Qatar Besieged

The post that was quoted here has been removed

Nowadays we cannot trust any messages from USA.
On one hand we have Twitters from Trump and his family.
On the other hand we have messages from Pentagon, FBI, and other official sources.
When they disagree, we know that USA cannot be represented from anywhere.
Who would we believe? USA is in chaos.

5 years to sort it out before FIFA World Cup

Well Trump the chump seems to be excelling himself here. At what point will he actually go to war against - the USA? [Qatar is actually the home of a huge US military base, btw. ]

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/the-qatar-crisis-and-trumps-dangerous-embrace-of-the-saudis/

The Saudis and their allies are actively undermining U.S. policies in the region, and the president congratulates them on their good work. They single out Qatar to settle scores with them over other issues, but dress up the score-settling as counter-terrorism and Trump believes it without question. The trouble isn’t just that he doesn’t grasp the trade-off being made, but that he actually thinks the U.S. is benefiting greatly from the Saudi-led bloc’s self-serving adventurism. Like many other hawks who conflate U.S. interests and those of bad regional clients, Trump can’t perceive the trade-off being made because he refuses to see the divergence of interests clearly on display.

Originally posted by finnegan
Well Trump the chump seems to be excelling himself here. At what point will he actually go to war against - the USA? [Qatar is actually the home of a huge US military base, btw. ]

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/the-qatar-crisis-and-trumps-dangerous-embrace-of-the-saudis/

The Saudis and their allies are actively undermining U.S. ...[text shortened]... off being made because he refuses to see the divergence of interests clearly on display.

Trump's companies have all sorts of business with the Saudis; they recently paid one of his hotels $270,000 for a lavish event in DC. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2017/06/05/saudi-payments-to-hotel-owned-by-president-trump/102536764/

Additionally, they treated Trump like a king on his recent visit there.

Appealing to the Donald's greed and vanity is an almost certain way to get him to jump through whatever hoop you desire.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Appealing to the Donald's greed and vanity is an almost certain way to get him to jump through whatever hoop you desire.

A playbook for Dems when he avoids (or survives) impeachment. But I doubt they can stomach it.

Originally posted by Sleepyguy
A playbook for Dems when he avoids (or survives) impeachment. But I doubt they can stomach it.

I suggested here they try it back in November. There were some comments made by various Democratic officials in line with such an approach, but it doesn't seem to have been seriously tried. Whether it might have worked is a moot point now.

Originally posted by no1marauder
I suggested here they try it back in November. There were some comments made by various Democratic officials in line with such an approach, but it doesn't seem to have been seriously tried. Whether it might have worked is a moot point now.

We could have had single payer by now!

Originally posted by Sleepyguy
We could have had single payer by now!

If the DNC started staying in his hotels and giving him receptions where he was treated like royalty, maybe.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Appealing to the Donald's greed and vanity is an almost certain way to get him to jump through whatever hoop you desire.

To what extent does Donald Trump really have free reign and stumble around like a bumbling fool and to what extent are the decisions backed by other people close to him? Is his stance on Saudi Arabia merely about his vanity or is there more too it behind the scenes?
And if it IS merely about his vanity, why is the blame all placed on him and not also on all those propping him up and allowing the clown show to continue?

Originally posted by twhitehead
To what extent does Donald Trump really have free reign and stumble around like a bumbling fool and to what extent are the decisions backed by other people close to him? Is his stance on Saudi Arabia merely about his vanity or is there more too it behind the scenes?
And if it IS merely about his vanity, why is the blame all placed on him and not also on all those propping him up and allowing the clown show to continue?

He is the President and the President is in de facto charge of US foreign policy and in undisputed control of the Executive branch. The "people close to him" have no power to thwart his policy decisions (such as they are); they can only seek to change his troubled mind.

Sp pretty much yes; he has free reign to stumble around like a blind fool in foreign affairs.

Originally posted by no1marauder
He is the President and the President is in de facto charge of US foreign policy and in undisputed control of the Executive branch. The "people close to him" have no power to thwart his policy decisions (such as they are); they can only seek to change his troubled mind.

Sp pretty much yes; he has free reign to stumble around like a blind fool in foreign affairs.

Well then it would seem to me that the US system is fundamentally flawed.

Given that he has so much power, I still think that allowing the current status quo to continue should be blamed squarely on those that do have a say in whether or not it should continue. I would think that irrevocable harm to the country should be sufficient grounds for impeachment. So either:
1. His party leaders do not think irrevocable harm is being done.
2. They don't have the guts to stand up and do something.
3. They actually want to let the harm continue for political reasons.

But the way I see it, as long as the media and people in general continue to point and Trump and put all the blame on Trump, none of the republicans will move a muscle.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Well then it would seem to me that the US system is fundamentally flawed.

Given that he has so much power, I still think that allowing the current status quo to continue should be blamed squarely on those that do have a say in whether or not it should continue. I would think that irrevocable harm to the country should be sufficient grounds for impeachm ...[text shortened]... e to point and Trump and put all the blame on Trump, none of the republicans will move a muscle.

Being a crappy President isn't grounds for impeachment:

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

US Constitution, Article II, Section 4.

While the meaning of "High Crimes and Misdemeanors" as far as the impeachments clause is a matter of considerable scholarly debate, merely following a foreign policy that in the opinion of some, many or most is causing "irrevocable harm" to the country doesn't seem to equal them.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Being a crappy President isn't grounds for impeachment:

Legally yes. But given the apparently far reaching powers granted to him, it should be.