Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Omnibus Politics Thread: Campaign 2016 EditionFollow

#2952 May 15 2017 at 8:06 AM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,156 posts
Gods, that IS written at a fifth-grade level.
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#2953 May 15 2017 at 3:37 PM Rating: Decent
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,138 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
It continues to be amazing how Spicer hasn't been replaced.

So, I didn't know that he was a Navy Officer. I looked him up on the Global Access List (GAL) and sure enough, there he was (email, phone number, etc.) I wonder if he manages that email. Tempted to send him a message...
#2954 May 15 2017 at 3:52 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
But her emails!...
Washington Post wrote:
President Trump revealed highly classified information to the Russian foreign minister and ambassador in a White House meeting last week, according to current and former U.S. officials, who said Trump’s disclosures jeopardized a critical source of intelligence on the Islamic State.

The information the president relayed had been provided by a U.S. partner through an intelligence-sharing arrangement considered so sensitive that details have been withheld from allies and tightly restricted even within the U.S. government, officials said.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#2955 May 15 2017 at 7:14 PM Rating: Good
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,138 posts
As long as it's not through a private email server sent to US government employees with the proper clearance and the need to know, then it doesn't matter.
#2956 May 15 2017 at 8:16 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,756 posts
Eh. Been stuck in Shanghai for the last couple weeks (virtually, anyway). I'm sure the conversation has moved on, but I'm going to respond to this anyway:

Jophiel wrote:
Putin* wants Trump president.


You have no evidence of this.

Quote:
Putin hacks DNC (as well as attempts elsewhere but DNC gets through) and gets material, passes it along to Assange who is anti-Clinton & anti-US and is a good source for distribution.


Unlikely methodology, and dependent on your starting, unsupported assumption above that Putin would prefer Trump in office versus Clinton, but let's pretend you're correct anyway. Where's the collusion?


Quote:
Putin, who also has contacts within the Trump campaign...


Does he? Let's be clear here, by "contacts" you really just mean "someone I, or someone in my government, or someone living in my country has ever spoken to or done business with". The label is literally being used that broadly when speaking of these connections. Oh. And having such "contacts" doesn't mean anything by itself. Lots of folks in Clinton's camp, including Clinton herself, had/have similar "contacts" with Putin's government and other prominent people in Russia. It's a meaningless statement IMO. If no one in Trumps campaign, transition team, or administration had "contacts" with people in Russia, it would be seen as a gross gap in their knowledge of Russia and ability to conduct rational foreign policy with said country. Somewhat by definition, anyone in your campaign who is there to fill in knowledge about Russia will have to have "contacts" with Russia.

It's BS rhetoric, and you really ought to know it, at least at some honest level somewhere inside yourself. Clinton herself had far more "contact" with Putin on both a personal and professional level than Trump did.

Quote:
..., drops information to Trump so he can coordinate responses to the days Wikileaks drops.


How? Is there *any* evidence of such information sharing? You'd think that would be the first thing that would be looked for, and the easiest thing to spot, and it's pretty ridiculous to assume, in an environment where a completely benign conversation between Flynn and the Russian ambassador got leaked, that if there was any actual evidence of this, it would not have been leaked ages ago. The fact that we're still spinning around speculating about stuff is the strongest evidence that there is nothing there (well, except the speculation).

And that also fails to address the core issue that this would require coordination, not just between two parties, but three. That massively complicates things, and makes it even less likely that there would not have been massive evidence of this (which is somehow magically not getting leaked, and wasn't back when Obama had all the power to do so and strong motivation to smash the Trump campaign). This is what I mean by it being overly convoluted. If you stopped at the whole "Putin preferred Trump and did some stuff to try to make that happen", it would be debatable, but at least in the realm of reasonable possibility. But the sheer volume of incredibly unlikely things that have to happen for the theory you're spinning to work put us squarely in tin foil hat territory.

What makes it a crazy conspiracy theory is that the only reason to speculate this silly series of things is out of a desire for the theory to "be true". You're starting with what you want to believe, and then basically fabricating a possible way in which it could have happened.

I'll ask again: How does Putin hand information to Trump about what's going to be leaked by Wikileaks? I already made the point that by handing it to Assange, Putin lost any control he may have had. You just responded with an argument that completely ignores that point. You'd have to argue that Assange gave Trump's people a heads up about what and when he was going to release information. Which cuts the Russians out of the whole business entirely (and which doesn't match the narrative, hence why that's not what's being argued in public). There's a pretty large logical gap in the whole "Russian collusion" claim.


Quote:
Conversations about Ukraine, Syria, Trump business interests in Russia, etc as well -- after all Putin's doing Trump favors.


What conversations though? And how were they in any way coordinated with the releases of leaked info? That's the next big problem. If this were true, we should have been able to easily see narrative patterns in the Trump campaign that alined with releases of hacked data. Was there any? I was watching the same election unfold that you did, but I don't recall any case where the Trump's campaign messaging seemed to be in any way synced with the releases from Wiki. The two were pretty well disconnected. Occasionally, something was leaked that the Trump campaign would comment on or respond to, but there was no sign of coordinated messaging at all.


Quote:
None of this is especially complicated or takes any sort of mental gymnastics to figure out. You can argue that it's not true and I'm not stating it as fact but, c'mon, this is pretty simple shit.


Except for the part where you try to make a case for collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians. You know, the central part of the accusation being made? You kinda drift off into the weeds in the last couple steps there.

For collusion to happen both parties have to have some kind of agreement and quid pro quo going on. One party doing something for the other, even in the hopes of getting something back, doesn't count. But we can't even find evidence of that, outside of sheer speculation that Putin would prefer Trump over Clinton (which, frankly, I find laughable).

Quote:
Even if Trump didn't come through on exactly what Putin wanted, having an inexperienced and incompetent guy in the White House only helps Putin. Look at the Syria attack; Putin couldn't have planned that better. Completely ineffective and didn't do shit but gives Putin a pretext to cut coordination with the US thus making any future attacks on Assad much more difficult and allows Putin to increase military presence in the region under the excuse of protection against US aggression. Putin doesn't need Trump to be his buddy, he just needs him in office being Trump.


That's a **** of a stretch. The counter claim would be that Putin wold not have had to go through that with Clinton. She would have just handed him control from day one. She's saddled with Obama's foreign policy, a good part of which she personally had a direct hand in implementing, and which has massively benefited Putin over the last 8 years. Why would he want Trump in office? A guy he'd have to hope would react the way he wants? A guy who is notoriously bull headed, and unpredictable?

Clinton is a known entity. More importantly, an entity he knows will act in ways that benefit him. Why on earth would he want or need someone else in office? The whole thing makes zero sense. Your entire claim rests on the idea that someone would expend serious effort and risk just to have a slim chance of changing the US election results from someone with a record of benefiting Russian interests to someone who is an unknown? Even if he had a fair idea that Trump might benefit him, it's still a hard call. Bang for buck alone, it makes no sense.

And let's face it, the "buck" in this case is based on pure speculation and circular logic. So yeah, I'm going to stick with "folks on the left desperate for an explanation for the election results other than that their platform and candidate just didn't resonate nearly as well as they thought they did". Cause that makes perfect sense and, you know, actually matches the facts we have.


Edited, May 16th 2017 2:56pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#2959 May 15 2017 at 8:33 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
So yeah, I'm going to stick with "folks on the left desperate for an explanation for the election results other than that their platform and candidate just didn't resonate nearly as well as they thought they did".

You mean I didn't convince Gbaji? Pass the salts.
Quote:
Why would he want Trump in office?

Don't read the news much, do you?

Edited, May 15th 2017 9:34pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#2960 May 15 2017 at 8:49 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,221 posts
It is almost as if T was trying to get fired. He is such an odd duck.
____________________________
Your soul was made of fists.

Jar the Sam
#2961 May 15 2017 at 10:38 PM Rating: Excellent
***
1,033 posts
Eh. Been stuck in Shanghai for the last couple weeks (virtually, anyway). I'm sure the conversation has moved on, but I'm going to respond to this anyway:

Quote:
Eh. Been stuck in Shanghai for the last couple weeks (virtually, anyway). I'm sure the conversation has moved on, but I'm going to respond to this anyway:
Quote:
Eh. Been stuck in Shanghai for the last couple weeks (virtually, anyway). I'm sure the conversation has moved on, but I'm going to respond to this anyway:


Eh. Been stuck in Shanghai for the last couple weeks (virtually, anyway). I'm sure the conversation has moved on, but I'm going to respond to this anyway: Eh. Been stuck in Shanghai for the last couple weeks (virtually, anyway). I'm sure the conversation has moved on, but I'm going to respond to this anyway: Eh. Been stuck in Shanghai for the last couple weeks (virtually, anyway). I'm sure the conversation has moved on, but I'm going to respond to this anyway: Eh. Been stuck in Shanghai for the last couple weeks (virtually, anyway). I'm sure the conversation has moved on, but I'm going to respond to this anyway: Eh. Been stuck in Shanghai for the last couple weeks (virtually, anyway). I'm sure the conversation has moved on, but I'm going to respond to this anyway: Eh. Been stuck in Shanghai for the last couple weeks (virtually, anyway). I'm sure the conversation has moved on, but I'm going to respond to this anyway: Eh. Been stuck in Shanghai for the last couple weeks (virtually, anyway). I'm sure the conversation has moved on, but I'm going to respond to this anyway: Eh. Been stuck in Shanghai for the last couple weeks (virtually, anyway). I'm sure the conversation has moved on, but I'm going to respond to this anyway: Eh. Been stuck in Shanghai for the last couple weeks (virtually, anyway). I'm sure the conversation has moved on, but I'm going to respond to this anyway: Eh. Been stuck in Shanghai for the last couple weeks (virtually, anyway). I'm sure the conversation has moved on, but I'm going to respond to this anyway: Eh. Been stuck in Shanghai for the last couple weeks (virtually, anyway). I'm sure the conversation has moved on, but I'm going to respond to this anyway: Eh. Been stuck in Shanghai for the last couple weeks (virtually, anyway). I'm sure the conversation has moved on, but I'm going to respond to this anyway: Eh. Been stuck in Shanghai for the last couple weeks (virtually, anyway). I'm sure the conversation has moved on, but I'm going to respond to this anyway: Eh. Been stuck in Shanghai for the last couple weeks (virtually, anyway). I'm sure the conversation has moved on, but I'm going to respond to this anyway: Eh. Been stuck in Shanghai for the last couple weeks (virtually, anyway). I'm sure the conversation has moved on, but I'm going to respond to this anyway: Eh. Been stuck in Shanghai for the last couple weeks (virtually, anyway). I'm sure the conversation has moved on, but I'm going to respond to this anyway: Eh. Been stuck in Shanghai for the last couple weeks (virtually, anyway). I'm sure the conversation has moved on, but I'm going to respond to this anyway: Eh. Been stuck in Shanghai for the last couple weeks (virtually, anyway). I'm sure the conversation has moved on, but I'm going to respond to this anyway: Eh. Been stuck in Shanghai for the last couple weeks (virtually, anyway). I'm sure the conversation has moved on, but I'm going to respond to this anyway: Eh. Been stuck in Shanghai for the last couple weeks (virtually, anyway). I'm sure the conversation has moved on, but I'm going to respond to this anyway: Eh. Been stuck in Shanghai for the last couple weeks (virtually, anyway). I'm sure the conversation has moved on, but I'm going to respond to this anyway: Eh. Been stuck in Shanghai for the last couple weeks (virtually, anyway). I'm sure the conversation has moved on, but I'm going to respond to this anyway: Eh. Been stuck in Shanghai for the last couple weeks (virtually, anyway). I'm sure the conversation has moved on, but I'm going to respond to this anyway: Eh. Been stuck in Shanghai for the last couple weeks (virtually, anyway). I'm sure the conversation has moved on, but I'm going to respond to this anyway: Eh. Been stuck in Shanghai for the last couple weeks (virtually, anyway). I'm sure the conversation has moved on, but I'm going to respond to this anyway: Eh. Been stuck in Shanghai for the last couple weeks (virtually, anyway). I'm sure the conversation has moved on, but I'm going to respond to this anyway: Eh. Been stuck in Shanghai for the last couple weeks (virtually, anyway). I'm sure the conversation has moved on, but I'm going to respond to this anyway: Eh. Been stuck in Shanghai for the last couple weeks (virtually, anyway). I'm sure the conversation has moved on, but I'm going to respond to this anyway: Eh. Been stuck in Shanghai for the last couple weeks (virtually, anyway). I'm sure the conversation has moved on, but I'm going to respond to this anyway: Eh. Been stuck in Shanghai for the last couple weeks (virtually, anyway). I'm sure the conversation has moved on, but I'm going to respond to this anyway.
____________________________
Timelordwho wrote:
I'm not quite sure that scheming is an emotion.
#2962 May 16 2017 at 7:35 AM Rating: Good
******
49,305 posts
Almalieque wrote:
So, I didn't know that he was a Navy Officer.
He's a Public Affairs Officer so we already know how good at that job he is.

I'm pretty sure just thinking about messaging him has started an avalanche of Article 15s down my way.

Edited, May 16th 2017 9:45am by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#2963 May 16 2017 at 10:30 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,201 posts
Jophiel wrote:
But her emails!...
Washington Post wrote:
President Trump revealed highly classified information to the Russian foreign minister and ambassador in a White House meeting last week, according to current and former U.S. officials, who said Trump’s disclosures jeopardized a critical source of intelligence on the Islamic State.

The information the president relayed had been provided by a U.S. partner through an intelligence-sharing arrangement considered so sensitive that details have been withheld from allies and tightly restricted even within the U.S. government, officials said.
Things I'm glad aren't my job right now:

1) National Park Ranger in sub-Saharan Africa.
2) Drug Smuggler in the Philippines.
3) Running an independent news website from China.
4) Sharing classified information with the President.

Smiley: rolleyes
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#2964 May 16 2017 at 11:33 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Or press secretary!
Political Wire wrote:
Fox News host Kimberly Guilfoyle tells the San Jose Mercury News that she is in conversations with the Trump administration about becoming White House press secretary.

Said Guilfoyle: “I’m a patriot, and it would be an honor to serve the country. I think it’d be a fascinating job, it’s a challenging job, and you need someone really determined and focused, a great communicator in there with deep knowledge to be able to handle that position.”

She added: “Sean Spicer is a very nice man and a patriot; he’s dedicated himself to this public service. Very tough position he’s in — I wish him the best, and I know he puts a lot of effort into it.”


Edited, May 16th 2017 12:33pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#2965 May 16 2017 at 11:50 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,201 posts
Nah, he'll be fine. Just needs to hide in the bushes until it's all over. Smiley: thumbsup
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#2966 May 16 2017 at 11:50 AM Rating: Good
******
49,305 posts
Standing at a podium and trying to sell government talking points is patriotic?
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#2967 May 16 2017 at 11:57 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,201 posts
It's somewhere on the scale below volunteer firefighter, but above janitor.
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#2968 May 16 2017 at 12:18 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
lolgaxe wrote:
Standing at a podium and trying to sell government talking points is patriotic?

In your face, Soldier Boy. I'd give him a discounted meal at the Golden Corral long before you'd be seated.

In other news, the secrets Trump blabbed to his Russian comrades were of Israeli Intelligence origin.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#2969 May 16 2017 at 1:02 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,156 posts
I thought the Israelis stopped passing us information back in January out of fear this would happen.
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#2970 May 16 2017 at 1:09 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
We sure showed them!
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#2971 May 16 2017 at 1:17 PM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,334 posts
It's pretty interesting being your neighbour right now.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#2972 May 16 2017 at 1:42 PM Rating: Good
******
49,305 posts
Every neighborhood has a crazy cat woman. Or, as the case may be:


Edited, May 16th 2017 3:57pm by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#2973 May 16 2017 at 4:23 PM Rating: Good
***
3,037 posts
Now it looks like the Washington Post is uncovering more information by the hour.

Latest is Coney kept detailed notes of his meetings with 45.
____________________________
In the place of a Dark Lord you would have a Queen! Not dark but beautiful and terrible as the Morn! Treacherous as the Seas! Stronger than the foundations of the Earth! All shall love me and despair! -ElneClare

This Post is written in Elnese, If it was an actual Post, it would make sense.
#2975 May 16 2017 at 4:45 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Oh, but hey, the White House is denying it! Boy, that means something these days, right? When the White House denies something? I wonder which formally respected figure they'll send out tonight to humiliate him or herself by insisting that it's all false.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#2976 May 16 2017 at 4:55 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,756 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Quote:
Why would he want Trump in office?

Don't read the news much, do you?


Is this another case of you using the word "news" to mean "opinion"? The "news" says that Trump is standing up to Russia in Syria. I mean, I get that you want to interpret the response to the whole air base attack as somehow "doing just what the Russians wanted", but that is... wait for it... opinion. The fact is that Trump actually launched an attack on an airbase in Syria in response to a chemical weapon attack by that country. He actually did something in response to that red line being crossed. What did Obama do in the same situation? Oh yeah! He handed the issue to... wait for it... the Russians.

So it's your "opinion" that responding to Syrian violations by handing control of the region to Russia is "not good for Russia", but responding to the same thing by attacking the air base, even with Russian troops on it is "good for Russia". You're entitled to your opinion, but that seems kinda contrived to me.

Is there other news (not opinion) that indicates that Trump has been, or will be, better for Russian interests than Clinton would have been (or Obama actually was).

And let's not forget on the whole "Russian collusion" thing, that there is one actual recorded account of a US presidential candidate promising Putin better deals if he wins the election (presumably implying a need to pretend to be tough during the election itself). But, of course, that was Obama. You do remember that, right? That's, actual collusion. That's actually giving Putin a reason to meddle in an election to help ensure an outcome because he's been told straight to his face that things will be better for him if said candidate wins.

Seems like your bar for collusion tilts pretty heavily depending on who the claim is aimed at. Not surprising really, but I'm honestly curious if you're self aware enough to realize this. You're literally attacking Trump because it's possible, if some unsubstantiated rumors are true, that he might just maybe, kinda, sorta, possibly have done the exact same thing we know for a fact that Obama did. Of course, there's no actual evidence of this. But maybe if you speculate hard enough. And enough people repeat the speculation. And they demand investigations into the speculations, maybe people will start to believe that it might be true.

Funny fact. I was watching some pundits chatting about this (can't remember which cable news channel it was on, but I've actually seen this same kind of language used a few times now), and one of them was raising the question of evidence of collusion to support the calls for more investigation. The guy who responded basically said something to the effect that the existence of investigations meant that there must be something to investigate. It would be hilarious if this were actually a punchline in an absurd comedy film. But... it's not.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#2977 May 16 2017 at 5:01 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
34,756 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
Standing at a podium and trying to sell government talking points is patriotic?


Serving your country, in whatever capacity, when asked by the president, is. But you knew that.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#2978 May 16 2017 at 5:10 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,756 posts
Samira wrote:
I thought the Israelis stopped passing us information back in January out of fear this would happen.


It's called setting the stage. Let's see. Outgoing officials in the Obama administration make a deal of publicly cautioning Israeli intelligence not to share stuff with Trump (cause you know, narrative says he's besties with Putin, right?). Israeli intelligence recognizes this as the political silliness it is, and continues business as usual. The Obama supporters/Trump opposers, then wait until Trump says anything remotely connected to sharing intelligence with the Russians and pounce on it.

Never mind that the intelligence folks in the room didn't think it was a big deal, and the Israelis don't think it's a big deal. To the left leaning news... It's a Big DEAL!!!!. Sigh...

How hard to you have to try to make reality fit your narrative here?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#2979 May 16 2017 at 5:27 PM Rating: Good
GBATE!! Never saw it coming
Avatar
****
9,164 posts
Far a guy who was basically calling Trump an unpolished turd this time last year, you sure are defending him pretty vigorously now.

Why is that?




EDIT "Turd" is filtered. Smiley: oyvey

Edited, May 16th 2017 5:30pm by Bijou
____________________________
Anna wrote:
People often say that if someone doesn't agree then, they don't understand their point. That's not true. Sometimes they don't agree with it.
#2980 May 16 2017 at 5:35 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
Is this another case of you using the word "news" to mean "opinion"?

No.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#2981 May 16 2017 at 7:05 PM Rating: Good
GBATE!! Never saw it coming
Avatar
****
9,164 posts
gbaji wrote:
Outgoing officials in the Obama administration make a deal of publicly cautioning Israeli intelligence not to share stuff with Trump (cause you know, narrative says he's besties with Putin, right?). Israeli intelligence recognizes this as the political silliness it is, and continues business as usual. The Obama supporters/Trump opposers, then wait until Trump says anything remotely connected to sharing intelligence with the Russians and pounce on it.
Cite, plz.
____________________________
Anna wrote:
People often say that if someone doesn't agree then, they don't understand their point. That's not true. Sometimes they don't agree with it.
#2983 May 16 2017 at 8:29 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
34,756 posts
Friar Bijou wrote:
Far a guy who was basically calling Trump an unpolished turd this time last year, you sure are defending him pretty vigorously now.

Why is that?


Because even an unpolished turd should be criticized for his actual failings and not made up ones. There's this whole tale out there. You might have heard of it? Something about a boy and a wolf?

If you spend all your time and effort howling at every single thing, no matter how minor, and attempting to convince the entire population that it's the biggest thing ever, and it's totally a horrible thing, and we must fight against it with all our might, over time, people will tune it all out. Yeah yeah, yet another scandal. Another claim about this, or that, or the other thing.

What's really happening is that in their rush to pile on Trump, the media is desensitizing the public to such things. My concern is that when/if something bad/illegal/immoral/whatever actually happens, no one will take the media seriously when reporting it. And no, I'm not just talking about Trump here. I'm talking about any such thing going forward, and any leader at any level going forward.

By all means, criticize our political leaders. It's healthy. But criticize them for what they [i]actually do[/]. What I'm seeing right now is massive criticism based on speculation about what might be, or what might happen, or what foul secret motives might be behind something, but not what actually is happening. Attack him on his economic policy. Attack him on his immigration policy. Question his foreign policy if you want. Education? Fair game. But this ridiculous nonsense about the election? Get the heck over it.

Nothing you do or say is going to undo the results of the election. Period. Accept that. Move on. The problem is that it appears as though the left thinks that by building up so much smoke around this unprovable (and un disprovable, which is the more important aspect) allegation, that they'll be able to mire his administration or something. But the more attention on this meaningless stuff, the less on other things, many of which (all of which) are far far more important.

What do any of you think will actually come of these allegations? This is not a Nixon moment, no matter how hard some are trying to make it so. There is no (domestic) crime at the center of it all. No cover up because there was no crime. Yet everyone is chasing after the cover up aspect hard. They're parsing every word said, every conversation had, every political or financial connection. But at the end of the day, unless you can find proof of someone close to Trump actually communicating with someone in the Russian government and planning out how to use their resources to win the election, you have nothing at all. And even if you manage to find that, unless you can show that Trump knew about it, or found out about it later and attempted to cover it up (as Nixon allegedly did with the whole Watergate break in), you still have nothing.

Given that the nearly immediate reaction of Trump upon finding out that Flynn merely had a phone conversation with the Russian ambassador, didn't say or do anything illegal in that conversation, but was dishonest to Trump (Pence actually) about the content of that conversation, was to fire Flynn, I think you'll have a hard time even suggesting that he's trying to cover up and protect anyone. If anything, Trump appears more than willing to throw anyone under the bus for the mere perception of doing something wrong. But despite this, the allegations continue, the speculations get wilder and wilder, and the whole thing is spinning into nonsense land.

So yeah. I'm going to defend against such allegations, right up until I see even a shred of evidence that the allegations have merit. I don't have to like someone to defend them, when I think they're being attacked for something they didn't do. And so far, all I've seen is allegations and rumors, repeated over and over. Has anyone here seen anything more? I mean, like an actual statement from any sort of official and reputable source that they have hard evidence of collusion between Trump and the Russians? I don't mean vague correlations (the Russians hacked the DNC, and later Trump won the election, so they must have been in cahoots!). I'm asking about real hard evidence. A recording of a conversation maybe? I mean, we know that the Obama administration did capture some communications, right? There was a whole thing about that (and what got Flynn fired). Um... Wouldn't you think that if a single one of those communications showed collusion that it would have been made public by now?

The absence of hard evidence (or anything even close to that) is astounding, given the disproportionate screaming about this going on. It's a cart that's like 10 miles ahead of the horse. And yeah, I find that to be ridiculous. And yes, I'd say the same thing no matter who was being targeted in this manner.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#2984 May 17 2017 at 4:52 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
6,366 posts
gbaji wrote:
Eh. Been stuck in Shanghai for the last couple weeks


Eaaggh... I hope you used protection.
____________________________
Galkaman wrote:
Kuwoobie will die crushed under the burden of his mediocrity.

#2985 May 17 2017 at 7:10 AM Rating: Excellent
******
49,305 posts
gbaji wrote:
Serving your country, in whatever capacity, when asked by the president, is.
Doing things for the betterment or defense of your country/men is patriotic. Doing what a leader says because a leader says isn't.
gbaji wrote:
Because even an unpolished turd should be criticized for his actual failings and not made up ones.
What has he actually done that has changed your opinion from his being the absolute worst thing that could possibly happen to the country to the point that you'd vote for Clinton to earn your "principled" vote of confidence?
gbaji wrote:
Nothing you do or say is going to undo the results of the election. Period. Accept that. Move on.
That's a really weird thing to insist when you spent so much energy to defend the guy that didn't want to deploy because the person he wanted to win an election didn't. Years after the fact.
gbaji wrote:
If you spend all your time and effort howling at every single thing, no matter how minor, and attempting to convince the entire population that it's the biggest thing ever, and it's totally a horrible thing, and we must fight against it with all our might, over time, people will tune it all out.
And when they do tune it out "someone" complains about how they're not actually just bored of all the howling and tuning them out but they simply must not be able to argue their points. Can you just imagine how annoying that would get?
gbaji wrote:
And yeah, I find that to be ridiculous.
At least you're pretending to feel a fraction of how we actually felt with your howling at every single thing, no matter how minor, and attempting to convince the entire population that it's the biggest thing ever, and it's a totally horrible thing, and we must fight against it with all our might.
gbaji wrote:
And yes, I'd say the same thing no matter who was being targeted in this manner.
Obama bows too low and it's the absolute worst insult to this country, yet 45 doesn't salute during a national anthem and not even a peep.

Is this a Dread Pirate Roberts thing? Did the original gbaji give you his codes and you're just trying to continue the tradition? The original was never good with keeping track of his stories either but this is just beyond inconsistent. It's like you've never even seen a gbaji post.

Edited, May 17th 2017 9:12am by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#2986 May 17 2017 at 8:01 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
lolgaxe wrote:
What has he actually done that has changed your opinion from his being the absolute worst thing that could possibly happen to the country to the point that you'd vote for Clinton to earn your "principled" vote of confidence?
Gbaji was also the guy to gloat on election night 2008 about how he was SO much better than the "Not my president!" Bush-haters because he acknowledged that Obama was president and deserved respect for the office.

That, of course, lasted about two days before Obama was so terrible that he ruined the presidency forever and deserved absolutely no respect. Shit, I don't think Gbaji even waited for him to take office.

Can we just agree that the person in the office makes absolutely no difference to Gbaji so long as the right letter (R) is following his name?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#2987 May 17 2017 at 8:39 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,221 posts
Bookies have Trump impeachment at 33%. Granted, bookies had T losing to H by a fair amount, but normally they tend to estimate risks well.. normally.

Edited, May 17th 2017 10:40am by angrymnk
____________________________
Your soul was made of fists.

Jar the Sam
#2988 May 17 2017 at 10:06 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Taegan Goddard opines that the fact that key Democrats aren't calling for impeachment should be worrying Trump. If Pelosi and Schumer just wanted to score partisan points they'd be calling for Trump's head. Instead, they're making the push for an independent investigation and special prosecutor and starting to see support for it among Republicans. It's a slow walk approach but, if they went full impeachment cry now, it would just solidify resistance along partisan lines. Be harder to do if there's a report detailing events (especially Trump trying to kill the Flynn investigation).
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#2989 May 17 2017 at 10:57 AM Rating: Good
******
49,305 posts
Well, Pence would certainly be a step up (not exactly a high hurdle all things considered). Not a particular fan of far edge religious people in government.

Edited, May 17th 2017 12:59pm by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#2990 May 17 2017 at 11:13 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Me neither. But I assume his policies will be much the same as Trump's anyway. If I have to pick between two drivers to take me to Trash Town, I don't want to go there but I want to wind up drowning in a flipped car in the river even less.

Speaking of drowning, Trump has taken up whining to Coast Guard cadets at graduation ceremonies. Captive audience, I suppose.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#2991 May 17 2017 at 1:56 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,156 posts
Trump 2017: "No politician in history has been treated worse or more unfairly."

1. "Why doesn't he show his birth certificate? There's something on that birth certificate that he doesn't like."
- March 23, 2011, on "The View"
2. "He's spent millions of dollars trying to get away from this issue. Millions of dollars in legal fees trying to get away from this issue. And I'll tell you what, I brought it up, just routinely, and all of a sudden a lot facts are emerging and I'm starting to wonder myself whether or not he was born in this country."
- March 28, 2011, on Fox News
3. "He doesn't have a birth certificate, or if he does, there's something on that certificate that is very bad for him. Now, somebody told me -- and I have no idea if this is bad for him or not, but perhaps it would be -- that where it says 'religion,' it might have 'Muslim.' And if you're a Muslim, you don't change your religion, by the way."
- March 30, 2011, on The Laura Ingraham Show
4. "I have people that have been studying [Obama's birth certificate] and they cannot believe what they're finding ... I would like to have him show his birth certificate, and can I be honest with you, I hope he can. Because if he can't, if he can't, if he wasn't born in this country, which is a real possibility ... then he has pulled one of the great cons in the history of politics."
- April 7, 2011, on NBC's "Today" show
5. "His grandmother in Kenya said, 'Oh, no, he was born in Kenya and I was there and I witnessed the birth.' She's on tape. I think that tape's going to be produced fairly soon. Somebody is coming out with a book in two weeks, it will be very interesting."
- April 7, 2011, on MSNBC's "Morning Joe"
Note: On April 27, 2011, President Obama made public his long form birth certificate. The Trump campaign in his statement portrayed this as the event that resolved the situation.
"Having successfully obtained President Obama's birth certificate when others could not, Mr. Trump believes that President Obama was born in the United States," Miller said.
But as the following comments demonstrate, whatever he thought personally, Trump continued to gin up birther issues for years after.
6. "He didn't know he was running for president, so he told the truth. The literary agent wrote down what he said ... He said he was born in Kenya and raised in Indonesia ... Now they're saying it was a mistake. Just like his Kenyan grandmother said he was born in Kenya, and she pointed down the road to the hospital, and after people started screaming at her, she said, 'Oh, I mean Hawaii.' Give me a break."
- May 24, 2012, interview with The Daily Beast's Lloyd Grove, responding to an erroneous report about Obama
7. "A lot of people do not think it was an authentic certificate. ... Many people do not think it was authentic. His mother was not in the hospital. There are many other things that came out. And frankly if you would report it accurately I think you'd probably get better ratings than you're getting."
- May 29, 2012, to CNN's Wolf Blitzer
8. "An 'extremely credible source' has called my office and told me that @BarackObama's birth certificate is a fraud."
- August 6, 2012, in a tweet more than a year after Obama released his longform birth certificate
9. "Was it a birth certificate? You tell me. Some people say that was not his birth certificate. Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't. I'm saying I don't know. Nobody knows."
- August 2013, to ABC News
10. "How amazing, the State Health Director who verified copies of Obama's 'birth certificate' died in plane crash today. All others lived."
- December 12, 2013, in tweet about the death of Loretta Fuddy.
11. "Well, I don't know -- did he do it? ... Well, a lot of people don't agree with you and a lot of people feel it wasn't a proper certificate."
-May 2014, in an interview with TV3's Colette Fitzpatrick in Ireland, Trump first contested whether Obama had released his birth certificate, then questioned whether its legitimacy.
12. "There are three things that could happen. And one of them did happen. He was perhaps born in Kenya. Very simple, OK? He was perhaps born in this country. But said he was born in Kenya because if you say you were born in Kenya, you got aid and you got into colleges. People were doing that. So perhaps he was born in this country, and that has a very big chance. Or, you know, who knows?"
- May 27, 2014, in remarks at the National Press Club
13. "Who knows about Obama? ... Who knows, who knows? Who cares right now?... I have my own theory on Obama. Someday I will write a book, I will do another book, and it will do very successfully."
- January 6, 2016, in an interview with CNN's Wolf Blitzer.
14. "I'll answer that question at the right time. I just don't want to answer it yet ... I don't talk about it anymore. The reason I don't is because then everyone is going to be talking about it as opposed to jobs, the military, the vets, security."
- September 15, 2016, in an interview with The Washington Post.

Also, Trump has not noticeably been shot, beaten nearly to death on the Senate floor, or hung on a meat hook by a screaming mob. Yet.


____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#2992 May 17 2017 at 2:09 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,156 posts
#2993 May 17 2017 at 3:18 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Samira wrote:
Trump 2017: "No politician in history has been treated worse or more unfairly."

Yeah, Jake Tapper immediately pointed out that (a) all of Trump's wounds are self-inflicted and products of his own action and (b) four presidents have been literally assassinated, not counting those who survived failed active assassination attempts. Plus the whole Trump is a racist who spent years claiming that the first African-American president was really born in Kenya thing.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#2995 May 17 2017 at 4:12 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Robert Mueller, former FBI director, has been appointed special counsel to lead an investigation into Russian tampering and possible collaboration during the election.

Edit: I said "independent" investigation which isn't fully accurate but more independent than if Rosenstein was running it.

Edited, May 17th 2017 5:15pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#2996 May 17 2017 at 4:21 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
***
3,262 posts
Rep calls for Impeachment from the house floor
____________________________
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
#2997 May 18 2017 at 7:28 AM Rating: Good
******
49,305 posts
David Clarke, who believes we should suspend habeas corpus and that the Black Lives Matters protesters are joining ISIS, apparently has taken a position as assistant secretary in the Department of Homeland Security.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#2998 May 18 2017 at 9:18 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,201 posts
Sounds... about par for the course. Smiley: frown
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#2999 May 18 2017 at 10:28 AM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,156 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Samira wrote:
Trump 2017: "No politician in history has been treated worse or more unfairly."

Yeah, Jake Tapper immediately pointed out that (a) all of Trump's wounds are self-inflicted and products of his own action and (b) four presidents have been literally assassinated, not counting those who survived failed active assassination attempts. Plus the whole Trump is a racist who spent years claiming that the first African-American president was really born in Kenya thing.


I enjoyed the tweet that pointed out, "Nelson Mandela spent 27 years in prison, but sure."
____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#3001 May 19 2017 at 8:57 AM Rating: Good
******
49,305 posts
There's more Weiner in the news, as Carlos Danger is expected to plead pled guilty to sending dick pics to at least one underaged teenager.

Edited, May 19th 2017 2:55pm by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 43 All times are in CDT
Anonymous Guests (43)