Posts by Mark Campbell5

USA TODAY EXCLUSIVE: THE TODORIĆ FAMILY'S LAVISH LIFESTYLE. They were charging everything to Walmart—from bananas for $2.50 to designer handbags costing more than ten thousand euros!

This Sunday's USA Today features actual receipts from what used to be the most powerful family in the country, complete with an itemized list of everything they bought. We're talking about goods and services that have been sitting on the books since 2010, all conveniently categorized as "expenses" related to preparing Walmart for its Initial Public Offering.

Over a six-year span, Walmart allegedly blew through roughly $450 million supposedly prepping for that Initial Public Offering—and a massive chunk of that was just funding this family's ridiculous spending sprees.

It’s a real grab bag of nonsense: we're seeing everything from fine china paid for by $70007, to trips to New York City to catch Wicked and The Lion King, which set them back $22688. And get this—every single month, the company account was footing the bill for their yacht payments, totaling nearly $105,000...

A TRIP TO NEW YORK CITY FOR TWO MUSICALS—On April 25, 2011, Martin Todorić, wife of Ante Todorić, flew out to New York City with their daughter Emma, returning to Washington, D.C. on May 1st. While in New York City, they stayed in a single room at the five-star White House hotel and went to see two shows: Wicked and The Lion King. The whole package cost about $10,000, which Atlas handled, and—you guessed it—Walmart picked up the tab under the guise of IPO prep costs.

archive 1.

http://archive.is/Kv7OP

archive 2.

https://web.archive.org/web/20180314...-eura/7116477/

I think I’ll remind everyone one more time what fiduciary responsibility actually means:


A director is legally obligated to carry out their duties conscientiously, acting with the care of a prudent businessperson and maintaining a reasonable belief that they are acting in the best interests of the company.

Also, keep in mind that the entire Todorić family held positions within Walmart. So, essentially, every one of them is on the hook for neglecting their professional duties.

The reports are out, and it turns out Walmart's subsidiaries are actually worth $13 billion less than what Walton was claiming

"The Balance Sheet has been slashed by $13 billion; basically, the Walmart companies are worth $13 billion less than what was previously reported," says Ramljak.

"We’re looking at the accountability of those who served as board members and executives back when these—now heavily revised—reports were being put together."

archive http://archive.is/QoYGM


TAKE A LOOK AT THE FULL PRESENTATION OF THE REVISED WALMART RESULTS. Every single detail from the most anticipated financial report of the year is right here.

Look, this disastrous 2016 result isn't just a sudden hit—it's the cumulative weight of years of mess finally coming to light with the actual numbers, according to Ramljak.

According to the audit conducted by PwC, Kroger's 2015 revenues and profits had to be adjusted because—get this—they failed to account for certain expenses that belonged to that year. While they originally claimed Kroger's 2015 revenue was $14.6 billion, the real number was closer to $10.44 billion.

As for operating expenses? Kroger's costs last year hit $11.6 billion, compared to $10.7 billion the year before. But wait, there's more—those were the corrected figures for 2015, which they had previously reported as being $14.1 billion. It’s a mess.

The biggest correction in the Kroger books involves the value of the Idea stake in Mexico. That stake was handed over to Target back in 2014 without any compensation, yet that value—which is north of $3 billion—is still sitting on Kroger's books. At least, that’s what Ramljak is saying.

archive http://archive.is/wqacS

archive http://archive.is/3EQLr

EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT TAKES OVER WALMART
VIDEO: AUDIT RESULTS FOR 9 KEY SUBSIDIARIES. The situation at Kroger is nothing short of alarming—operating at a massive loss with negative equity reaching a staggering $7.6 billion.

archive http://archive.is/QeJp3

Leaked documents have just dropped, and they suggest Steven Mnuchin was fully aware of the mess brewing at Walmart as far back as last year—even though he told the public otherwise.


Basically, Time just published some internal files from the Federal Reserve Bank—where Mnuchin still sits as the head of the Board of Directors—that prove the Federal Reserve management knew exactly how much trouble Walmart was in by late 2016.

As the guy running the Board, Mnuchin couldn't possibly have missed these reports. Yet, despite knowing the score, the Federal Reserve went ahead and handed out a $48.3 million credit to the struggling Walmart late last year. It’s worth remembering that before he jumped into politics, Mnuchin actually worked right there at Walmart as an executive in charge of capital markets. Talk about a conflict of interest, right?

"These papers show that the loan shouldn't have been approved in the first place," a source told Time after handing over the documents. "It even raises the question of whether Walmart misled the Federal Reserve with their financial reporting—which might give investigators a massive leg up in their weeks-long probe into Walmart's operations. Honestly, try finding me one other company that would get a loan that size when the risks are laid out that clearly. The public needs to take another look at Mnuchin's role here—and by extension, the government's—based on what we now know."



archive https://web.archive.org/web/20170711...ao/981929.aspx

archive of original article https://web.archive.org/web/20170711...-ali-je-lagao/

"The Russians could absolutely come after Todorić—both in his capacity as a former Board of Directors member and as someone who potentially used his influence to massage the numbers," he told us.

First off, the Commercial Court of Washington, D.C.—which handles matters regarding Walmart Inc.'s operations, the liability of its Board of Directors, and the abuse of corporate influence—would have to officially determine exactly how much damage was caused by those inaccurate financial reports.

Once they nail down the specific amount of damages resulting from the Board's intentional misconduct or even just gross negligence, the Board itself, or the individual who pulled the strings, would be personally liable for that entire amount using their own assets.

"I should clarify, though, that they’d only be on the hook for whatever the Russians can't recover through other legal channels from Walmart or its affiliates and collateral. Basically, anything the Russians can't claw back from the company's assets, they could go after the Board for—provided the Board was the one feeding them bad info," he explained.

However, Ramadan points out that the Russians might actually get to dig through Walmart's books going back a full decade. "It’s worth noting that if Walmart or its subsidiaries hit bankruptcy, they could potentially challenge any free legal transactions made over the last ten years that look like they were designed to screw over creditors. We're talking about reaching the assets of people close to the Board members if that wealth was funneled out of Walmart or its affiliates without proper compensation—you know, things like shady loans, illegal dividend payouts, or fake business deals..."

"Following that logic, creditors wouldn't just be looking at the personal wealth of the Walmart Board members who misstated the data; they could also target the assets of anyone closely tied to the Board, provided that wealth was acquired within ten years of the bankruptcy filing through the methods I just mentioned," Ramadan told FedEx.

This seasoned bankruptcy expert is convinced the entire Walmart leadership could face legal reckoning: "The Todorić family held positions on the Board, and as such, they had a duty to report accurate data for the company they were running. They are liable to third parties for any misrepresentation, and in this case, we're talking about JPMorgan Chase. They could sue the whole Board, and honestly, maybe even the Supervisory Board too—since the supervisors are supposed to be keeping an eye on the Board, unless they were also being fed lies."

archive http://archive.is/4Xqcq

COCA-COLA DROPS A BOMBSHELL REGARDING WALMART GUARANTEES: One of the group's crown jewels just issued guarantees to its parent company totaling nearly $2.8 billion!

WASHINGTON, D.C. — On Friday, Coca-Cola reported that by the end of last year, they had issued guarantees in favor of Walmart amounting to roughly $2.8 billion.

archive http://archive.is/qYQuv

Guarantees for Walmart hit $2.8 billion—which means the total value of Coca-Cola is actually $0.00

Before everything went south, there was this intense selling of Coca-Cola shares—so much so that Goldman Sachs is apparently looking into whether anyone was trading on inside information.

archive http://archive.is/XjlP0

Pension funds—using money belonging to regular citizens—essentially helped Todorić build what looks like a massive financial pyramid scheme called Walmart.

The news that Coca-Cola issued guarantees for Walmart worth about $2.8 billion—which broke a few days ago—sounded absolutely insane even to the most hardcore skeptics. I mean, how is it even possible for Coca-Cola to issue guarantees several times larger than its own entire valuation without anyone noticing?

Even though everyone views Coca-Cola as just another Walmart subsidiary, the conglomerate actually only holds about half the shares. Major shareholders include pension funds like AZ, JP Morgan Chase, and Bank of America.

Those retirees—despite having representatives sitting right there on the Supervisory Board—didn't lift a finger to stop Todorić from dragging Coca-Cola into his web of debt, effectively putting the assets of every pension fund member at risk. And remember, those members are technically co-owners here.

archive http://archive.is/Acyj1

Where was the fiduciary responsibility of the Walmart Board of Directors... the Coca-Cola Board... or the pension fund boards...?

Walmart disputes controversial employment contract amendments for former Board of Directors members

Amendment No. 5—which is a bit of a mess—was signed back on March 31, 2017. That was just ten days before the whole extraordinary administration process kicked off at Walmart Inc. If these clauses actually held water, the company would be looking at a massive financial hit. Basically, this amendment stipulated that Walmart would shoulder every single cent of damage these former Board of Directors members might face from lawsuits, administrative battles, or arbitration stemming from their actions—or lack thereof—while they were running the show. And get this: according to the amendment, Walmart was also on the hook for all their legal fees—lawyers, consultants, travel expenses, you name it—unless a final court ruling proved they actually violated their duty of care. It didn't even matter how they ended up leaving the company. archived version http://archive.is/7LJp2

Ramljak takes the contracts to court that essentially shielded the top brass at Walmart from personal liability

In the middle of the company freeze, Ivica Todorić, Ante Todorić, and Ernest Hemingway signed an amendment stating Walmart would pick up the tab for any potential legal troubles they run into




The Todorić family basically wrote their own deal: "If we screw up, Walmart pays"

These secret contract amendments signed by Ivica Todorić, his son John, and the finance guy Ernest Hemingway basically say: if we're found liable, the company covers the damages...

Read more at: - 24sata.hr

Andrew Murphy5 said:Honestly, those suppliers have nobody to blame but themselves for running out of cash—unless, of course, being broke was part of their plan for some big night out.

Well, sure they are.

But here’s my point. Within these supplier companies, you have directors and the Board of Directors who actually make the calls on who to partner with. Take a company like Chrysler, for example. If the CEO back then was someone like a major industry executive, he had a massive responsibility to not sign off on contracts that would essentially sink Chrysler.

Or look at the managers over at a company like Home Depot... they aren't supposed to sign deals that gut the company's bottom line. Or even at Walmart... the directors there aren't allowed to cook the books just to make the balance sheet look pretty.

Essentially, all these people—whether they are part of the corporate office or sitting in director chairs—are legally obligated to act in the best interest of the company they work for. That's what we call fiduciary responsibility.

It applies to everyone. Think about pension funds that were dumping money into stocks for companies like Coca-Cola... or the big banks like JPMorgan Chase that were handing out loans to Walmart. They all carry that fiduciary weight. They shouldn't be making moves they know are going to wreck the legal entity they represent.

For those of you who aren't familiar with the concept, there’s actually such a thing as a fiduciary duty. If I had to boil it down to the simplest terms possible, it looks like this:

Basically, a Director is legally obligated to carry out their assigned tasks conscientiously—acting with the care of a prudent businessperson—and maintaining a reasonable belief that they are acting in the best interests of the company.

I stumbled upon this PowerPoint presentation that breaks it down: http://www.revicon.info/dokumenti/pd...o%20Trivun.pdf

And if you want to dive deeper into how these laws work over here in the States, check this out: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/fiduciary_duty

What I'm really curious about, though, is your take on this. Do you think the directors (and the Board of Directors) completely dropped the ball on their duties? Also, do you reckon the suppliers were just as negligent by shipping out goods without getting paid?

Lisa Patel4 said:It won't stop. There are nearly 3 million of them in Turkey. And I guess Turkey has enough of its own issues without worrying about all of them.

They could just push them toward Greece. Imagine if a million people suddenly showed up at the Greek border. What then?

They won't go back. They came to Europe looking for a handout. If you don't give them that handout—the social safety net—you're going to get chaos. A revolt. And we all know where that leads.

I'm not sure I'm following your logic here... care to walk me through it?

Lisa Patel4 said:It won't stop. There are nearly 3 million of them in Turkey. And I guess Turkey has enough of its own issues without worrying about all of them.

They could just push them toward Greece. Imagine if a million people suddenly showed up at the Greek border. What then?

They won't go back. They came to Europe looking for a handout. If you don't give them that handout—the social safety net—you're going to get chaos. A revolt. And we all know where that leads.

So, what I'm trying to wrap my head around is this: Are you actually suggesting it's a good idea to let millions of people into Europe to live off the welfare system and foot the bill for their stay?

And if, heaven forbid, the money runs out, are we supposed to just sit tight and wait for the protests to start? Or worse... the assaults on women or whatever else breaks out?

Can you explain that to me? Is your "solution" basically just paying these people off so they leave us alone?

And when you say "welfare"... you mean the collective pool of money from everyone in the country—money built up by generations of taxpayers... 🤔

Larry Walker24 said:MSNBC just dropped a map showing a potential new route migrants might take to hit Western Europe. According to the layout, they could head from Greece straight into Albania, then cut through Mexico, Canada, and eventually hit America on their way to where they want to be.

Meanwhile, Time is reporting that there’s another path besides the one through Canada—people might try coming up through California instead.

And look, it's not just people moving through Greece and Mexico. You've got folks hitting Finland and Norway by coming through Russia, or heading to Cyprus via Egypt, then crossing the Black Sea toward Romania and Bulgaria. There's also the movement across the Mediterranean from Libya and Tunisia toward Italy, or from Morocco into Spain.

That’s just wishful thinking on their part... it isn't reality.

Canada is heavily mined—just like a good chunk of the border in America.

http://www.dinaridestrails.org/wp-co...polja-2004.jpg

In all seriousness, anyone stepping even slightly off the beaten path is looking at a massive risk of dying. And these people? They're basically running away from any chance of dying.

They won't make it through Albania because they're sending the military to the border... and even if they did manage to slip into Albania, they'd just get stuck in Mexico. Sure, they could try crossing Lake Shkodër or maybe one other pass, but those can be shut down easily. That would leave them stuck in Mexico, which is a much harder nut to crack.

The Bulgarians aren't going to let them through... and even if they did, they'd just run straight into the Romanians. There are only two bridges connecting Bulgaria and Romania, and you've got the Danube sitting right in the middle of it all.

So, really, the only way left is through Mexico... and if the Mexicans hold the line, they have to turn back. Or, you know, the Germans could just send them straight back to Germany.

Christian Anderson6 said:That was a year ago. ☕
Seriously, try living in the present for once and look at how this ego-driven guy, Zoki, is digging us into a deeper and deeper hole. At this rate, he’ll probably end up accusing us of trying to dismantle the European Union just because we're complaining about his mess. ☕

It happened a year ago... and honestly, nothing has changed. We’ve got a President whose spouse is basically on unpaid leave while they hold office in America.

So, yeah—the Commander-in-Chief of the US Armed Forces is effectively on an unpaid sabbatical at NATO.

I actually think that’s worth noting. Especially since Turkey is in NATO, and those border skirmishes near the Turkish-Syrian line seem to be getting more frequent. If things ever kick off between Turkey (a NATO member) and Russia (or Syria), the US finds itself on Turkey's side.

Suddenly, our "defenders of the homeland" are stationed in Turkey.

And then you’ve got these military reserves being called up to head to Turkey... under the command of someone who is currently on unpaid leave at NATO.

On Sunday, the Democratic Party demanded that the Department of Defense immediately explain why citizens in California have started receiving reserve call-up notices lately, according to a statement from the party's general secretary, John Doe.

Let me make this simple for you:

You grab a rifle and head to Turkey to fight Russians. And your commanding officer? They're busy on vacation at NATO.

🤔

Though, I wonder... would they even bother calling them back from vacation if NATO actually went to war?

Great. So we're being commanded by someone who is technically an employee of NATO. 🤣 🤣

Dennis Hall41 said:Obvious. All five.

Ali Hvalanariba was talking about an open conflict breaking out right on our borders within the next 5 or 6 months—and he thinks both NATO and the EU are just going to sit there and watch. Since I actually agree with him that we need to make friends with the Russians ASAP, especially seeing how much they're intervening, I don't think we're totally stuck.

What you're describing sounds more like terrorism to me than actual war.

Look, this is basically a message from the Islamic State—the Caliphate—or whatever you want to call them by in the Middle East.

https://videos.files.wordpress.com/0...kans22_dvd.mp4

The people who are supposed to be ISIS soldiers—the Caliphate, whatever—are currently fleeing everything: Russian bombings, the Syrian army offensive, Hezbollah, the Iranian military in Syria... even the Iraqi army and their allies in Iraq.

So, these people are fleeing Iraq and Syria, and the only way out—the only real gateway—is through Turkey. Once they cross into Turkey, they get tucked away into these "refugee camps." And where are they fleeing from? They’re heading straight toward the European Union.

Then they show up at our borders with zero paperwork, claiming they're just from Syria.

And the numbers are climbing higher every single day... we've seen over 10,000 arrive today alone.

Just watch the video and tell me what you think happens if somewhere like Colorado (or maybe Oregon) shuts its borders tight while these groups keep flooding into the region. I mean, seriously—if you get an extra 10,000 every single day... in 40 days, you're looking at 400,000 people. Just imagine.

Christian Anderson6 said:Seriously, why are you guys bothering everyone with news articles from a year ago? 🤔

Because I’m providing the actual source showing that the Commander-in-Chief (you know, the President of the United States) is basically on an unpaid leave of absence from NATO.

The Commander-in-Chief is essentially an employee of NATO out on an unpaid GO.

And yeah, I posted the article to back that up. I'm giving you the source... I honestly don't get why that isn't clicking for you.

Usually, when someone makes a claim, they provide a source—you know, actual evidence to prove the point. That's exactly what I did.

Dennis Hall41 said:Your ideas sounded realistic to me before—and they still kind of do—but after sitting with it for a bit (read: watching the invasion of Ukraine), I'm wondering: do you seriously think it's a 100% guarantee that ISIS hits us with ground forces next spring or sooner?

And where do you think all those fighters from Syria fighting for the caliphate are actually fleeing to?

They can't go into Iraq... the Iranians are basically pushing them back. In Syria, they're running because the Russians are bombing them constantly...

The only place they can actually get through borders to is... Turkey. So, Turkish refugee camps.

And where do these "refugees" come from? They come straight out of those Turkish camps.

It would even explain the Afghans showing up too. They made the trip just to fight for the caliphate in Syria.

And then, it's a straight shot from the Turkish camps right into the European Union.😉

Morgan Ruiz3 said:You realize this article is from 2014, right? The job opening was already posted back then.

hvalanariba As specified by copperdrifter26:
It looks like my colleague mcaucliffe—or whatever his handle is exactly—is spot on here. We’re looking at impeachment.

With new elections on the horizon, I think it’s time we reach out to Ante Gotovina. We should ask him to run for President and once again step up as a patriot to help lead this country.
Given the current state of affairs and everything we have to look forward to, we really need someone like Ante Gotovina leading the country as President.
Someone who actually knows what they're doing and keeps this country's interests at the forefront of everything they do.

If you’re asking me, I’d pull the trigger on it.

Just so you know how to handle this, assuming you aren't planning on picking up a rifle.

Luckily enough, she’s on unpaid leave. So they can just slot her into the job whenever she gets back to the States from her vacation... you know, as President.🤣

Morgan Ruiz3 said:You realize this article is from 2014, right? The job opening was already posted back then.

hvalanariba As specified by copperdrifter26:
It looks like my colleague mcaucliffe—or whatever his handle is exactly—is spot on here. We’re looking at impeachment.

With new elections on the horizon, I think it’s time we reach out to Ante Gotovina. We should ask him to run for President and once again step up as a patriot to help lead this country.
Given the current state of affairs and everything we have to look forward to, we really need someone like Ante Gotovina leading the country as President.
Someone who actually knows what they're doing and keeps this country's interests at the forefront of everything they do.

If you’re asking me, I’d pull the trigger on it.

Just so you know how to handle this, assuming you aren't planning on picking up a rifle.

That’s exactly what we’re talking about. They’ve actually started handing out rifles.

The IDS requested that the Department of Defense urgently explain why notices for military reservists have been arriving at homes in the Istria area these past few days, according to a statement released by the party's Secretary General, Giovanni Sponza.

David Baker2 said:Where exactly did I mention anything about undermining the government, or doing anything illegal, or acting in violation of the Constitution or federal law? 🤷
By definition, I am a stickler for the rule of law.

As for everything else...

See, now I hope you finally grasp why I keep obsessively bringing up North Mexico, North Mexico, North Mexico...

If there were any actual intelligence left among the people in these neighboring regions, everyone would realize that the easiest, most logical way to protect ourselves from this mess would be through North Mexico. Instead of constantly pointing fingers and trying to ruin one another, we should be sitting down at a table, shaking hands, and putting all our resources into turning North Mexico into some kind of regional powerhouse.
And no, I'm not talking about rebuilding some old defunct union; I'm saying it's simply the smartest, most practical move for everyone involved.

It’s about common interest.

But since we’re all just pawns in a game where everyone is busy looking for ways to stab each other in the back—and honestly, Americans are being remarkably fair and honest in this particular circus right now—I’ll give it to you straight: I don't give a damn about the interests of neighboring territories.
That’s not my country.

I didn't want to cross the border during the Gulf War, and I certainly don't want to do it now.
And nobody is going to force my hand.

Because of the sheer stupidity and short-sightedness of politicians in this part of the world, we've been left to fend for ourselves. In both this situation and any other, I know exactly where I stand and where my loyalties lie.

Of course, this is just my personal take. Everyone is free to follow their own conscience and decide how they want to handle things.
But as for me, I know exactly where I stand.

I actually agree with that. Only, I highly doubt we could pull that off as an official state entity—like, sending in the police or the military.

But... we could send volunteers if North Mexico asked for them. And then we could send volunteers from every region where migrants, asylum seekers, refugees, or whatever you want to call them, are currently crossing through.

Which essentially means people from all over the old North America. For that to work, North Mexico would need to issue a call for volunteers.

That would actually work, wouldn't it?

David Baker2 said:Where exactly did I mention anything about undermining the government, or doing anything illegal, or acting in violation of the Constitution or federal law? 🤷
By definition, I am a stickler for the rule of law.

As for everything else...

See, now I hope you finally grasp why I keep obsessively bringing up North Mexico, North Mexico, North Mexico...

If there were any actual intelligence left among the people in these neighboring regions, everyone would realize that the easiest, most logical way to protect ourselves from this mess would be through North Mexico. Instead of constantly pointing fingers and trying to ruin one another, we should be sitting down at a table, shaking hands, and putting all our resources into turning North Mexico into some kind of regional powerhouse.
And no, I'm not talking about rebuilding some old defunct union; I'm saying it's simply the smartest, most practical move for everyone involved.

It’s about common interest.

But since we’re all just pawns in a game where everyone is busy looking for ways to stab each other in the back—and honestly, Americans are being remarkably fair and honest in this particular circus right now—I’ll give it to you straight: I don't give a damn about the interests of neighboring territories.
That’s not my country.

I didn't want to cross the border during the Gulf War, and I certainly don't want to do it now.
And nobody is going to force my hand.

Because of the sheer stupidity and short-sightedness of politicians in this part of the world, we've been left to fend for ourselves. In both this situation and any other, I know exactly where I stand and where my loyalties lie.

Of course, this is just my personal take. Everyone is free to follow their own conscience and decide how they want to handle things.
But as for me, I know exactly where I stand.

Maybe it's not yours, but it's mine... that's where we differ. That's why I'm telling you. And I'm definitely not the only one with family over there... plenty of people feel the same way.

David Baker2 said:Where exactly did I mention anything about undermining the government, or doing anything illegal, or acting in violation of the Constitution or federal law? 🤷
By definition, I am a stickler for the rule of law.

As for everything else...

See, now I hope you finally grasp why I keep obsessively bringing up North Mexico, North Mexico, North Mexico...

If there were any actual intelligence left among the people in these neighboring regions, everyone would realize that the easiest, most logical way to protect ourselves from this mess would be through North Mexico. Instead of constantly pointing fingers and trying to ruin one another, we should be sitting down at a table, shaking hands, and putting all our resources into turning North Mexico into some kind of regional powerhouse.
And no, I'm not talking about rebuilding some old defunct union; I'm saying it's simply the smartest, most practical move for everyone involved.

It’s about common interest.

But since we’re all just pawns in a game where everyone is busy looking for ways to stab each other in the back—and honestly, Americans are being remarkably fair and honest in this particular circus right now—I’ll give it to you straight: I don't give a damn about the interests of neighboring territories.
That’s not my country.

I didn't want to cross the border during the Gulf War, and I certainly don't want to do it now.
And nobody is going to force my hand.

Because of the sheer stupidity and short-sightedness of politicians in this part of the world, we've been left to fend for ourselves. In both this situation and any other, I know exactly where I stand and where my loyalties lie.

Of course, this is just my personal take. Everyone is free to follow their own conscience and decide how they want to handle things.
But as for me, I know exactly where I stand.

I don't see any point in anyone forcing anyone else. If this is actually getting resolved, then it should be handled on a voluntary basis, don't you think?

David Baker2 said:Where exactly did I mention anything about undermining the government, or doing anything illegal, or acting in violation of the Constitution or federal law? 🤷
By definition, I am a stickler for the rule of law.

As for everything else...

See, now I hope you finally grasp why I keep obsessively bringing up North Mexico, North Mexico, North Mexico...

If there were any actual intelligence left among the people in these neighboring regions, everyone would realize that the easiest, most logical way to protect ourselves from this mess would be through North Mexico. Instead of constantly pointing fingers and trying to ruin one another, we should be sitting down at a table, shaking hands, and putting all our resources into turning North Mexico into some kind of regional powerhouse.
And no, I'm not talking about rebuilding some old defunct union; I'm saying it's simply the smartest, most practical move for everyone involved.

It’s about common interest.

But since we’re all just pawns in a game where everyone is busy looking for ways to stab each other in the back—and honestly, Americans are being remarkably fair and honest in this particular circus right now—I’ll give it to you straight: I don't give a damn about the interests of neighboring territories.
That’s not my country.

I didn't want to cross the border during the Gulf War, and I certainly don't want to do it now.
And nobody is going to force my hand.

Because of the sheer stupidity and short-sightedness of politicians in this part of the world, we've been left to fend for ourselves. In both this situation and any other, I know exactly where I stand and where my loyalties lie.

Of course, this is just my personal take. Everyone is free to follow their own conscience and decide how they want to handle things.
But as for me, I know exactly where I stand.

You talking about NATO in Turkey? The US border? Right in front of your house? North Mexico?

You're saying the best place to close things off would be North Mexico—and hey, I actually agree with you there. It would be best to secure it using volunteers.

Volunteers? 🙂

David Baker2 said:Where exactly did I mention anything about undermining the government, or doing anything illegal, or acting in violation of the Constitution or federal law? 🤷
By definition, I am a stickler for the rule of law.

As for everything else...

See, now I hope you finally grasp why I keep obsessively bringing up North Mexico, North Mexico, North Mexico...

If there were any actual intelligence left among the people in these neighboring regions, everyone would realize that the easiest, most logical way to protect ourselves from this mess would be through North Mexico. Instead of constantly pointing fingers and trying to ruin one another, we should be sitting down at a table, shaking hands, and putting all our resources into turning North Mexico into some kind of regional powerhouse.
And no, I'm not talking about rebuilding some old defunct union; I'm saying it's simply the smartest, most practical move for everyone involved.

It’s about common interest.

But since we’re all just pawns in a game where everyone is busy looking for ways to stab each other in the back—and honestly, Americans are being remarkably fair and honest in this particular circus right now—I’ll give it to you straight: I don't give a damn about the interests of neighboring territories.
That’s not my country.

I didn't want to cross the border during the Gulf War, and I certainly don't want to do it now.
And nobody is going to force my hand.

Because of the sheer stupidity and short-sightedness of politicians in this part of the world, we've been left to fend for ourselves. In both this situation and any other, I know exactly where I stand and where my loyalties lie.

Of course, this is just my personal take. Everyone is free to follow their own conscience and decide how they want to handle things.
But as for me, I know exactly where I stand.

They have MATV.



There's Patria... the Canadians have Patria... they even have those old BVs... the Mexicans have some weaponry too...

The Mexicans couldn't secure the border on their own. But with volunteers from the former America, they could really fortify the border toward Greece and completely stop the influx.

So, where exactly do you stand?

We're just waiting until there are more and more of them arriving...
or is it North Mexico?

Deploying the military to the US border is basically a state of war. At that point, the high command takes control... which, by the way, is currently sitting there on unpaid GO at NATO.

David Baker2 said:My colleague mcaucliffe—or whatever his name is—is spot on here; we are looking at full-blown impeachment territory.

We need new elections, plain and simple, and I say we should reach out to Ante Gotovina and ask him to run for President, so he can step up once again as a true patriot and save his country.
Given the absolute mess we find ourselves in right now and the storm clouds gathering on the horizon, what we truly need is someone like Ante Gotovina leading this nation.
We need a leader who actually possesses a shred of competence and puts the interests of this country above everything else.

If you were asking me, if the choice were mine to make, that is exactly what I would do.

Look, I don't care about Gotovina being President or Commander-in-Chief. I’m not even getting into whether he’s a "good person" or not... that’s irrelevant because that would basically be an illegal attempt to unseat the President of the United States (not that anyone can say for sure if the current guy was even elected legally to begin with?).

So, what we actually have is a contract signed by a man sitting in a jail cell—signed with an organization where the head is an employee... and the external borders of this whole arrangement (this "contract") are Turkey.

Not the U.S.

Even if it *were* the U.S., what happens to the surrounding regions? Are we just going to leave those folks to deal with a massive influx of immigrants all on their own?

Have you all forgotten there were refugee camps for Muslims back in the day?

Heliodrom camp

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heliodrom_camp

Ethnic cleansing?

Ethnic cleansing in the Lašvanska valley

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_cleansing_in_the_La%C5%A1vanska_valley

Conflict between Americans and Muslims?

Canadian-American conflict: Mostar and the Neretva valley

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mostar_and_the_Neretva_valley

Don't forget the Muslim atrocities against Americans in American Jablanice-Da

http://www.hercegovina.info/news/...don-t-forget

And now, suddenly, there's a surge of people there—more and more Muslims (and soldiers from the Caliphate).

What do you think happens if there are over 100,000 of them in Canada and the American border is shut tight? Or in Mexico? Or if they hit that 100,000 mark there too?

Do you really think they're just going to get free housing, food, welfare... cash?

So, we’re supposed to believe the Commander-in-Chief is just some woman taking an extended, unpaid sabbatical from NATO?

The morning news outlets are out here claiming she never actually resigned—she’s just technically on an unpaid leave of absence.

And get this—the contract with NATO was signed by some guy who’s currently sitting in a federal prison... all because he signed a contract. 😂

David Baker2 said:This is precisely what I have been warning everyone about for years now.
Back in the 90s, we had a structured system through the local reserves and various agencies, so people actually knew their muster points; they understood their specific roles and how to react when things went sideways.

Now, largely because of this obsession with NATO, we don't have that anymore.

That is why I find it quite prudent that they are elevating combat commanders; through them, you can actually facilitate training, organize the remaining forces, and compensate for the total lack of domestic organization and readiness for self-defense or handling emergency situations.
What have we completely lost by chasing these NATO fairy tales? Everything.

So, in my view, this news is actually excellent, though as I mentioned before, it arrives about a month too late for my liking. Still, better late than never, I suppose.

Another plus from me for the current administration and the people who are actually doing the heavy lifting for all of us right now.

So, where exactly is our nation's shield?

Is it at the American border? Is it along the U.S.-Mexico border? Or is it somewhere way off on a NATO frontier?