John Bolton Laughing

Look at upvotes and comments

imgflip.com/i/3a8bmr

imgflip.com/i/3a6rdq

imgflip.com/i/33yghr

imgflip.com/i/33hw27

imgflip.com/i/325o0u

imgflip.com/i/308wts

imgflip.com/i/2ye8i2

imgflip.com/i/2qmc85

imgflip.com/i/2qmbrl

imgflip.com/i/2qmall

imgflip.com/i/2qityy

Here's one for Hannity imgflip.com/i/363m3w

What a joke. Most conservatives (and liberals) are anti-war. In fact, most Americans are anti-war. The fact that YOU clearly believe conservatives are pro-war, means absolutely nothing.

To the GOP’s credit, most Republicans by now have woken up to the disaster that was the Iraq War

An under-appreciated reason why Trump beat the heavy favorite Jeb Bush in ‘16 I think

The jingoistic reaction to the Soleimani killing suggests old habits die hard though

You do realize democrats have started most of the US' wars in the last century, right? Not to mention that democrats were JUST as supportive of the invasion of Iraq as republicans. But hey, don't the truth get in the way of your narrative. I'm sure it's much too hard for you to accept that both parties have been warmongering c**ts considering your blind loyalty to the dems.

;)

I don’t know why so many conservatives think that the way the Democratic Party behaved that long ago is liable to trigger me

But yes Japan was idiotic for not surrendering way earlier, after the Yamato was sunk, Imo Jima was lost, Germany surrendered, or even after the first atom bomb was dropped

Both my grandfathers served in the Pacific Theater and may have died in the invasion of Japan if the atom bombs weren’t dropped, so I’m not really complaining honestly

There’s an interesting semi-revisionist history that it was actually the USSR joining the war against Japan did it rather than the atom bombs. Point being that Japan figured it would much rather be occupied by Americans than Soviets

And that decision did work out pretty well for them honestly. They could have wound up as North Korea Pt. II

I wasn't trying to trigger you. Tweak you a bit, perhaps :) I just don't want you to make a mistake and go full democrat.

Damn. Another reason to lament the nuking. I'M KIDDING, don't get mad. Glad your gramps both survived.

Yeah, they knew they were hooped when Russia attacked as they had a well oiled machine at the point, I doubt the Japanese had many antitank guns or tanks at that late stage. And their tanks sucked.

I agree. Look at Hiroshima today.

The wha?

Just a satirical comment using an extremely partisan statement.

Had at least one argument like that here once, like WWII was fought only by Democrats. Poor Hitler, he must have really hated them.

I heard a theory about republicans being more heavily drafted but I wasn't there. That being said, when someone declares war on you, you gotta do what you gotta do.

"You do realize democrats have started most of the US' wars in the last century, right?"

We've had more Democrat Presidents in office during the start of most of the wars in the last century but that doesn't necessarily mean they "started" them.

The only war that they were in office for at the time of starting you could say they didn't "start" is WW2. That and Afghanistan are the ONLY times in the last century that the US was attacked first, the rest were voluntarily entered. So yes, they did start them, though again it was often supported by republicans as well (similar to how a republican started the war in Iraq with major democrat support)

When did Afghanistan attack?

9/11. Unfortunately we went after Iraq.

That was Saudi Arabia.

Al-Qaeda was primarily based in Afghanistan at the time wasn't it?

Correct me if I'm wrong. I was wrong about which country was harboring Bin Laden. Thought it was Afghanistan but was Pakistan. D'oh. Also, it turns out we did go to Afghanistan after 9/11. But we eventually went to Iraq to pursue potential "wmd"s and probably to cut off any financial support Al-Queda allegedly might have gotten from old enemies, which we quickly deposed, in Iraq.

Most of the terrorists were Saudi's and I don't think the Taliban were involved. If they were based in Afghanistan, I'm not sure that justified attacking the country, imo. The anger after 9-11 was palpable.

The neocons involved in PNAC wanted war with 7 countries.

It was also claimed Iraqi's were smashing baby incubators, which was propaganda. I also thought the anthrax 'attack' which was claimed could only come from either the US or Iraq was pretty rich.

Afghanistan itself didn't attack, but the regime in power in Afghanistan funded and gave shelter to the people who did. To pretend that the war in Afghanistan didn't start as a direct result of 9-11 isn't particularly honest. Iraq is an entirely different ballgame and we had 0 legitimate reasons for getting involved.

Yet Saudi Arabia stays an ally and get their royals flown out?

You aren't wrong. The Saudis did get a free pass. Can't say I'm complaining too much considering we've spent too much blood money and time over there to begin with, though. Honestly while I understand why we went to Afghanistan in the first place, it is mind boggling that we are still there almost 20 years later. We should have left ages ago. There is no real justification for a 20 year occupation. Be nice if we would just leave that part of the world entirely. If they want to slaughter each other let them have at it.

Afghanistan has always been a tough nut to crack, going back to Alexander.

I'll give you Korea, which was Truman. And Vietnam was under Eisenhower. Bush Sr. and Jr. for both Iraqs.

I'm not sure how Woodrow Wilson started WW1.

Again, not refuting that we had Democrats in office at the start of most wars, just that they did not "start" them.

Saying Vietnam truly started under Eisenhower is a far stretch. Real US military involvement didn't start until the Tonkin incident which was under Johnson. And Wilson didn't start WW1, but it was under him that the US got involved, using an attack on a British ship as justification.

Which again, doesn't refute what I am saying. Most of these Democrats didn't "start" these wars.

I think that was a small aspect of it but Bush being dull as dishwater, destroyed in the debates and being a bigger open borders cuck than most democrats figured in as well.

Yeah turns out Michael Savage shouting about “borders, language, culture” and illegal immigration every single night for a solid decade had an effect on the GOP base on that issue

And yeah Jeb had the charisma of a basset hound mixed with a wet dishrag

Ummmmm - actually we don't. Who cares? The LEFT.

And y'all call yourselves Christians....

You believe a w**re that screws for money? You mental midget.

You are rooting for the downfall of the President because he wasn't your candidate. Proving you don't care about America or the constitution. It's all about a power grab.

You are cheering for a man you despised because of your hatred of Trump.
You lost your imaginary challenge with your own stupid Meme. It's right there for everyone to see. You can't see it, You are blinded by your own arrogance.

You wagered nothing of value KylieClown. You have nothing anyone wants.

Even a broken clock like Bolton can be right twice a day

And lol since when does opposing the President make one un-American?

Oh yeah — ever since Obama left office. Because opposing him was totally fine

You know when the clock is right 2 times a day. You can't say the same about Bolton.

Opposing the President doesn't make you un-American, Cheering for his downfall does.

Show me where The GOP and Conservatives actively brought up false all allegations to impeach Obama. "I'll have more flexibility after the election"
Show me anyone saying "Obama needs to be impeached. "Bypasses Congress and ships pallets of cash to A terrorist state"
Show me a video of Anti-Obama protesters screaming at the sky.
We made Memes that made you cry, Just like we do now.

If House Republicans thought any of that was worthy of impeachment, they could have done so

Your short descriptions of these incidents are not exactly neutral and unbiased

I could go in depth about them but it wouldn’t be worth my time, and you wouldn’t believe me anyway. ImgFlippers concerned about my own physical and mental health have reminded me to limit my replies to baseless nonsense

House Republicans knew they were impeachable offenses. They didn't divide the country out of vindictiveness. They didn't throw a 4 year temper tantrum like unhinged Democrats are doing

I see you didn't try to defend your Un-American stance. You don't have a defense.

My short descriptions of those incidents are fact. You will ignore the facts, You'll Lie, Deflect and use Whataboutism as a defense.

Nothing you say is neutral and unbiased. Fact.

You could go into depth using deflection More Whataboutism and lies, But you know you have no credibility.
No one is concerned about your physical and mental health, You narcissistic clown.
You keep replying with nonsense, ImgFlippers keep pointing it out.
You're too arrogant to see it.

It’s simply not “un-American“ to utilize the impeachment process: the Founders wrote it into the Constitution for a reason, and it is ridiculous you would even argue that

The proper procedure is to defend the charges on the merits, not attack the other side with baseless charges of being unAmerican traitors or whatnot

It is “un-American“ to cheer for the impeachment of a president because he isn't from your party.
You're a partisan hack, Unable to hide your bias.

On the positive side, Democrats have set a precedent for the GOP to impeach future Democrat presidents using the same logic and tactics.

I assure you. People who vote for Republicans want Trump out of office as well.

So is Trump claiming that Bolton's lying about the Ukrainian aid situation because he "fired him" yet?

Actually Bolton hasn't said anything. Some guy told the NYT what he thinks is in his book.

Schiff was the one that withdrew his subpoena because he wanted to rush through the impeachment before Christmas.

False. Schiff withdrew Bolton's former deputy, Charles Kupperman's subpeona.

To be fair I was at least half-way incorrect too. (Trump is claiming that Bolton is lying to sell more books... not because he "fired him". )

If a subpoena gets submitted then withdrawn is it public? I know what Schiff claims but I don't trust him. Still, Schiff did want his testimony and could have subpoenaed him, but if he did get sued, it might be the time factor that deterred him. Anyway, I'm willing to admit fault on this one.

:(

I'm not condoning Schiff's actions nor his character. I'm merely explaining how poorly I view Donald J. Trump. I certainly wouldn't want either of them to be President of the United States.

I'm still waiting for Schiff to present his proof that he claimed he had that proved Trump colluded with Putin. He's only the ranking member of the intel commission.

But you're entitled to your opinion, of course.

I'm still waiting for Trump to release his tax returns and his test scores. Something that wasn't paid off by someone or some cooperation to boost him up. The man comes off like a complete moron to me. And has come off like one since he was bosom buddies with the Democratic Party.

Idk. This instance sure appears to have become public. My understanding is Bolton's former deputy, Charles Kupperman, was initially ordered by Repubs to ignore the subpoena and he didn't know what to do legally... so he took it to court for answers. The House didn't want to have to wait and see how long courts would take to decide the issue, so they withdrew it.

I meant at the time of the hearing. Like would the republican congress know? Oh well, politics is disgusting regardless.

I would assume so, but idk