US Politics Thread 2016-2020 [Archive] - Page 20

August

05-21-18, 08:20 PM

Interesting article

http://thefederalist.com/2018/05/21/obama-administration-spy-trump-using-flimsy-evidence-lets-find/

Did The Obama Administration Spy On Trump Using Flimsy Evidence? Let’s Find Out (http://thefederalist.com/2018/05/21/obama-administration-spy-trump-using-flimsy-evidence-lets-find/)

After all, if the DOJ is incorruptible, there's nothing to worry about.

If the Justice Department and FBI are, as we’ve been told incessantly over the past year, not merely patriots but consummate professionals incapable of being distracted by partisanship or petty Washington intrigues, why are Donald Trump’s antagonists freaking out over the fact that an inspector general will assess (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/justice-department-calls-for-inquiry-after-trump-demands-probe-into-whether-fbi-infiltrated-or-surveilled-his-campaign/2018/05/20/636a05a0-5c7d-11e8-b2b8-08a538d9dbd6_story.html?utm_term=.11942f7f46c4) whether political motivation tainted an investigation into the president’s campaign? The American people should get a full accounting of what transpired during 2016. Isn’t that what we’ve been hearing since the election?

You believe Trump is corrupt. I get it. But surely anyone who alleges to be concerned about the sanctity of our institutions and rule of law would have some cursory curiosity about whether an investigation by the administration of one major party into the presidential campaign of another major party was grounded in direct evidence rather than fabulist rumor-mongering. Otherwise, any administration, including Trump’s, could initiate an investigation for whatever cooked-up superficial reason it wanted.

Perhaps all of this will lead to nothing exciting. Perhaps the competing narratives that have sprung up around Trump and Russia will end far less dramatically than either of their champions hope. But when “rule of law” enthusiasts keep arguing the DOJ is “independent” of the president, then turn around and argue that a congressional oversight committee shouldn’t have the right to ask the executive branch for documents pertaining to their inquiry, one begins to suspect that perhaps some of the hyperbolic rhetoric we’ve been hearing over the past two years has been little more than partisanship.

vienna

05-22-18, 04:37 PM

The core matter in the dispute over the document Nunes was seeking was not that DOJ and the FBI refused to turn over the document, since the did, in fact, turn over the specific document in question; the core dispute by Nunes is the name/identity of the informant was redacted, a normal procedure for persons involved in ongoing investigations. Protection of witnesses, informants, or other persons who are relevant to an investigation and may be in danger of harm is SOP for law enforcement/investigation...

A fact not known is Nunes never even read the redacted document he has so vocally criticized and decried, even after it was made public; that little bit of information came out when a reporter, who did have knowledge of the document's contents asked Nunes to comment on a specific aspect in te memorandum and Nunes could not do so, and then admitted he, in fact had never actually read the memo; Nunes claims he had a member of his staff read it and 'summarize' it for him; given the document is only a couple of pages, that must have been a very short summary...

I believe it is becoming evident the Trump team is trying to get a peek at what info the DOJ and Mueller may have on Trump and/or his associates. The Mueller investigation is new ground for Trump; he is not used to fighting 'in the dark'; in his business life, he has been able to use various tactics gaim information as means of leveraging his advantage, but now, against a blank wall, he has no advantage and it really is bugging Trump. Nunes has been his go to for intel, but Nunes has become less effective as time goes on and has become an increasing embarrassment. His other go-to sources are shrinking with the likes of his fixer Cohen now being swallowed up by the Trump web...

Trump's biggest problem is he's a "bluffer" poker player, who relies on bluster, braggadocio, and bullying to get the other guy to fold, and that has worked in his business dealings, particularly when used against weaker players; but, now, he is up against the consummate "poker face" player in Mueller who has kept a silent stone face throughout the his tenure as Special Counsel: no press conferences, no interviews, no press releases comment on progress, nothing at all for Trump to try and suss out what cards Mueller is holding, and, thus far, Mueller and his team have been very carefully dotting all the "i"s and crossing all the "t"s and not giving a crack in the wall for Trump to peek through; in other words, as a prosecutor, Mueller, and his team, are doing their jobs very well. Trump has relied on the naivete, incompetence, ignorance, or fear of his opponents to give him an advantage and, now, Trump has been disarmed and is flailing; given Trump's many self-failings and those of the people with whom he surrounds himself, Trump is seriously hurting...

I welcome the calls for the probe called for by Trump and Nunes, et al. I have a felling it may become a case of "careful of what you wish for": by trying to gain access to what DOJ/Mueller is holding, there is an equally strong possibility the Trump team may give the Mueller team intel it might not have had access to, sort of Trump looking into the abyss and having the abyss look back at him...

<O>

vienna

05-22-18, 06:12 PM

Well, I guess you could call Trump's efforts to impugn the DOJ/Mueller a sort of witch hunt; if so, it is convenient when the witch hunters burn their own selves at the stake :haha: :

Rudy Giuliani adds another dumb comment to his greatest hits list --

https://www.salon.com/2018/05/22/rudy-giuliani-adds-another-dumb-comment-to-his-greatest-hits-list/

So, would an effort to derail a legitimate criminal investigation by trying to tamper with the investigation by actively seeking classified intel, on false premises, be considered a form of... oh, what is it called?... you know... obstruction?...

<O>

vienna

05-22-18, 07:47 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hndSZXjmJmA

<O>

Bilge_Rat

05-23-18, 05:22 AM

Interesting article

http://thefederalist.com/2018/05/21/obama-administration-spy-trump-using-flimsy-evidence-lets-find/

great article, thanks for posting.

vienna

05-23-18, 12:57 PM

The NY Times has a pretty good sort of flowchart of the possible outcomes of the Mueller probes, with a bit of historical background:

How the Mueller Investigation Could Play Out for Trump --

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/05/23/us/politics/trump-mueller-russia.html

<O>

Platapus

06-03-18, 02:08 PM

Even Nathan Larson.

Who is Nathan Larson?

Nathan Larson is a pedophile and a white supremacist. And he's running for Congress

https://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/245c7061a313cc16bf9a30eec09f047bd6666183/c=0-81-299-306&r=x404&c=534x401/local/-/media/2018/06/01/USATODAY/USATODAY/636634529425251565-f71f162e7f104b0f947372088f76f99e5f774d50.jpg

Nathan Larson, a man who advocates pedophilia, white supremacy and rape, and who served 16 months in prison for threatening to kill the president, is running for Congress.

The 37-year-old accountant from Charlottesville, Va., is running as an independent in Virginia's 10th congressional district. Larson identifies himself as a "quasi-neoreactionary libertarian." His platform includes drug legalization, the elimination of all regulations regarding firearms and "putting an end to U.S. involvement in foreign wars arising from our country's alliance with Israel."

...

In 2008, Larson sent a letter to the Secret Service in which he threatened to kill either George W. Bush or Barack Obama, according to The Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-politics/he-threatened-to-kill-the-president-now-he-is-seeking-public-office/2017/03/08/ec31f768-0381-11e7-b9fa-ed727b644a0b_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.5790b98cb6c6). The following year, he pleaded guilty to threatening to kill a president and served 16 months in federal prison.
Before seeking a congressional seat, Larson ran for the Virginia House of Delegates as an independent. His candidacy became an issue in last year's Virginia gubernatorial race, because Larson is only able to run thanks to then-Gov. Terry McAuliffe, a Democrat, restoring civil and voting rights to former felons.

Ed Gillespie, last year's Republican nominee in the gubernatorial race, cited Larson's candidacy as a reason that restoring rights to felons was a bad idea and faulted Democrats who supported the move.

While Ralph Northam — then the Democratic nominee and now governor — agreed Larson's views are "abhorrent" and that he is not fit for office, he stood by the move to restore rights to people who served their sentence and are now living as law-abiding citizens.

In a rambling, hate-filled stream of consciousness he calls his "campaign manifesto," (https://archive.fo/8WkYo#selection-3121.158-3121.343)Larson laid out his views on the world. A fan of Nazi leader Adolf Hitler, Larson said he wants to restore "benevolent white supremacy," rebuild the patriarchy, eliminate child labor laws and legalize early marriage. He has also advocated for the legalization of incest and child pornography.

When asked if he is a pedophile or just wrote about pedophiliac sex fantasies, Larson told HuffPost Thursday (https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/nathan-larson-congressional-candidate-pedophile_us_5b10916de4b0d5e89e1e4824), "It’s a mix of both. When people go over the top there’s a grain of truth to what they say."
Given his views, Larson acknowledged to the news site that his candidacy is a long shot, but he said that he thought he has a chance amid a blowback against political correctness.

"A lot of people are tired of political correctness and being constrained by it," Larson told HuffPost. "People prefer when there’s an outsider who doesn’t have anything to lose and is willing to say what’s on a lot of people’s minds."

He also noted that people who disagreed with "someone like Trump … might vote for them anyway just because the establishment doesn’t like them."

According to Larson, whites differ from other races because of "our cultural creativeness, our willingness to invest in the long term rather than living for today, and our conscientious desire to do the right thing even if it requires heroic self-sacrifice for the good of society."

Additionally, Larson blamed school shootings on feminists.

"Many boys end up fatherless because feminists encouraged female sexual promiscuity and undermined husbands' authority over their wives," he said. "Guns don't kill people — feminists do."

He believes Congress should repeal the Violence Against Women Act and that women should be treated as "sex slaves" and "baby factories."
"We need to switch to a system that classifies women as property, initially of their fathers and later of their husbands," Larson said.

Larson also said sexual harassment only occurs because there are attractive females in the workplace when "it would be better if those girls got married no later than their early teens, so that they could spend their young womanhood in the marital home under the protection of their husbands."

Larson's view on sex and gender is laden with terminology often found in the misogynistic threads that populate the dark corners of the Internet on sites like 4Chan. He constantly refers to "cucks," alphas, betas, omegas, gammas and incels (involuntary celibates) (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2018/04/25/incel-what-and-why-alek-minassian-praised-elliot-rodger/549577002/).

Larson confirmed to HuffPost that he was the creator of two websites that provided forums for pedophiles and misogynists. Both sites were shut down by their domain hosts on Tuesday. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/06/01/pedophile-white-supremacist-congressional-candidate/663215002/

This is one of the nicer articles about him. Other news reports would not be allowed to be posted on this website because they go into a little too much detail on what this person states.

This guy stands approximately zero chance, but it will be interesting to see how many votes he actually gets.

In the US, pretty much anyone can run for elected office. That is just one of the risks we advice to accept.

He is a part time accountant who lives with his parents.. at 37... and he wants to be in congress.

Yikes.

em2nought

06-03-18, 04:24 PM

Next thing you know this guy will be running for office. :D

http://technewsbase.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/1527031133_parents-sue-30-year-old-son-to-kick-him-out-of-house-620x330.jpg

August

06-03-18, 08:48 PM

Next thing you know this guy will be running for office. :D

http://technewsbase.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/1527031133_parents-sue-30-year-old-son-to-kick-him-out-of-house-620x330.jpg

A younger version of Cool Moose party candidate Bob Healey (RIP)

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d6/Robert_J._Healey.jpg/330px-Robert_J._Healey.jpg https://i.redditmedia.com/JgT9-GPtL5NZIzxa8gIUeaHOMliSGXf-2jh-QoYfjH4.png?w=610&

Buddahaid

06-03-18, 10:24 PM

mapuc

06-04-18, 11:28 AM

So you have some "special type" of people who wants to run for Congress, Senate.

Let them run, it is more the voters I would fear,
´cause they could give some of these people enough votes.

Markus

em2nought

06-04-18, 11:34 AM

Let them run, it is more the voters I would fear,
´cause they could give some of these people enough votes.

Markus

We should definitely fear voters who are informed by our mainstream media instead of possessing a lick of their own common sense. :up:

mapuc

06-04-18, 02:52 PM

Sorry if this have been discussed.

Read in a Danish article Trump

Tweeted that he would pardon himself because as the President he could do so.

!!?? Being a total novice in American laws and Federal Laws I have to ask

Can he do that ?

Markus

Platapus

06-04-18, 03:39 PM

I wrote this post back in July 17. I hope it answers your question. This post has been updated with some new research I was able to come across.

The topic of Presidential pardons has come up on the Internets Tubes. Judging from the posts I have read on multiple forums, there are some misunderstandings about this. What better chance can I have to get all pedantic, bombastic, and pompous about something near and dear to me – policy

First of all, we need to understand the terminology. Despite the Constitution describing powers of pardon, what we are really talking about is powers of Clemency – Executive Clemency to be specific.

The President enjoys several different types of Clemency Powers

1. Commutation of Sentences – Reducing or removing the amount of time a convicted person has to serve in prison as a result of their conviction.
2. Respite– A temporary suspension of a sentence. Almost always used to delay the execution of a convicted prisoner to allow additional time for review
3. Remission – Just like a Commutation but applies to monetary fines. Commutations and Remissions are treated differently and the Executive has to render each separately.
4. Amnesty – A formal and irreversible decision that the government will not prosecute a person (or group of persons) for a specific crime or groups of crimes.
5. Pardons – The forgiveness of a crime granted after conviction. The crime and all its penalties are forgiven, but the fact of the conviction stays on the person’s record

Wait a minute. Secure the telephonic communication device there professor. Everyone on the Internet knows that President Ford pardoned Nixon and there was no trial no less a conviction. What gives?

Well technically Ford did not pardon Nixon and technically Ford did pardon Nixon.

Technically, what Ford issued was a Special Amnesty for Nixon, meaning that the federal government won’t prosecute Nixon for any crimes he may have committed. Amnesties are way better than Pardons as the issue of guilt never comes up. So why does everyone believe Ford pardoned Nixon?

Well Pardons are easier to understand and spell than Amnesty for one thing, but the real reason is that due to a circular definition, Amnesty is a type of Pardon… even though technically Amnesty is a type of Clemency, which is even harder to understand and spell. So to be really accurate, Ford issued Nixon a Type of Pardon, in which the specific type was a Special (limited) Amnesty. In the end, it really was a difference that made no difference.

This intermingling of the terms also appears in Ex Parte Garland 71 U.S. 333 (1866). It should be noted that this case only involved Mr. A.H. Garland. There is differing opinions whether this case established any precedent. This case becomes important later in this long and boring post of mine.

So now that we understand (kinda) that we are talking about Clemency, lets see what the Constitution says

“...he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.”

We can forgive the writers for the slightly inaccurate use of the terms Reprieves and Pardons. Word meanings and what they encompass can change. Rest assured that where the Constitution states Reprieves and Pardons, what they meant was Executive Clemency.

But let’s look at the other words. The next phrase is “for offenses against the United States..” This limits what the president can apply his or her powers of Clemency to. Offenses against the United States are usually violations of Federal Law.

The President does not have Executive Clemency powers where state laws are involved. That clemency power is held by the governor of the state where the crime was involved (and that can get complicated depending on the extent of the crime). A good way to find out if a specific case is an “offense against the United States" is to look at the case title.

If the title of the case is “The United States v. John Dough it is about an offense against the United States. If the case is “The State of Ohio v. John Dough, it is not an offense against the United States, but an offense against the State of Ohio.

Is there anything other than state and federal offenses? Yes.

There are Crimes against the Court. These include perjury (but often there is a companion federal law that prohibits perjury) and Contempt of Court. It needs to be recognized that there is a difference between Contempt of Court and Criminal Contempt of Court. The former is a crime against the court and the second is a crime against the state/federal government.

The President does not have Executive Clemency power concerning Crimes against the Court. Even if the President pardons a person from violating any federal laws about perjury, the court still maintains power over Crimes against the court.

A moments careful thought should illustrate the wisdom of this exclusion from Executive Clemency. If the president could pardon anyone who commits perjury or contempt of court, it would be impossible to hold the president accountable for any wrong doings.

There are also Crimes against Congress. These also include perjury and contempt. Yes Contempt of Congress is a crime, but fortunately only when under oath so pretty much all the citizens are safe. But in any case, the President does not have Executive Clemency power concerning Crimes against the Congress.

Again, a moments careful thought should illustrate the wisdom of this exclusion from Executive Clemency. If the president could pardon anyone who commits perjury or contempt of congress, it would be impossible to hold the president accountable for any wrong doings.

The final phrase in the constitutional article is “except in Cases of Impeachment.”. Impeachment is a power of the congress and the the President does not have Executive Clemency power concerning impeachment.

Once again, a moments careful thought should illustrate the wisdom of this exclusion from Executive Clemency.

Can the President Pardon him or herself?

Yes and no. It depends on if Ex Parte Garland established precedence.
If it did then yes

If, however, Ex Parte Garland did not establish precedence, then no.

However, any presidential pardon will have no effect on any impeachment proceedings as impeachment is a power reserved to the Legislative Branch.

Some facts to consider:

1. The president enjoys a temporary immunity from prosecution of state and federal crimes during their time in office. This immunity used to cover immunity from civil prosecution but that was removed during the Bill Clinton administration. So if the president has temporary immunity from prosecution, there can’t be a conviction and therefore no way to pardon.

2. The president can, however, be impeached. As stated in the Constitution, the President does not have the power to issue pardons in cases of impeachment. Once the president is successfully impeached (meaning convicted), he or she is no longer the president and therefore has no Executive Clemency powers at all.

The only effect of a president pardoning him or herself will be that after they leave office, he or she would not be able to be tried for any of the crimes for which they received a pardon. The Supreme Court would certainly become involved in evaluating whether a president can pardon themselves.

Can the president issue a special amnesty on him or herself?

Now that’s an interesting question. Fortunately, the answer is no and the answer is not contained in the Constitution. There is a long standing tenet of Natural Justice that "no-one should be a judge in his own cause". If you want to impress people, that would be nemo judex in sua causa.

Chicks dig guys that can speak Latin....no, I can't back that up. They mostly just roll their eyes at you. :oops:

Well, technically, the president can issue a special amnesty on themselves. But there would be an excellent chance of impeachment as this would truly be flaunting presidential power over the law. Also, just as with a self-pardon, the SCotUS will become involved.

Just like a pardon, self-issuing a special amnesty won't prevent congress from using their authority to impeach.

This is one of the examples of why the interpretation of the Constitution can not be limited to only the words contained in the constitution but must incorporate those tenets that the writers felt did not need to be repeated. If a constitution were to list every single tenet, the document would be hundreds of pages long. This is why ScotUS justices spend most of their time reading both US and foreign case studies. If interpreting the constitution were just based on the text, we would not need a Supreme Court and sure would not need so many justices to agree.

Most likely much more than you ever wanted to know about Clemency. By the way, the same restrictions that apply to the President also apply to the individual Governors with respect to their legislation and courts.

So when you read that the president can pardon anyone for anything, they are mistaken. A great deal of thought has gone in to the balance of allowing Executive Clemency but also protecting against its abuse. Not a perfect system, but one that all the political parties in our country have used for their advantage.

mapuc

06-04-18, 04:29 PM

I....I...I'....m speechless

Trying to get a grip of all this interesting information you have given me as an response to my question.

I tried to remember what you wrote back in July 2017, but I had to give up.

Ex Parte Garland established precedence

In your answer you wrote

"Yes and no. It depends on if Ex Parte Garland established precedence.
If it did then yes"

Lets say it does and Trump pardon him self.

Then a new question came into my mind
The Republican have majority in Congress and in the Senate right now.

Lets assume the Democrats wins the mid-term election. Can they as they have the majority in Congress and the Senate overrule this
Pardon and impeach the President ?

(I have the feeling you have given me the answer in your response)

Edit:
I may have found it.

"he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment "

Don't know if was the right part I copied

End of Edit.

Markus

em2nought

06-04-18, 04:34 PM

So when you read that the president can pardon anyone for anything, they are mistaken. A great deal of thought has gone in to the balance of allowing Executive Clemency but also protecting against its abuse. Not a perfect system, but one that all the political parties in our country have used for their advantage.

Seems like staging a coup d'état to clean up at Justice, the FBI, and the deep state swamp would be much less confusing. :up:

mapuc

06-04-18, 05:42 PM

Erased because it already have been given an answer to.

Markus

Rockstar

06-06-18, 11:07 AM

The Justice Department's internal watchdog has concluded thatJames Comey defied authority at times during his tenure as FBI director, according to sources familiar with a draft report on the matter.

One source told ABC News that the draft report explicitly used the word "insubordinate" to describe Comey's behavior. Another source agreed with that characterization but could not confirm the use of the term.
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/doj-watchdog-finds-comey-defied-authority-fbi-director/story?id=55670834
Now I know why Comey was in such a hurry to write his book. If convicted of crimes pertaining to national security he may not be able to profit from the story. :O:

u crank

06-06-18, 11:42 AM

Not to worry. I'm sure Comey will spin 'defying authority' on CNN into some boy scout quality in his quest for 'A Higher Loyalty'. :03:

Catfish

06-06-18, 11:56 AM

I am sure if this had been Trump, the right wing media would have boasted about how independent, vigilant and self-conscious he has acted, against the swamp and the deep state :D

Highbury

06-06-18, 03:57 PM

Why is the president's personal attorney discussing international diplomacy? The same attorney, who is not an employee of the White House, was the first to announce the impending release of 3 American citizens from NK as well. Would that have been considered normal with any other administration?

(I know the link is Twitter and NBC, but it is the only link to video I can find right now and it is ad free).

https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/1004412724439343105

I am not sure KJU will like that phrasing before a summit has happened.

em2nought

06-06-18, 11:32 PM

Looks like a minor revolt against socialism might be brewing in California. :up: hehe

vienna

06-07-18, 07:26 AM

Nah, not much, if anything at all changed: the CA-GOP was unable to force out DEM candidates in any of the US House races and the total number of registered GOP voters in CA has declined to only 25.1% of the total registered voters, as opposed to 44% of CA voters declaring as DEM; in fact, the category of "No party preference" (Independents) is larger than the declared GOP total. Even with an influx of heavy out-of-state GOP cash prior to the primary, there really hasn't been a change in the voter's general leanings. What was a surprise was the turnout of DEM voters in the GOP stronghold of Orange County, which, during the 2016 Presidential Election not only had a stunningly large turnout (you might say it was "yuuuge"), the County's vote went overwhelmingly for the DEM candidate (Clinton) the first time a DEM candidate carried the County in over 80 years. At this point, there is only a very slim chance of CA-GOP backed candidates ousting incumbent DEMs and a good chance of DEMs taking currently GOP held or leaning House seats. A poor quality of GOP candidates and a dwindling GOP base is a big factor to the DEMs maintaining it's hold on the state...

Interestingly, CA-GOP primary candidates were noticeably avoiding mentioning connections to Trump in their campaign ads with the noticeable exception being the GOP gubernatorial candidate Cox, who was being actively backed by Trump; even with Trump's open support, Cox only garnered about 25% of the vote as opposed to about 33% for the DEM candidate, Newsom; this result came from a field of over 30 candidates that was heavily DEM and, with the very strong probability the voter's of the other losing DEM candidates keeping their votes within the party, Newsom is pretty much going to win in November...

So, no revolt, just business pretty much as usual...

<O>

u crank

06-07-18, 03:31 PM

So, no revolt, just business pretty much as usual...

I guess the obvious question is....are you happy about that?:hmmm:

vienna

06-07-18, 04:13 PM

I guess the obvious question is....are you happy about that?:hmmm:

Neither happy nor concerned. As I have very often pointed out, I am an Independent, allied to no party. To me, it's just sort of a political 'chess game', and, as in the situation of watching a chess game in process, what goes on on the board is what it is; my comments about the CA primary and the parties involved is just my view of the game and how it's being played. In the end, the sucesses and/or. failures of the players will be seen in November, but, right now, nothing has really changed overall and there might be gains or losses then; the GOP effort to take advantage of a DEM vote split fizzled out and now it's up to the CA-GOP and the RNC to get their candidates elected in CA. The really big problem for the CA-GOP, and has been for a very long time, is the party has misread the state's voters and their concerns; they back issues and candidates that run contrary to voter's sentiments, they lose, and then they wonder why they lost; I guess "out of touch" is an apt description...

As for the DEMs in CA, well, the elections are for them to lose...

<O>

u crank

06-07-18, 04:44 PM

Well I actually wasn't asking about the primaries although your opinion on them is interesting to hear. My question was more about the state of things in general in California. Are you happy about that?

vienna

06-08-18, 01:20 PM

Well, let's see...

CA has an economy that provides 16+% on the US national GDP...

If Ca were a separate country, it would be the world's 5th largest economy, actually bigger than the UK...

CA receives only 87% back from every tax dollar it sends to the US treasury, so there are a lot of other states benefiting from CA...

CA has a broad and diverse economic base and has shown the ability to adapt to changes in technology and social shifts, resulting in continued growth and new employment opportunities...

I don't know what other people may think a status like this might signify, but, to me, it ain't all that bad. I know CA has been a thorn in the Far Right GOP's side, but think about it: the FR-GOP keeps carping about CA, their position that CA is "all wrong", but if being "all wrong" gives such good results, may be going "Far Right" would be a big ("yuuuge") mistake; it would seem the voters of CA seem to feel a radical change to what has either been a lesser or failing political stance in the state is not really a great idea: don't mess with success...

In saying this, I am in no way saying DEM control of the state is solely responsible for its success. There have been a good number of GOP politicians who have made positive impacts on the state at various levels, and, sadly, the national GOP has mainly heaped scorn on them as not being "GOP enough". It is really too bad since they have been some of the most productive office-holders, even if they don't toe the total Party line. Here in LA, there was a great GOP mayor who came into office right after the 1992 Riots and he completely reorganized the City's government and actually accomplished a very long overdue revamping of the City Charter. I voted for him when he first ran and I voted for him when he stood for re-election. He is a billionaire businessman and widely active in civic affairs and philanthropy. One of his first acts as mayor was to show up at random city departments unannounced and spend the day working with the employees to get a feeling for what conditions were like in the workplace; this wasn't just a show up and get a photo-op sort of visit, he actually did the work; I think it was his second or third drop-in where he spent the day on a trash truck, hauling trash cans and doing the job (and he was, even then, not a young man). He left office due to term limits, limits he imposed when he revamped the City Charter (the previous mayor had served 20 years in office, a total of five terms). There was talk of him running for Governor after he left office, but the State GOP didn't like his unwillingness to fully embrace the FR-GOP stances in their entirety and shunned him; too bad, since an awful lot of voters, myself included, would have been more than eager to give a shot at perhaps repeating his success on a Statewide level...

So, am I happy with Ca, in its current state? Well, no one is ever 100% happy with something as complex and multifaceted as a state's conditions, but, yeah, I feel, on the whole, its working. I'm also not so hide-bound or tunnel-visioned to believe any one party or political philosophy is the 'absolute answer' to all problems; that is a form of idiocy I can't bring myself to support...

Maybe the national GOP and its supporters might take a look at why CA is so prosperous and how it got that way and maybe adapt to meet realities instead of party ideologies; maybe then, some of the other states they control can improve themselves and CA might not have to lose 13% of its paid-in taxes to support them...

<O>

Mr Quatro

06-08-18, 01:38 PM

Well, let's see...

So, am I happy with Ca, in its current state? Well, no one is ever 100% happy with something as complex and multifaceted as a state's conditions, but, yeah, I feel, on the whole, its working.

<O>

So is the repeal of the CA gas tax in favor of the GOP working too?

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/democratic-calif-state-senator-recalled-over-support-for-gas-tax-hike/

Democratic California state senator Josh Newman was booted from office after less than two years on Tuesday, defeated by Republican ex-assemblywoman Ling Ling Chang in a recall election. Newman defeated Chang very narrowly in 2016, prompting Carl DeMaio, a former member of the San Diego City Council, to spearhead the movement for a recall.

Republicans criticized Newman last year, for his support of a bill that increased the state gas tax by twelve cents a gallon and hiked vehicle fees to finance improvements to mass transit and repairs to roads and bridges. The criticism seems to have resonated with voters. About 51 percent of California voters want to scrap increases to the state’s gas tax and vehicle-registration fees, according to a USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times poll.

“Make no mistake about it: State Senator Josh Newman’s political career is over because he supported the car- and gas-tax hikes,” DeMaio said.

vienna

06-08-18, 02:33 PM

So is the repeal of the CA gas tax in favor of the GOP working too?

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/democratic-calif-state-senator-recalled-over-support-for-gas-tax-hike/

Only if you look at the recall in the light the GOP casts. In context, here is what happened: a gas tax was passed and the GOP glommed onto it like it was the last life preserver on the Titanic; they needed something, anything to try to rouse their base, or what is left of it; all their other 'hot button' "issues" weren't on the ballots or even relevant anymore, so they needed something to cling to in the primaries. The GOP started what is a fiction that Newman was the deciding vote on the tax; actually that 'honor' goes to a GOP Sen. Anthony Cannella, who was the lone GOP Senator to vote for the tax increase; without Cannella's vote, it wouldn't have passed:

Fact check: Was Sen. Josh Newman the deciding vote on California's gas tax increase? --

https://ballotpedia.org/Fact_check/Was_Sen._Josh_Newman_the_deciding_vote_on_Californ ia%27s_gas_tax_increase%3F

So, why did the CA-GOP go after Newman? Mainly, because Newman defeated a GOP candidate in 2016, losing the GOP a long-held seat and giving the CA-DEM a 'super-majority'; the real reason for the recall is simple: the GOP is desperate to win, no matter what they have to do or say:

Josh Newman's recall shows that Republicans only want to win, no matter the cost to Californians --

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/la-ol-enter-the-fray-watch-out-the-newman-recall-shows-1528301379-htmlstory.html

Two other points to consider:

1. The CA-GOP received massive funding from the national GOP for the recall effort and it is unlikely they can keep up that sort of level of spending in all the races statewide, or nationwide for that matter, and, with their traditional 'hot button' issues (abortion, "family valeues", etc.) getting less and less play politically, having to campaign on actual issues is going to be more difficult;

2. ...which brings up the alleged issue at the core of the recall: the gas tax; the day after the Primary, a poll showed only 51% of the voters surveyed supported a repeal of the tax, which, given normal margins of error, is a less than an enthusiastic base for repeal; all that GOP money spent and, yet, they can't rouse the voters to stand firmly behind what the CA-GOP claims is the 'actual' issue; also of note: the GOP candidate who did win the recall election only got 34% of the total vote, so the seat is still not all that secure...

So is the repeal of the CA gas tax in favor of the GOP working too?

Well, it worked in that the GOP got back the seat they lost in 2016 by creating a non-issue and blaming someone who actually was not the deciding vote, in other words, a lie...

What doesn't seem to be working is any real gain by the CA-GOP or the national GOP: the two candidates who will run for the US Senate seat are both DEM, so, no matter who wins, that seat will not change party; and, DEM candidates for statewide offices are pretty much running ahead of CA-GOP candidates for the November General Election...

...and, since some on the forum seem to have such a fascination with Adam Schiff, he won the DEM nomination with 72.3% of the total vote. The GOP candidate? He got 22% of the vote. The other candidate, who is also a DEM, got 5.7% of the vote, but it is likely those votes will go for Schiff in November; so, it seems, Schiff not leaving anytime soon...

<O>

u crank

06-08-18, 03:06 PM

Well, let's see...

So, am I happy with Ca, in its current state? Well, no one is ever 100% happy with something as complex and multifaceted as a state's conditions, but, yeah, I feel, on the whole, its working. I'm also not so hide-bound or tunnel-visioned to believe any one party or political philosophy is the 'absolute answer' to all problems; that is a form of idiocy I can't bring myself to support...

Maybe the national GOP and its supporters might take a look at why CA is so prosperous and how it got that way and maybe adapt to meet realities instead of party ideologies; maybe then, some of the other states they control can improve themselves and CA might not have to lose 13% of its paid-in taxes to support them...

I asked that question because I have read articles that don't paint that rosy a picture.

For example, this survey rates all the states in different catagories.

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/rankings

According to this particular survey, California ranks 38th in infrastructure, 43rd in fiscal stability, 46th in opportunity and dead last in quality of life.

That's why I asked that question.

In other words it wasn't a political question.

vienna

06-08-18, 04:21 PM

I asked that question because I have read articles that don't paint that rosy a picture.

For example, this survey rates all the states in different catagories.

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/rankings

According to this particular survey, California ranks 38th in infrastructure, 43rd in fiscal stability, 46th in opportunity and dead last in quality of life.

That's why I asked that question.

In other words it wasn't a political question.

You asked a non-political question in a "US Politics Thread"... :hmmm: :D

I've seen quite a few of those surveys over the years, and all I can say is there's a survey to satisfy every viewpoint, it just depends on who you ask, what you ask, when you ask, and how you ask...

Personally, while I do have some quibbles, overall, living in CA isn't so bad and, overall, is better than a lot of other states; how can I say that? Maybe its due to all those people for those other states who keep flocking to CA escaping whatever problems they're having in their previous home states. You bring up surveys: there was one a bit of a while back the CA-GOP cited saying large numbers of people were leaving the state because they didn't like it here; their survey, their results. However, if you look at state records of population changes, more people are coming into CA than are leaving, some thing the other survey didn't deem to acknowledge. The knock about high taxes, over-regulation, etc., still hasn't reduced the number of new citizens, the growth of business, or the overall production numbers of the state...

I don't think there is any state that has or will ever have a straight-across-the-board high percentile rating, so I just concern myself with where I am and what goes on around me, when it come to quality of life...

<O>

u crank

06-08-18, 05:08 PM

You asked a non-political question in a "US Politics Thread"... :hmmm: :D

I have a rebellious side.:O:

vienna

06-08-18, 06:11 PM

Gee, I never noticed... :haha:

<O>

Rip

06-09-18, 08:20 AM

You asked a non-political question in a "US Politics Thread"... :hmmm: :D

I've seen quite a few of those surveys over the years, and all I can say is there's a survey to satisfy every viewpoint, it just depends on who you ask, what you ask, when you ask, and how you ask...

Personally, while I do have some quibbles, overall, living in CA isn't so bad and, overall, is better than a lot of other states; how can I say that? Maybe its due to all those people for those other states who keep flocking to CA escaping whatever problems they're having in their previous home states. You bring up surveys: there was one a bit of a while back the CA-GOP cited saying large numbers of people were leaving the state because they didn't like it here; their survey, their results. However, if you look at state records of population changes, more people are coming into CA than are leaving, some thing the other survey didn't deem to acknowledge. The knock about high taxes, over-regulation, etc., still hasn't reduced the number of new citizens, the growth of business, or the overall production numbers of the state...

I don't think there is any state that has or will ever have a straight-across-the-board high percentile rating, so I just concern myself with where I am and what goes on around me, when it come to quality of life...

<O>

Stop drinking the kool-aid. California net-migration is going out not in. The only population increasing in Cali is that of non-citizens.

Wealthier people and those from states like New York and Illinois are moving in by the droves to California while young people with less money are bailing out to states such as Texas, Arizona and Nevada, a report from the state’s Legislative Analyst’s Office revealed Wednesday.

The underlying factors of these migration patterns are not spelled out in the report, but the data analyzed by the state’s fiscal and policy adviser office offers a pek at some interesting trends.

Between 2007 and 2016, some 5 million people moved in to California and 6 million people moved out to other states — a net loss of about 1 million residents, the report relayed.

Even that is worse than you would imagine when you see where the people who move in are coming from.

People from 15 states moved in to California between 2007 and 2016, the report found, with most coming from states like New York, Illinois, New Jersey and Michigan.

So in essence the ones moving in are escaping even more poorly administered states like Illinois who is on the verge of a financial meltdown.

u crank

06-09-18, 04:05 PM

Is there anyone in Washington who is not involved in this kind of thing.

A former staff employee of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI) has been indicted and arrested on charges of making false statements to special agents of the FBI during the course of an investigation into the unlawful disclosure of classified information, ....

https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/pr/former-us-senate-employee-indicted-false-statements-charges

The guys title and job description says it all...

At the time he made the alleged false statements to the FBI, Wolfe was Director of Security for the SSCI, a position he held for approximately 29 years. As SSCI Director of Security, Wolfe was entrusted with access to classified SECRET and TOP SECRET information provided by the Executive Branch, including the U.S. Intelligence Community, to the SSCI. In this position, Wolfe was responsible for safeguarding all classified information in the possession of the SSCI.

And who did he unlawful disclose the classified information to? Why his girlfriend of course. That would be one Ali Watkins, currently a New York Times reporter. Back in the spring of 2017, Wolfe tipped Ms. Watkins that Russian spies had attempted to recruit Trump-campaign adviser Carter Page back in 2013. Watkins used that leak to write a BuzzFeed article provocatively headlined “A Former Trump Adviser Met with A Russian Spy” The leak and the article were suspiciously timed to cover for revelations that the Obama Justice Department used the unverified Steele dossier, generated by the Clinton campaign, to obtain FISA-court surveillance warrants against Page.

Wonder how many more of these leakers will be exposed?

Platapus

06-09-18, 06:56 PM

Disgraceful. Disturbing lack of professionalism these days.

August

06-09-18, 07:14 PM

Disgraceful. Disturbing lack of professionalism these days.

It's more than that I think.

Mr Quatro

06-09-18, 10:22 PM

Is there anyone in Washington who is not involved in this kind of thing.

At least he was just caught for leaking ... :yep:

Look what happens if you get caught lying to the US Congress, like Hillary Clinton and James Clapper. :oops:

https://www.cnbc.com/2016/07/07/what-happens-if-you-lie-to-congress.html

What happens if you lie to Congress

Q: Who has ever lied to Congress?

A: This might be a tough one to answer comprehensively especially because it is extremely rare to see charges brought. In fact, a study from 2007 found just six successful convictions of perjury or related charges in relation to Congress in the previous 60 years.

u crank

06-10-18, 06:57 AM

At least he was just caught for leaking ... :yep:

Actually Mr. Quatro, he was caught for "making false statements to special agents of the FBI during the course of an investigation into the unlawful disclosure of classified information".

But you are right, testifying before Congress is a joke. Put these people before a Grand Jury and see what happens.:yep:

Catfish

06-10-18, 07:05 AM

Let us please put things in perspective.
Trump said that H. Clinton lied to the FBI.
He had and has no evidence. The FBI denies that she ever lied to them.
Next claim is that Clinton lied to Congress. However she did not.
https://verdict.justia.com/2016/08/19/outrageously-false-charges-perjury-hillary-clinton
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/dec/05/donald-trump/donald-trump-falsely-claims-hillary-clinton-lied-f/
They can just lie and call her a liar and worse, and obviously have nothing to fear.
Trump's and certain people's wishful thinking has nothing to do with facts or the truth. Basically Trump can invent any "truth" and make up any statement, and people fall for it. Because certain people already have an opinion, and then look for any tweet and sh!t to back it up.

u crank

06-10-18, 07:54 AM

Lying

-to speak falsely or utter untruth knowingly, as with intent to deceive.

Disingenuous

-not candid or sincere, typically by pretending that one knows less about something than one really does.

August

06-10-18, 09:47 AM

Platapus

06-10-18, 09:59 AM

It's more than that I think.

Selling out your country for a few thousand dollars. Yikes :nope::nope:

u crank

06-10-18, 10:05 AM

Then there is liar liar pants on fire.

That's stand-up comedy at its best.:up:

Mr Quatro

06-10-18, 10:10 AM

True charity is when you don't want anything in return :yep:

Notice that Bill and Hillary Clinton are no longer in the charity business :o

u crank

06-10-18, 10:12 AM

Let us please put things in perspective.

For example, seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level when they were sent and received. These chains involved Secretary Clinton both sending e-mails about those matters and receiving e-mails from others about the same matters. There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation.

We do assess that hostile actors gained access to the private commercial e-mail accounts of people with whom Secretary Clinton was in regular contact from her personal account. We also assess that Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal e-mail domain was both known by a large number of people and readily apparent. She also used her personal e-mail extensively while outside the United States, including sending and receiving work-related e-mails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries. Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail account.

...from the statement by FBI Director James B. Comey on the Investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton’s Use of a Personal E-Mail System. July 5, 2016.

https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/statement-by-fbi-director-james-b-comey-on-the-investigation-of-secretary-hillary-clinton2019s-use-of-a-personal-e-mail-system

So here we have a person who has been in the US political system most of her adult life. First Lady of Arkansas, First Lady of USA, two time Presidential candidate for Democratic Party, US Senator for State of NY, and Secratary of State in Obama administration. To pretend that having a private, unsecured email server for convieniece is ok and to pretend not to know about security classifications is not honest. Call it what you like.

Having a private email server means her emails are not subjected to Freedom of Information Act scrutiny. Can you guess why?

Catfish

06-10-18, 11:35 AM

"Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information."

So?

"Trump referred to her communication with the FBI "on the Fourth of July weekend" during the campaign. There is no transcript of the interview that FBI agents had with with Clinton on July 2, 2016, about her email usage in what her campaign described as a "voluntary interview."
Comey was not present for the discussion. But he spoke for the agency five days later when House members quizzed him about what happened in a hearing.
Rep. Gerald Connolly, D-Va., explicitly asked Comey if Clinton lied to the FBI in that interview.
Comey’s response: "I have no basis for concluding that she was untruthful with us."
During a line of questioning with then-Rep. Mick Mulvaney, R-S.C., Comey reiterated, "We do not have a basis for concluding she lied to the FBI."
Here’s another exchange with then-Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, in which Comey repeatedly said he was not aware of any FBI case in which Clinton lied."

And so on. So, after all there is no legal right to call her a liar. The only liar who lies so often that no one even seems to notice it anymore, is Trump.

August

06-10-18, 11:39 AM

18 U.S. Code § 1924 - Unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material

Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, by virtue of his office, employment, position, or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than five years, or both.

Catfish

06-10-18, 12:06 PM

18 U.S. Code § 1924 - Unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material

So where is the official and legal accusation, with evidence, that she did exactly that?

August

06-10-18, 03:46 PM

So where is the official and legal accusation, with evidence, that she did exactly that?

Are you serious? Literally 1000's of official emails many classified transmitted off from government networks onto a secret unauthorized mail server that was hidden in a residence.

Then she had them destroyed after they were subpoenaed. You see obstruction of justice in Trumps mere suggestion that Comey go easy on Flynn if possible yet you don't see it in destroying subpoenaed evidence?

em2nought

06-10-18, 04:43 PM

Platapus

06-11-18, 06:34 PM

If (BIG IF what with the Deep State, Military Industrial Complex, and D.C. swamp) Trump can turn us around from the disaster where we were headed he's going to rank ahead of Lincoln, and only behind Washington in the history books. Think about that. :up:

You wish for that, while I wish for a pony for my birthday. They both have approximately the same chance of happening.

August

06-11-18, 06:49 PM

I wish for a pony for my birthday.

Quoted for posterity. :D

JU_88

06-12-18, 04:48 AM

So where is the official and legal accusation, with evidence, that she did exactly that?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_gAUhgBgnb8

grab some popcorn :Kaleun_Salute:

Platapus

06-13-18, 10:30 AM

Quoted for posterity. :D
It is in May. Last may, I did not get a pony either. :wah:

Rockstar

06-13-18, 03:06 PM

And so it begins

https://s.faketrumptweet.com/jidjmvmr_1stexln_1chzz5i.png

Catfish

06-13-18, 03:13 PM

And so it begins

https://s.faketrumptweet.com/jidjmvmr_1stexln_1chzz5i.png

You know what frightens me? That Dump has so such success among US citizens.

Though i think this one is fake news. But who knows, this idiot is unpredictable.

Dowly

06-13-18, 04:05 PM

And so it begins

https://s.faketrumptweet.com/jidjmvmr_1stexln_1chzz5i.png
No such tweet exists on his account.

Rockstar

06-13-18, 04:32 PM

https://faketrumptweet.com/fake-tweet/jidkbke7_167yrn3_1chzz5i

:D. Have fun

Platapus

06-13-18, 05:38 PM

As unbalanced as Trump is, I would not have been surprised if that was an actual tweet.

Jimbuna

06-14-18, 07:09 AM

No such tweet exists on his account.

I thought as much....not even he could pull a stunt like that.

https://faketrumptweet.com/fake-tweet/jidkbke7_167yrn3_1chzz5i

:D. Have fun

:haha:

Rockstar

06-14-18, 05:15 PM

The poop has hit the fan.

https://media.giphy.com/media/aXQgIccqMYXtK/giphy.gif

https://www.justice.gov/file/1071991/download

https://storage.googleapis.com/afs-prod/media/media:d05e56b7e15a483ca0e0451a94f08cb9/800.jpeg

u crank

06-14-18, 05:53 PM

Pass the popcorn. :03:

Rockstar

06-14-18, 07:15 PM

https://media.giphy.com/media/NipFetnQOuKhW/giphy.gif

Rockstar

06-15-18, 10:38 AM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQFEY9RIRJA

Dowly

06-15-18, 12:03 PM

"This report did not find any evidence of political bias or improper considerations actually impacting the investigation under review."
-FBI Director Christopher Wray (appointed and highly praised by Trump himself)

Rockstar

06-15-18, 01:54 PM

I can appreciate Mr. Wrays position he inherited a mess from Comey and I too think Wray will do a fine job. But what he said isn't what the report stated. The report didn't conclude there wasn't any evidence. What the report said is there was no documentary or testimonial evidence. In other words the IG may have had their suspicions but they cannot prove what motivated Comey to be insubordinate, wander off the reservation and influence a national election. Plus I don't think IG is obligated to prove motive they just need to prove an illegal act was committed, their job is done. But I suspect the tax payers will be held liable for another upcoming and very public congressional boondoggle.. errr I mean investigation this time its political bias! No complaints from the majority taxpayer though they love the drama and name calling. Now as for Muellers investigative A-team their texts are pretty damning making it obvious to anyone what their motivation was.

Does make me wonder though who Comey's so called 'Higher Authority' is that persuaded him do the things he did.

I said it before I'll say it again this whole thing has been one big political boondoggle from the start.

Mr Quatro

06-15-18, 03:06 PM

The final answer is simple Trump would not be the POTUS without the controversy of did or did she not break the law with a private server and email question compounded by the FBI (headed by Comey) decided to at the last minute get a subpoena to open her secretary's husband's computer to investigate for any violations of the law.

A shadow was cast on Hillary Clinton that lasted to election day. I think the 911 fainting spell also added to the non Hillary voters too.

We have a better choice with Trump as POTUS even though the powers that be certainly can be blamed for a royal mess up. If Trump can clear his name from this Russia probe he will be elected again. The only people even close to beating Trump are in his own party. :yep:

August

06-15-18, 04:08 PM

The report didn't conclude there wasn't any evidence. What the report said is there was no documentary or testimonial evidence. In other words the IG may have had their suspicions but they cannot prove what motivated Comey to be insubordinate, wander off the reservation and influence a national election.

Well put Rockstar. FBI misconduct is currently being investigated by US Attorney John Huber and motives will certainly be a part of that.

What I want to know is why Peter Strzok hasn't been fired yet.

u crank

06-15-18, 05:35 PM

Two things I see (so far):D from Inspector General Michael Horowitz's report.

One, Trump, Jeff Sessions, and the DOJ had a legitimate reason for firing James Comey. That is pretty apparent.

Two, the very people who tried to protect and who supported Hillary Clinton probably cost her the White House. Stupid is as stupid does.

Platapus

06-15-18, 05:52 PM

We had just a hair over 18% voter turnout in my precinct. It should be a lot higher, but it was one of our better turnouts. I have worked primaries where we have had 1% turnout.

The breakdown was 57% Democrat and 43% Republican ballots cast. Virginia has open primaries so we don't know how many democrats and republicans and independents voted. We can only count the number of ballots.

Méo

06-15-18, 11:42 PM

From 17:18 to 17:30

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KCVSx_4V0wo

Afterwards he said that was just a joke, the easiest possible escape, but it doesn't sound like a joke at all ...or everything that comes out of his mouth is a complete joke.

Even if it would be a joke, there's always a glimmer of truth behind this kind of ''humour''.

Tells a lot about the man.

Anyone has a proper facepalm picture :hmmm:

Dowly

06-16-18, 02:58 AM

But what he said isn't what the report stated. The report didn't conclude there wasn't any evidence. What the report said is there was no documentary or testimonial evidence.Oh, really?

We found no evidence that Comey’s public statement announcing the FBI’s
decision to close the investigation was the result of bias or an effort to influence the
election.In brief,
we found no evidence that the decision not to prosecute Clinton under these
statutory provisions was tainted by bias or other improper considerations.We found no evidence that Comey’s decision to send the October 28 letter
was influenced by political preferences.Based on our investigation, we found no evidence to indicate that improper
political considerations influenced the FBI’s processing and release of the Clinton
Foundation documents or the use of an FBI Twitter account to publicize the release.And those are just few examples I found searching the document for 'no evidence', plenty more if you search for 'bias'.

Plus I don't think IG is obligated to prove motive they just need to prove an illegal act was committed, their job is done.One of their tasks was to see if the decisions concerning the Clinton investigation were influenced by "improper considerations". Says so right in the report, page 1 (2 in PDF).

As for the Clinton investigation in general, the report blows some pretty big holes in the Trumpster narrative. Might want to have a read the next time you plan on using the "But her eeeemaaails" argument. :yep:

u crank

06-16-18, 06:44 AM

What I want to know is why Peter Strzok hasn't been fired yet.

That's a good question. A lot of former FBI agents are asking the same question.

What I find hard to understand is that Strzok's text “No. No he’s not. We’ll stop it.” in response to Page's “[Trump’s] not ever going to become president, right? Right?,” is just now seeing the light of day. Why was this, the most damning piece of evidence against Strzok kept under wraps until now?

Rockstar

06-16-18, 08:30 AM

Oh, really?

And those are just few examples I found searching the document for 'no evidence', plenty more if you search for 'bias'.

One of their tasks was to see if the decisions concerning the Clinton investigation were influenced by "improper considerations". Says so right in the report, page 1 (2 in PDF).

As for the Clinton investigation in general, the report blows some pretty big holes in the Trumpster narrative. Might want to have a read the next time you plan on using the "But her eeeemaaails" argument. :yep:

Word searches, really? Please use common sense for a moment. What is your motive for posting here? What decision have you ever made in life that did not have a motive? Unless you are a mindless bag of rocks you have a reason for everything you do in life even when it comes too improper considerations. The IG plainly states they found no documentary or testimonial evidence that prove his motives were political but then neither do they attempt to show what his motives were otherwise. The most likely reason is like the prosecution, IG is under no obligation to prove motive just illegal actions, and they did. What Comey's reasons were at the time of his insubordination and improper considerations is still a big unknown. Why? I'll say it again, because IG found no documentary or testimonial evidence to present which proves one way or another what goes on in another mans mind. Furthermore I don't believe they under any obligation to do so and what bothers me is why they even brought it up to begin with! But that's up to the next public boondoggle to decide.

Who was Comey's 'Higher Authority'?

u crank

06-16-18, 10:08 AM

As for the Clinton investigation in general, the report blows some pretty big holes in the Trumpster narrative. Might want to have a read the next time you plan on using the "But her eeeemaaails" argument. :yep:

Ok I'll bite. Just what is the 'Trumpster narrative' in regards to the Clinton investigation?

Mr Quatro

06-16-18, 10:15 AM

Word searches, really? Please use common sense for a moment. What is your motive for posting here? What decision have you ever made in life that did not have a motive? Unless you are a mindless bag of rocks you have a reason for everything you do in life even when it comes too improper considerations.

Who was Comey's 'Higher Authority'?

Rockstar needs a snickers bar :yep:

https://shawglobalnews.files.wordpress.com/2016/04/snickers-bar.jpg?quality=70&strip=all&w=720&h=469&crop=1

Dowly

06-16-18, 10:17 AM

Word searches, really?
Yes, word searches. When the report is the size of a good size book, word search comes handy.
Please use common sense for a moment.I am going by what the report says. Everything else is assumptions.
What is your motive for posting here?My motive is to counter the BS in this instance by using th report itself, not some biased media source as you seem to use.
What decision have you ever made in life that did not have a motive?Probably none.. so what? There are multiple types of motives, some are bad, some are good, some are ordinary like me going out to buy food because I have none.
The IG plainly states they found no documentary or testimonial evidence that prove his motives were political but then neither do they attempt to show what his motives were otherwise.I posted a number of quotes that said "no evidence" was found of bias or improper considerations.
The most likely reason is like the prosecution, IG is under no obligation to prove motive just illegal actions, and they did.The report says what their intentions were, I posted about that too. Just because you ignore it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
Who was his 'Higher Authority'?It's the name of his book, often it is the publishers who decide the name.

Dowly

06-16-18, 10:18 AM

Ok I'll bite. Just what is the 'Trumpster narrative' in regards to the Clinton investigation?
That Hillary Clinton got out of it without charges because of bias/favorism/you name it.

That's what Trump has been touting for a year or so now.

u crank

06-16-18, 01:44 PM

That Hillary Clinton got out of it without charges because of bias/favorism/you name it.

That's actually a fairly acurate statement.

In Oct. 2015,

Federal agents were still cataloging the classified information from Hillary Rodham Clinton’s personal email server last week when President Obama went on television and played down the matter.

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/17/us/politics/obamas-comments-on-clinton-emails-collide-with-fbi-inquiry.html

“I don’t think it posed a national security problem,” Mr. Obama said Sunday on CBS’s “60 Minutes.” He said it had been a mistake for Mrs. Clinton to use a private email account when she was secretary of state, but his conclusion was unmistakable: “This is not a situation in which America’s national security was endangered.”

So here you have the President of the USA on national television interfering and commenting on an ongoing investigation. This could not be a clearer message to Hillary supporters in The DOJ and the FBI. The President has spoken.

Then you have the top lawyer in the USA, Attorney General Loretta Lynch meeting with the husband of a person under investigation by the FBI. I guess they talked about the weather.

Then there is the investigation. It was not a normal FBI investigation. A key witness, Cheryl Mills was present when Mrs. Clinton was interviewed. She was later granted immunity for her cooperation. Evidence was destroyed, there was no grand jury, no subpoenas, and no search warrants.

And then there was the people doing the investigation.

From the IG report.

We were particularly concerned about text messages sent by Strzok and Page that potentially indicated or created the appearance that investigative decisions they made were impacted by bias or improper considerations. Most of the text messages raising such questions pertained to the Russia investigation, and the implication in some of these text messages, particularly Strzok’s August 8 text message (“we’ll stop” candidate Trump from being elected), was that Strzok might be willing to take official action to impact a presidential candidate’s electoral prospects. Under these circumstances, we did not have confidence that Strzok’s decision to prioritize the Russia investigation over following up on the Midyear-related investigative lead discovered on the Weiner laptop was free from bias

MaDef

06-16-18, 05:34 PM

That Hillary Clinton got out of it without charges because of bias/favorism/you name it.
I held a Top Secret clearance while in the U.S. Navy. Had I been that lackadaisical with anything marked "confidential" or above, I would have found myself in an article 32 hearing at the very least. Someone had to go out of their way for Clinton to get a pass notwithstanding the media's own spin.

August

06-16-18, 08:52 PM

One more thing: she might be our next president, the last thing you need [is] going in there loaded for bear. You think she’s going to remember or care that it was more [DOJ] than [FBI]? Feb. 25, 2016. Text by FBI agent Lisa Page to Boyfriend Peter Strzok (FBI agent in charge of the Clinton email server investigation) as he prepared to interview Clinton. Fear is a motive too.

Platapus

06-16-18, 10:03 PM

I think it would be a monumental mistake for the DNC to nominate Hillary for president. As last election proved, the baggage she has (whether deserved or undeserved) is an unsurmountable barrier for too many voters.

And honestly, I don't think she can bring anything to the table that would justify the risk of them losing another election.

Henry Ford once said " You can't build a reputation on what you are going to do" But, in my opinion, that's all that Hillary has done---built her reputation on what she is going to do, but not a lot on what she was actually able to do. All one has to do is look at her record after 8 years in the Senate and 4 years as SecState. Lots of what she wants to do and what she promises to accomplish, but rather light on being able to actually accomplish things.

As I have written in the past, Hillary's legacy is being probably the only candidate that could lose against a buffoon like Trump.

The DNC better pick a winnable candidate for 2020. The Democrats are perfectly capable of losing the 2020 election as they did in 2016.

Mr Quatro

06-17-18, 07:50 PM

I didn't know they had that many to run against Trump or Pence or General Kelly or whoever ran last time in the GOP

Democrats set earlier 2020 primary convention date

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/exclusive-democrats-anticipating-heated-primary-set-earlier-2020-convention-date/ar-AAyHESg

Democrats will hold their convention in 2020 earlier than they have in more than two decades, Democratic operatives tell CNN, partly out of anticipation of a crowded and contentious primary.

The Democratic National Convention is slated to take place from July 13 to July 16, 2020, almost two weeks earlier than the 2016 convention.

Democratic National Committee officials, including chair Tom Perez and interim DNC CEO Mary Beth Cahill, have considered a series of factors in deciding to host their biggest political event earlier than normal, party operatives tell CNN. But a key reason for the decision is the expectation the 2020 primary could be a combative affair with more than two dozen Democrats running, making it essential that the party allow more time for tensions to cool after a nominee is officially selected.

em2nought

06-18-18, 06:08 AM

Democrats set earlier 2020 primary convention date

They obviously need more time to "arrange" things without leaving as much evidence this time around. They were pretty sloppy last time, but then nobody ever told them they might lose, so they never expected a light to shine on any of it. :D

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BnfR7_Fu-g

Skybird

06-20-18, 12:47 PM

Trumps says the US will leave the UN Human Rights Something. I say "Bravo!" for that! This ugly body is an incarnation of institutionalised antisemitism, excuses and covers human rights violators and gives a stage for to many war criminals and dubious godfathers of political and murderous crime, turning the offender into a monitor over human rights all too often. The whole body seems to run by the Cairo Declaration of Islamic Human Rights and thus has embraced Sharia supremacy over any human rights there are. In no other body of the UN, the cancer tumors that have conquered it and turned it into a cloud of rotten scents celebrate bigger, louder parties. Its a tool of globla jihad now, plain and simple.

Europe should follow the American example.

Of course it will not, pitiful as it is.

Catfish

06-20-18, 01:27 PM

you are right, only that Dump does not leave it because of the reasons you mentioned. The 'president' does not care for human rights at all.

However it is interesting one person can do that without consulting another government institution.

August

06-20-18, 01:59 PM

you are right, only that Dump does not leave it because of the reasons you mentioned.

Right like you have any clue at all what the Presidents reasons might be.

em2nought

06-20-18, 02:05 PM

The 'president' does not care for human rights at all.

Since I don't have kids, if I was taking the abuse that's being leveled 24/7 I'd be considering this in the back of my brain: Trump and all the Republicans should just come out of the closet as "Democrats" and switch parties, then give the Democrats every last thing they want so we can sit back and watch it ALL burn. Those of us who are left can then "maybe" rebuild from the rubble in the distant future. Call it the Colombia Doctrine maybe. The only path to a better future is to hit the absolute bottom first.

:hmmm: The only "catch" is our nuclear arsenal which, if we didn't dismantle, would eventually do us all in when we became too stupid/poor to maintain it any longer. ...and if we did that China would just claim our land for unpaid debt and exterminate anyone left so "catch 22".

Catfish

06-20-18, 02:24 PM

this is not about democrats or republicans, it is about one big error who became 'president'.
i need one look and listen to one sentence, and what this blubbering something talks about, and especially *how* it says it and which vocabulary it uses. If l no one sees or understands what this is about...
Have fun making America great again, i'm out.

u crank

06-20-18, 03:39 PM

this is not about democrats or republicans, it is about one big error who became 'president'.

I've said it before. I'll say it again. The USA dodge a bullet by not electing Hillary Clinton as president. I don't call it a mistake I call it damn good luck.

i need one look and listen to one sentence, and what this blubbering something talks about, and especially *how* it says it and which vocabulary it uses. If l no one sees or understands what this is about...
Have fun making America great again, i'm out.

Come on man. The last guy was a very eloquent speaker. He was smooth. He could sing, dance and play basketball. Lovely family man. The question is was he a good president? Are you going to judge him by how he spoke? Less than two years after he left office we are finding out just how corrupt that administration was. And we haven't heard it all yet. The IG report on the FISA warrant applications should be just as telling as the Clinton investigation report was.

Look, I'm no fan of Donald Trump by any stretch. I wish he'd throw his phone in the Potomac River, stop with the personal attacks and get a damn hair cut. That being said I think he has a long way to go in catching up to the last guy in terms of corruption. I guess we'll have to wait and see.

Bilge_Rat

06-20-18, 03:47 PM

Right like you have any clue at all what the Presidents reasons might be.

:sign_yeah:

Bilge_Rat

06-20-18, 03:56 PM

...so….despite all the out of control vitriol coming from the now totally deranged anti-Trump forces…

turns out Trump's approval rating of 45% is exactly the same as that of Obama in june 2010:

Not only that, but Trump's approval in this poll is now equal to Obama's at the same point in Obama's presidency. Gallup had Obama at 45% approval by late June 2010.

https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/trump-approval-rating-gallup-poll-obama-popularity/

and if you look at the Real Clear politics poll numbers, his approval rating keeps going up and has gone up even higher among Republicans, before it was around 80%, now it is hovering around 90%.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/

as others have noted, when the media reports every story as if it is the end of the world, ordinary voters start to tune out...

em2nought

06-20-18, 04:06 PM

This article sums up exactly why the left is frothing at the mouth, and so dishonestly worried about "children".

He Fights
https://townhall.com/columnists/evansayet/2017/07/13/he-fights-n2354580

August

06-20-18, 04:31 PM

This article sums up exactly why the left is frothing at the mouth, and so dishonestly worried about "children".

https://townhall.com/columnists/evansayet/2017/07/13/he-fights-n2354580

I love this part:

Trump is fighting. And what’s particularly delicious is that, like Patton standing over the battlefield as his tanks obliterated Rommel’s, he’s shouting, “You magnificent bastards, I read your book!” That is just the icing on the cake, but it’s wonderful to see that not only is Trump fighting, he’s defeating the Left using their own tactics.That book is Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals – a book so essential to the Liberals’ war against America that it is and was the playbook for the entire Obama administration and the subject of Hillary Clinton’s senior thesis. It is a book of such pure evil, that, just as the rest of us would dedicate our book to those we most love or those to whom we are most indebted, Alinsky dedicated his book to Lucifer.

Trump’s tweets may seem rash and unconsidered but, in reality, he is doing exactly what Alinsky suggested his followers do.

Platapus

06-20-18, 05:03 PM

...so….despite all the out of control vitriol coming from the now totally deranged anti-Trump forces…

turns out Trump's approval rating of 45% is exactly the same as that of Obama in june 2010:

https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/trump-approval-rating-gallup-poll-obama-popularity/

and if you look at the Real Clear politics poll numbers, his approval rating keeps going up and has gone up even higher among Republicans, before it was around 80%, now it is hovering around 90%.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/

as others have noted, when the media reports every story as if it is the end of the world, ordinary voters start to tune out...

I thought that polls were all fake and not to be trusted.

I wished people would make up their mind :03:

August

06-20-18, 05:06 PM

I thought that polls were all fake and not to be trusted.

I wished people would make up their mind :03:

They aren't to be trusted which makes Trumps numbers even more impressive. They're probably 10% or so on the low side.

Bilge_Rat

06-21-18, 05:39 AM

I thought that polls were all fake and not to be trusted.

I wished people would make up their mind :03:

That is a simplistic view of a complex situation, so no I am not surprised that is the only thing you understood. :ping:

Onkel Neal

06-21-18, 06:09 AM

I've said it before. I'll say it again. The USA dodge a bullet by not electing Hillary Clinton as president. I don't call it a mistake I call it damn good luck.

Come on man. The last guy was a very eloquent speaker. He was smooth. He could sing, dance and play basketball. Lovely family man. The question is was he a good president? Are you going to judge him by how he spoke? Less than two years after he left office we are finding out just how corrupt that administration was. And we haven't heard it all yet. The IG report on the FISA warrant applications should be just as telling as the Clinton investigation report was.

Look, I'm no fan of Donald Trump by any stretch. I wish he'd throw his phone in the Potomac River, stop with the personal attacks and get a damn hair cut. That being said I think he has a long way to go in catching up to the last guy in terms of corruption. I guess we'll have to wait and see.

Same here, I'm more happy now than ever Trump beat Hillary.

One thing about him, he sure has revealed how vulgar the liberals can be, and how corrupt the media is. Freakin NPR, I can't even listen to them now. It's always some one-sided piece about the plight of "people of color", transgender heroes, and poor pitiful "migrants".

Dowly

06-21-18, 07:49 AM

The Onion seems to be able to just write actual news these days and they are just as funny and bewildering as the satire they usually write. :haha:

Political Scientists Baffled By Trump’s Ability To End Something He Had No Control Over Just Days Ago (https://politics.theonion.com/political-scientists-baffled-by-trump-s-ability-to-end-1827000942)

NEW HAVEN, CT—At a loss to explain the mysterious nature of the president’s powers, political scientists were reportedly baffled Wednesday by Donald Trump’s ability to end the practice of separating families who cross the U.S. border seeking asylum mere days after stating that he had no control over it. “Just yesterday, he was explaining that his hands were tied and there was nothing he could do to stop children and infants from being forcibly torn away from their parents and put into cages—but then today, out of nowhere, he suddenly issued an executive order doing just that!” said Bruce Ackerman, a constitutional law professor at Yale University, remarking that this inexplicable development will fundamentally upend how the presidency is understood, because there is no theory in the entire field of political science that explains how it could be possible. “No new amendments to the Constitution have been passed, so the powers vested in the Executive Branch should be the same today as they were yesterday, right? And yet somehow, they have changed! Decades of research will be required before we can even begin to comprehend such a phenomenon. In the meantime, we can only sit back and wonder if there are any other powers the president has yet to discover.” At press time, sources confirmed Ackerman and his colleagues had flipped over an original copy of the Constitution and found a list of previously unknown executive powers that appeared to have been hastily scrawled in with a ballpoint pen.

em2nought

06-21-18, 07:56 AM

Same here, I'm more happy now than ever Trump beat Hillary.

One thing about him, he sure has revealed how vulgar the liberals can be, and how corrupt the media is. Freakin NPR, I can't even listen to them now. It's always some one-sided piece about the plight of "people of color", transgender heroes, and poor pitiful "migrants".

Sounds about right. I'd add that he's revealed that there actually is/was a democrat "deep state" also.

Rockstar

06-21-18, 09:42 AM

Have fun making America great again, i'm out.

https://media.giphy.com/media/qEBlgZpZWHihO/giphy.gif

Platapus

06-21-18, 02:56 PM

That is a simplistic view of a complex situation, so no I am not surprised that is the only thing you understood. :ping:

I am just going on what your Dear Leader said.

Skybird

06-21-18, 03:22 PM

"For every complex problem, there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." - H.L. Mencken

u crank

06-21-18, 03:36 PM

One thing about him, he sure has revealed how vulgar the liberals can be, and how corrupt the media is.

That is so true. I'm amazed at how well educated and supposedly well informed people have lost their common sense. The left/Liberals/progressives are in a perpetual state of outrage that boarders on lunacy. And that's the polititians and the media. The Hollywood types have gone right over the edge.

Trump must go to sleep every night with a smile on his face.:D

August

06-21-18, 10:00 PM

Sounds about right. I'd add that he's revealed that there actually is/was a democrat "deep state" also.

Yep and while some are doing their best to ignore it the chips are going to continue to fall. I hear they escorted Strzok off FBI premises under guard the other day.

JU_88

06-24-18, 05:14 AM

Mr Quatro

06-24-18, 09:15 AM

Increasingly the left has become hooked on the idea that we just tore all the worlds nation borders, we would magically all just live in one big happy multi cultural utopia.
Naive doesn't even begin to describe it.
Even the Chinese recently invented a derogatory term 'Baizuo' to describe 'white left' (progressive left)

Watch out the left might just use that ("just tear up all the worlds nation borders, we can then all just live magically in one big happy multi cultural utopia.") quote to run on in 2020 :yep:

JU_88

06-24-18, 10:02 AM

Watch out the left might just use that ("just tear up all the worlds nation borders, we can then all just live magically in one big happy multi cultural utopia.") quote to run on in 2020 :yep:

wouldn't surprise me.
Multi cultural societies are possible, but only when all the 'multiple cultures' involved ultimately agree to respect and abide by one culture lol - in that sense the term is in itself is a bit of a lie. Any society that wants to set up different rules and standards for different groups (aka the current left with its oppression Olympics) is 100% doomed to descend in to a bitter resentful hell of infighting and chaos, that much is clear.

August

06-24-18, 12:15 PM

Turns out it's the liberals who are the true authoritarians..

The American Journal of Political Science published a correction this year saying that the 2012 paper has “an error” — and that liberal political beliefs, not conservative ones, are actually linked to psychoticism.
“The interpretation of the coding of the political attitude items in the descriptive and preliminary analyses portion of the manuscript was exactly reversed,” the journal said in the startling correction.
“The descriptive analyses report that those higher in Eysenck’s psychoticism are more conservative, but they are actually more liberal; and where the original manuscript reports those higher in neuroticism and social desirability are more liberal, they are, in fact, more conservative.”
In the paper, psychoticism is associated with traits such as tough-mindedness, risk-taking, sensation-seeking, impulsivity and authoritarianism.

https://nypost.com/2016/06/09/science-says-liberal-beliefs-are-linked-to-pyschotic-traits/

https://nypost.com/2016/06/09/science-says-liberal-beliefs-are-linked-to-pyschotic-traits/

Bleiente

06-24-18, 01:32 PM

I apologize for interrupting the discussion, but I have just found this article or interviev in a respected German newspaper called "Spiegel":
http://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/soziales/handelsstreit-zwischen-den-usa-und-china-oekonom-mei-xinyu-im-interview-a-1213873.html

Obviously, Beijing seems to be pretty sure of it... :hmmm:

em2nought

06-24-18, 04:59 PM

If a second American Civil War was to start tomorrow, I believe I'm almost to the point that my zeal for killing democrats would be greater than my zeal for killing the Japanese after the raid on Pearl Harbor had I been alive on Dec 7th, 1941. That's kind of a scary thought, and not to my credit. They had best turn it down a notch IMHO. :timeout:

mapuc

06-24-18, 05:26 PM

I don't think a Civil war is nearby, but a seed can very well have been planted for a future conflict in the USA.
When this occurred or what kind of seed it was I can't say.

Markus

Rockstar

06-24-18, 07:52 PM

Turns out it's the liberals who are the true authoritarians..

https://nypost.com/2016/06/09/science-says-liberal-beliefs-are-linked-to-pyschotic-traits/

https://nypost.com/2016/06/09/science-says-liberal-beliefs-are-linked-to-pyschotic-traits/

So what you're saying Hitler really was a liberal? :D

JU_88

06-25-18, 12:50 AM

Im still confused about the U.S the term 'liberals' the word seems to ecompass the authoritarian left, which i not really fair tbh.
A true liberal will have more nuanced/balanced views on things like the role and size of government, economics, foreign policy, immigration etc. (Much like your average conservative does)
What you are seeing from your 'loudest' democrats now is not very liberal at all but far left authoritarianism.

Also take this infamous ANTIFA graffiti from the Berkeley riots for example.

https://smagicblog.files.wordpress.com/2017/02/c3ownyyueaeeev2.jpg?w=662

'liberals' like most conservatives have enemies at both ends of the political spectrum. They should not be the enemy. An actual 'liberal' will have little problem in identifying the insane ideological dogma of the far left. - like most conservatives they might not have the backbone to speak out against it publicly.
But to be fair, we are now in a situation where doing so can quite easily cost you your job and/or reputation (if you have one).....
Look at James Demore, Bret Wienstien, Lindsay Shepard, and to some extent, Jordan Peterson, Elon Musk, & Kanye West - though those last three (like Trump) proved too robust to take down, but all are liberals or conservative moderates.
which kind of re-enforces the gyst of the article that August posted, lets face it. Failing the far lefts moral purity test is now punishable in real world terms. If that's not authoritarian I don't know what is.

Imo Liberals and conservatives are in the same boat and need to put some of there differences aside to hold the moderate line at all costs, long enough to let the already powerful far left eat it self and to also keep the less significant (real) far right at bay.

However if Civil war II did break out (and I genuinely hope it doesn't), I know who I'd put my money on.

u crank

06-25-18, 05:44 AM

Im still confused about the U.S the term 'liberals' the word seems to ecompass the authoritarian left, which i not really fair tbh.
A true liberal will have more nuanced/balanced views on things like the role and size of government, economics, foreign policy, immigration etc. (Much like your average conservative does)
What you are seeing from your 'loudest' democrats now is not very liberal at all but far left authoritarianism.

Indeed. True 'Classic Liberals' are a dying breed. I believe that this 'authoritarian left' is being infused and taken over by some very extreme anti-intellectual views. The most predominate one is identity politics. Long held truths, for example, are derided and discarded because they are the product of a dead white guy. Your value to society is not what you contribute but what you are. What could produce an unjust society more than illogical thinking like that?

which kind of re-enforces the gist of the article that August posted, lets face it. Failing the far lefts moral purity test is now punishable in real world terms. If that's not authoritarian I don't know what is.

The real calling card of the authoritarian left, one which drives it in the media and politics is constant moral outrage. This results in labeling your opponents with every manner of immoral names. Fascist, Nazi, racist,etc. The moral outrage can't stop or the movement dies. This produces some very unhinged rhetoric, which sensible people on the Left refuse to call out much to their shame. The beast feeds itself.

The problem with the 'progressive left' is just that. It keeps moving left.

JU_88

06-25-18, 06:41 AM

The real calling card of the authoritarian left, one which drives it in the media and politics is constant moral outrage. This results in labeling your opponents with every manner of immoral names. Fascist, Nazi, racist,etc. The moral outrage can't stop or the movement dies. This produces some very unhinged rhetoric, which sensible people on the Left refuse to call out much to their shame. The beast feeds itself.

Yeah I think its all dying though, never mind the obvious recent shift in the political landscape.
Look at the youth culture. I mean which one do you think is going to resonate more.

(NSFW)

This?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVujxKA7SIE

Or these?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZXB7OZcV7o
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2nv1dZCHtm8

No contest :03:

Mr Quatro

06-27-18, 12:38 PM

I clicked on some click bait about Sanders that said he wasn't a liberal and then in the article it stated how he was going to run for POTUS in 2020. I can't believe he would try again. I think he's even been indicted for money laundering too.

This isn't the click bait article just a PR stunt :yep:

Sanders congratulates progressive candidates on primary wins

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/394328-sanders-congratulates-progressive-candidates-on-primary-wins

PS Sanders is 76 years old :o

I found the click bait don't click on it: Bernie Sanders Is Not the Left

https://newrepublic.com/article/149378/bernie-sanders-not-left

Onkel Neal

06-28-18, 05:41 AM

Haha, get ready for a whole new wave of liberal hysteria.

Kennedy retirement kicks speculation over Supreme Court replacement into high gear (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/06/27/kennedy-retirement-kicks-speculation-over-supreme-court-replacement-into-high-gear.html)

President Trump told reporters the “search for a new justice will begin immediately” after the Wednesday announcement from Justice Anthony Kennedy that he plans to step down from the high court.

The announcement kick-started rampant speculation about whom Trump will pick for what could be the most consequential appointment of his presidency, giving him the opportunity to move the Supreme Court more solidly to the right.

My guess is Amul Thapar or Joan Larsen, you know, someone to appease the left's identity counters, but it won't help.

Skybird

06-30-18, 04:20 AM

German media report the Pentagon studies plans to withdraw most or all of its forces from Germany, either back home, or shifting them to Poland. Same media also state Trump considers recognition of the Russian Krim annexion.

Its unknown whether these things are meant serious, or are just threats to influence the coming NATO summit.

If I were Trump, I would pull out of Germany, in full. That is no anti-Americanism from my side. The Germans must finally learn to care for their freedom and security by their own means. They have taken a free ride at the US' cost for too long already. Complecancy, bigottery and weakness have taken over.

Recognising the Krim annexion, would just be Realpolitik. The russians will nto give it up, no matter what the EU monkey cry and yell. The Ukraine, being a hellhole of corruption and criminal oligarchies forming the political caste, must not be a priority for us. Its up to its people to claim it back for themselves - or always fall for the same bunch of criminal politicians time and again. The Ukraine is no enrichment for the EU, just another hungry mouth that needs to get oulled by the West.

They want to enlarge the EU already again, with Albania and Makedonia. More hungry mouthes that will take much more than they ever give back. Thanks, but no thanks at all.

Germany currently hosts the biggest contingent of US forces outside the US. I thought that meanwhile Southkorea was in that seat, but if they write the truth, I was wrong. Some 35 thousand GIs are still here.

mapuc

07-05-18, 04:43 PM

I have a question

What is American Voices ?

A friend of mine, had posted a story made by this American Voices.

If it is an non-serious page, then I want read it.

Or maybe I will, to see what they have to tell the readers.

Markus

em2nought

07-05-18, 06:34 PM

If I were Trump, I would pull out of Germany, in full. That is no anti-Americanism from my side. The Germans must finally learn to care for their freedom and security by their own means. They have taken a free ride at the US' cost for too long already. Complecancy, bigottery and weakness have taken over.

Since you fellas don't appear to intend to protect western civilization from Islam, we probably should. We'd probably be better off aligned with the Ruskies. Maybe if we pull out you'll wake up. :hmmm:

August

07-06-18, 12:00 AM

I think this may have got missed. This is a pretty big deal in US politics.

Cliven Bundy acquitted. Judge declares mistrial citing "Flagrant" Federal misconduct.

In April 2014, America was transfixed by an armed standoff in the Nevada desert. On one side was a collection of dangerous, out-of-control armed men who were deliberately provocative, prone to saying unhinged things in a single-minded quest to destroy their enemies, and who lied time and again to cover their misdeeds.

On the other side was Cliven Bundy.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/01/cliven-bundy-case-dismissed-judge-gloria-navarro-cites-flagrant-federal-misconduct-bureau-land-management/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=NR%20Daily%20Monday%20through%20Frida y%202018-01-09&utm_term=NR5PM%20Actives

Catfish

07-10-18, 06:35 AM

So Russia helped against Clinton before and during the 2016 elections, but wanted to get caught? All to stir the water and to polarize the american people politically, at least that worked. Maybe someone will be sued, but it won't be Clinton. :hmmm:

"Defendants and their co-conspirators used their fictitious online personas to interfere with the 2016 U.S. presidential election. They engaged in operations primarily intended to communicate derogatory information about Hillary Clinton, to denigrate other candidates such as Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio, and to support Bernie Sanders and then-candidate Donald Trump."

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/16/russian-meddling-intended-to-help-trump-hurt-clinton-senate-says.html

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/5/16/17361650/russia-election-trump-putin-intelligence-committee

https://www.justice.gov/file/1035477/download

opinion, but worth reading:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/17/opinion/russia-interference-elections-trump.html

"If there were any lingering doubts that Russia’s intervention was aimed at harming Hillary Clinton’s campaign and bolstering Donald Trump’s, an internal directive quoted in the indictment spells it out explicitly: “use any opportunity to criticize Hillary and the rest (except Sanders and Trump — we support them).”

"Friday’s indictment should serve as a reminder that Project Latkha didn’t merely aim to influence the outcome of the election, but also its tone, and Americans’ attitudes toward their own democratic institutions."

That obviously works well. Dividing people and introducing a rough tone..

I wonder where Russia elsewhere orchestrates people and politics.. most probably wherever possible. The internet sure makes it easier.

em2nought

07-10-18, 08:51 AM

On one side was a collection of dangerous, out-of-control armed men who were deliberately provocative, prone to saying unhinged things in a single-minded quest to destroy their enemies, and who lied time and again to cover their misdeeds.

On the other side was Cliven Bundy.

Bahahaha! :up:

their co-conspirators used their fictitious online personas to interfere with the 2016 U.S. presidential election. They engaged in operations primarily intended to communicate derogatory information about Hillary Clinton, to denigrate other candidates such as Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio

Da comrade Catfish! :Kaleun_Cheers: I was working to undermine Hillary every chance I got(still get), I must be a Russian implant. "Many miles to go before I sleep." :doh: It wasn't hard to discredit candidates like low energy Jeb Bush after he sees the will of the American people, and then condescendingly tells Trump that he can't do that during the debates(follow the will of the American people). Big oopsie Jeb. lol

u crank

07-10-18, 12:21 PM

Da comrade Catfish! :Kaleun_Cheers: I was working to undermine Hillary every chance I got(still get), I must be a Russian implant.

:har:

Outstanding! :up:

Mr Quatro

07-10-18, 01:39 PM

Bahahaha! :up:

Da comrade Catfish! :Kaleun_Cheers: I was working to undermine Hillary every chance I got(still get)

I refer to Hillary as Mrs Santa Claus due to the red pants suit she wore for the last Trump debate :yep:

I'm so glad she lost I heard a rumor that voters were more worried about who she would've picked for the supreme court replacements than any other reason.

Catfish

07-12-18, 03:02 AM

[...] Da comrade Catfish! :Kaleun_Cheers: I was working to undermine Hillary every chance I got(still get), I must be a Russian implant. [...]

You do not see the catch 22, do you? :03:
Putin knows bloody well what he's doing.

vienna

07-13-18, 01:20 PM

Has Trump finally fallen through the "Looking Glass"? He actually called a recorded interview he, himself, gave to the Sun UK "fake news"; the guy is so dishonest he no longer can keep his lies and deceit straight:

Trump denies he said something that he said on a tape everyone has heard --

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2018/07/13/trump-denies-he-said-something-that-he-said-on-a-tape-that-everyone-has-heard/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.66c62526baae

The more Trump goes on, the more it appears his style may be based on Nathan Thurm: :haha:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWomk2yt-C8

<O>

vienna

07-13-18, 02:52 PM

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C3cC5fjWMAA57G1.jpghttp://www.topprotestsigns.com/images/1f98db6734-C3cC5fjWMAA57G1.jpg

<O>

Skybird

07-13-18, 04:14 PM

Trump said at NATO summit he now wanted 4% of GDP spent on defence.

German 4% of national GDP spend on defence would make German defence spendings 2x - 2.5x the Russian budget and almost as much as the Chinese budget.

Do you feel safer then, world? :haha: :shucks:

He also brought the stunt to refer to his own statements on something as fake news later on. :har:

vienna

07-13-18, 05:23 PM

The Queen Checking Her Watch While Waiting for Donald Trump Is a True Mood --

https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a22141582/donald-trump-queen-elizabeth-visit-checks-watch/

Scenario:

[Queen Elizabeth II looks at watch while waiting for Trump; thinks:]

"Hmm, five more minutes and I do believe I may be able to have him beheaded..."...

[Smiles inwardly]

<O>

em2nought

07-14-18, 12:49 AM

Trump said at NATO summit he now wanted 4% of GDP spent on defence.

German 4% of national GDP spend on defence would make German defence spendings 2x - 2.5x the Russian budget and almost as much as the Chinese budget.

Russians probably pay $75 for a rifle while the west probably spends $800 for one so.... :hmmm:

Hawk66

07-14-18, 03:27 AM

em2nought

07-14-18, 02:54 PM

It would be interesting to know how historians will label this period, in which we live. I have a simple word for it: Insane.
It does not matter which kind of politics: Migration, defense spending, or the genius deal maker...

I guess one main lesson is already vanished: You can destroy things, reputation and trust in a second but to build the same you need decades

There's not a single person, living beyond their means, who likes to be suddenly forced to live within their means. There's also not a single person with people constantly reaching into their pockets who doesn't wish for zippers.

Some call it migration, others call in invasion. :03:

Catfish

07-14-18, 03:01 PM

[...] Some call it migration, others call in invasion. :03:

'Invasion' :hmmm:

"An invasion is a military offensive in which large parts of combatants of one geopolitical entity aggressively enter territory controlled by another such entity, generally with the objective of either conquering; liberating or re-establishing control or authority over a territory; forcing the partition of a country; altering the established government or gaining concessions from said government; or a combination thereof."

Catfish

07-15-18, 02:58 PM

So for Trump (and the whole US?), the EU is "the enemy" :hmmm:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jul/15/donald-trump-vladimir-putin-helsinki-russia-indictments

August

07-15-18, 05:34 PM

So for Trump (and the whole US?), the EU is "the enemy" :hmmm:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jul/15/donald-trump-vladimir-putin-helsinki-russia-indictments

No he said "foe" which as you know has more synonyms than just "enemy", and when it comes to trade you are indeed our foes. Competitors just like Croatia was the foe of France in the recent soccer championships. I suppose you could try to make it into something more than that if you are biased enough to ignore the obvious meaning.

u crank

07-15-18, 06:12 PM

Excellent article by Victor Davis Hanson. The title, 'Why Europe Gets No Respect' says it all.

https://www.hoover.org/research/why-europe-gets-no-respect

The 21st century has not been too impressed. A bullying China has sized up Europe and concluded that it either cannot or will not do much about Chinese mercantilism, which is based on violations of almost all the canons of postwar trade agreements. Two-million impoverished and mostly Muslim migrants rightly assumed that Europe is hopelessly divided and completely incapable of exercising either the political or moral will to protect its own sovereignty, much less defend its political and religious history and traditions. Russia cynically accepts that an unarmed and energy-hungry Europe will not to do much to check Russian expansionism. Europe appears to Russia more worried about oil and natural gas supplies than translating its moral outrage over Putin’s authoritarianism into any concrete pushback. Better, then, to buy as much Russian natural gas as possible, while damning a supposedly colluding Trump administration for being too soft on the Russian oligarchy.

The European furor over Donald Trump is not, as alleged, because he and the nation that elected him are crude, but that he and his country are needed more than ever by a continent that has lost its way.

Catfish

07-16-18, 02:55 AM

No he said "foe" which as you know has more synonyms than just "enemy", and when it comes to trade you are indeed our foes. Competitors just like Croatia was the foe of France in the recent soccer championships. I suppose you could try to make it into something more than that if you are biased enough to ignore the obvious meaning.

foe
noun

a person who feels enmity, hatred, or malice toward another; enemy: a bitter foe.
a military enemy; hostile army.
a person belonging to a hostile army or nation.

and so on.
This is the obvious meaning, make of it what you want. Ah i hear you, fake definitions :03:
But whatever definitions he uses, this is what Trump really thinks about Europe.

The term used by your 'president' (and i did not say America as a whole, unless you all suddenly are so keen of supporting hatred, racism and xenophobia) can have no other meaning and is clear as mud, it is brazen and an offense. Using such terms insulting alleged friends and allies is either dumb or sheer hatred, but until now i was not aware that one person is able to change a whole country's perception and opinion with a tweet, overnight.
As someone else said, trust is built up in decades, while reputation can be lost in minutes.

vienna

07-16-18, 12:54 PM

...

As someone else said, trust is built up in decades, while reputation can be lost in minutes.

...as proved by "president" Snowflake...I mean Trump... with the truly cowardly, weak, sad and pathetic 'performance' he gave as Putin's Toadie-In-Chief at this morning's press conference. I never saw an American "president" as low as Trump. What's next? Trump declaring the US will now have "peace in our time"?...

<O>

August

07-16-18, 01:21 PM

foe
noun

a person who feels enmity, hatred, or malice toward another; enemy: a bitter foe.
a military enemy; hostile army.
a person belonging to a hostile army or nation.

and so on.
This is the obvious meaning, make of it what you want. Ah i hear you, fake definitions :03:
But whatever definitions he uses, this is what Trump really thinks about Europe.

The term used by your 'president' (and i did not say America as a whole, unless you all suddenly are so keen of supporting hatred, racism and xenophobia) can have no other meaning and is clear as mud, it is brazen and an offense. Using such terms insulting alleged friends and allies is either dumb or sheer hatred, but until now i was not aware that one person is able to change a whole country's perception and opinion with a tweet, overnight.
As someone else said, trust is built up in decades, while reputation can be lost in minutes.

Do you work for CNN Catfish? your half truth definition in order to deliberately misconstrue someones words is just something they like to do.

I'll post a proper definition of the word for you when i get home tonight.

As for reputations worry about your own, because Trump is right, you Germans are double dealing us. Whining about our dealings with the russians while cutting huge gas deals of your own with them.

Bleiente

07-16-18, 02:04 PM

So today I looked at the press conference of Putin and Trump and was very amused about it.

Since actually two evil gangster bosses meet in order to conspiratorially express their mutual trust as well as to plan further, just so that they are not hung in their own state for high treason.

In this respect, you really want something like the "Bolsheviks" back, then such criminals and tsars are simply taken to the basement and shot with his family. :yep:

vienna

07-16-18, 03:15 PM

Um, yeah, like, so Trump said and Putin said there is, like, no Russian interference or contact with US politicians, administrations and entities...

Like, then, how do ya explain this from this past Sunday and today?...

Document: Justice Department Charges Russian National for Conspiracy to Act as a Foreign Agent --

https://www.lawfareblog.com/document-justice-department-charges-russian-national-conspiracy-act-foreign-agent

Maria Butina, Russian gun rights advocate, charged in U.S. with acting as Russian Federation agent --

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/maria-butina-russian-gun-rights-advocate-charged-in-us-with-acting-as-russian-federation-agent/2018/07/16/d1d4832a-8929-11e8-85ae-511bc1146b0b_story.html?utm_term=.01e7fad90790

Note how this person is in the US on a Student Visa...

<O>

Skybird

07-16-18, 03:23 PM

So the Donald manages to indirectly label the intelligence services and the FBI as America's biggest enemy, bigger threat than Russia or China.

Well.

Idiots do like idiots do. Thats what makes them idiots. Future historians will - hopefully - mention the Trump phenomenon in one sentence with the collective mass hysteria about claimed satanistic cults in the US in the 80s or the abductions by little grey aliens in the 90s.

But I must apologize for having so fundamentally underestimated this Donald's tremendous entertaining value when he took office. RTL Samstag Nacht back in the 90s was a bore compared to these daily gigs.

skidman

07-16-18, 03:58 PM

Since actually two evil gangster bosses meet in order to conspiratorially express their mutual trust as well as to plan further, just so that they are not hung in their own state for high treason.

You got it all wrong. A very clever ex-intelligence man faced a moronic, clueless, flatfooted amateur and devoured him between breakfast and lunch. Putin completely outmaneuvered Trump who went away empty-handed.

Mr Quatro

07-16-18, 04:06 PM

skidman

07-16-18, 04:16 PM

Politics is not about lie and truth. It's about interests and how to enforce them. You can bet your lower back that Putin has read his Machiavelli. Trump does not know who Machiavelli was.

vienna

07-16-18, 04:16 PM

President Trump is taking a lot of heat on this one ... he looked bad in front of the press and the whole world, uh?

What's Trump suppose to do in front of the whole world call Putin a liar? :o

Russians have been lying for as long as I have been alive and that is a long time. You know they lie and you deal with it:yep:

Yeah, but it is a whole different game when a president, knowing full well they are lying, goes ahead and agrees with and fully supports those lies...

...but, then again, what can you expect from the Liar-In-In-Chief?...

...certainly, with Trump, you can't expect guts, balls, integrity or loyalty to America...

<O>

vienna

07-16-18, 04:19 PM

...And, if I really get mad enough, I'll tell you how I really feel about him...

<O>

August

07-16-18, 05:32 PM

Here you go Catfish, the definition of Foe (I have highlighted the parts you omitted:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/foe

foe
fō
noun
noun: foe; plural noun: foes
an enemy or opponent.
"join forces against the common foe"

Synonyms: enemy, adversary, opponent, rival, antagonist, combatant, challenger, competitor, opposer, opposition, competition, other side.

See Catfish? You deliberately left out the less martial meanings of the word foe just because you hate Donald Trump. That's pretty much the same crap you see from the Dems via their media shills every day. Now as a private individual you can be as biased as you please but I prefer to hold our news media to a higher standard.

vienna

07-16-18, 05:55 PM

...and the majority of Americans expect a President to adhere to a higher standard and Trump is a spectacular failure in all respects...

...you might say he's a "Yuuuuge" failure...

<O>

August

07-16-18, 06:07 PM

Barack Obama October 2016:

There is no serious person out there who would suggest that you could even rig America's elections, in part because they are so decentralized. There is no evidence that that has happened in the past, or that there are instances that that could happen this time," the president said to the future president in October 2016.

"Democracy survives because we recognize that there is something more important than any individual campaign, and that is making sure the integrity and trust in our institutions sustains itself. Because Democracy works by consent, not by force," Obama said.

"I have never seen in my lifetime or in modern political history, any presidential candidate trying to discredit the elections and the election process before votes have even taken place. It is unprecedented. It happens to be based on no fact. Every expert regardless of political party... who has ever examined these issues in a serious way will tell you that instances of significant voter fraud are not to be found. Keep in mind elections are run by state and local officials."

Apparently according to the Democrats Russian meddling is only an issue if the wrong person wins the election. I have no doubt that had they won the last election we would not be hearing anything about Russian meddling.

Platapus

07-16-18, 06:19 PM

vienna

07-16-18, 06:33 PM

Barack Obama October 2016:

Apparently according to the Democrats Russian meddling is only an issue if the wrong person wins the election. I have no doubt that had they won the last election we would not be hearing anything about Russian meddling.

Been drinking that Trumpette Kool-Aid again, eh. Note that you didn't give the source of your quote. My guess is it came from some sad, pathetic Trump-supporting website or some desperate Far-Right GOP site looking to try to hoodwink the gullible and uninformed. Like all such cherry-picked quotes, context is vital and like so many of Trump's panic driven flailings, it is wildly inaccurate as to the actual truth. From The Wire via FactCheck.org:

Trump’s Misguided Comparison --

https://www.factcheck.org/2018/02/trumps-misguided-comparison/

From the above article, here is Obama's actual statement, in full (the bolded parts are the words Trump very selectively chose to quote while 'conveniently ignoring the context:

It was these voter fraud claims from Trump to which Obama referred in remarks at a press conference on Oct. 18, 2016. The portions quoted by Trump are in bold.Obama, Oct. 18: I have never seen in my lifetime or in modern political history any presidential candidate trying to discredit the elections and the election process before votes have even taken place. It’s unprecedented. It happens to be based on no facts. Every expert, regardless of political party, regardless of ideology — conservative or liberal — who has ever examined these issues in a serious way will tell you that instances of significant voter fraud are not to be found; that, keep in mind, elections are run by state and local officials, which means that there are places like Florida, for example, where you’ve got a Republican governor whose Republican appointees are going to be running and monitoring a whole bunch of these election sites. The notion that somehow if Mr. Trump loses Florida it’s because of those people that you have to watch out for — that is both irresponsible, and, by the way, it doesn’t really show the kind of leadership and toughness that you’d want out of a president.

If you start whining before the game is even over, if whenever things are going badly for you and you lose you start blaming somebody else, then you don’t have what it takes to be in this job. Because there are a lot of times when things don’t go our way, or my way. That’s okay. You fight through it, you work through it. You try to accomplish your goals.

But the larger point that I want to emphasize here is that there is no serious person out there who would suggest somehow that you could even rig America’s elections, in part because they’re so decentralized and the numbers of votes involved. There’s no evidence that that has happened in the past, or that there are instances in which that will happen this time.

And so I’d advise Mr. Trump to stop whining and go try to make his case to get votes.

Note that the statement regards only Trump's false claims of the election being rigged against Trump (the excuse he would have used had he lost) by domestic efforts and is not a denial of Russian tampering; in fact, there is absolutely no mention of Russia or other foreign interference at all in the statement. And it should be kept in mind that, at that time, the awareness of Russian efforts and the extent of those efforts was basically next to nil...

So, basically, Trump has been lying again and is misusing a quote from Obama, a quote that originally castigated Trump for being such a big, whiny baby and to get over it...

..and to stop whining is also good advice for the Trumpers out there to stop getting their Pampers in a twist over the rubbish the Far-Right Fake Media has been dishing out. To the Trumpers: You backed a loser and its time you just admit it and help the rest of the nation try to undo the damage Trump, and you, have done...

<O>

August

07-16-18, 07:52 PM

There is a difference between rigging an election as in hindering or affecting the collecting and recording of votes and interfering with the campaigns of one or more of the candidates as in using illegal means to misrepresent and to attempt to influence the voters in an unauthorized manner.

What Obama said and what the investigation is revealing are not mutually exclusive.

You mean not mutually exclusive like even though it turns out that the FBI did indeed spy upon the Trump campaign, Trump can still be wrong when he says he was "wiretapped"?

vienna

07-16-18, 08:30 PM

Got any actual, solid provable facts to back up the wiretapping and spying charges? I mean, something substantial, not just some op-ed piece or some Trump apologist's speculation cobbled together from out of context whacked out conspiracy theories? Like I said before, if there were any actual substance to those claims, logic and common sense would dictate a GOP president with a his own-appointed GOP AG, FBI Director, et al, would actually back up the BS with legal action and get some indictments. Its not all that difficult to do: after all Mueller seems o be having pretty good success with actual facts and evidence...

<O>

Catfish

07-17-18, 02:08 AM

Here you go Catfish, the definition of Foe (I have highlighted the parts you omitted:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/foe

See Catfish? You deliberately left out the less martial meanings of the word foe just because you hate Donald Trump. That's pretty much the same crap you see from the Dems via their media shills every day. Now as a private individual you can be as biased as you please but I prefer to hold our news media to a higher standard.

Hmm, but your link tells something different:

"Definition of foe1 : one who has personal enmity (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/enmity) for another

Embrace, embrace, my Sons! be foes no more!
—Alexander Pope

2 a : an enemy in war
b : adversary (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/adversary), opponent (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/opponent)

a political foe

3 : one who opposes on principle

a foe of needless expenditures

a foe of censorship

4 : something prejudicial or injurious"

And here is the meaning as described by the Cambridge dictionary:

"foe noun [ C ] (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/help/codes.html)
uk /fəʊ/ us /foʊ/ literary

an enemy (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/enemy): The two countries (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/country) have united (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/united) against their (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/their) common (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/common) foe.
They were bitter (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/bitter) foes for many years (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/year).
Foes of the government (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/government) will be delighting (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/delight) in its (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/its) current (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/current) difficulties.

Thesaurus: synonyms and related words
Enemies & rivals" (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/topics/family-and-relationships/enemies-and-rivals/)

So there is a slightly less harsh meaning at the fourth position or so? A rival or a competitor are one thing. But when i call someone a foe it is perfectly clear what that means. Bending, twisting and turning internationally accepted definitions to suit one's agenda is not a good basis for a discussion. Well we are used to it with Bannon's Fox News, which must have been doing damage control overtime in the last days. Funny how they now try to blame all critics on a "personal hate" towards Trump, when the main reason of all critic is obviously his incompetence, manners, and defending the alt-right.
My guess is that Trump just does not think before talking, which is one of his main problems.

I do not condemn him, also some points he makes are not wrong (thinking of defense budget, or foreign trade surplus, but he completely forgets what e.g Europe or other counties pay for computer licences and patents, which easily puts the US ahead regarding the trade surplus). Also he is (intentionally or not) destabilising NATO and international relations.

I do not hate Donald Trump, but what i think of him of being fit for that 'job' is something different. It is not even despise, but he clearly is no match for Putin, the latter had him for breakfast. After the G7 summit, the NATO meeting, the visit in the UK, how he behaved and what he said, by his own words his only friend sits in Moscow?

Certainly, one should never stop talking to each other, influence is bilateral, and people who talk and trade at least hesitate before shooting at each other. It would be also much easier for Germany to trade with Russia than with the US, if you think of geography and borders and let all else aside. That it is how it is is the direct product of NATO and the soviet block post WW2.
So Trump suddenly finds that talking with Russia again is in order, ok, granted.

But right now, with the Crimea, Syriah, Iran, provocations by fly-bys of russian jets, meddling with the US elections and Novitschok in England, a bit reluctance would also have been in order.

Germany had talks with Putin already years ago, with the "Petersburger Dialog" (https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&u=http://petersburger-dialog.de/ein-forum-fuer-den-dialog-der-zivilgesellschaften&prev=search) (hope the link works, translation by Google), to support the succession of a civilian society in Russia by means of trade and talks. Norway just joined with the arctic panel (Arctic panel (http://eu-arctic-forum.org/allgemein/the-high-level-petersburg-dialogue-between-russia-and-germany-introducing-an-arctic-panel/)). Just of all the US should know what trade is able to mobilise when it comes to relations, and political and civilian influence, e.g. after WW2. It was not Germany nor any other country that hindered or blocked the US to do something like that, it was just that the US were not interested.

So the relations between Russia and the US are by now better, thanks to Trump. If so, good. It would be even better if that would not come at the price of neglecting and insulting the natural allies of the US.

Skybird

07-17-18, 07:42 AM

Quite good comment on the state of things in the triangle US-Europe-Russia. And why Europe maybe even deserves to be humiliated by the Donald.

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=de&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.spiegel.de%2Fpolitik%2Fdeutschl and%2Ftreffen-mit-wladimir-putin-trumps-rache-am-westen-kommentar-a-1218870-druck.html&edit-text=

Original: http://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/treffen-mit-wladimir-putin-trumps-rache-am-westen-kommentar-a-1218870.html

Catfish

07-17-18, 07:58 AM

[...] And why Europe maybe even deserves to be humiliated by the Donald. l (http://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/treffen-mit-wladimir-putin-trumps-rache-am-westen-kommentar-a-1218870.html)

I didn't know you were a flagellant :haha: :03:

Ok, one of the better articles alright.

Bilge_Rat

07-17-18, 08:35 AM

Skybird

07-17-18, 09:03 AM

so I have to say the american so-called "mainstream" media, democratic politicians and those suffering from "Trump derangement syndrome" have really reached a new low and really backed themselves into a corner, but I really do think they are too stupid to realize it.

After consistently ramping up the rethoric from "not experienced enough" to "incompetent" to "sexist" to "racist" to "Hitler", they are now calling the President of the United States a "traitor" with a straight face and calling for his overthrow!

Are these otherwise normal people complete morons? Do they really want to start a civil war over a lost election?

What will they say next week when they create the next "outrage of the day"? How can they top "traitor"?

Meanwhile Trump's approval rating among Republicans still sits at 90% and he still on track to win re-election in 2020. :arrgh!:
Trump has Merkelized the Republican party.

When Merkel took over the chancellor's office, the following two or three years she was busy with drastically eradicating every figure and name that maybe could ever pose a threat to her: may it be in elections, in race for the next candidacy, or may it mean critical opinions to her course. The high profiled named alpha males started to dissappear. One got complimented to the state presidency that in Germany is practically meaning- and powerless. The next got just bullied out until he voluntarily quite and withdraw from the party. Another one was complimented over to the ECB. The next got shifted to the distant office in some Brussel EU building. And so forth. After three and four years, no critical voice and nobody able and strong enough to seriously snap back at her, was left, the whole party had been turned into a club of Merkel-loyal claqueurs, puppies licking her hands, everybody who could disturb her daily routine, was gone. Since then she sees herself and her course as "alternativlos", as "without alternative". And in a way she is right: she has made sure that no personnel in her party was left that within the schemes and playing rules of mainstream politics could replace her or even threaten her. That way even her lousiest policies now in a way indeed are "without alternatives".

Trump does the same. The real heavyweights in the Rep party, practically are gone, are powerless, are unable to influence the party's inner mood or that in the country. Trump has turned his fans into addicts by giving them their daily dose of Trumpian drugging, like Merkel has soothed and lulled Germans into believing that Germany cannot go without the caretaking of Big Mama Merkel, and with her all things will be well - forever.

With some actions and claims by Trump, he just is right. The problem I have is I do not see him saying and doing these things while knowing that they are right, instead he opportunistically just does a lot of things like he pleases, without knowing and caring at all, and for mere probability he occasionally hits the right button and rings the correct bell and picks one of the few corns on the floor that hide between the many little stones and sand grains. Its as if you throw dice several times, and every time you get a 6, you claim that to be your strategy. It isn't. Its chance.

Thats why I say Donald Makes Himself Bigger Trump is an idiot, an intellectual void, even where he occasionally hints at something on which I would agree. Because the reasons why he hints at that, and why I agree with it maybe, could not be more apart.

That I take it for granted that the election campaign was interfered by Russia in Trumps favour, and that he is clearly in abuse of his position to protect himself from law enforcement, does not make it any better.

Germany after Merkel is not any better, but worse, and the world after Trump'S reign, and America, will not be better, but worse as well. Merkel and Trump are very different, but in a way, in the ways by which they cling to power, they are so similiar. I cannot stand them both. Its also possible that after Trump stops pushing the world around, said world will have found ways to push back that in the future, they years after Trump, or even already during his second term, will socially and economically backfire heavily against the US. Because the rub is in this: when you force somebody else so hard into submission and leave him no other way than to grow strong and stand up and break your oppression in self defence, he one day finally will do right this. And thats ends your rule over him then.

Since there are millions and millions of Trump supporters still supporting this infantile carricature of a leader, my sympathy will be extremely limited. You do not have just a claimed right to vote. Of course you also can be held responsible for what or whom you vote for.

Bilge_Rat

07-17-18, 09:15 AM

Skybird,

you seem to think that americans care one iota what any German thinks of their leader. Germany has been a non-entity since 1945, everyone knows that.

German businesses are the ones pushing the hardest to have the sanctions rolled back against Russia since it is hurting their business.

Skybird

07-17-18, 09:30 AM

https://www.politico.eu/article/putins-pearl-harbor-attack-on-the-us-is-our/

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/16/opinion/trump-and-putin-vs-america.html

Skybird

07-17-18, 09:35 AM

Mr Quatro

07-17-18, 09:37 AM

Meanwhile Trump's approval rating among Republicans still sits at 90% and he still on track to win re-election in 2020. :arrgh!:

Some 28 months from now will be another election that will decide the POTUS till 2024. The last one was a circus and the next one will be a circus.

At this point in time I see no one that can even touch Trump at the polls on the democrats side. Maybe someone will emerge, but the run for POTUS will start as soon as the mid term elections are over in November 2018 (this year)

The only competition Trump has for POTUS is in his own party which includes the same people that ran last time which are all jockeying for that chance even as we speak.

Trump will be Trump and overcome these obstacles to be the winner in 2020 ... yes you can quote me on this lol :D

Warning I have been wrong before about McCain and Obama, but we learn from our mistakes. :yep:

AVGWarhawk

07-17-18, 12:15 PM

Currently the Dems have no one of interest to run against Trump. Winfrey? Not interested and sorry, kind of laughable. Joe Biden maybe. Bernie Williams? Man sits in a million dollar home talking socialism. Something wrong with that picture.

u crank

07-17-18, 12:58 PM

Like I said before, if there were any actual substance to those claims, logic and common sense would dictate a GOP president with a his own-appointed GOP AG, FBI Director, et al, would actually back up the BS with legal action and get some indictments.

Vienna I am surprised that you would suggest such a thing. I always thought you were the kinder, gentler type. Don't you realize the heartache and chaos this kind of thing would cause. Think about the mental well being of the country's progressive elites. These people are already on the edge of insanity and this kind of action by Trump would push them over it. Rachel Maddow would probably have to be institutionalized permanently. Donny Deutsch would probably have a stroke on the air and that would traumatize early morning TV watchers from Washington to New York. Our beloved late night comics would be rendered speechless and hurt themselves trying to mime their routines with the appropriate outrage. CNN would repeat the phrase 'obstruction of justice' so many times that it would lose all meaning. Society would breakdown. Keep this kinda thing under wraps. After all we have a duty to protect the weak and emotionally unstable. It's the least we can do.:D

Jimbuna

07-17-18, 01:25 PM

Why has the POTUS so much to say about every 'ally' he has met in recent days/weeks?

Hawk66

07-17-18, 02:00 PM

https://www.mccain.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=press-releases&id=A99FDA26-673D-4560-B4EA-5AEDF0685EC5

don't think one could summarize it better...

What I am waiting for is now that McCain gets marked as 'liberal', 'mainstream' or probably be part of the 'establishment'.

Bleiente

07-17-18, 02:20 PM

Von Due

07-17-18, 02:33 PM

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-44864739

Did... not... did... not.... did...

Will he make up his mind already?

vienna

07-17-18, 03:10 PM

...

After all we have a duty to protect the weak and emotionally unstable. It's the least we can do.:D

Well the GOP seems to doing a very fine job of protecting "the weak and emotionally unstable", particularly since he is their leader... :haha:

https://riasv.ru/images/sizednews/16489715318335602.jpg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kk6uNlSkLj4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3ozFYaGTxo

<O>

Bleiente

07-17-18, 03:18 PM

https://riasv.ru/images/sizednews/16489715318335602.jpg

Clearly - what is actually to be expected from a total failure, which has given a little power.

Idiots are acting idiotic ...

:haha:

Skybird

07-17-18, 03:29 PM

......................."I'll win again in 2020!!".................................................. ..............................."I trust in you!"

https://www2.pic-upload.de/img/35645486/Unbenannt.png (https://www.pic-upload.de)

Der Tagesspiegel
LINK (https://www.tagesspiegel.de/images/treffen_ts/22805122/2-format1007.jpg)

Bleiente

07-17-18, 03:32 PM

Skybird

07-17-18, 03:37 PM

https://www2.pic-upload.de/img/35645506/Unbenannt2.png (https://www.pic-upload.de)

.................................................. ...Cerebellum..................................... ................................and Cerebrum

Der Tagesspiegel
LINK (https://www.tagesspiegel.de/images/kleinhirn_ts/22791610/2-format1007.jpg)

Bleiente

07-17-18, 03:51 PM

So with tomatoes, onions and garlic this breakfast would taste, unfortunately I would have to beat at least 6 eggs with such a small brain to make the portions decent for such a small snack with my girlfriend in the morning.

Wachteln sind so selten... :haha:

August

07-17-18, 03:56 PM

Hmm, but your link tells something different:

No it doesn't. You DID leave out the less martial meanings of the word like I said. Maybe it's different in the German language but in English words can have more than one meaning as it clearly shows in spite for your irritating white on white text.

u crank

07-17-18, 04:05 PM

Well the GOP seems to doing a very fine job of protecting "the weak and emotionally unstable", particularly since he is their leader... :haha:

And here I thought you had a sense of humor. Oops.:oops:

Bleiente

07-17-18, 04:07 PM

[/COLOR][/COLOR]

No it doesn't. You DID leave out the less martial meanings of the word like I said. Maybe it's different in the German language but in English words can have more than one meaning as it clearly shows in spite for your irritating white on white text.

Now it's enough @August
Trump is proven to be a cheater, a wimp, and an idiot.
Honestly, no rational-minded person understands your motivation.

But if YOU want it, I'm sure I'll find it out and will reveal it here.

Just shut up if you have no idea.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jetzt reicht es @August
Trump ist nachgewiesen ein Betrüger, ein Schlappschwanz und Idiot. :yep:
Ehrlich versteht kein vernünftig denkender Mensch Deine Motivation.

Aber wenn DU es darauf anlegst, finde ich es garantiert raus und werde es hier offenlegen.

Einfach mal die Schnauze halten, wenn man keine Ahnung hat. :03:

:salute:

Catfish

07-17-18, 04:16 PM

[/COLOR][/COLOR]

No it doesn't. You DID leave out the less martial meanings of the word like I said. Maybe it's different in the German language but in English words can have more than one meaning as it clearly shows in spite for your irritating white on white text.

August, yes I posted the first three usual meanings of the word 'foe' as it is described in the Merriam-Webster, and then the meaning as it is described in the Cambridge dictionary. The Merriam-Webster has indeed a fourth definition, as i already quoted in post 4914, and it is:
4 : something prejudicial or injurious
I also wrote that Trump does not care much about what he says, and he may indeed may have meant it less aggressively. Though i am sure he meant it exactly as it sounds.
Ok i give up, you "win"

My "irritating white text" as you wrote comes from the fact that quoting from the Merriam-Webster screws up colours because of its links, and also paragraphs and bold/thin letters. So in order to make this mess readable at all, i had to edit and re-edit it, and then finally switched it all to white because i did no get the original text colour back. It took almost 20 minutes just to make this !"§$%&/(!! post readable. Ah whatever!

August

07-17-18, 04:25 PM

I think that this whole discussion is going so well, because capitalism reaches its limits and that this representative (Trump) as president has always been a failure in the economy; it is only a mouthpiece for multilateral corporations.

So he just wants to uphold the standard of living for himself as well as for his family, which he / she simply took away from the hard-working sections of the population.

I remember such great domestic presidents as "Teddy" Roosevelt, who vigorously opposed the barbarism of profiteering, as well as of Standart Oil and similar societies.
Trump is just a symptom - he is the idiotic agent of capitalist interests.

I'm sorry but that is just hilarious! You sound like Radio Moscow back in the day!

What multinational corporations in particular is Trump a slave to? Certainly not AT&T (owner of CNN) so who?

The fact is Trump is the first politician in my lifetime to actually try to fulfil the promises he made on the campaign trail, and in spite of what the leftist media says so far he hasn't done bad at all.

And Teddy Roosevelt? Really?, he's your shining example of the anti-capitalist? The extremely rich guy who stole Panama from Columbia just so he could build a canal which turned out to be to the immense profit of, wait for it, commercial interests? Just hilarious!

vienna

07-17-18, 04:37 PM

And here I thought you had a sense of humor. Oops.:oops:

My, you do have a point: Trump actually being "weak and emotionally unstable" is not a laughing matter nor is the GOP doing a very fine job of protecting him. I promise to really take seriously the harm and danger to which both of them have left the nation, its laws, and its heritage...

I don't know; maybe Trump will get lucky and Mueller will have a 'sense of humor'... :haha:

Until then: lighten up - the 'joke' that is Trump will most likely soon be over... :03:

<O>

August

07-17-18, 04:38 PM

and he may indeed may have meant it less aggressively. Though i am sure he meant it exactly as it sounds.

Well dude all you had to do was read the rest of his sentence and you wouldn't have to be declaring a loss now:

What he actually said was:

"I think the European Union is a foe, what they do to us in trade."

That tells me that he meant it as a competitor not like we were going to go to war with you.

Ok i give up, you "win"

Well actually I won way back in November of 2016. Hopefully i'll win again this November when the repubes hold on to congress and again in 2020 when Trump wins reelection.

vienna

07-17-18, 04:41 PM

...

Well actually I won way back in November of 2016. Hopefully i'll win again this November when the repubes hold on to congress and again in 2020 when Trump wins reelection.

Oh dear, he's smoking that whacky tabacky again...

<O>

August

07-17-18, 05:01 PM

Now it's enough @August
Trump is proven to be a cheater, a wimp, and an idiot.

Just last month he was a maniac war monger trying to start a war with North Korea and now he's a "wimp"? Well that "idiot" was smart enough to beat out 16 (17 counting the Hillabeast) other challengers and go on to win the oval office and he did it without cheating. He remains in office in spite of the best efforts of both political parties and the media who have destroyed their own credibility in their failed efforts to bring him down.

Honestly, no rational-minded person understands your motivation.

But if YOU want it, I'm sure I'll find it out and will reveal it here.
Says the guy so blinded by his own bias and hatred that you will say just about anything in an impotent attempt to irritate someone who doesn't drink your brand of koolaid. Hilarious.

Just shut up if you have no idea.See what I mean? Well make me shut up.

You get 70% of your energy from Putin. So if he has anyone under his thumb it's you Germans, yet you want to quibble over the meaning of an English word with an English speaker. Just hilarious!

u crank

07-17-18, 05:31 PM

I don't know; maybe Trump will get lucky and Mueller will have a 'sense of humor'... :haha:

Mueller will need a sense of humor and some magic to pull that rabbit out of his hat.

Until then: lighten up - the 'joke' that is Trump will most likely soon be over... :03:

I thought I had lightened up. It's all very entertaining actually.

mapuc

07-17-18, 06:11 PM

Skybird

07-17-18, 06:26 PM

You get 70% of your energy from Putin.

2017 Germany, according to the German Federal Office of Statistics, has imported oil and gas form Russia worth 19.8 bn Euros, that equals 35% of all German imports of these two fossil fuels. Russia is just one of 23 or 27 nations that Germany buys gas and oil from.

The 70% claim comes from the projection of the Northstream-2 pipeline (in construction) that can transport gas from Russia to Germany directly and bypasses Poland, Ukraine etc. However, most of that gas is not meant to be delivered to germany for consummation, but further distribution to France, the Czech Republic etc. The US strictly opposes this project and tries to torpedoe it since long because the US want to sell their own liquidized gas (is that the term in English? The abbreviation is LNG) to the EU.

The strategic dependency of Germany form russian energy imports is not the real aim of the Donald's fake fact. And why should the Donald strategically dislike Germany making deals with Donald's new close buddy Vladimir anyway? :D

The German goverment since several years follows a plan to diversify its energy imports. The imports from Russia have been substantially reduced over the last years.

40% of the German energy mix is produced via nuclear plants, renewables, brown coal. Most of those 40% are renewables, and their share is climbing. Nothing from these three energies comes from Russia.

The Donald babbles fake facts once again, or is it allowed to call it just bullsh!t ? He has his facts not straight, like often on Germany (and others as well), and he probably does not care to have them straight anyway, being the great propagator and conductor of public opinions that he is.

Germany is Russia's second biggest trading partner behind China, but for Germany, only 3% of German imports come from Russia and 2% of German exports go there. That makes Russia not really a heavyweight of German trade interests. The dependency is such that not Germany is Russia's hostage, as the Donald claimed, but more reasonable it would be to see things right the other way around.

The last simulation that was run on behalf of a government demand to learn how a total energy embargo by Russia would affect Germany, showed that currently Germany could hold out, without further preparation than what already has been done, for 5 months. That implies that in these 5 months Germany would not try to replace the Russian blocked deliveries and find no other deliverers on the world market. Of course, germany would not stay that passive.

The Donald is a circus animal trainer in the circus ring, he has his domestic donkeys dancing around him while he stands there, and instead of using a whip he swings fake facts and propaganda, and all the donkeys run in a choreographed circle around him and yell Eeeee-Aaaaa!

As a summary: Germany's energy demands are met by Russian imports like this: 12% of the total German energy need is serviced with Russian oil, 9% of the total German energy demand is serviced with Russian gas, and then there is 3% of the eneregy demand serviced with Russian imports of black coal. And thats it. Further, Trump wants the Europeans to buy American liquidized gas, LNG. Like he wants them to buy non-competitive cars nobody in Europe voluntarily wants to buy, we just do not like them that much. The issue whenever Trump talks of "unfair trade" is that he wants non-competitive American products being enforced on others to buy them nevertheless. That is his defintion of "fairness": selling non-competitive stuff at overpriced prices so that the donkeys at home go Eeee-Aaaa! Fake-fair, that is.

Build your export cars in such a way that we like them better, and then maybe we will buy more of them. That simple it is, Donny. Thats why many Americans like to buy German and Jsapanese cars: becasue they are build in such a way that Amerians lik,e them. No Satanic magic in that, no unfair tricks or anything. Just delivering what customers in the US want. While even investing in the American homeland and producing there and creating jobs there and paying taxes there (more than Google or Apple do in Europe...) instead of just importing from Japan and Europe.

Bleiente

07-17-18, 06:54 PM

I think any meaningful discussion is useless here.
The future will show what an incomprehensible idiot this Trump is, although the Trumpeltier had already proved it sufficiently in the past.

Nothing has ever produced this wimp, only squandered his father's stolen money. :yep:

Oh yes - in my opinion, he should now be charged as a traitor. :03:

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Ich denke, jegliche sinnvolle Diskussion ist hier nutzlos.
Die Zukunft wird zeigen, welch ein unfaßbarer Idiot dieser Trump ist, wobei es das Trumpeltier ja schon in der Vergangenheit hinreichend bewiesen hatte.

Nichts hat dieser Schlappschwanz jemals zustande gebracht, hat nur das ergaunerte Geld seines Vaters verschleudert. :yep:

Achja - nach meiner Meinung sollte er jetzt auch als Hochverräter angeklagt werden. :03:

mapuc

07-17-18, 07:03 PM

That's another question

Did President Trump break some Federal laws when he said those things at the press meeting ?

Or was his acting nothing more than-you fill in your own words here. ?

As Platapus once told me(us)

He may be a jerk, but this is not a federal…..something (forgot the word)

Bleiente

07-17-18, 07:16 PM

I had said it immediately after the press conference.
Interestingly enough, just a few hours after me, an ex-CIA chief also said Trump committed treason.

But this must and should be clarified by the corresponding prosecutors and the courts.

August

07-17-18, 07:44 PM

2017 Germany, according to the German Federal Office of Statistics, has imported oil and gas form Russia worth 19.8 bn Euros, that equals 35% of all German imports of these two fossil fuels. Russia is just one of 23 or 27 nations that Germany buys gas and oil from.

You are right it was an exaggeration, however 35% is still a big enough amount to still maintain his point, especially when the remainder is split 22 (or 26) ways.

The 70% claim comes from the projection of the Northstream-2 pipeline (in construction) that can transport gas from Russia to Germany directly and bypasses Poland, Ukraine etc. However, most of that gas is not meant to be delivered to germany for consummation, but further distribution to France, the Czech Republic etc.

"Most of that gas" still means that with the completion of that pipeline Germanys imports from Russia are going to grow, maybe not 70% (although that could change) but for sure they will grow.

The US strictly opposes this project and tries to torpedoe it since long because the US want to sell their own liquidized gas (is that the term in English? The abbreviation is LNG) to the EU.

Of course we oppose it. Our NATO partner, a nation we have spent trillions protecting and fostering for decades prefers to improve their ability to trade with the very people that NATO exists to defend its member nations against while you blow off your financial obligations to it but we're jerks for bringing it up?

Sometimes I wonder if we'd be better off leaving European defense to Europeans. Maybe keep a relationship with the Brexit Brits just to maintain a forward base in case you produce another Napoleon or Hitler. I can't imagine you'd be sorry to see us go. After all you have done nothing but complain about us for decades anyways.

The strategic dependency of Germany form russian energy imports is not the real aim of the Donald's fake fact. And why should the Donald strategically dislike Germany making deals with Donald's new close buddy Vladimir anyway? :D

In other words 2+2 doesn't equal 4 and anyways why should 4 get upset just because it consists of two pairs? :)

Could it possibly in some far off universe mean that Trump actually does dislike Germany making deals with the Russians? I mean, sometimes things are actually as they appear to be!

Armistead

07-17-18, 08:37 PM

I fully understand there are people who strongly support Trump as there are those who do not.

The supporters, must have made some kind of facepalm after his statement after the meeting in Helsinki.

Markus

Yes, when everyone is saying Russia did try to meddle when Obama was president into the election and Obama did sweep it under the rug because people thought Hillary would win, but to the bigger fact, both sides agree it was stopped and had no impact on the election. Trump should just tow the theme Nikki Haley promotes, Russia did it, it didn't impact the election, but it's serious and outrageous and will be dealt with.

I think Trump is so stuck on the collusion charge that in his mind he connects anything to do with Russia interfering with himself and unable to promote them as two separate issues. It would be so easy to do. This makes people suspect Russia has something on Trump, but I find that hard to believe considering he's conducted successful strikes in Syria that killed Russians, sent advanced weapons to Ukraine, expanded sanctions on Russia, expelled Russian diplomats from the US, rebuilt the military, condemns the pipeline, got Nato spending increased, etc..

Trump is acting like he did with Kim in NK, like respect and kudos. I think it's his business approach of carrots and getting a foot in the door to work deals that he can brag on, but it just doesn't work with politics the way he does it and he seems beyond himself to grasp it to protect his delusional ego.

..and yes, I voted for him and will again.

vienna

07-17-18, 08:42 PM

Mueller will need a sense of humor and some magic to pull that rabbit out of his hat.
...

I don't think it will be that difficult for Mueller: so far, except for Manafort and the Russians who are out of reach, he has gotten a guilty plea and convictions for pretty much every indictment; its a very impressive batting average (I'm in a MLB All Star Game mode) and he has exhibited a prosecutorial method to not indict unless he can really nail the subjects of his investigations. There was one person who was asked about being interviewed by Mueller and his team and, while not speaking about the specifics of what was asked said something like "They have everything, they know everything". He has confounded the Trumpers by keeping his hand held close and not tipping his cards, something whic has given fits to Trump and Manafort. Remember, Mueller, aside from being a decorated Marine combat officer (Vietnam), has a reputation as a very effective and successful prosecutor and an equally strong reputation as a very well-organized and meticulous administrator; in other words, Trump's worst nightmare. So far, Mueller hasn't lost on the matters he has brought to court related to the Special Counsel investigations and he seems to be well on his way to success on the currently open cases...

....

I thought I had lightened up. It's all very entertaining actually.

You say the funniest things... :haha:

Regarding Trump's attempt to walk back his own disaster at his presser with Putin, here's some things to consider: did he really misspeak or is it more a case of a very Freudian slip? If it was a simple misspeak, why did it take him over 24 hours to correct and clarify? He must have had someone point out to him what a hugely idiotic statement he had just made and it would be common sense for him to act as quickly as possible to correct any error; I mean, after all, the guy tweets about every trivial slight he feels, and he can't even get it up enough to at the very least tweet out a correction? His excuses just don't hold water...

...and then, today, Trump couches his 'acceptance' of US intelligence findings on Russian interference and influence in the 2016 Election by adding his fallback of 'and there are other countries who may have been involved' or responsible in spite of the fact no evidence to support that claim has been presented to date. Trump just does not want to openly condemn the actions of a foreign power to attack a fundamental, if not the fundamental, foundation of US democracy, the voting process. Today, a reporter even asked him if he would right then and there, make a definitive statement condemning the Russian actions and Trump refused to even answer. What is Trump afraid of, why is he so terrified of Putin? One can only conclude Trump is a spineless coward and a disgrace to the office he holds: he is like a cowardly general who will not engage the enemy and is as equally despicable...

It seems, also, the Trump may be trying to quash the truth about a statement Putin made during their presser:

The White House Transcript Is Missing the Most Explosive Part of the Trump–Putin Press Conference --

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2018/07/trump-putin-press-conference-transcript/565385/

<O>

Onkel Neal

07-17-18, 08:55 PM

I'm pretty sure Trump says things he doesn't completely mean, it's very typical of him to run his mouth without giving a lot of thought to what he says.

vienna

07-17-18, 09:04 PM

I've recently seen a number of article about Trump's haphazard approach to matters; one article had the title "Trump: Ready, Fire, Aim!"; that pretty much sums it up...

<O>

August

07-17-18, 09:05 PM

I'm pretty sure Trump says things he doesn't completely mean, it's very typical of him to run his mouth without giving a lot of thought to what he says.

He's definitely not an orator.

Onkel Neal

07-17-18, 09:22 PM

Yeah, and I don't mean to suggest that he's stupid, he just does not measure his words.

I would bet in his mind he thinks "yeah, Russia hacked or tried to hack our elections, they tried to troll public opinion in my favor. They'll never admit it so why get all butthurt over it. We have a dept. in the CIA that does the same thing to them. And then there's the Democrats, they hack themselves. :haha: "

Obama tried to influence Israeli elections, previous administrations have tried to influence other political events.

Mostly what we are experiencing is the daily barrage of BS from the mainstream media who hates Trump and have discarded any remnant of impartiality.

em2nought

07-17-18, 09:38 PM

I'm pretty sure Trump says things he doesn't completely mean, it's very typical of him to run his mouth without giving a lot of thought to what he says.

It's like me on a "date". Instead of "a bridge too far" I go "one joke too far". lol Next thing you know a hot latina is headbutting me. :D

If I was Trump, I'd be in a hurry to get things done. I'd figure any moment some fake news inspired wackadoodle leftist is going to poison my food and kill me, or my whole family. The vetting process has to be hellava good for the White House staff. I think I'd be afraid to eat or drink anyplace else.

I think Trump knows exactly where he wants to get to, he doesn't know exactly the road he needs to take. There will be pain, but in the end we'll be much better off if he can manage it, and if the minions can tolerate the short term pain for the long term gain, that's the sticker. The obstructionist don't help either, if Trump succeeds they look like seventy years of crap. Hopefully he can steer the zealots off the hull wrecking shoal that is Roe vs. Wade. Wish he didn't have to saddle himself with Pence to get my mother's and all the little church ladies like her to vote for him.

Catfish

07-18-18, 02:10 AM

From all accusations, i would never have thought that just of all Trump's relation with Putin would win the praise of US republicans. Trump can do what he wants, Fox and his supporters will always defend him. Quoting Em2nought: "Da comrade!" This is real Nibelung loyalty :up:

Here is the whole interview. I only watched it this morning. This is so weird, it really hurts just to watch this staged event, Putin really has him for breakfast. As Lavrov said, "This is better than super."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=We5vSlR9Krs

When Putin is being asked whether Russia interfered with the US election in 2016, he answers in russian with "Da, [...]", and the translator literally translates it with "Yes we did". What? :haha:

I try to imagine what had happened, had Obama done that. Amusing, it seems Trump really has the jester's license.

Skybird

07-18-18, 04:35 AM

You are right it was an exaggeration, however 35% is still a big enough amount to still maintain his point, especially when the remainder is split 22 (or 26) ways.

No, its only around 25% that gets imported from Russia. The 35% above means gas and oil imports in total, from all 23(27) importingrting countries.

See here, this shows the German energy mix and imports for 2017. Source: German department of trade and industry

https://www2.pic-upload.de/img/35647569/Bildschirmfotovom2018-07-1811-17-06.png (https://www.pic-upload.de)

You see the percentage per energy carrier, in red: the Russian import in total. Around 25%. With the Northstream-2, that was planned ro raise to something below 30%, but more likely after the Krim annexion is that the German import of Russian energy will be pushed down even further, also becasue renewables get used slightly faster than planned. For comparison: Trump claims we get 70% of our energy from Russia. An exaggeration near a factor of 3. 25%. 70%

Its not the first time he mentions utter nonsense. Its a pattern with him.

"Most of that gas" still means that with the completion of that pipeline Germanys imports from Russia are going to grow, maybe not 70% (although that could change) but for sure they will grow.

See above. I recall to have read earlier somewhere that less than 10% of that gas arriving via Northstream-2 was planned to be used in Germany. And that was years ago.

Of course we oppose it. Our NATO partner, a nation we have spent trillions protecting and fostering for decades prefers to improve their ability to trade with the very people that NATO exists to defend its member nations against while you blow off your financial obligations to it but we're jerks for bringing it up?
Its not about that America wants Europe to buy its stuff. Itd about the deception it hides its ambition in. The lying and defaming used to deliver the demand. For myself, I prefer to spend more for our own military, have less dependency on America there, and keep the freedom to choose whether or not buying US gas, no matter what Washington wants us to do.

Sometimes I wonder if we'd be better off leaving European defense to Europeans. Maybe keep a relationship with the Brexit Brits just to maintain a forward base in case you produce another Napoleon or Hitler. I can't imagine you'd be sorry to see us go. After all you have done nothing but complain about us for decades anyways. See above. Its the underhanded fashion in which Trump delivers the message while hdiing his own ambitions. Last but not least America rebuild Germany not just for military defense against the USSR, but also to create a big, US dominated export market. The simple GI may have thought that he was there for an idealistic cause. But the mission was about economics from all beginning on.

Could it possibly in some far off universe mean that Trump actually does dislike Germany making deals with the Russians? I mean, sometimes things are actually as they appear to be!Yes. That is why we take Trump as what he appears to be. A Trottel and an uneducated, unclassy prolet who mistakes rudeness for clearness and offence for determination.

Bilge_Rat

07-18-18, 08:12 AM

Mostly what we are experiencing is the daily barrage of BS from the mainstream media who hates Trump and have discarded any remnant of impartiality.

exactly.

u crank

07-18-18, 01:01 PM

Remember, Mueller, aside from being a decorated Marine combat officer (Vietnam), has a reputation as a very effective and successful prosecutor and an equally strong reputation as a very well-organized and meticulous administrator; in other words, Trump's worst nightmare. So far, Mueller hasn't lost on the matters he has brought to court related to the Special Counsel investigations and he seems to be well on his way to success on the currently open cases...

Mueller smuller.

I'm afraid your esteemed view of Mr. Mueller is not a universally held one.

http://thefederalist.com/2018/04/19/revealed-robert-muellers-fbi-repeatedly-abused-prosecutorial-discretion/

https://saraacarter.com/robert-mueller-andrew-weissmann-the-fbi-and-the-mob/

But that was then. Now what's he up to?

...it is difficult to understand any proper purpose served by Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s indictment of twelve military officers in the Kremlin’s intelligence services for doing what everybody in America already knew that they did, and has known since before Donald Trump took office — indeed, since before the 2016 election.

Make no mistake: This is nakedly politicized law enforcement. There is absolutely no chance any of the Russian officials charged will ever see the inside of an American courtroom. The indictment is a strictly political document by which the special counsel seeks to justify the existence of his superfluous investigation.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/07/muellers-latest-indictments-russians-politicized-pointless/

At one time I supported Mueller's investigation as a necessity. No more. Mueller has shown himself to be just another Washington bureaucrat pumping up his personal resume and exposing himself ( like Comey) to be a political actor. And please don't point out the fact that they are Republicans. So is John McCain and a host of other GOP members who hate Trump.

So now, the purported need for Mueller is being rationalized on two fictitious premises.

The first is that the new indictment shows we needed Mueller to get to the bottom of Russia’s perfidy. This is false: There is nothing new in Mueller’s indictment, his participation was unnecessary to discover what our counterintelligence investigators have learned, and the intelligence they have gathered should not have been put in an indictment — aggression by hostile foreign powers is not a law-enforcement issue, and it is a mockery of the justice system to charge foreign aggressors and pretend we presume them innocent of their attacks against our country.

The second is that the number of indictments Mueller has generated proves that there were solid grounds to suspect Trump-campaign “collusion” in Russia’s election-meddling. The blatant, partisan dishonesty of this claim is best encapsulated in this passage from the Washington Post’s report on Mueller’s new indictment:

"Mueller and a team of prosecutors have been working since May 2017 to determine whether any Trump associates conspired with Russia to interfere in the election. With the new indictment, his office has filed charges against 32 people on crimes including hacking, money laundering and lying to the FBI."

The Post goes on grudgingly to point out that 26 of the 32 charged are Russians “who are unlikely to ever be put on trial in the United States.” (Unlikely?) But the paper conveniently omits mention of the fact that none of the 32 have been charged with a Trump–Russia conspiracy to interfere in the election. That’s the only thing Mueller was needed for.

In the world of diplomacy and political intrigue there are consequences for actions taken. Mueller's contributing.

What there will be, though, is a new international order in which nation-states are encouraged to file criminal charges against each other’s officials for actions deemed to be provocative (or, more accurately, actions that can be exploited for domestic political purposes). Of all government officials in the world, American officials are the most active on the global stage — and that includes meddling in other countries’ elections. I doubt our diplomats, intelligence operatives, elected officials, and citizens will much like living in the world Robert Mueller and Rod Rosenstein have given us. If the idea was to give Vladimir Putin and his thug regime a new way to sabotage the United States, nice work.

Skybird

07-19-18, 05:11 AM

Trumps comments in Helsinki have severey pushed me to believe that he is indeed a Sovjet sleeper, is deep in Russia's pockets. He is just too retarded in his brain to realise that himself.

Yesterday there was a small 10 minute clip about it in some German TV magazine, "Auslandsjournal", a weekly over here. In it, some names were mentioned and I later googled them up. Also it reminded of the fact that Friday before the meeting between Putin and his American pet the deputy secretary of justice filed legal cases against a dozen Russian intel officers of the Russian secret service for rigging the elections and maniulating and stealing computer hardware and software linked to the election process.

They mentioned a British journalist, Luke Harding. Harding tells the story of a Sovjet defector who surrendered to the Brits in 1989. He had a list that showed what traits and characteristics the KGB was looking for in possible American targets for recruitment as Sowjet spies. He said: "We know from leaked documents they are looking for people who are vain, ambitious, narcissistic, perhaps unfaithful to their wives, corruptible and lousy analysts. And Trump ticked every single box." At that time, Putin was intel officer stationed in Dresden.

Russia wants to drive a wedge between Europe and America.And now look at what Trump does. He fulfills Russia's wet dreams. He does so already since the late 80s, after his first visit to the USSR where he was flattered and complimented until he melted like butter in the sun. The first thing he did after returning form that trip was to finance a campaign in which he attacked NATO, Japan and South Korea over their "abuse" of America.

The most promising strategy to destroy your enemy from within is when you make him believe that he must do it himself and that he must do it because it is rational, reasonable, the logical thing to do, and in his own interest. Thats what is happening: Americans are being pushed to the argument that NATO members pay too little and are a burden for the US and thus America would be better off to quit and leave them behind. And that is strategic Russian/Sovjet key interest since over one half of a century now: to bring America and Europe apart.

Don't be stupid any longer, america. You allowed to get fooled and so voted a Russian puppet into office who happens to suffer from severe personality problems and some of the most impressive display of pathologic narcissism as I have ever seen it. Dumb and tumb like a block of wood. Stop excusing this incapable moron and stop assuming he just does not care for what he talks and that he does not mean it. The KGB looked for "people who are vain, ambitious, narcissistic, perhaps unfaithful to their wives, corruptible and lousy analysts." And yes - Trump is the perfect candidate for this description. He betrays you, and he is a traitor to your people. Continuing to excuse this carricature of a man means you bring ever more shame and laughter about yourself this way.

I remind of the decoding of the German Enigma in WWII. In order to not communicate to the Germans that their code was unlocked, the Allies allowed to not rescue each and every ship at sea that was targetted by German U-boats, instead, they gave their actions a random pattern that let it look as if they sometimes just had luck when countering the German threat "in time", "just by chance", while on other occassions the Germans were allowed to score heavily, just to protect the secret of that Enigma was decoded. In a comparable manner, the occasional "success" decisions by Trump should not be taken as evidence that he really understands what he is doing, or that his actions are evidence for being hurtful for Russian interests. The Russian intel services have that already priced in. Its all about hiding that Trump is in Russia'S pockets.

Its worth to read Harding's full story:

http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/saturday/audio/2018624819/luke-harding-how-russia-helped-trump-win-the-white-house

It makes all a frightening lot of perfect sense. The West may beleive that it won the cold war. But there was another cold war after 1989. And that was won by Russia. And nobody in America notices it. And nobody would beleive it since it violates the holy self-defintion of being the best, the greatest, and the strongest. Putin has your face in the dirt and his fist around your balls. And Americans just dream on !?

Them Russians are damn clever in making moves, aren't they.

Skybird

07-19-18, 06:22 AM

And this. In the time before the summit, two months, Russia has reduced its pile of American treasuries by over 80%. Eighty percent. As a result the interest for Americna treasuries on global market climbed from 2.7 to 3.1%, meaning that it costs the American state more to sell its treasuries. Russia is pratccally free of holding such treasuries now, just 14 billion are left.

https://www2.pic-upload.de/img/35653664/Bildschirmfotovom2018-07-1913-23-58.png (https://www.pic-upload.de)

Best friends, eh...? LOL

Hawk66

07-19-18, 01:06 PM

Of course we oppose it. Our NATO partner, a nation we have spent trillions protecting and fostering for decades prefers to improve their ability to trade with the very people that NATO exists to defend its member nations against while you blow off your financial obligations to it but we're jerks for bringing it up?

Sometimes I wonder if we'd be better off leaving European defense to Europeans. Maybe keep a relationship with the Brexit Brits just to maintain a forward base in case you produce another Napoleon or Hitler. I can't imagine you'd be sorry to see us go. After all you have done nothing but complain about us for decades anyways.

As I have mentioned several times here that I agree that Germany spends not enough on defense (although I consider the margin of 80 billions as too much, since Germany has no atomic weapons), I consider your points as a little too arrogant, frankly speaking.

First of all Germany has spend >>2% during the cold war and had the most severe risk of being the battlefield of a hot war with the probable outcome to cease as a nation after the war. I guess I have not to outline the reasons for this...

Second, alone in the Afghanistan 'war', which was initiated after article 5, alone 60 soldiers lost their life, many more others and Germany pumped billions in additional support. You seem not to have any respect for this or recognition.

Third, you can have different opinions of migration and refuges, but which nation took the most refuges after the struggle in the middle east and paid the price for Putins game ? What is Trumps answer for this ...building walls like in Mexico and then simply not care what happens ? Is this the morale view of the current American ultra ? 'right'

If you want to have a scientific and unbiased view on NATO you may read
https://www.amazon.com/Defense-West-European-Transatlantic-Bargain/dp/1526105764

But I guess in the Trump age, facts do not count anymore...

vienna

07-19-18, 03:14 PM

https://www.wykop.pl/cdn/c3201142/comment_wpmYCPaCTpK9QtvR1yIE4xH3bxbjqcKB,w400.jpg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yoH_nWpcHDE

<O>

AVGWarhawk

07-19-18, 03:20 PM

https://scontent.fphl2-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/37284592_1959325567421348_6826376468566638592_n.jp g?_nc_cat=0&oh=1159d287d2f44fe95fc858254a9ce943&oe=5BD5BC3E

Skybird

07-19-18, 04:03 PM

https://scontent.fphl2-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/37284592_1959325567421348_6826376468566638592_n.jp g?_nc_cat=0&oh=1159d287d2f44fe95fc858254a9ce943&oe=5BD5BC3E
And the prologue of each of these pictures...? :hmmm: One of the six western politicians stands way apart in this regard, has a past histoy with Russia that is very different from that of the others. I wonder whom it is.

u crank

07-19-18, 04:08 PM

https://i.imgur.com/wlYj8aj.jpg?1

u crank

07-19-18, 04:09 PM

And the prologue of each of these pictures...? :hmmm: One of the six western politicians stands way apart in this regard, has a past histoy with Russia that is very different from that of the others. I wonder whom it is.

Top right and middle left. :yep:

Skybird

07-19-18, 05:08 PM

Okay, such over-qualified clever returns need it maybe to indeed lay out black on white what I linked to just one page earlier. Obviously else some people cannot bring themselves to read it and then explain why they think this compares to the - in comparison - trivial financial misteps of for example the Clintons.

To really understand the Donald Trump-Russia story we need to go back to the Cold War, Harding says.

“He has a history of engagement with the Eastern Bloc, he married a woman from communist Czechoslovakia in the 1970s – Ivanka – and we know from de-classified files that Czechoslovak spies took a very close interest in the Trumps.

“If you then fast-forward to 1987, you have Donald Trump travelling on an expenses-paid visit to Moscow, that much was known. What I discovered was that the Soviet ambassador at the time made a concerted effort to flatter and butter up Donald Trump.”

Harding says the ambassador and his daughter visited Trump Tower and proceeded to tell Trump he was a “business genius” who'd built “the most beautiful building in America”.

According to the ambassador’s daughter, Trump melted. It was like “honey to a bee”, she said.

Trump had the kind of profile the KGB found useful and became the target of a classic KGB “cultivation exercise”, Harding says.

“We know from leaked documents they are looking for people who are vain, ambitious, narcissistic, perhaps unfaithful to their wives, corruptible and lousy analysts. And Trump ticked every single box.”

What they didn’t know was that 30 years later this man would be president.
“I think they thought he might be useful to them in some way.”

Trump was most probably what the KGB called a “confidential contact", Harding says.

“What we can say factually is the Soviet state spent hard currency bringing him over [to Moscow]. They would have bugged his hotel room – this is back in '87 – where he was staying round the corner from Red Square.

“He met Soviet officials, he discussed building a hotel, nothing came of it, but what was interesting when he flew back to New York six weeks later he took out three full-page advertisements in the New York Times the Washington Post and the Boston Globe criticising Ronald Reagan’s foreign policy.”

At that time Trump was making noises about a political tilt, Harding says.
“It didn’t happen, the Soviet Union collapsed … but then 5 or 6 years ago we see another concerted effort, this time by Vladimir Putin and his spy agencies, to get close to Donald Trump.”

During the 2016 presidential campaign, a dossier by a former British spy and expert on KGB espionage came to light and shone a light on the Trump’s Russian connections.

Chris Steele was engaged to write the dossier by a wealthy Republican, and when Trump became the GOP presumptive nominee the Democrats picked up the contract.

“Chris Steele didn’t know who the client was. He was basically hired because he was the go-to-guy on Russia and acknowledged expert on Kremlin espionage. He sent out a query to his secret sources ‘What is the relationship between DT and Moscow?’ Steel says he got a series of hair-raising replies.”

Steele’s sources confirmed a “well-developed conspiracy” involving Trump and Russia went back at least 5 years, Harding says.

“It was transactional, with Trump supplying titbits of information about Russian oligarchs in America and the Kremlin funnelling useful political intelligence to Trump and to some extent shaping his political ambitions.”
Steele was so alarmed at what he discovered he passed his information on to the FBI, Harding says.

Yet it was Hillary Clinton who received FBI scrutiny during the campaign.
“On the one hand, there was the Hillary Clinton email server, which was really a non-scandal and relatively trivial.

“On the other hand, there are allegations which senior people in Congress were privately being briefed about as early as September of 2016 that Trump was kind of in bed with the Russians and receiving information that was helping him, from a country that was traditionally an adversary of the United States.”

Steele expected the FBI to move expeditiously, Harding says, and he doesn’t fully understand why the Bureau didn’t.

“The FBI is a Republican-leaning institution, but I was told that the New York division, in particular, hated Hillary Clinton with a white-hot passion. I think there may have been a degree of politicking there."

Senior sources in the Obama administration told Steele they also knew what was in the dossier, but decided to keep quiet, fearful that Trump would use it as a weapon against them.

They were also supremely confident their candidate would win.
“In the end, they didn’t say a huge amount, and I think they now recognise that was a pretty terrible mistake.”

The whole imbroglio has been compared to Watergate, but Harding believes it to be more serious.

“Watergate was one group of Americans screwing another group of Americans. Whereas this is one group of Americans cheating by enlisting the help of an unscrupulous foreign power which had its own agenda – the goal being to destroy Hillary Clinton.”

We know from leaked documents [the KGB] are looking for people who are vain, ambitious, narcissistic, perhaps unfaithful to their wives, corruptible and lousy analysts. And Trump ticked every single box.

Harding says he asked himself a simple question when starting the book: “Why is Donald Trump so nice about Putin? He is so fantastically rude about practically everyone else on the planet.”

The logical answer is Putin has leverage, he says.

“There’s a long history of the KGB spying on people in their intimate moments, sending a tranche of young women to seduce westerners and diplomats and so on – they even had a name, they were called 'swallows'.”
There are also unanswered questions about flows of money from Russia to Trump, particularly after 2008 when “he was broke”, Harding says.

“Obviously Putin knows the full extent of this alleged conspiracy. He knows what money did or didn’t go from Moscow into Trump. He knows what Trump really did during these various Russian trips.

“The dossier alleges Trump has had a series of adventures, not just one.”
Robert Mueller, who is leading the United States Department of Justice investigation into links between the Russian government and Donald Trump's presidential campaign, is “almost padding towards the front door of the Oval Office", Harding says.

“He’s not there yet, but he’s slowly approaching. I think that explains Trump’s agitated state of mind.”
Such a story you usually would expect to see just in a Hollywood spy movie. This ^ is what makes Trump's handshakes with Putin something different than Bush's or Clinton's or Obama's handshakes, AVGwarhawk, u_crank.

You Americans have a Russian bug in the oval office. You named him "Mr. President". And that is a coup that compares to nothing you guys are bringing up here. You get f-worded by the Kremlin, and all you care for is to bow down deeper and lift your rearends higher and calling that your precious free decision and your sovereignty by which you show the world how strong and great again you are. I call it differently. I call it "getting f-worded".

At least you won a prize: all laughter of the world will be on you. The damages yau cause however also will be felt by many others, and so that is where the joking ends. Winner by technical K.O.: Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin. What a formidable opponent in the Great Game! Repeatedly playing the biggest military power of the globe against the wall - without firing one shot at it, without taking one single return! Wowh. Since 1989, American diplomacy in Russia is a show of dilettantees. Yelzin made the dollar sign blinking in your eyes and so you got greedy and stopped actually seeing with your eyes. When Yelzin left, a new player seated at the table and tried fair deal, you played foul on him, and he immediately understood and changed the rules. And since then you have lost every point to him that was played over. You are not up to him. None in the West seems to be. John MacCain warned you of this man from early on. You did not listen. And so he makes his moves and scores as he wants, catching you unaware again and again and again.

THE_MASK

07-19-18, 05:13 PM

Better to be friends with a country that has a massive nuclear arsenal than enemies .

vienna

07-19-18, 05:33 PM

Interesting how so many of Trump's supporters, when faced with facts about Trump's corruption, duplicity, dishonor, and lies frantically leap up with claims about Clinton, Obama, etc., rather than directly, and honestly, address Trump's failings. I guess if they don't have legs to stand on, they've got to look to whatever they can pull out of their asses as a means of desperate deflection. Obama, the Clintons, et al, are not currently in the White House or even in positions of power or influence over the general population. If the Trumpers really think Obama, Clinton, etc. should be prosecuted in a court of law, then make it happen; I'll even support you in the criminal process if you can get charges filed; otherwise "quityerbitchin'" and grow a pair and a spine to go with it; if ya got nothin', ya got nuthin'. Saying someone else did so and so is not an answer to the question about why Trump is selling thing country out to Putin and others and why we, the people, should in any way support someone who is so abysmally unqualified to hold the office of Prsident. When the questions are asked about Trump's idiocies, it would be nice to hear an actual answer instead of evasion, deflection, schoolyard cries of "They did it first", platitudes or any of the other attempts at not actually answering the questions posed...

"Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it."

-- Mark Twain

Trump and his cohorts are undeserving...

<O>

mapuc

07-19-18, 06:09 PM

According to a Danish online newspaper, the US Senate has asked the translator who participated in the private meeting between Putin and Trump.

The (Senate) has what I understand, summoned this female translator.

I guess it has something to do with her professional secrecy

Markus

vienna

07-19-18, 06:45 PM

The whole question of the US translator for Trump is an interesting and complex issue. In a sense, the translator is an official employee of the US Government and not a specific employee of Trump, personally, so any sort of 'client privilege' for Trump is questionable if the client is, ultimately, the US Government. She could also be seen as a sort of 'recording' as if she were a recording device or other tech (in her case analog 'human tech') that might be present during other normal meetings. She could also be viewed as simply a witness, someone who happened to draw the straw and be present at the meeting. Her status needs to be defined before she actually is called to testify. In any case, if called to testify, it is severely doubtful she would testify in public: the content of any meeting at the level of a summit would be of the highest classifications and would only be able to be heard in closed door session. What I do find really amusing is Trump and his administration's claims there are no recording of Trump's summit with Putin. Given Putin was a senior officer of the KGB and given the still common Russian propensity to wiretap and/or bug anything they think might profit them, it is a stretch to actually believe Putin doesn't have recordings of the summit. But Trump apparently doesn't think there are any recordings. Why? Because Putin told him there are none...

<O>

u crank

07-19-18, 06:53 PM

u crank

07-19-18, 07:18 PM

Better to be friends with a country that has a massive nuclear arsenal than enemies .

That's way too logical. You must be crazy.:O:

People wonder why Trump is nice to Putin and won't criticize him in public. I can think of one very obvious reason. Trump, (who is really stupid) knows that you can't criticize a dictator or embarrass him in public and then expect to negotiate with him in private. You can criticize Angela Merkel or Theresa May in public because they are not dictators. They do the same to Trump. That's OK in a free and democratic world. But Putin is a dictator and is not criticized in his world. Not without repercussions. Doing it to Putin in front of millions of people, some of them Russians, would be the end of that relationship. But Trump is really stupid and he doesn't know that.

Skybird

07-19-18, 08:11 PM

As I said: the laughs are all on you, America. If that is all you have to say on Trump's history with Russia, not even mentioning his terrible manners, his intellectual impotence and his obvious contempt for women, you deserve every decibel of it. What a great, wise, educated, rational statesman you have! :yeah: But I stick to it, you have made a Russian bug your president, and the more obvious that becomes, the more desperately you will defend him in order to not needing to realise that you did what you did.

Putin just grins. Inside. He plays not only Trump but millions of Americans like a fiddle. :har:

August

07-19-18, 08:31 PM

Putin just grins. Inside. He plays not only Trump but millions of Americans like a fiddle. :har:

Oh is that so? Just how exactly is Putin playing me like a fiddle? I mean here I am with a shiny new Trumpian tax break in my pocket, busy as heck at work because of the roaring economy, watching a solid pro-rkba SJC being formed, seeing the leftists howl in impotent rage.

From where I sit things are looking pretty good. :up:

u crank

07-20-18, 05:37 AM

Interesting how so many of Trump's supporters, when faced with facts about Trump's corruption, duplicity, dishonor, and lies frantically leap up with claims about Clinton, Obama, etc., rather than directly, and honestly, address Trump's failings.

I would say that one reason for this is that these people, now out of power , still seek to be part of the ongoing political discussion. let's see.....

Barak Obama breaks with tradition to criticize his successor. His wife has done the same.

Hillary Clinton is a non stop critic of Trump and his voters. She wrote a book.

Former Obama CIA director John Brennen has been a non stop critic of Trump and now works for NBC News where he says stupid things on the air.

Former Obama Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, not to be out done is the spook expert at CNN criticizing Trump.

Former CIA Director Michael Hayden of the Bush and Obama administrations gets in on it to at CNN as well.

Former Obama FBI director James Comey says "all who believe in this country's values" should vote for Democrats in the upcoming midterm elections.

If these members of the former administration wish to continue contributing to the political discussion, good for them. It's a free country. But everything, and I mean everything they have ever done should be open for scrutiny. Most of these people have lied publicly, some have lied under oath. Some are guilty of other crimes. You want to play in the big league, expect a big league treatment.

The other option...go away quietly.

If the Trumpers really think Obama, Clinton, etc. should be prosecuted in a court of law, then make it happen;

I think you know that is not going to happen and is probably a good thing. The precedent set there would mean every new administration would prosecute people in the outgoing administration. But I see no reason why their misdeeds can't be pointed out.

Skybird

07-20-18, 06:10 AM

Oh is that so? Just how exactly is Putin playing me like a fiddle? I mean here I am with a shiny new Trumpian tax break in my pocket, busy as heck at work because of the roaring economy, watching a solid pro-rkba SJC being formed, seeing the leftists howl in impotent rage.

From where I sit things are looking pretty good. :up:
As I said, the GRU already has priced such little details in. The disruption of world trade, the self-inflicted erosion of the Western "union" and the overstretching of the West and the US are worth to allow you a little tax brake. If your country agrees to good-bye itself from world affairs and leave thigns to Russia and China instead, then that really is worth it.

Thats the trick in it. To make you do and will the self-isolation of your country and brakign ties you formed i decades before - and make you beleive that it its good for you so that you donot stop to fulfill Russian interests.

As I earlier said: America allows itself getting f-worded by the Kremlin. Some just take money for it.

Jimbuna

07-20-18, 08:24 AM

President Donald Trump has invited Russian leader Vladimir Putin to visit the US, in a move that drew startled laughter from a US intelligence chief.

"That's going to be special!" said Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats, when he was told about the invitation during a live interview.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-44895384

The show must go on apparently.

Skybird

07-20-18, 02:52 PM

Oooops.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-44906898

Irrelevant. Its not about Clinton's little Willy.

August

07-20-18, 05:33 PM

As I said, the GRU already has priced such little details in...

...The disruption of world trade :o

...the self-inflicted erosion of the Western "union" :o:o

...the overstretching of the West and the US :o:o:o
...are worth to allow you a little tax brake.

Oh dear, how disconcerting that so much hinges on my little tax break!

If your country agrees to good-bye itself from world affairs and leave thigns to Russia and China instead, then that really is worth it.
Thats the trick in it. To make you do and will the self-isolation of your country and brakign ties you formed i decades before - and make you beleive that it its good for you so that you donot stop to fulfill Russian interests.

So the implication being that if we're not going to pay for your defense anymore we have to retreat back to our own continent? Sorry to pop your bubble but one does not equal the other.

As I earlier said: America allows itself getting f-worded by the Kremlin. Some just take money for it.

That remains to be seen. So far all we have is the usual histrionics and posturing from the usual Trump haters. Vapor Hate. Nothing of substance but,.... Trump dammit! :)

Skybird

07-20-18, 05:44 PM

The usual rhetoric distractions.

vienna

07-20-18, 06:17 PM

I would say that one reason for this is that these people, now out of power , still seek to be part of the ongoing political discussion. let's see.....

Barak Obama breaks with tradition to criticize his successor. His wife has done the same.

Hillary Clinton is a non stop critic of Trump and his voters. She wrote a book.

Former Obama CIA director John Brennen has been a non stop critic of Trump and now works for NBC News where he says stupid things on the air.

Former Obama Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, not to be out done is the spook expert at CNN criticizing Trump.

Former CIA Director Michael Hayden of the Bush and Obama administrations gets in on it to at CNN as well.

Former Obama FBI director James Comey says "all who believe in this country's values" should vote for Democrats in the upcoming midterm elections.

...

Regardless of their opposition to Trump, they are still not in any position of power and are not currently answerable for the current Trump follies and blunders. What they say is of no consequence in terms of actual determination of current policy or operations. Its just opinions, words...

...Unless, of course, the Trumpers are so terrified of opinions and words; if, so, what a lot of sad, weak, snowflakes...

I do want to thank you for saving me extra typing by completing my post for me with, actually, your sage words (with a bit of correction on my part)...

...

If these members of the current administration wish to continue contributing to the political discussion, good for them. It's a free country. But everything, and I mean everything they have ever done should be open for scrutiny. Most of these people have lied publicly, some have lied under oath. Some are guilty of other crimes. You want to play in the big league, expect a big league treatment.

The other option...go away quietly.

...

I think you know that is not going to happen and is probably a good thing. The precedent set there would mean every new administration would prosecute people in the outgoing administration. But I see no reason why their misdeeds can't be pointed out.

Thanks for the assist!... :up:

<O>

u crank

07-20-18, 06:33 PM

I do want to thank you for saving me extra typing by completing my post for me with, actually, your sage words (with a bit of correction on my part)...

Thanks for the assist!... :up:

Well if you're incapable of coming up with anything original I will gladly do some ghost writing for you. Problem is I can't guarantee the proper amount of lefty/SJW/progressive/TDS outrage you might require. But hey I will work for beer.:D

vienna

07-20-18, 07:24 PM

Well if you're incapable of coming up with anything original I will gladly do some ghost writing for you. Problem is I can't guarantee the proper amount of lefty/SJW/progressive/TDS outrage you might require. But hey I will work for beer.:D

Oh, I wasn't copying you because I had nothing original to add; it's just that you seemed to be echoing my sentiments about the Trumpers and my fingers do get weary on occasion. As far as being "Leftie", some of my Left acquaintances think I'm too far Right and some of my Right acquaintances think I'm too far Left, so I seem to have struck a happy balanced in the middle, one of the benefits of independent, considered thought...

As far as the beer, well, we'll have to see how the tariffs go as to how much you will be entitled to... :03: :D

BTW, are you loving the idea of "The Cohen Tapes"?... :haha:

<O>

August

07-20-18, 07:42 PM

The usual rhetoric distractions.

Says the guy who attempted to tie the fall of western society to my tax break.

u crank

07-20-18, 07:56 PM

BTW, are you loving the idea of "The Cohen Tapes"?... :haha:

Well the MSM chimps are sure going crazy over them. I hope nobody injures themselves.:O:

Skybird

07-20-18, 08:04 PM

Says the guy who attempted to tie the fall of western society to my tax break.
No. Said the guy who just points out that in the face of a Russian coup against your country and political system and a frontal attack on the economic fundament of Western strength you worry about not more than your little tax break.

You are cheap to have. Very. A steal.

I remember that many years ago you gave me a long lecture on why Clinton, lying in shame about his dropped pants in the office, was committing amost high treason, destroyed the fundament of trust in the American potlical system and that this loss of honour poses an existential threat to America's strength and even could make the sky falling.

Say, how many affairs of married Donald more must come o light and how many more most derogatory comments on women must fall out of his facial anus before you show the same fervor in condemning him like you did condemn Clinton? Not to mention that Trump is obviously in Putin's pockets and a man with serious personality problems and probbaly also serious cognitive issues, not to mention his significantly short memory. Such a man having control over nuclear weapons - well, its not as dangerous as Clinton drawing blank his little Willy, but I would assume that it is seen as a threat nevertheless!?

August

07-21-18, 12:41 AM

No. Said the guy who just points out that in the face of a Russian coup

Coup? Do you actually believe this guff?

against your country and political system and a frontal attack on the economic fundament of Western strength you worry about not more than your little tax break.

You are cheap to have. Very. A steal.

I remember that many years ago you gave me a long lecture on why Clinton, lying in shame about his dropped pants in the office, was committing amost high treason, destroyed the fundament of trust in the American potlical system and that this loss of honour poses an existential threat to America's strength and even could make the sky falling.
Uh huh, cheap, you're calling us cheap, well at least we don't rely on others to provide for our own national security, and as for old lectures I seem to recall you tried to pin that blarney that on me back then, and like I told you back then it was not that he dropped his pants in the oval office Skybird! I could hardly care if Bubba tagged a dozen chubby interns while swinging from the Oval Office chandelier, more power to him.

But....

The difference is that he lied about it in a court of law under oath.

Doing it under oath, committing Perjury, that is breaking the law. Not some anti-trump media invented fake outrage of the day "OMG he said the P word once!" that they try to make us care about, but a real crime like what Bubbas wife committed with her illegal email server.

Time will tell if there is any substance to the medias latest attack angle but I rather suspect that it will amount to nothing just like it always does.

Onkel Neal

07-21-18, 07:46 AM

Well if you're incapable of coming up with anything original I will gladly do some ghost writing for you. Problem is I can't guarantee the proper amount of lefty/SJW/progressive/TDS outrage you might require. But hey I will work for beer.:D

No! You will do it for free, and get no more beer than the other comrades. We all strive equally for the ultimate victory over individualism, accountability, and initiative! For the Motherland! :rock:

But....

The difference is that he lied about it in a court of law under oath.

Doing it under oath, committing Perjury, that is breaking the law. Not some anti-trump media invented fake outrage of the day "OMG he said the P word once!" that they try to make us care about, but a real crime like what Bubbas wife committed with her illegal email server.

Why do they always ignore that aspect? It wasn't about his pitiful behavior, it was about perjury. Oh, and wagging his finger in our faces and lying.

I'll never deny Trump is an uncouth and vulgar rich guy, but why do Clinton defenders pretend Bill is any different?

u crank

07-21-18, 08:00 AM

I didn't have time last night to comment on this so here goes.

Regardless of their opposition to Trump, they are still not in any position of power and are not currently answerable for the current Trump follies and blunders.

That is true...They are not answerable for Trump's policy.

What they say is of no consequence in terms of actual determination of current policy or operations. Its just opinions, words...

But what they say is of consequence because of the platform that they have. They are not just regular citizens minding their own business. These people that have deep connections in the Washington bureaucracy and they are in the media commenting in a very biased way about the current administration. They are effecting opinions and doing it intentionally. They are not news readers but opinion makers. They have not gone away. In fact they are getting paid to not go away.

They are also highly hypocritical.

John Brennen has accuses the President of treason. James Clapper says the Russians have something on Trump. James Comey is urging Americans to vote Democrat.

These are the people, Clapper, Director of National Intelligence, Brennon, head of the CIA and Comey, director of FBI who were supposed to be guarding the door. All were on duty when the Russians attacked the US election in 2016. And the gutless MSM chimps will have them on and never bring that up. Instead they hang on every word of these 'experts' without question simple because of their political stance. What a joke.

Then there is this.

"Gov. Romney, I'm glad you recognize al-Qaida is a threat, because a few months ago when you were asked what is the biggest geopolitical group facing America, you said not al-Qaida, you said Russia. And the 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back. Because the Cold War has been over for 20 years."

Barak Obama debating Romney in 2012.

Each administration should be judged on what it has achieved. At the end of the Obama’s two terms, Putin had elevated Russia to a credible revisionist power on the international stage. Russia annexed Crimea and occupied much of Eastern Ukraine; by successfully propping up the degenerate Assad regime, the Kremlin gained a veto on any possible political solution to Syria, and got a meaningful foothold in the broader region for the first time since Sadat threw Soviet advisors out; and its populist allies and fellow-travelers were on the rise in Europe, fueling both anti-Americanism and illiberal-ism; and most damning of all, it managed to meddle, almost unopposed, in U.S. politics—all on Obama’s watch.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2018/03/05/dont-rehabilitate-obama-on-russia/