US Presidential Contenders

[Buster's Uncle]

Force choke

[Buster's Uncle]

Obama: Guantanamo Bay undermines security, must be closed
Associated Press
By LOLITA C. BALDOR and KATHLEEN HENNESSEY  45 minutes ago



President Barack Obama speaks in the Roosevelt Room of the White House in Washington, Tuesday, Feb. 23, 2016, to discuss the detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The Obama administration released its long-awaited plan to close the detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and transfer remaining detainees to a facility in the United States. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)



WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama on Tuesday vowed to "once and for all" close the detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba and transfer the most detainees to a facility in the U.S., submitting a plan short on specifics and unlikely to make headway with opponents in Congress.

Obama cast his proposal, released Tuesday after months of delay, as a moment to turn the page on a facility that for years has raised nettlesome legal questions, become a recruitment tool for violent extremists and garnered strong opposition from some allies abroad.

"I don't want to pass this problem onto the next president, whoever it is," Obama said, in an appearance at the White House. "If we don't do what's required now, I think future generations are going to look back and ask why we failed to act when the right course, the right side of history, and justice and our best American traditions was clear."

Despite the big ambitions, Obama's proposed path to closure remained unclear. It leaves unanswered the politically thorny question of where in the U.S a new facility would be located and whether it could be completed by the end of Obama's term. Moving detainees to U.S. soil is currently prohibited under U.S. law and lawmakers have shown little interest in removing the restrictions.

"We will review President Obama's plan but since it includes bringing dangerous terrorists to facilities in U.S. communities, he knows that the bipartisan will of Congress has already been expressed against that proposal," said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.

House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., said Obama had yet to convince Americans that moving detainees to U.S. soil is "smart of safe."

"It is against the law — and it will stay against the law," Ryan said.



Vice President Joe Biden reacts to comments made by President Barack Obama, accompanied by Defense Secretary Ash Carter, in the Roosevelt Room of the White House in Washington, Tuesday, Feb. 23, 2016. Obama announced Pentagon's long-awaited plan to shut down the detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and transfer the remaining detainees to a facility in the U.S. The plan is Obama's last-ditch effort to make good on campaign vow to close Guantanamo. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)


Even Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., a former prisoner of war and an advocate of closing the prison, called Obama's report a "vague menu of options," which does not include a policy for dealing with future terrorist detainees.

Obama has "missed a major chance to convince the Congress and the American people that he has a responsible plan to close the Guantanamo Bay detention facility," he said.

It's not clear whether that chance ever existed. Momentum to close the facility has slowed dramatically under Obama's tenure. Congress remains deadlocked on far less contentious matters, and the issue has little resonance on the presidential campaign trail.

Still, for Obama, the facility stands as a major unfilled promise and a painful reminder of the limits on his power: His first executive order sketched out a timeline for closing the prison, but was ultimately derailed by Congress.

The White House has not ruled out the possibility that the president may again attempt to close the prison through executive action — a move that would directly challenge Congress' authority. The plan submitted Tuesday does not address that option.

The proposal underscores the administration's strategy of shrinking the population, hoping the massive cost for housing the diminished population would ultimately make closure inevitable.



In this Nov. 21, 2013, file photo reviewed by the U.S. military, dawn arrives at the now closed Camp X-Ray, which was used as the first detention facility for al-Qaida and Taliban militants who were captured after the Sept. 11 attacks at Guantanamo Bay Naval Base, Cuba. U.S. officials say the Pentagon’s long-awaited plan to shut down the detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and transfer the remaining detainees to a facility in the U.S. calls for up to $475 million in construction costs, but would save as much as $180 million per year in operating costs. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak, File)


Under the plan, roughly 35 of the 91 current detainees will be transferred to other countries in the coming months, leaving up to 60 detainees who are either facing trial by military commission or have been determined to be too dangerous to release but are not facing charges.

Those detainees would be relocated to a U.S. facility that could cost up to $475 million to build, but would ultimately be offset by as much as $180 million per year in operating cost savings. The annual operating cost for Guantanamo is $445 million. The U.S. facilities would cost between $265 million and $305 million to operate each year, according to the proposal.

The plan considers, but does not name, 13 different locations in the U.S., including seven existing prison facilities in Colorado, South Carolina and Kansas, as well as six other locations at current correctional facilities on state, federal or military sites in several states. It also notes that there could be all new construction on existing military bases. The plan doesn't recommend a preferred site and the cost estimates are meant to provide a starting point for a conversation with Congress.

More detailed spending figures, which are considered classified, will be provided to Congress, said U.S. officials, who were not authorized to discuss the plan publicly ahead of its release, so spoke on condition of anonymity.

Members of Congress have been demanding the Guantanamo plan for months, and those representing South Carolina, Kansas and Colorado have voiced opposition to housing the detainees in their states.

"We must safeguard the missions on Fort Leavenworth, the nearly 14,000 military and civilian personnel and their family members, and the thousands of Kansans who live in the Leavenworth community," Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kan., said in a statement Tuesday.

Advocates of closing Guantanamo say the prison has long been a recruiting tool for militant groups and that holding extremists suspected of violent acts indefinitely without charges or trial sparks anger and dismay among U.S. allies.

Opponents, however, say changing the detention center's ZIP code won't eliminate that problem.

On that point, Obama's proposal faced criticism even from those who endorse closing the detention center. His initial campaign pledge was widely viewed as a promise to end the practice of detaining prisoners indefinitely without charge, not to bring that practice to the U.S., said Naureen Shah, director of Amnesty International USA's Security and Human Rights Program.

"Whatever the president proposes, even if it doesn't come to fruition, the administration is changing the goal posts on this issue," she said.

Obama said Tuesday he would also propose changes to the military commissions, which he noted have been costly and ineffective. Those changes would also require congressional action, he noted.

__

Associated Press writer Deb Riechmann and Donna Cassata contributed to this report.

http://news.yahoo.com/pentagons-guantanamo-plan-lays-costs-savings-080548790--politics.html


 

[Buster's Uncle]

The twitter feed I saw the original -posted above- on commented "It's like she's actively trying to summon memes" - who am I to make a liar out of him?

[vonbach]

Its doesn't matter. She's going to be nominated, she already has the delegates.
The only thing that can stop her is her going to jail or dropping dead on the campaign trail.
She really does make it easy though doesn't she?

[Buster's Uncle]

Yeah - I said all along that we were probably going to get stuck with her; and while a stiff public manner doesn't make her a terrible person -there's evidence of that, but not because she overthinks it when she knows there cameras looking- it does make her a terrible candidate and an easy target for larfs.

[Rusty Edge]

Nevada Was Great For Donald [Sleezebag], Bad For Ted Cruz

By Nate Silver and Harry Enten


-2016-republican-primary/]http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/nevada-caucus-results-donald-[Sleezebag]-2016-republican-primary/

"Tuesday night’s results were very bad news for Cruz. It’s not just that it was his third third-place finish in a row. It’s also how Cruz lost. He carried only 27 percent of the white born-again and evangelical Christian vote, behind [Sleezebag]’s 41 percent. Cruz also lost this group in New Hampshire and South Carolina. But, unlike in South Carolina, Cruz also trailed among “very conservative” voters in Nevada, 34 percent to [Sleezebag]’s 38 percent. Finally, Cruz continues to struggle among “somewhat conservative” and moderate voters. He earned just 16 percent and 7 percent among those groups, respectively, according to the entrance poll."

The article goes on to make a variety of points interesting points- [Sleezebag] stomped Rubio in what was Marco's former home, Rubio beat Cruz again, and that states are a series of case by case events, not necessarily as much about momentum and national context as they seem. [Sleezebag]'s message always resonated in NV and AZ.


*******************************************

I gotta go now, I'll talk some more about Cruz later.

[Rusty Edge]

I've been listening to or watching campaign speeches.

I think Cruz is one of the cleverest candidates. Maybe that also makes him one of the most dangerous.
Winning  Iowa by convincing caucus goers that Carson was about to suspend his campaign. Promoting some out of context clip that makes Rubio sound anti-Bible when the opposite is true. Then there's his high-sounding rhetoric about the Constitution. When he's talking about religious liberty, he means the right to refuse to do business with gays and deny them marriage licenses. Discrimination, in other words.
When he's talking about right to life, I think he means that life begins at conception, and that any birth control method that prevents implantation is a form of abortion and should be abolished.

Taken as a whole he sounds downright devious. Then there is the matter of tearing up the Iran deal and Obamacare on day 1, before any alternative has been worked out.

Frankly, I don't think a zealot in the Whitehouse dealing with other zealots in the Middle East will work out well for anyone. I don't think I could vote for this guy, even if he were the only alternative to [Sleezebag] as the GOP candidate.

Cruze is kinda scarey.

[Buster's Uncle]

Cruz reminds me somewhat of Mrs. Clinton -wants it too bad and tries too hard; would slit your throat for the vote in your pocket- and somewhat of an internet acquaintance I won't even name in case he's still hate-lurking me occasionally.

[Buster's Uncle]

From Facebook:

Dr. David Duke


Former head of Ku Klux Klan discussed [Sleezebag] · 1 hr ·
..

100 major media articles about me today, but not one dared to call to call me and interview on why White Americans are overwhelmingly supporting Donald [Sleezebag].

They are obviously afraid to hear the logical reasons I offer.

1) Because we must secure our border
 2) Because we break the power of the Jewish Federal Reserve and predator banks Goldman Sachs that are robbing us blind.
 3) Because we are tired of massive Jewish money and lobbies controlling American politics
 4) Because we sick and tired of Zio Wars
 5) Because we don't war Word War III with Russiia
 6) Because like every people on Earth, White people have a right to preserve their heritage, their nations, their values, and provide for a decent, not a THIRD WORLD future for our children.
 7) Because [Sleezebag] exposes the lies of a controlled media and a controlled opposition media (Fox News)

Even the New York Times admits that the Republican rank and file have adopted my political programs. Donald [Sleezebag] has the same positions I had in 1992 in the primaries where even though I was illegally kept out of debates I scored lot more support than Paul, Carson and others in primaries I was not illegally kept out of.

The fact that [Sleezebag] (and others) say what I say almost 25 years ago does not make him bad, but it makes me pretty damn good.

By the way, you can read my essays and hear my interviews before the Iraq War in 2002 -2003 saying there were no weapons of mass destruction that the war in Iraq would be a disaster of America.

In every election I ever ran in starting in the 1970s I preached the necessity of securing our borders and the catastrophe that would befall our nation if we went to war.

Dr. David Duke

[vonbach]

Your posting this like its going to matter to the Right.
Everyone on the right gets called a racist anyway.
The buzzword is losing its impact. It has been for years.
After awhile the political pendulum shifts now were going to
go right wing.

[Buster's Uncle]

No - the right has been getting more openly racist in the last ten years - and dead to shame.

I find your pendulum remark reality-challenged, too.  We're overdue for a swing alright, but not that way.

[vonbach]

America is the most tolerant its ever been and all it gets us is grief.

I find your pendulum remark reality-challenged, too.  We're overdue for a swing alright, but not that way.

America is the modern equivalent of Weimar Germany. Look how the pendulum shifted back then.
For that matter Nixon was a reaction to the 60's cultural revolution. And Obama was the first
openly liberal president since then.

[Buster's Uncle]

Weimar Germany couldn't handle its cranks and looneys and haters looking for scapegoats and spreading hate fiction - you mistake my forbearance thus far for something similar.

So the next time I see your current sig, I'm taking action -24 hours worth- and every time I see it.

[Rusty Edge]

It's interesting. Now that the GOP field has finally shrunk to [Sleezebag] vs. various alternatives- one Theocon, one Neocon, one Fiscon, and one Outsider, pressure is being brought to bear for others to follow Walker's lead and bow out.

Of course, even if they don't think they can win, nobody wants to quit before their home state election.

Cruz thinks he's the clear alternative, because he won the Iowa Caucus, the only one besides [Sleezebag] to win anything. But that was a while ago.

Rubio thinks he's the clear alternative because he has the most delegates among the alternatives, and he's beat Cruze the last two times. But he hasn't beat [Sleezebag].

Kasich knows he's the only Republican who polls strong against both Hillary and Bernie, and isn't winning really the point in the Republican party? If he quit, [Sleezebag] could take Ohio and secure the nomination. Perhaps he's only a spoiler. But, he's picking up supporters and donors from Jeb's campaign, and the longer he stays in, the better people get to know him.

Carson?  He's running because he cares about a couple of issues, and a s long as he's in the race, he has a microphone and publicity. His support would probably split between [Sleezebag] and Cruze if he dropped out.

ME, I think the candidates deserve to keep trying their best until their home states, but if they can't win there, they should bow out of the race. This includes [Sleezebag].

[Buster's Uncle]

Do you think the party establishment prefers Kasich to Rubio, given the probabilities?  I do think it's clearly down to one or the other - and I would have guessed settling for Rubio.