clear winner though. He would have funded anti-Assad insurgents of the worst kind, and now the Kurds are free to be awesome.

    2. “Since we can’t live the counter factual of not invading, we will never know for sure if the Iraq war was a mistake or not.”

      well certainly not with that attitude you wont.

      1. With that attitude, you couldn’t say that Vietnam was a mistake. Or our insane involvement in WW1. Or the Philippine occupation after the Spanish-American war. Or the Canadian invasions during the War of 1812…

        Or the Roman attack during the battle of Cannae… Or the Persian tactics during the battle of Gaugamela…\

        I mean, I could go on…

    3. Since we can’t live the counter factual of not invading, we will never know for sure if the Iraq war was a mistake or not.

      I was in the Iraq war. It was a mistake.

      After 9/11 we should have put up a trillion $ bounty on Osama’s head (a few billion for his lieutenants) and pulled every American troop out of any foreign country. Osama head on a pike in front of the White House in, what, a few weeks? No more stupid wars.

  5. Oh my god!! Trump said “I guess so”!! Seriously is this the best you can do? There’s plenty of reasons to dislike Trump, but this is pretty weak.

  6. I’m annoyed with the ‘by Reason Staff’ thing. It got me to click on another Richman article.

    From one of Richman’s links:
    They’d take a little bit of intelligence, cherry-pick it, make it sound much more exciting, usually by taking it out of context, often by juxtaposition of two pieces of information that don’t belong together.”

    Pot, meet kettle.

    1. Would anyone who isn’t a masochist chick on a Richman article if they were not tricked into doing so?

      1. Sometimes it is amusing to see what his self-loathing has vomited up this time.

    2. I’m annoyed with the ‘by Reason Staff’ thing. It got me to click on another Richman article.

      Yeah, it’s insulting. Whenever I see “Reason Staff”, I know right away which Reason staffer it’s by.

  7. he again, to his credit, said the war “may have been the worst decision any president has made in the history of this country

    That judgment is to Trump’s credit??! If he’d said it was a bad decision, that’d be one thing, but ranking it as the worst in US hx? Woodrow Wilson made worse decisions seemingly every month! That’s just to take 1 obvious example.

    1. I don’t know, it destabilized the middle-east, may have contributed to the Arab Spring, and the rise of ISIS, which then lead to the refugee crisis, which is now destabilizing Europe, and this still isn’t finished playing out.

      1. I’d make the argument about getting involved in WW1.

        1. There’s a good chance the Kaiser would have won, and history would have been very different. Not sure if would have been better or worse.

          WW1 what a horrible tragedy regardless, we’re still feeling the effects.

          1. You can make a very good argument that the “destabilizing” the Middle East began with, and was made possible by, our intervention into World War I. Without an Allied victory, there would have been no dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire and no creation of the artificial political entities that we now call the Middle East.

            1. The Ottoman was falling apart as it was, it might have broken up more peacefully on its own or more. The political aftermath of the loss of most of its European territories was the proximate cause of WWI.

              1. The Middle East fell apart *suddenly* because the Ottoman’s sided with the Germans (the story of why is interesting). After the German’s lost, we got Sykes-Picot which gave us the foundation for the modern ME. The career diplomats that really knew the ME objected to the partitioning but were out voted by Top Men in the English and French central governments.

                Read: “A Peace to End All Peace” for the details.

                1. “The Ottoman Endgame” is good too, although it does not focus specifically on the ME.

      2. That assumes that that other stuff would not have happened anyway. I find that unlikely. The Middle East was not going to last as it was very much longer. The most I think you can say is that invading Iraq brought on the inevitable earlier than it otherwise would have happened.

        1. I don’t disagree with you. I’m only saying the issue is debatable.

          1. It is. And it is too bad our political system and class is so fucked up we can’t have an honest debate about it.

        2. John, I just read your long rant on a prior thread. Very nice.

          1. Thanks you. I mean every word of it. I am just disgusted with these people.

      3. But it was Nixonomics that raised those stakes to begin with, as just one among various lousy effects.

  8. Still I can’t help but think that Sanders’s disposition is more consistent with a noninterventionist foreign policy. Maybe it’s no more than a gut feeling, but it’s something. I generally see no good reason to vote, and I certainly wouldn’t give money to a candidate. But I confess that I sometimes root against a particular candidate. If Sanders gets the nomination, I expect I’ll be rooting for the Republican to lose.

    Of course, Sheldon. Bernie is only on record supporting regime change in Libya and Syria, and voted for several past interventions. But he’s the harbinger of the pacifist American foreign policy you seek. Totally not a nut whose primary focus is stealing money and redistributing it who barely knows his ass from a hole in the ground on foreign policy (or much else). Bernie will do what the Democratic establishment wants him to do foreign policy wise. He is no different on foreign policy than Hillary.

    1. Given Richman’s political past in the LP, I would guess he would support Gary Johnson if he believed his one vote
      would actually make any difference.

    2. In 1980 I rooted for Soviet communism to lose and it did. The entire Democratic party apparatchik had fastened suckers like remoras about its jaws urging US surrender to the USSR and a Vichy-style occupation of the US and Europe. That collapsed, but instead of freedom moving into the niche, the GOP reverted to the Christian National Socialism of the Herbert Hoover and Adolf Hitler Administrations, complete with asset-forfeiture prohibitionism to completely destroy the economy and bring back securities market panics. Surely there must be a political party out there, some alternative to the seesawing of bureaucratic versus ecclesiastical coercive altruist dictatorships.

  9. JOIN US NEXT WEEK, when Sheldon Richman reveals that Donald Trump is a Mossad agent who wants to murder Palestinians! And the moon landing was an Israeli plot!

    1. That makes me wish Trump would make a surpise trip to Israel this spring and give Bibi a big sloppy and public kiss. The butt hurt such a thing would illicit in Richman would be delicious. Richman is a horrible human being. I know it is wrong but I can’t help but enjoy his unhappiness and suffering.

  10. Trump is awesome. Even if only because he causes butthurt across the entire political spectrum.

    1. You said it Troy. And the truth is our country has been run primarily by delusional morons since Reagan left office. It is hard to see how Trump could do any worse and he is likely to do better.

      1. Did you folks see Bret Easton Ellis’ tweet from yesterday?

        Just back from a dinner in West Hollywood: shocked the majority of the table was voting for Trump but they would never admit it publicly.

        This election is the most hilarious/terrible one I’ve ever seen.

        1. I think he is going to win and win big. I have no idea what kind of President he will be, but the resulting butt hurt is going to be wonderful.

  11. Still I can’t help but think that Sanders’s disposition is more consistent with a noninterventionist foreign policy. Maybe it’s no more than a gut feeling, but it’s something. I generally see no good reason to vote, and I certainly wouldn’t give money to a candidate. But I confess that I sometimes root against a particular candidate. If Sanders gets the nomination, I expect I’ll be rooting for the Republican to lose.

    Just for fun, here’s a slightly different take on Richman’s crappiness. This concluding paragraph is written like a Facebook post.

    1. I would like to hear the tortured logic necessary to rationalize being a libertarian and openly supporting a socialist for President.

      1. Not logic so much as something you think about for a few minutes a day in between posting selfies and cat pictures

      2. Didn’t Marx promise that government would “wither away” after the socialist revolution?

  12. You want to know the real surprise here – a Richman weekend post that doesn’t draw in the usual morality-play flame-fest. Look at what Trump can accomplish!

  13. You went full Rothbard, Sheldon. Never go full Rothbard.

  14. Hello president hillary….and the best aftermath of that would be goodbye presidency.

  15. When Richman says that Bush lied America into Iraq, Richman is lying. As usual.

  16. “I’m not talking about not lying,” he said. “No one knows why we went into Iraq.”

    Actually, the primary sources of the mission provide a straightforward explanation for the why of OIF.

    Explanation of the law and policy, fact basis for Operation Iraqi Freedom.
    Answer to “Did Bush lie his way to war with Iraq?”.

  17. I see no way for advocates of a pacifist foreign policy

    Ah, pacifism. So this is where the Israeli hatred comes from. Those damn Israelis actually defend themselves against their enemies. If only they’d just be pacifists and let themselves be exterminated, then Sheldon would love them.

  18. Was it a mistake to invade Iraq? Depends on who you are. You don’t build an over priced, bloated, inefficient military and not use it.

    We invaded Iraq for unseen parties agendas. For money. For hegemonic power in the region. And for more power here at home (see patriot act). And probably some other equally crazy motives but certainly not the stated reasons.

    For a long time I resisted the notion that powers within our gov would start a war for motives other than the defense of the nation but when all evidence points to the contrary I had no choice but to modify my world view.

    And now with the Obama administration carrying out the same policies albeit by more subversive means (state department, NGO’s fomenting revolutions), I have zero doubt that we are governed by psychopaths. And now the waste from years of psychotic policy we are faced with perpetual war.

    So was it really a mistake?

  19. I never would have suspected that looter politicians are also liar politicians had I not read it here. I have, moreover, heard rumors of a third party, something having to do with freedom, liberty, classical liberal values. These rumors are so persistent that perhaps some of Sheldon’s incisive investigative journalism might be in order to get to the bottom of whether there really is such a “third” party alternative and whether it might be a vehicle for paradigm shift worth voting for.

  20. My friend’s ex-wife makes $86 /hour on the internet . She has been fired for 5 months but last month her income was $21442 just working on the internet for a few hours. look at here…

    [][][][][][][] http://www.Wage90.com

  21. my friend’s sister-in-law makes $85 hourly on the internet . She has been without a job for ten months but last month her paycheck was $21785 just working on the internet for a few hours. look at this web-site….
    Clik this link in Your Browser

    ??????????? http://www.Wage90.com

  22. Google pay 66 $ per hour my last pay check was $45123 w0rking 96 hours a week 0nline. My younger brother friend has been averaging 8 k for months now and he w0rks about 18 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it out. This is what I do.. check this link,,,

    === http://www.workprospects.com

  23. You’re seriously going to sit there and say Trump can’t be trusted because of something he said over a decade ago when he wasn’t a politician and was hosting The Apprentice, when Hillary Clinton who while she was a politician couldn’t even protect highly classified intelligence?

  24. my friend’s sister-in-law makes $85 hourly on the internet . She has been without a job for ten months but last month her paycheck was $21785 just working on the internet for a few hours. look at this web-site….
    Clik this link in Your Browser

    ??????????? http://www.Wage90.com

  25. As Randolph Bourne observed: “War is the health of the state”, meaning, if you have governments in the first place, you _must_ have wars- it is how all governments, throughout history, have survived [or tried to].

    Get over it, Sheldon 🙂 .

    So no matter _who_ gets elected [ Trump, Sanders, Rubio, Cruz, Hitlery or whomever] , and the same as always [ i.e . exactly as it has _always_ been in the past], more war is guaranteed, especially in light of the fact that the new president will be, again as always, a hand- puppet of the militarist establishment hiding behind the curtain who depend on more wars to keep their gigantic welfare scam in perpetual motion.

    Dream On?:

    “In your dream, the Pentagon is not a scam,
    In your dream, 9/11 was not a scam,
    In your dream, the war on terror is not a scam
    In your dream, al -qaeda was not a scam,
    In your dream I.S.I.S. is not a scam”

    Lyrics excerpted from: “Dreams [Anarchist Blues]”:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMXtoU…..e=youtu.be

    Regards, onebornfree.

    1. Sorry, Youtube changed my song link. New [correct] link to song “Dreams [Anarchist Blues]” is :

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

      Regards, onebornfree.

  26. Bob Hanky said: “You’re seriously going to sit there and say Trump can’t be trusted because of something he said over a decade ago when he wasn’t a politician ”

    Dream On?:

    “……In your dream, Donald Trump is not a fraud,
    In your dream, Sanders is not a fraud,
    In your dream,all the rest are not frauds,
    In your dream, Obama is not a fraud,
    In your dream, Reagan was not a fraud,
    In your dream, all the rest were not frauds,

    In your dream, the constitution was not a scam,
    In your dream, the Supreme court is not a scam,
    In your dream, 9/11 was not a scam…….”

    Lyrics excerpted from:

    “Dreams [Anarchist Blues]”:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMXtoU…..e=youtu.be

    Regards, onebornfree.
    onebornfreedotblogspotdotcom

  27. Bob Hanky said: “You’re seriously going to sit there and say Trump can’t be trusted because of something he said over a decade ago when he wasn’t a politician ”

    Dream On?:

    “……In your dream, Donald Trump is not a fraud,
    In your dream, Sanders is not a fraud,
    In your dream,all the rest are not frauds,
    In your dream, Obama is not a fraud,
    In your dream, Reagan was not a fraud,
    In your dream, all the rest were not frauds,

    In your dream, the constitution was not a scam,
    In your dream, the Supreme court is not a scam,
    In your dream, 9/11 was not a scam…….”

    Lyrics excerpted from:

    “Dreams [Anarchist Blues]”:

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

    Regards, onebornfree.

  28. My last pay check was $9500 working 12 hours a week online. My sisters friend has been averaging 15k for months now and she works about 20 hours a week. I can’t believe how easy it was once I tried it out. This is what I do..
    Clik This Link inYour Browser….

    ? ? ? ? http://www.workpost30.com

  29. My last pay check was $9500 working 12 hours a week online. My sisters friend has been averaging 15k for months now and she works about 20 hours a week. I can’t believe how easy it was once I tried it out. This is what I do..

    Click This Link inYour Browser….

    ? ? ? ? http://www.Paybucket40.com

  30. just before I looked at the bank draft 4 $4970 , I accept …that…my father in law was like they say actualie making money in there spare time from their laptop. . there great aunt had bean doing this for less than thirteen months and at present paid the mortgage on there condo and purchased a brand new Volkswagen Golf GTI . check out here….

    Clik this link in Your Browser
    ????? http://www.Wage90.com

  31. just before I looked at the bank draft 4 $4970 , I accept …that…my father in law was like they say actualie making money in there spare time from their laptop. . there great aunt had bean doing this for less than thirteen months and at present paid the mortgage on there condo and purchased a brand new Volkswagen Golf GTI . check out here….

    Clik this link in Your Browser
    ????? http://www.Wage90.com

  32. The Fit Finally programs and guides are based on over 600 research studies conducted by some of the biggest Universities and research teams of the world.
    We take pride in the fact that our passion for better health and fitness is 100% backed by science and helps 100’s (if not 1000’s) of people every year since 2010. Just try it:

    http://03615gbnxbyy5y42r9r8o80…..kbank.net/

  33. The technology is so developed that we can watch videos, live streaming, TV serials and any of our missed programs within our mobiles and PCs. Showbox
    All we need is a mobile or PC with a very good internet connection. There are many applications by which we can enjoy videos, our missed programs, live streaming etc.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.