It's nearing time to 86 47 with 25.

[red viking]

2 minutes ago, JimmySpeaks said:

You created a thread wanting the stock market to crash and America to fail. That’s 110% wanting. 

It DID crash and trumptard caved on tariffs as a result. Mission accomplished. TACO. Oh wait, it's Taco  Tuesday. What will he backtrack on today? 

[braves121]

Seems our blockade is not working as several ships have passed the strait. Taco Tuesday i guess 

[ionel]

30 minutes ago, braves121 said:

Seems our blockade is not working as several ships have passed the strait. Taco Tuesday i guess 

Define "several."  Do you understand the purpose of the "blockade?" 

[braves121]

1 minute ago, ionel said:

Define "several."  Do you understand the purpose of the "blockade?" 

4 ships tied to Tehran passed. The purpose was to put pressure on Iran and not let Iranian tied ships pass

[ionel]

1 minute ago, braves121 said:

4 ships tied to Tehran passed. The purpose was to put pressure on Iran and not let Iranian tied ships pass

The purpose is to shut it down so they can create a mine free lane for transition and to ensure that Iran doesn't drop new mines and then open back up to the non Iran port transport.  4 ships within a day or two of shutting down does not defeat the purpose especially  if we know what those ships are transporting and their departure and destination ports.  

[Caveira]

7 minutes ago, braves121 said:

4 ships tied to Tehran passed. The purpose was to put pressure on Iran and not let Iranian tied ships pass

More misleading / less than actual 

About the “4 ships passed” claim

• There ARE reports of a few Iran-linked ships getting through the Strait of Hormuz early on (some reports say ~3–4 ships). 
• BUT:
  • Many of these ships were not heading to Iranian ports, so they weren’t technically violating the blockade. 
     
  • https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2026/apr/14/middle-east-crisis-live-hezbollah-urges-lebanon-to-pull-out-of-talks-with-israel-blockade-of-strait-of-hormuz-begins?utm_source=chatgpt.com
  • Some may have been in a gray area (grace period, already en route, or sanctions loopholes). 
    https://nypost.com/2026/04/14/world-news/iran-linked-ships-transit-through-strait-of-hormuz-in-defiance-of-president-trumps-blockade/?utm_source=chatgpt.com

---

[red viking]

Blockade is failing, just like everything else in this war. Pathetic. 

[braves121]

9 minutes ago, Caveira said:

More misleading / less than actual 

 

About the “4 ships passed” claim

• There ARE reports of a few Iran-linked ships getting through the Strait of Hormuz early on (some reports say ~3–4 ships). 
• BUT:
  • Many of these ships were not heading to Iranian ports, so they weren’t technically violating the blockade. 
     
  • https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2026/apr/14/middle-east-crisis-live-hezbollah-urges-lebanon-to-pull-out-of-talks-with-israel-blockade-of-strait-of-hormuz-begins?utm_source=chatgpt.com
  • Some may have been in a gray area (grace period, already en route, or sanctions loopholes). 
    https://nypost.com/2026/04/14/world-news/iran-linked-ships-transit-through-strait-of-hormuz-in-defiance-of-president-trumps-blockade/?utm_source=chatgpt.com

---

As of April 2026, President Trump has ordered a U.S. Navy blockade of the 

Strait of Hormuz

 to prevent Iran from extorting vessels and to increase economic pressure following an initial Iranian closure of the strait. The action aims to force an agreement to end the ongoing conflict by stopping Iran from collecting tolls and, in effect, controlling the waterway
 

4 oil tankers linked to Iran have passed and a sanctioned Chinese oil tanker with Iran oil also passed AFTER the blockade deadline. If ther is a gray area that’s not really much of a blockade. It doesn’t make much sense to claim this is for economic pressure when we are letting them transport their only product that can make them money 

Edited April 14 by braves121

[Interviewed_at_Weehawken]

33 minutes ago, red viking said:

Blockade is failing, just like everything else in this war. Pathetic. 

You are failing

[JimmySpeaks]

3 hours ago, red viking said:

It DID crash and trumptard caved on tariffs as a result. Mission accomplished. TACO. Oh wait, it's Taco  Tuesday. What will he backtrack on today? 

Crashed. Bahahahahahhahahahahahhahaha.  

[ionel]

52 minutes ago, braves121 said:

... a sanctioned Chinese oil tanker with Iran oil also passed AFTER the blockade deadline. If ther is a gray area that’s not really much of a blockade.

So we should've blown up the Chinese tanker?  How many Chinese tankers didnt go through?  Can you show us a map of the path the tanker took (should be on the tracking web site) and maybe we can better explain why it was not a good idea to blow it up.  

[Bigbrog]

58 minutes ago, braves121 said:

As of April 2026, President Trump has ordered a U.S. Navy blockade of the 

Strait of Hormuz

 to prevent Iran from extorting vessels and to increase economic pressure following an initial Iranian closure of the strait. The action aims to force an agreement to end the ongoing conflict by stopping Iran from collecting tolls and, in effect, controlling the waterway
 

4 oil tankers linked to Iran have passed and a sanctioned Chinese oil tanker with Iran oil also passed AFTER the blockade deadline. If ther is a gray area that’s not really much of a blockade. It doesn’t make much sense to claim this is for economic pressure when we are letting them transport their only product that can make them money 

Man...come on!  This is so disingenuous, inaccurate and conflated it's ridiculous.  You can't honestly be playing that type of mental gymnastics in your head just because you hate Trump...or can you?

[braves121]

3 minutes ago, Bigbrog said:

Man...come on!  This is so disingenuous, inaccurate and conflated it's ridiculous.  You can't honestly be playing that type of mental gymnastics in your head just because you hate Trump...or can you?

All I’m doing is pointing out the contradictions . the admin tells us one thing and their actions are different 

[ionel]

7 minutes ago, Bigbrog said:

Man...come on!  This is so disingenuous, inaccurate and conflated it's ridiculous.  You can't honestly be playing that type of mental gymnastics in your head just because you hate Trump...or can you?

[Bigbrog]

7 minutes ago, braves121 said:

All I’m doing is pointing out the contradictions . the admin tells us one thing and their actions are different 

You are pointing out "contradictions" about things you are getting off of headlines/social media/biased news sources...I can't honestly believe you think you have all the information on the topics you brought up...do you?  You honestly don't think you are "reaching/exaggerating/hoping/etc." in your "conclusions" of said situations??  With that being said, are there now and have there been "cover ups" in the past...absolutely.  I am skeptical of every administration too, but to a point.  I have always first and foremost given the position of President the utmost respect whether I voted for them or not.  Even if Presidents do stupid stuff I agree they should be called out on it but the absolute HATE you and others have for Trump (again I didn't vote for him and there are things I really don't like about him) is next level and really quite ridiculous.  You all seem to do the same thing and take the absolute worst possible perspective and opinion of every single tiny little thing he does and says and ramble that around in your heads to make these completely asinine assessments about him.  Is it really that hard to say "I don't like Policy A because of XYZ" and leave it at that as opposed to "I don't like Policy A because of XYZ because that clearly means he is a puppet of <insert flavor of the day country to hate> and thus he is Hitler/fascists/king wannabe/racists/etc."??

[Paul158]

3 hours ago, ionel said:

So we should've blown up the Chinese tanker?  How many Chinese tankers didnt go through?  Can you show us a map of the path the tanker took (should be on the tracking web site) and maybe we can better explain why it was not a good idea to blow it up.  

The tanker did not leave from Iranian port. So, it was allowed to go through.

[Scouts Honor]

if the dems had something on trump. TRUST me, it would be out.

look what they are doing to swalwell right now.

and then remember this

 

[GreatWhiteNorth]

Now Trump is threatening (again) to fire Fed Chair Jerome Powell. 

Quote

Powell's term as Fed chairman is set to expire in mid-May, but he's promised to stay on the job until a successor is confirmed.

"That is what the law calls for," Powell told reporters last month. "And that's what we're going to do in this situation."

Last month, a federal judge ruled that those cost overruns are a mere pretext and concluded that the real purpose of the Justice Department's probe is to intimidate the central bank.

"The Government has offered no evidence whatsoever that Powell committed any crime other than displeasing the President," Judge James Boasberg wrote in a decision quashing subpoenas. "There is abundant evidence that the subpoenas' dominant (if not sole) purpose is to harass and pressure Powell either to yield to the President or to resign and make way for a Fed Chair who will."

That could backfire on the president, delaying the confirmation of Kevin Warsh to serve as the next Fed chair and leaving Powell in the position longer.

A key member of the Senate Banking Committee, Republican Thom Tillis of North Carolina, has said he will not vote to confirm Trump's nominee until the Justice Department's probe is resolved. The committee is scheduled to hold a hearing on Warsh's nomination next week.

Trump renews threat to fire Fed Chair Jerome Powell : NPR

Why does Trump keep creating unnecessary chaos and uncertainty when that is the last thing we need? I would think there must be at least one adult in the White House who is able to explain to him that this isn't helping. Maybe not.

If we can't 25th him out, maybe someone can take on the role of anti-chaos advisor. Something has to give - the country is being driven into the ground while we all watch.

[Caveira]

12 minutes ago, GreatWhiteNorth said:

Now Trump is threatening (again) to fire Fed Chair Jerome Powell. 

Why does Trump keep creating unnecessary chaos and uncertainty when that is the last thing we need? I would think there must be at least one adult in the White House who is able to explain to him that this isn't helping. Maybe not.

If we can't 25th him out, maybe someone can take on the role of anti-chaos advisor. Something has to give - the country is being driven into the ground while we all watch.

If we could not 25 Biden our can you 25 anyone out?   Simply not liking any policy from a Pres is not grounds for 25 boss

Edited April 15 by Caveira

[mspart]

1 hour ago, GreatWhiteNorth said:

If we can't 25th him out, maybe someone can take on the role of anti-chaos advisor. Something has to give - the country is being driven into the ground while we all watch.

Who is this WE you speak of?   Last I read, the 25th states that this is up to the VP and the cabinet.   So I ask again, who is this WE you speak of.  

mspart

[red viking]

2 hours ago, Caveira said:

If we could not 25 Biden our can you 25 anyone out?   Simply not liking any policy from a Pres is not grounds for 25 boss

Um...yes it is. When his decisions are impulsive, make no sense and he changes mind every day and thinks he's Jesus. It's a national security threat. 

[Caveira]

13 minutes ago, red viking said:

Um...yes it is. When his decisions are impulsive, make no sense and he changes mind every day and thinks he's Jesus. It's a national security threat. 

Hate to spoil your party boss but it is not.   The president discharging stuff you don’t like is not grounds for the 25th

Short answer: No—not by itself. What you’re describing (erratic behavior, bad judgment, changing positions, even extreme rhetoric) is not enough on its own to trigger the  25th Amendment.

Here’s why:

---

What the 25th Amendment actually requires

The key standard in Section 4 is:

the president is “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office”

That’s it. There’s no checklist, no medical test, no definition of “mental unfitness.” 

---

Who decides (this is the big part)

It’s not voters or the opposing party. The process is:

1. Vice President + majority of Cabinet must agree
2. They formally declare the president unable to serve
3. If challenged, Congress needs a 2/3 vote in both chambers to keep the president sidelined 

That’s an extremely high bar.

---

What it’s really meant for

Historically and legally, this is designed for clear incapacity, like:

• Coma
• Stroke
• Severe cognitive breakdown
• Being unable to communicate or make decisions

Not just:

• impulsive decisions
• controversial policies
• acting erratically or offensively
• “thinking he’s Jesus” (as a political characterization)

Even experts note it’s more about inability than bad behavior or disagreement

[red viking]

19 minutes ago, Caveira said:

Hate to spoil your party boss but it is not.   The president discharging stuff you don’t like is not grounds for the 25th

 

Short answer: No—not by itself. What you’re describing (erratic behavior, bad judgment, changing positions, even extreme rhetoric) is not enough on its own to trigger the  25th Amendment.

Here’s why:

---

What the 25th Amendment actually requires

The key standard in Section 4 is:

the president is “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office”

That’s it. There’s no checklist, no medical test, no definition of “mental unfitness.” 

---

Who decides (this is the big part)

It’s not voters or the opposing party. The process is:

1. Vice President + majority of Cabinet must agree
2. They formally declare the president unable to serve
3. If challenged, Congress needs a 2/3 vote in both chambers to keep the president sidelined 

That’s an extremely high bar.

---

What it’s really meant for

Historically and legally, this is designed for clear incapacity, like:

• Coma
• Stroke
• Severe cognitive breakdown
• Being unable to communicate or make decisions

Not just:

• impulsive decisions
• controversial policies
• acting erratically or offensively
• “thinking he’s Jesus” (as a political characterization)

Even experts note it’s more about inability than bad behavior or disagreement

I was describing symptoms of frontal lobe dementia. That IS A SEVERE COGNITIVE BREAKDOWN. 

[Caveira]

4 minutes ago, red viking said:

I was describing symptoms of frontal lobe dementia. That IS A SEVERE COGNITIVE BREAKDOWN. 

You can wish it all you like.  You’re not being realistic.  In your gut you know it.  The 25th will not be invoked.  

[Caveira]

11 minutes ago, red viking said:

I was describing symptoms of frontal lobe dementia. That IS A SEVERE COGNITIVE BREAKDOWN. 

No it does not.

Why:

• Frontotemporal dementia is a progressive neurological disease that shows a clear, worsening decline over time in behavior, judgment, language, and functioning. 
• It typically includes patterns like loss of empathy, impaired judgment, disinhibition, and inability to function in daily life—and these steadily get worse over years. 
• Diagnosis requires clinical evaluation and medical evidence, not interpretation of public actions or political decisions. 

What you’re pointing to (impulsive decisions, conflict, unpredictability) can be explained by political strategy, personality, or policy disagreement.

That may be fair to criticize, but it is not sufficient evidence of dementia.