probably but also you have a portion of the right wing (and even some on the left!) who has pined for this for yearrrrrrrrrs and an administration possibly incompetent enough to do it.

@realDonaldTrump
President Obama made a desperate and terrible deal with Iran - Gave them 150 Billion Dollars plus I.8 Billion Dollars in CASH! Iran was in big trouble and he bailed them out. Gave them a free path to Nuclear Weapons, and SOON. Instead of saying thank you, Iran yelled.....
9:03 AM · Jun 21, 2019 · Twitter for iPhone

@realDonaldTrump
....Death to America. I terminated deal, which was not even ratified by Congress, and imposed strong sanctions. They are a much weakened nation today than at the beginning of my Presidency, when they were causing major problems throughout the Middle East. Now they are Bust!....
9:03 AM · Jun 21, 2019 · Twitter for iPhone

@realDonaldTrump
....On Monday they shot down an unmanned drone flying in International Waters. We were cocked & loaded to retaliate last night on 3 different sights when I asked, how many will die. 150 people, sir, was the answer from a General. 10 minutes before the strike I stopped it, not....
9:03 AM · Jun 21, 2019 · Twitter for iPhone

@realDonaldTrump
....proportionate to shooting down an unmanned drone. I am in no hurry, our Military is rebuilt, new, and ready to go, by far the best in the world. Sanctions are biting & more added last night. Iran can NEVER have Nuclear Weapons, not against the USA, and not against the WORLD!
9:03 AM · Jun 21, 2019 · Twitter for iPhone

First of all, the tweets read like a bad spy novel. Second, I think they totally back Bucky up as this being completely made up. If it is true, it makes him look indecisive not diplomatic.

Iran can never get nuclear weapons which is why I destroyed the main thing preventing them from getting nuclear weapons.

JUburton wrote:Iran can never get nuclear weapons which is why I destroyed the main thing preventing them from getting nuclear weapons.

*Point to head guy*

How much is I.8 Billion dollars?

Also the 1 and the I aren't even close together on a keyboard or on an iphone.

President Trump's interview with a team of reporters from Time magazine took a sudden turn when he made a comment about prison time for a journalist. The exchange happened in the Oval Office on Monday. Time published the interview transcript on Thursday evening, and that's when the comment started to get attention.

Here's the background: Trump showed the four reporters a letter that he said was "written by Kim Jong Un. It was delivered to me yesterday. By hand." Then he asked to go off-the-record, so that he could make comments that would not be reported or included in the transcript. The Time photographer who was in the room evidently tried to take a photo of the letter's contents — and when the interview was back on the record, press secretary Sarah Sanders said, "You can't take a picture of that, sorry."

Later in the interview, the Time team brought up the fact that Trump tried to "limit Mueller's Russia probe to only future election meddling." One of the reporters (the transcript doesn't say who) noted that Trump dictated a letter to a former aide, Corey Lewandowski, "telling him to tell" former attorney general Jeff Sessions "to limit the investigation." The details were included in former Special Counsel Robert Mueller's report. The Time reporter said "he testified under oath under threat of prison time, that that was the case Mr. President." Trump, cornered, did what he usually does: He lashed out and brought up the other letter, the one he had shown off earlier, from North Korea's dictator.

Quoting from the transcript:
TRUMP: "Excuse me — Under Section II — Well, you can go to prison instead, because, if you use, if you use the photograph you took of the letter that I gave you —"
TIME: "Do you believe that people should be —"
TRUMP: "confidentially, I didn't give it to you to take photographs of it — So don't play that game with me. Let me just tell you something. You take a look —"
TIME: "I'm sorry, Mr. President. Were you threatening me with prison time?"

Trump's response
"Well," he said, "I told you the following. I told you you can look at this off-the-record. That doesn't mean you take out your camera and start taking pictures of it. O.K.? So I hope you don't have a picture of it. I know you were very quick to pull it out — even you were surprised to see that. You can't do that stuff. So go have fun with your story. Because I'm sure it will be the 28th horrible story I have in TIME Magazine because I never — I mean — ha. It's incredible. With all I've done and the success I've had, the way that TIME Magazine writes is absolutely incredible."
Then the president continued raging against the magazine's coverage. "Some day within the next 20 years," he said, "maybe you'll pick me as Man of the Year. O.K., big deal." The "Person of the Year" title was last bestowed on Trump in 2016.

So what about the photos?
Were there photos of the letter? Will TIME publish them? No: "At various points during the interview, the President asked to go off-the-record, and TIME is honoring those requests," a spokeswoman told me. Due to that agreement, the contents of the letter itself are considered off-the-record.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/21/media/ti ... index.html

I guess going to prison isn't too bad relative to what KJU or MBS do to members of the media. As an aside, it is remarkable (in a bad way) how much admiration Trump seems to have for Kim Jong Un. Birds of a feather...

People who know better than I do, how much of the Iran situation is just peevishness over being denied arm sales to the Saudis? I'm still leaning toward a small international crisis with minimal casualties helps election chances, but maybe that's too much of a long view with trump.

swishnicholson wrote:People who know better than I do, how much of the Iran situation is just peevishness over being denied arm sales to the Saudis? I'm still leaning toward a small international crisis with minimal casualties helps election chances, but maybe that's too much of a long view with trump.

War will not help him. At best, it’s neutral. In all likelihood, it’s a massive negative.

The Savior wrote:

swishnicholson wrote:People who know better than I do, how much of the Iran situation is just peevishness over being denied arm sales to the Saudis? I'm still leaning toward a small international crisis with minimal casualties helps election chances, but maybe that's too much of a long view with trump.

War will not help him. At best, it’s neutral. In all likelihood, it’s a massive negative.

I'm not talking about war. I'm talking about ginning things up enough that popular opinion is worked up against Iran. At worst i see him aiming for a "bloodless' act of "retaliation" such as he apparently wasn't able to pinpoint yesterday.

There is a high profile accuser of sexual misconduct against Trump published in an article.. Don denies it because there is no video, and he wants people to call with information supporting his denial, especially to demonstrate that it is a plot by the Democrats. Also stated that he has never met her... but there are pictures of them taking.

Pete Buttigieg appears to be an incompetent mayor. I don't see how anyone could vote for the guy for president. Sheesh

you're right, people never cast their presidential vote for incompetents

pacino wrote:Pete Buttigieg appears to be an incompetent mayor. I don't see how anyone could vote for the guy for president. Sheesh

I'm on the sidelines since I have no say in who the Democrats choose for President, but Buttigieg has handled the recent situation in South Bend very well.

It's important as Democrats that we start early with our circular firing squad.

pacino wrote:Pete Buttigieg appears to be an incompetent mayor. I don't see how anyone could vote for the guy for president. Sheesh

Please qualify how Buttigieg is incompetent. All evidence is to the contrary.

swishnicholson wrote:

pacino wrote:Pete Buttigieg appears to be an incompetent mayor. I don't see how anyone could vote for the guy for president. Sheesh

I'm on the sidelines since I have no say in who the Democrats choose for President, but Buttigieg has handled the recent situation in South Bend very well.

You can vote in NJ in either primary if you're unaffiliated, and there's still plenty of time to change before next year if one has the desire to do so

jerseyhoya wrote:

swishnicholson wrote:

pacino wrote:Pete Buttigieg appears to be an incompetent mayor. I don't see how anyone could vote for the guy for president. Sheesh

I'm on the sidelines since I have no say in who the Democrats choose for President, but Buttigieg has handled the recent situation in South Bend very well.

You can vote in NJ in either primary if you're unaffiliated, and there's still plenty of time to change before next year if one has the desire to do so

Not without changing my unaffiliated status. And I refuse to register with the party of Norcross and Sweeney. Which I realize is intellectually idiotic since it excludes me from having any voice in a change of leadership. But there you are.

Joe Sestak is running for president

Lmao

I'm currently crawling through the Office of the Inspector General's full, redacted report on the Presidents Surveillance Programme, hunting for a particular reference regarding DoJ briefing the NSA to put their bulk acquisition of metadata on a firmer legal footing, and I came across this fascinating wee slice of history from 2004 regarding Mueller, Comey and their discussions with Bush. I thought it worth posting because it just underlines how far Trump and the Executive in general have drifted from the standards of the presidential office back in the day. 15 years is a fierce long time in politics.

https://i152.photobucket.com/albums/s168/Wizlah/OIG%20Report%20on%20PSP%20Comey%20and%20Mueller.jpg