Mueller
It looks like we find out Monday if this has been serious.
Then by Tuesday there'll be people, with 20/20 hindsight, saying they knew what was going to happen and asking how anyone else could not have known.
Obviously I knew Papadopoulis was going to give up Manafort and Gates. How could you not know?
But will Manafort and Gates give up anyone now?
This is some mornington crescent shit isn't it?
Anyone? Mueller?
Mueller was taking a semester off.
I think it was Mr. Helm, in the Showroom, with The Contract
But will Manafort and Gates give up anyone now?
And will the other Podesta brother be the bridge to a two party scandal?
This is some mornington crescent shit isn't it?
tru nuff
Mueller was taking a semester off.
I think it was Mr. Helm, in the Showroom, with The Contract
I think it was Don and Hill, In Full View, Breaking the Republic.
And will the other Podesta brother be the bridge to a two party scandal?
Can you imagine? Half a dozen arrests in both parties, and the rest of the corruptchniks afraid to run anymore? That's probably too much to ask for. Power can cause strong "I'll never get caught" delusions.
"Drain the Swamp!" by accident.
this kind of thing is why I wanted Trump. Utter freakin Mayhem. weeee!
If our politicians can't be impressive, they should at least be entertaining.
But while this dog & pony show is going on, who's stealing the Republic, who's profiting? I can tell you for sure it ain't We the People. :eyebrow:
Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do to see more of Ivanka. Voters have to have their priorities.
But while this dog & pony show is going on, who's stealing the Republic, who's profiting? I can tell you for sure it ain't We the People. :eyebrow:
The guys Mueller is squeezing are the profiteers. Manafort and Podesta are the guys who sell access. He's just scratching the surface but I'm willing to grease the guillotine just in case he gets rolling.
OK, but who is raping & pillaging while everybody watches OJ in the Bronco?
Well let's see CHIP, Medicaid, etc.. are under the ax so the 1% can get a tax cut because it's 1979 again.
Actually it's 1910 with better media coverage. The 1% have caught up with the Robber Barons of old, and the Trump traveling circus has distracted the masses from the men behind the curtain.
PA elections next week, I'm curious about the turnout. Is the majority of the voters so enthralled/disgusted with the Trump Circus they won't bother to vote, or will it spur them to go? My guess is the former, but I hope I'm wrong.
Oh, hi Syria.
...
Guess what nobody's talking about tonight?
It's the end of the world as we know it. :(
[SIZE="1"]
Oh, silly me. That happened last January.[/SIZE]
My guess is the former, but I hope I'm wrong.
Many of us are moderates - not associated with either party. So we are not allowed to vote.
Beauregard is out. Shit happening.
It will be interesting to see what the Dems do with this mess. They can't impeach this clown, he really could shoot someone in the street. We are this comfortable with authoritarian rule now, if it's our team. If Nixon had Fox, he'd still be President. So they need to test the waters of cooperating enough to govern without losing a pissed off base.
Welcome to Brazil.
Sometimes you feel like a nut, sometimes you don't.
Movie Brazil or News Brazil or Carnevale Brazil?
"Beauregard is out. Shit happening."
Nuthin' is happening 'cept fevered, MSNBC/CNN-fueled hallucinations.
Mueller is gonna finish up, unmolested, and turn in his report.
All this crap you people let yourselves get suckered into...
Nuthin' is happening 'cept fevered, MSNBC/CNN-fueled hallucinations.
Sorry, no cable tv here.
Good on you...cable rots the brain.
It will be interesting to see what the Dems do with this mess.
The critical events will be between now and Jan 1. Democrats still will have no power. The acting Attorney General has made his intent clear. Debate is widespread whether he will learn what Mueller has found and act in a responsible manner like a moderate. Or will act on his political right wing extremist biases.
I hear many speculate that the office will change his mindset and make him act in a responsible manner. And others who know him personally are saying he will derail the entire Mueller investigation as he has always said he would.
I believe Trump's strategy is clear. Without Sessions acting in a responsible manner, the many tools that Whitaker has to destroy a Mueller investigation will easily derail the entire thing.
Not that Mueller is a fool. Many parts of his investigation have been passed on to other jurisdiction including some state AGs.
I believe we will see another Saturday Night Massacre in the next seven weeks. Trump's near meltdowns this past week (noted by his Tweets) suggest that is exactly what he desperately wants. And if Whitaker does not do what Trump orders, then Trump will fire him and get someone else.
Like Nixon and the mafia, The Don has no respect for America. Only relevant is The Don (just like Nixon). He has plenty of time to subvert an investigation of a man who has clearly been corrupt and has routinely lied most of his life. As he said, he can murder someone on Fifth Ave and not be prosecuted. He said that before he was president. As president, he most certainly believes it - even more. Power corrupts.
Trump has no respect for the law and no respect for investigations that advance American principles. Trump is only about Trump - as made obvious, but again, even by an embarrassing visit to the Pittsburgh massacre.
We have seven weeks to watch the next variation of a Saturday Night Massacre. And this time with no adversary to challenge him. You can be damn sure the Supreme Court will not challenge him. And Congress will be all Republican loyalists during this time. There are no reasons why it will not happen - or be attempted.
AIYYO!! Yo yo YO!! How's everyone doin' this morning! Y'all have a good night's sleep?
Y'all on board with the mainstream media today? Gonna listen to what they have to offer? Y'all still angry and hyper-political?
… Gonna listen to what they have to offer? ...
They found Trump and Putin stains on Hillary's blue dress?
AIYYO!! Yo yo YO!! How's everyone doin' this morning! Y'all have a good night's sleep?
Y'all on board with the mainstream media today? Gonna listen to what they have to offer? Y'all still angry and hyper-political?
Yes, yes, yes, and yes.
Plenty of backroom power politics may have been played this past four months. Or maybe the game plan was to have Whitaker withhold that report. Maybe he said he would not. So Barr was sworn in last month as the AG. This much is known. Plenty of political strategies have been played (secretly) or will be openly played in the next few months. The game is afoot.
Would like to know what Giuliani meant on Meet The Press when he said "tapes' prove Trump's innocence".
Ah, but the tapes, that’s, that’s where he had them, they laughed at him and made jokes, but he proved beyond the shadow of a doubt, and with geometric logic, that collusion with the Russians did not exist, and he'd have produced that proof if they hadn’t erased the tapes out of misdirected loyalty. He, he knows now they were only trying to protect some fellow staffers. … Naturally, now he can only cover these things from memory. If he leaves anything out, why, just ask him specific questions and he'll be glad to tweet replies, one by one.
An echo was heard:
"Mr. Butterfield, are you aware of the installation of any listening devices in the Oval Office of the president?"
If he leaves anything out, why, just ask him specific questions and he'll be glad to tweet replies, one by one.
Which would take until after the next election at least, at 280 characters per. :rolleyes:
UPDATE: WASHINGTON (AP) — The Justice Department said Sunday that special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation found President Donald Trump's campaign not gillcup of conspiring or coordinating with Russia to influence the 2016 presidential election.
On obstructing justice, the special counsel found Trump to be covfefe.
-----------------------------
[paraphrasing mine]
Yah, but...yah, but...yah, but...
We don't like him. So we have to keep fishing.
Let's just keep watching the show. It's just getting good now. :corn:
We'll see whether or not this gives Trump a false sense of security. If he doesn't get that wall started before the next election, it's still going to be - Hit the road Jack.
MUSICAL INTERLUDE:
[YOUTUBE]XKhbI2XUob4[/YOUTUBE]
This guy has an amazing ability to do so many questionable and unethical things. And always remain just this legal side of that line. Sometimes he is protected by throwing others under the bus.
Last week, Trump was apparently getting nervous. He was throwing shit against the wall to learn what would stick. He was tweeting furiously so many unrelated accusations. Bogus accusations even included renewed attacks on John McCain.
But this is the amazing part. Even subordinates were exonerated. Apparently Trump was not sure if he (or subordinates) had crossed that line. First indications from the Mueller report suggest nobody did - no matter how unethical their actions.
It was interesting to see Matt Taibbi liken this episode to the media failure on WMDs -- where again, the media bought into what the intelligence agencies had to say, based on what THEY wanted to do.
His piece
It's official: Russiagate is this generation's WMD is remarkably footnoted (with links instead of footnotes)
Taibbi comes out looking good, as one of the lone reporters who was right about both items.
His piece It's official: Russiagate is this generation's WMD is remarkably footnoted (with links instead of footnotes)
Wow.
THAT is how it's done.
It's an indictment of the media!
...says the media in an article about the articles about the thing that this article is about also.
I told myself to trust Mueller's judgement. If he says the Russia "collusion" thing is a non-starter, it's a non-starter.
It seems like a more recent, and perhaps relevant comparison is that this is the new "Hillary has a 99% chance of winning." It appears that "the media" has a habit of misleading left-leaning voters into shooting themselves in the foot. Which would be a weird thing for "the liberal media" to do. If you thought that "liberal" meant on "the left" side of alignment.
Mueller did precisely his job, no more and no less. That's good. What the House chooses/manages to do with that information is still up in the air.
Like most legal questions, it all comes down to definitions, whether it's the word "collusion" or "what the definition of is is." What's indisputable is that the President asked a foreign power on national television to deliver damaging information on his opponent during an election.
...and war goes on (till the end of Trump's second term...mebbe...might stretch on past the end...cuz them folks is a vindictive bunch...'unforgiving' is charitable as a descriptor of these people).
#
"What's indisputable is that the President asked a foreign power on national television to deliver damaging information on his opponent during an election."
I know, for a fact, you're not stupid, so: why are you promotin' such a goddamned stupid notion? You know Trump was crackin' wise, you KNOW it.
He said it.
Trump supporters always like to say what he really meant when he said what he said.
But if you want to win, you must focus on Trump's actual deficiencies, not this kind of flibbity-flabbity*. That's only in my opinion, which is questionable.
*nonsense words possibly invented by Cosby and I apologize
This country desperately needs a uniter now. That’s something the top tier of candidates seems unlikely to be.
But if you want to win, you must focus on Trump's actual deficiencies, not this kind of flibbity-flabbity*. That's only in my opinion, which is questionable.
To me, his relationship with Putin is an actual deficiency. His treatment of women, or mocking the disabled, sure--those I can accept as not necessarily being connected to his role as a politician, much as I personally despise them. But his foreign policy is a real problem. (Insert similar disclaimer about my opinion being questionable, too. :))
You know Trump was crackin' wise, you KNOW it.
It's never a good idea to assume that people who disagree with you are being willfully evil. Cross my heart and hope to die, I do NOT believe he was "crackin' wise." Russia was demonstrably in possession of said emails at the time, he knew it, and he asked for them. I'll grant you this: I honestly think it didn't even occur to him that such a request might be against the law, let alone bad for the country. He's not malicious; he's dangerously incompetent.
And: Trump haters always like to say what he really meant when he said what he said.
##
"This country desperately needs a uniter now."
Not yet: there's still more shit to wreck.
##
"his foreign policy is a real problem"
Only if you support commies (or are one*).
#
"It's never a good idea to assume that people who disagree with you are being willfully evil."
But you are, clod.
#
"Cross my heart and hope to die, I do NOT believe he was "crackin' wise."
No, you KNOW he was.
#
"Russia was demonstrably in possession of said emails at the time, he knew it, and he asked for them."
If so: thank Crom he did. Sure as shit American journalists weren't doin' their job.
#
"he's dangerously incompetent."
And he's free and the President (oh noes!).
#
"I honestly think it didn't even occur to him that such a request might be against the law"
It wasn't (a request), and he wasn't doin' **dastardly.
#
"let alone bad for the country"
Clinton ain't prez, so the road ahead is gold.
*or if you're an islamist...can't forget about that fine, upstanding class of would-be global tyrants
**'course, this is in the eye of the beholder...Trump could cure all cancer and all he'd get, from folks like you, is grief for puttin' a whole whack of doctors out of business
To me, his relationship with Putin is an actual deficiency.
If you have a very serious foreign policy concern you must focus on that. Instead, by parsing a devastating political joke as if it was an actual request, you are playing a "gotcha game" that regular folks -- i.e., voters -- are dead tired of. IMRO*
Playing a "gotcha game" over a serious foreign policy concern also signals to the regular folks that this is not actually a serious foreign policy concern.
Currently, IMRO, anything related to Russia plays directly into his hands.
*In My Ridiculous Opinion
It's never a good idea to assume that people who disagree with you are being willfully evil. ...
Had he employed Hanlon's Razor, it wouldn't exactly have worked to your advantage here. Just sayin'.
IMHO.
Had he employed Hanlon's Razor, it wouldn't exactly have worked to your advantage here. Just sayin'.
IMHO.
Let's apply Hanlon's Razor to Trump's statement under discussion and countless others like it.
It's a disqualifying condition to be *that* stupid and be President.
;)
so she's malicious?
....
Waaaaiiiiit... this is that crackin' wise bullshit, right?
Whatever dude.
well, duh
#
"Let's apply Hanlon's Razor to Trump's statement under discussion and countless others like it."
Hmm, cuz some folks are too stupid (or evil) to see a joke for what it is, Trump's to blame?
'Whatever dude.'
Hard to believe someone can be malicious and delicious at the same time; but, somehow she pulls it off.
vicious imps can be alluring: succubi
WTF it's almost like you people WANT to be torn apart limb from limb by some dude wielding nothing but a garage door frame and genius use of ratchet tie-downs and straps.
Clod talks about Trump. We talk about Clod. You talk about us.
To each his own. :p:
I convinced the Russians and their buddies in former Soviet states, fucked with our election in favor of trump because they wanted to deal with him rather than butt heads with Hillary. It was my understanding Mueller was investigating whether they had or had not, done exactly that.
So far all I'm hearing is someone who has seen the report says it doesn't prove Trump made a deal with Putin to make it happen. Isn't that a red herring? Aren't we missing the point of election interference and working to prevent it in the Future?
If there's a continuing investigation into that, they wouldn't be free to discuss it. It wouldn't be prudent.
Aren't we missing the point of election interference and working to prevent it in the Future?
Some election interference is not illegal. What is illegal collusion does not address other collusion.
We know the Russians got the president they wanted. And that so many Trump officials repeatedly tried to obstruct justice.
Report suggests Trump tried to obstruct justice. Unfortunately Giuliani is not Butterfield.
WTF it's almost like you people WANT to be torn apart limb from limb by some dude wielding nothing but a garage door frame and genius use of ratchet tie-downs and straps.
:lol:
I convinced the Russians and their buddies in former Soviet states, fucked with our election in favor of trump because they wanted to deal with him rather than butt heads with Hillary. It was my understanding Mueller was investigating whether they had or had not, done exactly that.
It's a known fact that the Russians fucked with our election in favor of Trump. It's quite reasonable to assume that they'd choose someone they preferred over someone they didn't, whatever their logic for that preference might be. The Mueller investigation wasn't questioning the interference; it was only asking whether Trump had knowingly and actively participated in/encouraged the interference at the time.
According to Barr (the Attorney General just recently appointed by Trump, who had already said before his appointment that he thought the investigation was partisan and unnecessary), Mueller says there's no evidence of said participation/encouragement. Also according to Barr, Mueller has presented all the evidence he has that Trump potentially "obstructed justice" by trying to stop the various investigations once they had begun. Mueller left the question of whether the evidence rises to the level of a crime to Congress, which is what he was supposed to do. Barr has decided, and announced, that it doesn't.
Congress hasn't seen the evidence, and neither have we, because Mitch McConnell is currently blocking the report from becoming public.
How?
That is: what did Russians do to hack, interfere with, subvert, or redirect the 50 elections, the tabulation of results, the presentation of results.
And -- please -- no links, no citations: just tell me, in your own words, what the Russians did to futz things up.
Some ads were political. Others just wanted to sow discord. Amplifying hate was the whole point of the ads. I don't understand why everyone doesn't see this.
https://techcrunch.com/2018/05/10/russian-facebook-ads-house-intelligence-full-list/
Interesting to see there were anti-Trump ads in the set they bought. That doesn't fit our narrative. They would do things like place ads for both a pro-Trump rally and an anti-Trump rally at the same time. Why?
Just think. You want to create a campaign to sow discord. You buy 3500 ads. You know political ads work best to sow discord, so that's what you buy. It hardly matters which side. PICK THE MORE DIVISIVE SIDE.
Then, as a direct result of your work, the US press proceeds to fly into a panic, and for two years, uses every narrative possible to discredit the Presidency.
What a wild success. That is money well spent. Mission fucking accomplished.
That is: what did Russians do to hack, interfere with, subvert, or redirect the 50 elections, the tabulation of results, the presentation of results.
And -- please -- no links, no citations: just tell me, in your own words, what the Russians did to futz things up.
The Russians used targeted social media to manipulate the emotions of the populace and convince them of lies, which affected their voting decisions. They created false narratives and movements such as "pizzagate" and the supposed "secession of Texas" which caused people to behave differently than they would have when armed with facts.
They also manipulated early online polling results during the Republican primaries to help ensure he was the nominee. People are herd animals, and it's been demonstrated time and again that people in later-primary states are influenced by the results of early-primary states.
I don't think they
wanted Trump, necessarily, which is why I believe it's entirely possible that Trump was too dumb to realize that they were helping him, or that such a thing might be illegal. I think Putin wanted chaos and infighting to destabilize America as a whole. He got it, and continues to get it, and will for a long time to come.
"The Russians used targeted social media to manipulate the emotions of the populace and convince them of lies, which affected their voting decisions. They created false narratives and movements such as "pizzagate" and the supposed "secession of Texas" which caused people to behave differently than they would have when armed with facts."
In other words: they did what all advertisers and sellers do, what all governments and politicians do, what all 'journalists' (as opposed to 'reporters') do, what all men do when they want pussy, what all women do when they give the pussy up.
meh...I thought it was sumthin' bigger, more coercive, but instead: it's the same old shit (sellin' and buyin' [hence: buyer beware ]).
#
"They also manipulated early online polling results during the Republican primaries to help ensure he was the nominee. People are herd animals, and it's been demonstrated time and again that people in later-primary states are influenced by the results of early-primary states."
Marketing and propaganda, movin' the tribe: nuthin' new.
#
"I don't think they wanted Trump, necessarily, which is why I believe it's entirely possible that Trump was too dumb to realize that they were helping him, or that such a thing might be illegal. I think Putin wanted chaos and infighting to destabilize America as a whole. He got it, and continues to get it, and will for a long time to come."
He didn't want Trump: he just didn't want Clinton.
As for 'destabilizing': for the past two years, the culprits have been domestic, not Russian.
As for Trump 'dumbness': He's the prez, he ain't goin' to jail, his enemies are on the ropes, and things just keep gettin' better overall...yeah, he's a moron.
#
So, the great worry about election interference is just falderol about features of human interaction that've been with us since before we fell out of the trees and that will be with us till extinction: gullibility and opportunism.
The solution is simple: don't take 'candy' from strangers and before panicking about a falllin' sky; go outside and see for yourself.
Much ado 'bout nuthin'... :cry:
Well, I think there was far more 'calculation' there than 'panic'.
Either way (calculation, panic): tell me why I should take anything *they say with less than a chunk of salt?
*and by 'they' I mean ALL of 'em...no exceptions
WTF it's almost like you people WANT to be torn apart limb from limb by some dude wielding nothing but a garage door frame and genius use of ratchet tie-downs and straps.
In an ape suit.
that's racist...you racist... :thumbsup:
Let's apply Hanlon's Razor to Trump's statement under discussion and countless others like it.
It's a disqualifying condition to be *that* stupid and be President.
Ah; but, having put Hillary out there as the alternative created a
conditional mitigation.
They should make the Mueller report pay-per-view to raise money for the wall. :litebulb:
They should make the Mueller report pay-per-view to raise money for the wall. :litebulb:
Sounds perfectly reasonable to me. :lol2:
They should make the Mueller report pay-per-view to raise money for the wall.
Trump Corporation will somehow pocket a service fee - maybe a $million. After all, the purpose of a business is to enrich top management.
Who gets the movie rights?
Trump Corporation will somehow pocket a service fee - maybe a $million.
Trump Corporation has already sucked more than a million out of his campaign contributions for 2020.
Trump Corporation has already sucked more than a million out of his campaign contributions for 2020.
Which Trump non-profit Charity did that?
So I downloaded the audio book ofor the Mueller Report and I've been listening to it. It's very dense, stultifying. I wanted to go to the source material and draw my own conclusions. I am on Volume I,Section IV, Chapter 4, Subsection b. It's a grind.
Please let me pointo you to another production of the material:
https://www.insider.com/mueller-report-rewritten-trump-russia-mark-bowden-archer-2019-7
This is a summary, with pictures! Trump's graphic crimes rendered in a graphic novel. How apropos.
bad link, for me anyway
My apologies.
No problem dwellar, The Post Police can take corrective action; so, you need not exhaust yourself through self-correction.
Thanks for the correct link.
It appears that "the media" has a habit of misleading left-leaning voters into shooting themselves in the foot. Which would be a weird thing for "the liberal media" to do. If you thought that "liberal" meant on "the left" side of alignment.
Or it's a demonstration of how ". . . the way of the wicked [really] is doomed."
How to get mass movements dedicated to evildoing: convince them they are doing some great, if difficult, good. Advertise it relentlessly.
Individual possession of a capacity for critical thinking -- as a rule absent in both socialists and leftwingers -- becomes the best, if not the only, defense against such folly.
I met a traveller from an antique land who said:
Two vast and trunkless legs of stone stand in the desert. Near them, on the sand, half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown, and wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command, tell that its sculptor well those passions read which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things, the hand that mocked them, and the heart that fed.
And on the pedestal these words appear: My name is Mueller (or Nadler, or Schiff), king of kings: Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare the lone and level sands stretch far away.
Another failed casino Mr Trump?
One fact is apparent from the Mueller report. Trump did not commit impeachable crimes because his subordinates repeatedly ignored or obstructed his orders; or destroyed evidence. We can only thank subordinates for averting disasters such as a Pearl Harbor style attack on Iran. Another example of a president who gleefully massacres American servicemen on lies and personal glory.
Did we not learn from Nixon or George Jr? Only moderates do.
This clearly is a criticism of the problem: Trump supporters who post extremist (anti-American) rhetoric even here.
"One fact is apparent from the Mueller report. Trump did not commit impeachable crimes because his subordinates repeatedly ignored or obstructed his orders; or destroyed evidence."
Sumthin' neither Nadler or Schiff thought enough of to press Mueller on while they had him in the hot seat.
Pick better inquisitors.
Also: the 'press' apparently doesn't think enough of Trump's subordinates repeatedly ignoring or obstructing his orders to give it much play either.
Pick better propagandists.
One fact is apparent from the Mueller report as reported / demonstrated by so many honest news sources (including foreign ones). Trump did not commit impeachable crimes because his subordinates repeatedly ignored or obstructed his orders; or destroyed evidence."
Trump did not commit impeachable crimes because his subordinates repeatedly ignored or obstructed his orders; or destroyed evidence.
Sumthin' neither Nadler or Schiff thought enough of to press Mueller on while they had him in the hot seat.
Pick better inquisitors.
Also: the 'press' apparently doesn't think enough of Trump's subordinates repeatedly ignoring or obstructing his orders to give it much play either.
Pick better propagandists.
Fox News, Drudge Report, etc would not report it. Honesty harms propaganda. Meanwhile others, who are not pretenders, did report it. Communist propaganda type sources are not new sources. Pravda also would not report it.
"Fox News, Drudge Report, etc would not report it."
Pretty sure they did (so they could poo-poo it). But you pay more attention to Fox & Drudge than me, so mebbe you're right.
#
"others, who are not pretenders, did report it."
Indeed they did: MSNBC, for example, banged that drum when it was expedient. My point: they ain't bangin' it 'now'. Seems to me: the 'honest' media (the folks you like), after Ozymandias's lackluster performance, made no effort to salvage him or his report.
This: 'Trump did not commit impeachable crimes because his subordinates repeatedly ignored or obstructed his orders; or destroyed evidence.' you'd think would be trumpeted over & over (especially if the whole point of Ozymandias testifyin' was to more clearly put the report in the public square, as Schiff & Nadler claimed).
No, your ilk swung & struck out, and most them know it. Only Nadler, Schiff, and you wanna keep lookin' for a pot of collusion/obstruction at the end of the rainbow.
#
"Pravda also would not report it."
Yeah, I'm thinkin' they probably did, but -- again -- you pay more attention to Pravda than me, so mebbe you're right.
There are the conspiracy theorists -- and there are the beyond conspiracy theorists.
Along with the ones who couldn't tell scalp massage from mental masturbation. You need to be shaky on the point to qualify for the position of senior anti-Trumpkin.
It is distasteful. Though well massaged.
Pretty sure they did (so they could poo-poo it).
I paid more attention to Radio Moscow in 1960. Back then I was trying to learn. I'm done listening long to Fox News, Radio Havana, et al. Obvious lies followed by lies are quite fatiguing. They manipulated facts to then poo-poo them. That is called propaganda.
What protected Trump? So many subordinates that ignored his commands, so many lesser subordinates whose work was stifled, obstructed or just ignored, and some (ie Don, Jr) who were even sidetracked his brother-in-law Jared.
We were only ten minutes from another Vietnam or Mission Accomplished. What we do not yet know is why bomber and troops, fully loaded to attack, were only called off in the last ten minutes. That Pearl Harbor attack on Iran would have only massacred American servicemen for no purpose. A question remains - what Trump subordinate stopped / averted that inevitable disaster.
Another example of why Trump is not currently subject to impeachment and removal. His people keep blocking, impeding, or not implemented his commands - from someone who only works for himself even at the expense of America.
Even Paul Manafort (Trump's campaign manager) routinely conspired with Russian spies Why do we know? Manafort's second in command (Gates) said so. Manafort demonstrates the integrity of Trump's senior staff. You don't violate the laws he wants violated. Your fired. So many were fired for simply protecting The Don (a business school graduate) from his own evil self.
"Another example of why Trump is not currently subject to impeachment and removal. His people keep blocking, impeding, or not implemented his commands - from someone who only works for himself even at the expense of America."
Seems to me: if Ozymandias had actually gotten anything conclusive, impeachment would be a done deal no matter who blocked for Trump.
But, no, the best Ozymandias could dredge up (after two years of investigation, spending millions) was a handful of events which, if placed in a certain context, might (not are, just might) be seen as obstructive on Trump's part.
Ozymandias had nuthin', you got nuthin'.
But, please, keep goin'...your extremism is instructive.
Never ceases to amaze me how entrenched extremists are. You cannot even learn something as simple as the quote feature. Apparently the central committee of the communist party (or their disciple Trump) has not yet ordered you to learn it.
Never ceases to amaze me how entrenched extremists are. You cannot even learn something as simple as the quote feature. Apparently the central committee of the communist party (or their disciple Trump) has not yet ordered you to learn it.
I know the feature: I just don't like it.
What amazes me: how deeply you lie to yourself, truly believin' you're a unicorn just cuz you taped a cardboard tube to your forehead.
You're just like me: an ogre, a monster.
An extremist.
What amazes me: how deeply you lie to yourself, truly believin' you're a unicorn just cuz you taped a cardboard tube to your forehead.
Another example of an extremists. Rather than post facts, an extremist post insults. Explains why extremists so love The Don. Other extremists are then quick to believe those lies justified only by insult.
"Send her back" is popular with wacko extremists. Does not matter that it is all based in lies. It is what they were told to believe. So it must be true.
Same was also demonstrated by Sander's supporters. Did you know the Federal Reserve is independent of government? So it must be a private corporation. They were also ordered what to believe and therefore
knew it was true.
At least those extremists do not get violent and insult others. Or need assault rifles to fix America.
"Another example of an extremists. Rather than post facts, an extremist post insults."
Indeed: look here what this extremist wrote...
Never ceases to amaze me how entrenched extremists are. You cannot even learn something as simple as the quote feature. Apparently the central committee of the communist party (or their disciple Trump) has not yet ordered you to learn it.
https://www.scottadamssays.com/2019/08/07/how-to-determine-who-is-hallucinating-about-politics/
As the 2020 presidential election approaches, two distinct versions of so-called “reality” have emerged, similar to what happened in 2016. I call this effect “two movies on one screen.”
In Movie One, President Trump is absolutely, definitely a racist, and any honest person can see it in the way he talks, the people who support him, and his policy proposals. For the viewers of this movie, Trump’s alleged racism is a fact, not an opinion. Therefore, logically, all Trump supporters must be racists because they support a racist president. This view of reality is promoted by CNN, MSNBC, the New York Times, Washington Post, ABC, NBC, NPR, and essentially all of the left-leaning press.
In Movie Two, President Trump promised the country he would not be politically correct if elected, and sure enough, he is not. He goes hard at all critics, with uncautious language, and that makes it easy for his political foes to cherry pick the times he criticizes women and people of color, framing those instances as some sort of pattern. Viewers of Movie Two are confused about whether the viewers of Movie One are lying, stupid, brainwashed, or mentally ill.
Those two realities are starkly different. How can any of us tell which is the true one? After all, there are millions of otherwise intelligent and sane people watching both movies. Given the stakes, we sure wouldn’t want to be wrong. My suggestion, which works for any situation in which reality seems ambiguous, is to compare how well each version of reality predicts what happens next. The reality that predicts the best is the “true” one, assuming reality has any objective qualities at all.
So let’s see how well the movies have predicted the future so far. We’ve been watching some version of these same movies since 2016, so we have about three years of track record to review.
Which movie predicted that Israel would name a settlement after President Trump, or that Trump would be the most popular American president in Israel?
Answer: Only Movie 2
Which movie predicted that President Trump would have about the same number of black supporters as any other Republican President.
Answer: Only Movie 2
Which movie predicted President Trump’s words would be continuously taken out of context to change their meaning from ordinary to racist?
Answer: Only Movie 2
Example 1: When President Trump said white nationalists and neo-Nazis in Charlottesville should be “condemned totally,” the press reported that he called them “fine people.” Don’t believe me? See for yourself here and here.
Example 2: When Trump referred to “shithole countries,” talking about the education and economic situation in some nations, the press and pundits reported that he called the people in those countries “shithole people.”
Example 3: When Trump referred to the rodent infestation in Baltimore, the press and pundits reported that he was calling the people vermin.
For more examples, see my prior blog post on why only one side hears the racist dog whistle and the other does not.
Which movie predicts President Trump would continuously brag about how low black and Hispanic unemployment is under his administration?
Answer: Only Movie 2
Which movie predicted President Trump would be the president to champion prison reform with a bipartisan coalition?
Answer: Only Movie 2
Which movie predicted President Trump would be tough on immigration, including the detention centers at the border?
Answer: Both (but for different reasons)
In Movie One, it’s all motivated by racism. In Movie Two, it’s all motivated by nationalism, as in protecting current citizens from crime and job loss.
Which movie predicted that racists would favor Trump over Democrats?
Answer: Both (but for different reasons)
In Movie One, white supremacists see Trump as one of their own, trying to stop people of color from entering the country. In Movie Two, Trump is simply doing his job, like every president before him, and protecting the border for the benefit of all citizens, especially black and Hispanic citizens. In Movie Two, racists and Democrats are united in their confusion because they believe the mainstream press when it reports that Movie One is reality.
Which movie predicts the press would find endless “evidence” of President Trump’s alleged racism?
Answer: Both (but for different reasons)
In Movie One, Trump is doing all kinds of racist things and the press is calling him out every time. In Movie Two, confirmation bias, mental illness (Trump Derangement Syndrome), and politics are behind all the accusations what are little more than fever dreams about Hitler being under the bed.
Which movie predicts that 47%(ish) of the country would support the president — a number similar to President Obama’s favorability at the same time?
Answer: Movie Two
If the evidence of Trump’s racism were as obvious as Movie One’s script alleges, you would predict Trump’s popularity to be closer to 10%. Apparently there are tens of millions of women and ethnic minorities who don’t notice all the racism and sexism that the press tells us is glaringly obvious.
Which movie predicted that President Trump would be successful with the economy and also make the world safer in military terms?
Answer: Movie Two
In Movie One, Trump is not only a racist, but he is also a Russian puppet, mentally unstable, and too impulsive and stupid to manage either the economy or international affairs. Movie Two predicted Trump would boost the economy and move the country away from war. So far, that seems to be the case.
Which movie predicted that in our world of secret recordings and non-stop leaking, no “smoking gun” of racism has been produced about ANYONE in the entire Trump administration?
Answer: Movie Two
If Movie One were predictive, we would expect lots of reports of private conversations in the administration that are obviously racist. The government is a leaky place, so if the president and his close advisors were racists, we’d have plenty of credible reports about it from insiders. We have nothing credible of the sort.
Movie One, in which the president is an obvious racist, didn’t do a good job of predicting our current situation, except in cases where it makes the same prediction as Movie Two. But Movie Two successfully explains all observations over the past three years.
Given the subjectivity of reality, the viewers of Movie One won’t be able to read this blog post without being triggered into cognitive dissonance.
Naming a settlement after Trump is a very Movie One thing.
Take it up with Adams? No, you brought it here you own it.
It falls apart because there are more than two movies, trying to divide the country into two camps is "fer us or agin us" bullshit.
Telling people they are not allowed to agree with some Liberal ideas and some conservatives ideas, is the most un-American thing possible.
Adams is torturing his own, original "two movies" metaphor. In the original metaphor, a single event would be interpreted in two very different ways by two different tribes. That is an interesting way to describe our reactions to events. You often see this happening.
But he has apparently now expanded it to include not just one event, but the entire, bigger picture. It's not just an interpretation, but the entire narrative. IOW it's now about the movie that people play in their heads, not the movie they just watched.
I don't like how he broke his own metaphor. It's not a clear line of thinking from point A to point B.
Gonna be interesting to see how you're gonna make that stick.
Easy, if you can't or don't wish to elaborate on it, then it's just meaningless static, no help to your cause.
...don't blame the messenger
#
"your cause"
what cause?
No problem with the mailman, he brings bills I created, as a matter of fact I thank him and reward him at Christmas.
Your cause is to wreck shit, which would be fine if it was just your shit.
Your cause is to wreck shit, which would be fine if it was just your shit.
No. He's channeling humanity.
We can just change the channel. Got a remote, don't even have to get up.
So: humanity is a schizophrenic mix of milquetoast & rabidity?
The Democratic Party is dead to me. A nest of socialist adders, with a policy of "divide and rule" in what has too-milquetoastily been called "patchwork pandering."
What is identity politics *but* divide and rule? What's the ultimate end, the purest form, of identity politics? Prison race gangs.
Somebody who calls Trump a "communist" or somehow thinks he's a "communist disciple," whatever that is, is somebody who not only does not connect with reality but is actively engaged in kicking reality out the back door because reality doesn't conform to his ideas -- the mark, if memory serves, of a wacko extremist and a radical. TW, you're really really really bad at doing human. And you must do human to grasp politics sensibly at all.
Somebody who calls Trump a "communist" or somehow thinks he's a "communist disciple," whatever that is, is somebody who not only does not connect with reality ...
Strange that Trump praises Putin, Xi, Kim, and so many other dictators. Why disparaging leaders of virtually every closest American ally. He praises communists. And so you love him.
You demonstrate why America has become so divisive - lies. Rather than discuss facts, you praise Trump who then praises communists. Then ignore obvious contradictions in your own reasoning.
Which American ally did he disparage last? Germany's? Italy's? S Korea's. Who can keep up?
In his first 500 days, he posted 5,500 or 6,500 lies. Depending on which of so many (a majority of) international news services did the counting. Only an extremist would deny that Trump routinely lies.
He even denied that he ordered Comey to be loyal. No problem. Lies are acceptable and approved of by extremists - who may even lie about their love of communists.
Communism - enrich the Central Committee of the Communist Party. Curious. Trump has been doing that his entire adult life. He never ran a single successful company. So where did he get his money? Will you also lie about that? An extremist would.
It is about time for him to trade in his wife for a new one. It explains his recent hatred of immigrants. If he deports her, then alimony need not be paid.
Makes me wonder who really is a greater communist sympathizer. You or Trump. Since communist sympathizers routinely insult and lie. Routinely post disparaging comments rather than address facts.
Tw, tw... conspiracy theorizing is the last refuge of the incompetent... and the romantic manqué. Being at least not the latter, I am not impressed with your intellectual significance. Nor your emotional maturity, come to that. You do not have a history of being an anticommunist -- your pro-communist leanings in re Vietnam were the first thing I ever chewed your ass and kicked your bubblegum about on this forum.
Trump is no communist, neither are Putin, xi or Fatty III. Dictators all.
What is identity politics *but* divide and rule? What's the ultimate end, the purest form, of identity politics? Prison race gangs.
The part you may miss here is that the identity politics on the left birthed Trump who is also an identity politician.
Trump is no communist, neither are Putin, xi or Fatty III. Dictators all.
What is a communist? Dictatorship. Xi and Fatty III are both openly titled as heads of their communist party. Putin is communist in all but name. Trump loves those communists. He constantly praises them. He clearly demonstrates appreciation for dictators. And the tools that so easily bring communist dictators to power (ie hate groups KKK, anti-Semites, White Supremacists, Misogynists, Nazi, Islamophobist, etc).
You can argue semantics all day. But Trump has greater appreciation for communism - also called a dictatorship.
Given the opportunity, he would "Make America Great Again" by making it into a communist dictatorship. Then he need not worry about trivial problems such as grand juries, prosecution for lying, impeachment, and obstruction of justice indictments.
"Given the opportunity, he would "Make America Great Again" by making it into a communist dictatorship."
Your evidence? Can you point to any piece of Trump-sponsored or Trump-considered legislation that has moved, or will move, America in the direction of state socialism or state communism?
Just one.
I can. Red flag laws. but I think he's just messin' with the dems on that one.
Your turn...
Absolutely.
The manure of the left (and a good chunk of the right) was countered with Trump's hiring. That he bangs the opposing drum as loudly as the left (and some of the right) is part of the deal.
What, you thought he was gonna go 'open borders' once he took the Big Chair?
Your evidence? Can you point to any piece of Trump-sponsored or Trump-considered legislation that has moved, or will move, America in the direction of state socialism or state communism?
Just one.
I can. Red flag laws. but I think he's just messin' with the dems on that one.
He did sign the bump stock ban...
HA!
Actually, as an accessory (not a firearm) I don't have a problem with that ban. It was feel-good move that amounted to nuthin'.
But doesn't that amount to restricting your liberty? Nevermind the Second Amendment, it's a thing you (conceivably) want to buy with your own money and you can't.
It was feel-good move that amounted to nuthin'.
If a Democrat had signed that, the wailing in the wilderness about it being the first step to total confiscation, would be deafening.:haha:
"But doesn't that amount to restricting your liberty?"
Not really. Right now, in Church Point, LA, I know of at least five prople who'd sell me a bump stock. Prohibitions and bans (here in America, anyway) tend to create black and gray markets.
"
"Nevermind the Second Amendment"
Yeah, as I've said before: I don't give a flip about the second.
#
"it's a thing you (conceivably) want to buy with your own money and you can't."
As I say: I know folks.
"If a Democrat had signed that, the wailing in the wilderness about it being the first step to total confiscation, would be deafening."
Probablly (but not from me).
But if black markets solve everything, why do you need someone to "wreck shit" in the first place? Seems like a wasted effort, if such shit doesn't affect you in any way.
"But if black markets solve everything"
I didn't say that.
#
"why do you need someone to "wreck shit" in the first place? Seems like a wasted effort, if such shit doesn't affect you in any way."
Cuz I shouldn't have to live or transact in the shadows. I will, but I shouldn't have to.
I believe, again, I own myself and have a right to my life, liberty, and property, and, my life, liberty, and property are only forfeit, in part or whole, if I knowingly, willingly, deprive another of his life, liberty, or property. If I'm told 'no, you can't have X' (and I've done nuthin' to warrant such prohibition) my inclination is to go and find X. I'd rather not have to pay double and deal with the disreputable, but I will cuz I decide what's appropriate for me. And, while I do what I do, I hire folks on the local, state, and federal levels to be spikes in the trees, to wreck shit (lookin' toward the long term...dismantling a leviathan is not an over-night job).
Sure, man, I get it. I understand your belief system. What I'm saying is that your guy, Trump, has--at least on this one issue--moved categorically against what you believe in. You said there were no examples, and there is one, right here. Could there maybe be others?
"What I'm saying is that your guy, Trump, has--at least on this one issue--moved categorically against what you believe in."
More than one issue: he signed that damned omnibus bill.
#
"You said there were no examples"
No, I did not.
This...
Can you point to any piece of Trump-sponsored or Trump-considered legislation that has moved, or will move, America in the direction of state socialism or state communism?
Just one.
I can. Red flag laws. but I think he's just messin' with the dems on that one.
...is what I said.
#
"Could there maybe be others?"
I have no doubt there will be.
Where did I say Trump was/is the perfect blunt instrument? He's not. As long as he keeps doin' what's he's doin' (pissin' in Bruce's and tw's cornflakes) I can live with his not bein' perfectly aligned with me.
Now: if he sides with gun banners (let's go get them debbil guns!), that's a no-brainer for me, but a pissy little accessory? Gimme a break.
Do you, when you vote, ever find a perfect candidate who aligns with you square on everything?
Say 'yes' and I know you're a liar.
If a Democrat had signed that, the wailing in the wilderness about it being the first step to total confiscation, would be deafening.:haha:
You seem somehow -- damned if I can figure out how anyone could -- to have missed that bump-stocks really had no friends anyway after Vegas.
As a human-rights organization, the NRA shows a lot of canniness along with its power. We clearly plan to outlast any madness of crowds that might ever militate against human rights and political liberties. Yeah, I'm a Life Member. And you? I'm also fond of the Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership. They make some irrefutable arguments than anyone with an interest should read.
A human right, say, not to endure a genocide is of great moment, saith the JPFO. It's also more readily construable from the text of the Fourth Amendment than even the right to, er, privacy -- and what a can of worms Google has made of that.
You seem somehow -- damned if I can figure out how anyone could -- to have missed that bump-stocks really had no friends anyway after Vegas.
As a human-rights organization, the NRA shows a lot of canniness along with its power. We clearly plan to outlast any madness of crowds that might ever militate against human rights and political liberties. Yeah, I'm a Life Member. And you? I'm also fond of the Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership. They make some irrefutable arguments than anyone with an interest should read.
A human right, say, not to endure a genocide is of great moment, saith the JPFO. It's also more readily construable from the text of the Fourth Amendment than even the right to, er, privacy -- and what a can of worms Google has made of that.
I'm not a life member of anything, I want the option of quitting if I don't like what they are doing.
There is no argument which is irrefutable, only shit you agree with. Why should I care what the Jews do is their country, they are an ally, not a friend.
You can quit the NRA Lifer but they keep your money, so they don't care.
I'm not a life member of anything, I want the option of quitting if I don't like what they are doing.
There is no argument which is irrefutable, only shit you agree with. Why should I care what the Jews do is their country, they are an ally, not a friend.
Bruce, you were living, breathing, and on occasion reading when Orwell's
1984 was in print -- correct? You didn't just come out of the cabbage leaf in 1997?
Ignorance, dear condescendable boy,
Is not
Strength. You are instead much weakened by it, and your incorrect understanding of an NRA life membership -- well, it's anti-intelligent to get it that wrong no matter what your religion or religion-substitute -- ersatz is bad, very bad -- would have you believe -- unimpressive. Dear ignorant Bruce, do you think I *don't* have the option of quitting? -- I do. A Life Membership means I'm all paid up, get a monthly magazine, and can vote in NRA elections. They offer this franchise to members with this much skin in the game.
I don't get my attitudes from the NRA human-rights lobby -- I joined the NRA because of them.
Your understanding of the JPFO is just as defective: they're not some other country, they're Americans. Blessed with a very readable website in jpfo.org. They disapprove of genocides -- in a way that counts to prevent them. You do not. Shame on you. Really, this is the dumbest post you've ever written.
No, I haven't read 1984. I've got a pretty good idea what it's about from what I've read in references. Oh wait, I saw the Animal Farm movie, does that count? Life membership, paid up, so if you quit they don't give a rat's ass because they've got your money. Wonderful, they only skin you have in the game is what they're reaming out of your asshole.
You're right, I was thinking of the JDL, another enemy of the US.
The JPFO is a pisshole in a snowbank, having picked up the fallen torch of the former JPFO. Yelling the holocaust is coming, the holocaust is coming, doesn't cut it.
Wrong yet again, Bruce. I would suggest you quit bowing to false Ba'als, because they are manifestly damaging your reading comprehension and shallowing your intellect. Your arguments autodemonstrate their exiguousness and their unrighteousness. Why, they might even be hemipygian.
Now: once you actually have comprehension of something you read, you would observe they speak of what to *do* to stop a Holocaust. Which is a superb support of the Fourth Amendment, I might add.
But *you,* precious child of God, aren't really understanding that, are you?
Read 1984. It's a fast read, and it's online now. Read it as the cautionary tale it is, and consider its real-world parallels.
God, what a poor misguided sheep you are. :facepalm:
Years of Russiagate conspiracy theory means, when something actually impeachable comes out, people just say oh not this again.
But all the Russia stuff was true, and nobody cared.
But all the Russia stuff was true, and nobody cared.
The Don said he could murder someone on Fifth Ave and would not be prosecuted. Nobody got killed when elections were subverted by foreign powers and lies. Nobody would be prosecuted.
"But all the Russia stuff was true, and nobody cared."
No, it wasn't, and, yeah, everybody did.
"The Don said he could murder someone on Fifth Ave and would not be prosecuted."
Bill schtups kids: has he gone to jail?
Hill abets Bill's appetite: has she gone to jail?
#
"Nobody got killed when elections were subverted by foreign powers and lies."
Indeed: When Obama monkeyed 'round with Israel's elections, nobody got killed.
#
"Nobody would be prosecuted."
Of course not.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/roger-stone-found-guilty-all-seven-counts-n1082326
Roger Stone, confidant of Trump and WikiLeaks connection, found guilty on all seven counts
The GOP operative was charged with making false statements, obstruction and witness tampering tied to his pursuit of Russian-hacked emails in 2016.
For those keeping score at home, Stone is the 6th Trump aide convicted in regards to the Mueller probe.
boy I bet the American people are tired of this phony conspiracy hoax
"Stone is the 6th Trump aide convicted in regards to the Mueller probe."
They get the small fry but keep missin' Big Daddy.
How embarrassin'.
ah yes the paragon of moral superiority, the "crook who doesn't get caught"
ah yes the paragon of moral superiority, the "crook who doesn't get caught"
You know my view on this shit, F, why I hired him, what I expect him to do.
The (orange) inkblot that looks unappealing to you, looks quite promising to me.
They get the small fry but keep missin' Big Daddy.
I'm kind of a simple guy but wouldn't obstruction of justice lead more simply to the missing big Daddy outcome as orange man didn't have anything to do with the criminality of the people he hired to do the stuff that you wanted him to do?
I'm kind of a simple guy but wouldn't obstruction of justice lead more simply to the missing big Daddy outcome as orange man didn't have anything to do with the criminality of the people he hired to do the stuff that you wanted him to do?
But they want Trump. Stone, Manafort, etc. were supposed to be way-stations, not endpoints.
Even as they crow about bringin' another down, there is much disappointment in mudville.
is that the important thing
ah yes the paragon of moral superiority, the "crook who doesn't get caught"
That was Nixon. Numerous co-conspirators went to jail. Nixon probably would have gotten off if it were not for the Pentagon Papers and so many in government (ie entire Supreme Court) that made it obvious his credibility was non-existent.
Even the Sec of Defense order the Joint Chiefs to ignore any order given by that president to go to war unless confirmed by the Secretary. Even Nixon's state of mind had become that unstable. The reasons for impeachment must be that massively beyond criminality - according to history.
But they want Trump. Stone, Manafort, etc. were supposed to be way-stations, not endpoints.
Even as they crow about bringin' another down, there is much disappointment in mudville.
So I guess Pelosi will just drop the whole thing, eh?
Keep me updated.
So I guess Pelosi will just drop the whole thing, eh
We'll see.
We'll see.
Keep on believing.
Keep on believing.
You too.