13 Russian Nationals Indicted
POSTED BY: captaincrunch
UPDATED: Wednesday, August 8, 2018 03:28
VIEWED: 21330
PAGE 2 of 3
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
I'm sure Mueller is personally keeping you in the loop. / sarcasm
In other words ... liar.
No he doesn't. It's all over the news in this country kiki. If you lived here you would know that. You see we have a free press. You should get out more. It's not healthy sitting in a building in St. Petersburg day and night.
T
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
They would "Lock Her Up" and through away the key....are you kidding? No due process, why bother....this is how they think. Imagine if she would have said, "Hey Russia, please find the 33 thousand emails."
They would have her on bread and water in Guantanamo.
SGG
Quote:
Originally posted by second:Quote:If Hillary had Russian citizens who were paid $millions by Putin and working under false names within the USA to get Hillary elected, she would be in trouble with the law.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:Quote:What would be your definition of "Team Hillary"? Anyone who supported Hillary including some random Ukrainian national living in the USA?
What is your definition of "Team Trump"?
"Team Trump" would be anyone working for Trump's campaign committee, just like "Team Hillary" would be anyone working for Hillary's campaign committee. That should be obvious.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Go find those quotes, or join the list of liars.
Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
They would "Lock Her Up" and through (sic) away the key....
So anyway ... anyone up for a rational, fact-based, and civil discussion about the topic?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Yanno, I'm pretty tired of crazy people, sociopaths, and drunkards making things up and claiming that I have posted them.
Apparently, a lot of the people who are aghast about Trump have serious mental and/ or ethical issues with reality and honesty.
So anyway ... anyone up for a rational, fact-based, and civil discussion about the topic?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
LMAO.........Ha, ha, ha!
SGG
Quote:
Originally posted by THGRRI:Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
I'm sure Mueller is personally keeping you in the loop. / sarcasm
In other words ... liar.
No he doesn't. It's all over the news in this country kiki. If you lived here you would know that. You see we have a free press. You should get out more. It's not healthy sitting in a building in St. Petersburg day and night.
T
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I meant throw, but I already joined the Liars Club, many moons ago.
SGG
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:Quote:Go find those quotes, or join the list of liars.
Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
They would "Lock Her Up" and through (sic) away the key....
So anyway ... anyone up for a rational, fact-based, and civil discussion about the topic?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Yeah, we're right next to the pimps, whores and rapists.....#BIGAmericans, Woo Hoo!
SGG
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
Yanno, I'm pretty tired of crazy people, sociopaths, and drunkards making things up and claiming that I have posted them.
Apparently, a lot of the people who are aghast about Trump have serious mental and/ or ethical issues with reality and honesty.
So anyway ... anyone up for a rational, fact-based, and civil discussion about the topic?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Mueller....the Big Kahuna! He's revving up the Collusion Machine and pretty soon he's gonna start mowing down the line.
Sing it Johnny!
"I hear the train a comin', rollin' round the bend, and I ain't seen the sunshine since I don't know when........Well I'm stuck in Folsom Prison and time keeps dragging on..."
Ah!, those Folsom Prison Blues!
SGG
Quote:
Originally posted by THGRRI:Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:Quote:That's a good question. Maybe it has to do with being - yanno - sociopaths who feed on hatred. Why let facts, reason, common sense, get in the way of a good hatred?
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Good grief, your delusions know no bounds. I still can't figure out what the hell is wrong with you people.
OK, that was fun. Now enough distractions and diversions. 13 Russians and 3 Russian companies indicted by Mueller. Word is, many more to come.
T
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"Yeah, we're right next to the pimps, whores and rapists.....#BIGAmericans, Woo Hoo!"
Actually, yes - you are. You like victimizing people. And for no reason other than you disagree with them. That's not much of a reason.
BTW - you may have missed my posts about an internet libeler's legal liability. You can be sued. And, in California, an ANONYMOUS website extends the statute of limitations beyond a year, up to indefinitely.
So I suggest you don't make it worth my while to go after you.
OTOH, if you can keep your discussions on-topic, civil, and most importantly - HONEST, we can get along just fine. Now, if being the stand-up guy you claim to be motivates you, you know, fighting the good fight for the right causes and so on - then being on-topic, civil, and most importantly - HONEST, should be no problem for you.
So anyway ... anyone up for a rational, fact-based, and civil discussion about the topic?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by THGRRI:
Everything going my way guys. Cry about it somewhere else. Everything I, G, SGG, Second, KPO, wishie and some others have been saying has been going on, is resulting in guilty pleas and indictments.
Add to that nothing, and I mean nothing you guys have been crying about has resulted in anything. No guilty pleas and no indictments. Why, no evidence. Love it...
tick tock
"Your way". Whatever you say, Sinatra.
You've allowed this to become who you are, haven't you? I'm going to actually feel bad for you when nothing comes of any of this.
You've accomplished nothing since November 9th of 2016. This IS your life now, so I understand why you would say "your way" about it.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
HEY, ALL OF YOU IDIOTS: If you click on my name, you will see that I've been here since 2002.
So youre a real fan uv Firefly. That explainz why youre here. You coud hav been in America for decadez. Moles gotta hav their showz also.
----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early
http://www.7532020.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
You're moving up on my list.
But, keep on trolling. Every time you troll, you reset the clock.
So anyway ... anyone up for a rational, fact-based, and civil discussion about the topic?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Actually, I do have a question for you.
What are you trying to prove?
That you're so stupid you can't believe a genuine American has a different opinion than you? That you can't be shamed or cowed into behaving like a decent person, not even for one short post? That you're so addicted to bullying it's worth being sued over? That you're so propagandized you can't even consider for a moment that the government might be lying to you?
What's going on in there?
So anyway ... anyone up for a rational, fact-based, and civil discussion about the topic?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Kettle meet Pot, Pot, Kettle.
SGG
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
Just a reminder to trolls - the trolling you do today - can be held against you years from now. Don't feel safe.
HAS IT NOT OCCURRED TO YOU BY NOW THAT IF YOU HAVE TO RESORT TO LOGICAL FALLACIES AND TROLLING YOUR SO-CALLED ARGUMENTS ARE LIES?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Oh it's threats now, well, now this is a fine how do you do. Imagine, a libel case from someone slinging hash at folks all the way from California. Well, isn't that something.
You have a very entertaining and scrupulous mind. Will wonders never cease. It's amazing because this is a case of the pot calling the kettle black. And it's funny you saying that I victimize people. What a load of horse shit. I have kept mostly to myself lately for just that reason, because you enjoy insulting people and when a body defends itself, suddenly it's called victimizing.
Change the subject, deflect and gaslight all you want. It makes no never mind to me.
No, I didn't miss your lame threats to sue for libel. Go right ahead, sue. You have a lot of nerve talking about keeping discussions on topic and civil. It's of no consequence, because anytime I bring up a topic or post a comment with my opinion you revert to name-calling and innuendo of drinking and mental instability.
Oftentimes I use my style of writing and my choice of prose to defend myself. In other moments I would get angry and spew forth a hail of curse words to vent.
At one time, I even offered up an apology and you saw fit to scoff at my offer. And without knowing me you take a statement I made to ridicule and embarrass me. And now you suggest that I be careful and dangle the threat of a lawsuit in my face, while professing that you wish to proceed discussing topics in a civil manner. It is the equivalent of speaking softly, while clubbing me in the back of the head.
But know this...I will continue to discuss, comment and otherwise hob-knob as I see fit. Should you care to reply, that is up to you. Should you not, again that is your prerogative. Should you chose to insult and/or belittle, again that is your choice. I am my own person, I do not follow what others do or say. Unless I agree with them; and I say so. I AM ME, SGG, always have been and always will be. I am no one's puppet or punching bag.
I am a human being, I give respect where respect is earned. I give no quarter and expect none in return.
SGG
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
"Yeah, we're right next to the pimps, whores and rapists.....#BIGAmericans, Woo Hoo!"
Actually, yes - you are. You like victimizing people. And for no reason other than you disagree with them. That's not much of a reason.
BTW - you may have missed my posts about an internet libeler's legal liability. You can be sued. And, in California, an ANONYMOUS website extends the statute of limitations beyond a year, up to indefinitely.
So I suggest you don't make it worth my while to go after you.
OTOH, if you can keep your discussions on-topic, civil, and most importantly - HONEST, we can get along just fine. Now, if being the stand-up guy you claim to be motivates you, you know, fighting the good fight for the right causes and so on - then being on-topic, civil, and most importantly - HONEST, should be no problem for you.
So anyway ... anyone up for a rational, fact-based, and civil discussion about the topic?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
Actually, I do have a question for you.
What are you trying to prove?
If I wanted to proov sumthing, I woud spend a day examining your posts for the last few yirz and charting the various aspects uv support for the TrumPutin conspirasy. Hardly nesusery tho. Your pozition haz been clear to the key playerz here for yirz.
----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early
http://www.7532020.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
You know, I just thought of something. I was replying to Second. So, you thought I was talking to you? Keeks, you okay? By the way, that phrase "Lock Her Up" is common among Hilary haters. I'm not sure where the "lie" comes in.
SGG
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:Quote:Go find those quotes, or join the list of liars.
Originally posted by SHINYGOODGUY:
They would "Lock Her Up" and through (sic) away the key....
So anyway ... anyone up for a rational, fact-based, and civil discussion about the topic?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
It is a shot across the bow. Fair warning that something is coming down the road, just don't know when or what, but something's in the air. Now, you could argue, or discuss calmly, that I'm speaking out of turn and that I know nothing...that Mueller has shot his load.
True that. I know nothing. Mueller could very well have nothing more.
Tick tock...
SGG
Quote:
Originally posted by captaincrunch:
What a fun day!
Indictment came today. All Russian names.
From second:
www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-indictment/russians-indict
ed-in-2016-u-s-election-meddling-investigation-idUSKCN1G022U
http://fingfx.thomsonreuters.com/gfx/mkt/5/1605/1603/internet_research
_agency_indictment.pdf
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA versus
Yevgeniy Viktorovich Prigozhin,
Mikhail Ivanovich Bystrov,
Mikhail Leonidovich Burchik
A/K/A Mikhail Abramov,
Aleksandra Yuryevna Krylova,
Anna Vladislavovna Bogacheva,
Sergey Pavlovich Polozov,
Maria Anatolyevna Bovda
A/K/A Maria Anatolyevna Belyaeva,
Robert Sergeyevich Bovda,
Dzheykhun Nasimi Ogly Aslanov
A/K/A Jayhoon Aslanov
A/K/A Jay Aslanov,
Vadim Vladimirovich Podkopaev,
Gleb Igorevich Vasilchenko,
Irina Viktorovna Kaverzina, and
Vladimir Venkov.
How funny (?) that the descriptions and details that Rosenstein & Co. used could have been lifted from any number of threads or honest posters on this forum, it was almost like word for word. I'm tempted to say "vindication b*tches" but I'll wait because I know it's going to just get better.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:In other words, you're lying your ass off and know - you've got nothing.
Originally posted by JO753:
If I wanted to proov sumthing, I woud spend a day examining your posts for the last few yirz and charting the various aspects uv support for the TrumPutin conspirasy. Hardly nesusery tho. Your pozition haz been clear to the key playerz here for yirz.
What do you think will happen when you really HAVE to prove I've been part of the 'conspiracy'? What quotes do you think you'll be able to find? Because there will come a time where you'll have to put up - or pay the price. Literally.
Better start looking for those quotes now, dood.
Tick, tock ...
So anyway ... anyone up for a rational, fact-based, and civil discussion about the topic?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Shitty
"So, you thought I was talking to you?" No, I didn't. I thought you were talking ABOUT me. And ... libeling.
You pretend to have legal knowledge. You DO know that word, right? You know you don't have to be talking TO ME to be LIBELING me, right?
If I were you, I would try to pretend being a normally, averagely decent human being instead of a lying troll. Because you never know when YOU might be called to account. Literally.
So anyway ... anyone up for a rational, fact-based, and civil discussion about the topic?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
shitty
LET ME POINT OUT YOU STARTED WITH THIS: "They would "Lock Her Up" and through away the key....are you kidding? No due process, why bother....this is how they think. Imagine if she would have said, "Hey Russia, please find the 33 thousand emails."
They would have her on bread and water in Guantanamo.
SGG"
Neither I nor Signy have EVER even suggested such a thing. And you weren't 'responding' or 'defending' yourself. You were attacking.
So go ahead. Try and defend your actions. See how far it flies in the face of facts.
So anyway ... anyone up for a rational, fact-based, and civil discussion about the topic?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
"Gee, no, do please point out your intense brilliance." I was pointing out your incessant lying. But carry on thinking you can lie about everything.
You realize how desperate you sound, right? "You lie about everything."
So if I lie "so incessantly" you should be able to point to them pretty easily, right? Go ahead then, point to all my lies. Come on, just a few then.
Or, just answer one question: do you know what Mueller knows? Let's see if you can - I'll just keep asking until you do.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I red the entire inditement.
Its a compliment to Joss Whedon that hiz show motivated this website and it got popular enuf to make it worth money to station sum trollz here.
Putin and hiz oligarks got more money than they coud spend in 1,000 lifetimez, so maybe theyd be willing to pay for a new seriez & more moviez!
----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early
http://www.7532020.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
lol... you have to be trolling yourself right now J0. You don't actually believe that anybody here is a Russian Troll that has been groomed for over a decade only to do Putin's work now that Trump is president, do you?
That's just insanity. Even I'm not that paranoid, and I used to be pretty gorramed paranoid. Go back to my posts from 2006-2007. I was terrified of the Patriot Act. Then again, I was 27 years old and still thought the world revolved around me.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Nobody from Team Trump?
Trump is last stupid. It's called an investigation for a reason. This is how this one is unfolding. Witch hunt sig, nope, it's about the Russians. Trump can't stop it now. Even the republicans through Muellers actions are being forced to fall into line. It's that or look treasonous themselves.
It's also about conspiracy, it's about financial ties that leave Trump open to blackmail and even to committing acts of treason.
tick tock comrade
T
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by JO753:
I red the entire inditement.
Its a compliment to Joss Whedon that hiz show motivated this website and it got popular enuf to make it worth money to station sum trollz here.
Putin and hiz oligarks got more money than they coud spend in 1,000 lifetimez, so maybe theyd be willing to pay for a new seriez & more moviez!
Good idea JO. No, great idea!!! For the show I mean and who should pay for it.
As for Russian trolls being here. Sig and kiki are of Polish decent. They've both posted that. Perhaps you remember? I believe their blood lines include Russian heritage. Sock puppet copped to this as well.
I think it's pride for the motherland that drives them and why they troll on behalf of Russia. And why if they do live here now are traitors to this country. I can understand pride in one's heritage but if they live here now, they should at least be fair in their judgements, even handed. They have been everything but.
T
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
KIKI, at this point I really think THUGR etc are really just trying to yank our chain, nobody could be THAT stupid! THUGR in particular insists on making defamatory and blatantly untrue statements (statements which can be PROVEN to be untrue) so he's just digging his hole deeper and deeper. Let him dig. And if the others want to follow him into that hole of total idiocy/ culpability, let them follow.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
America is an oligarchy
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
http://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/joe-rick-scott-gets-it-wrong-on
-fbi-criticism-1164874819804
Trump paying a price with students for using school shooting to suggest it happened because of the Russia investigation.
T
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
This video answers your question better than I can Jack. Watch it, and if you think it is fake news than there is nothing further to discuss. This is about one aspect of the damage Trump is doing to America's foreign policy. This is a serious discussion by serious men.
Everything changed with these 13 Russian indictments. And it's far from being over. Not even close. Wiki leaks, the DNC hacking and then Trump. Now Jack, now everyone, now it begins.
T
In Munich, Russian Amb. Kislyak won't answer meddling question]
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
So, Facebook admits that the majority of ad Buys occurred AFTER the Election.
Before Election Day the MSM was reporting that Hilliary would win, and the activities were anti-Hilliary. The day after the Election, MSM reports Trump won, and all activities switch to Anti-Trump.
So your Spin is that these disruptor groups are biased one way?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
So, Facebook admits that the majority of ad Buys occurred AFTER the Election.
Before Election Day the MSM was reporting that Hilliary would win, and the activities were anti-Hilliary. The day after the Election, MSM reports Trump won, and all activities switch to Anti-Trump.
So your Spin is that these disruptor groups are biased one way?
You must have an IQ of 2. You always misinterpret the point of the story. Russia asshole, your spin can't change that. It's like after a debate and you feel like the spin artist was watching something else. And I say an IQ of 2 because you really suck at it.
A spin room, also known as spin row or spin alley, is an area in which reporters can speak with debate participants and/or their representatives after a debate. The name refers to the fact that the participants will attempt to "spin" or influence the perception of the debate among the assembled reporters.
T
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by THGRRI:
As for Russian trolls being here. Sig and kiki are of Polish decent. They've both posted that.
I'm not much uv a historian, but I know that during WW2 Russia rounded up all the smart peepl they coud in Poland and massacred them.
https://www.britannica.com/event/Katyn-Massacre
Seemz like theyd hav good reazon to dislike Russia.
----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early
http://www.7532020.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by JO753:Quote:
Originally posted by THGRRI:
As for Russian trolls being here. Sig and kiki are of Polish decent. They've both posted that.
I'm not much uv a historian, but I know that during WW2 Russia rounded up all the smart peepl they coud in Poland and massacred them.
https://www.britannica.com/event/Katyn-Massacre
Seemz like theyd hav good reazon to dislike Russia.
Think Ukraine and the Russian migrants there and what happened. Think Georgia and the Russian migrants and what happened there when Bush was president. Poland is full of Russian communists. Kiki admitted her father was kicked out of Poland and England after that. It's no wonder after seeing how disloyal she is to the country that accepted her and her family. America
There were people who fought against communist servitude. Lech Walesa was born on September 29, 1943 in Popowo, Poland. After graduating from vocational school, he worked as a car mechanic at a machine center from 1961 to 1965. He served in the army for two years, rose to the rank of corporal, and in 1967 was employed in the Gdansk shipyards as an electrician. In 1969 he married Danuta Golos and they have eight children.
During the clash in December 1970 between the workers and the government, he was one of the leaders of the shipyard workers and was briefly detained. In 1976, however, as a result of his activities as a shop steward, he was fired and had to earn his living by taking temporary jobs.
In 1978 with other activists he began to organise free non-communist trade unions and took part in many actions on the sea coast. He was kept under surveillance by the state security service and frequently detained.
In August 1980 he led the Gdansk shipyard strike which gave rise to a wave of strikes over much of the country with Walesa seen as the leader. The primary demands were for workers' rights. The authorities were forced to capitulate and to negotiate with Walesa the Gdansk Agreement of August 31, 1980, which gave the workers the right to strike and to organise their own independent union.
The Catholic Church supported the movement, and in January 1981 Walesa was cordially received by Pope John Paul II in the Vatican. Walesa himself has always regarded his Catholicism as a source of strength and inspiration. In the years 1980-81 Walesa travelled to Italy, Japan, Sweden, France and Switzerland as guest of the International Labour Organisation. In September 1981 he was elected Solidarity Chairman at the First National Solidarity Congress in Gdansk.
The country's brief enjoyment of relative freedom ended in December 1981, when General Jaruzelski, fearing Soviet armed intervention among other considerations, imposed martial law, "suspended" Solidarity, arrested many of its leaders, and interned Walesa in a country house in a remote spot.
T
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Whatever. I don't care. He's an idiot who couldn't be bothered to google 'lawyer internet libel' and see that there are pages of lawyers doing a brisk business crushing libelers like him. That getting a lawyer is a matter of 'pick and chose', not some far-fetched fantasy.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
KIKI, at this point I really think THUGR etc are really just trying to yank our chain, nobody could be THAT stupid! THUGR in particular insists on making defamatory and blatantly untrue statements (statements which can be PROVEN to be untrue) so he's just digging his hole deeper and deeper. Let him dig. And if the others want to follow him into that hole of total idiocy/ culpability, let them follow.
I wasn't asking for him to swear to chastity and join Mother Teresa's Missionaries of Charity, and devote the rest of his life to good works.
I just wanted him - and others - TO STOP TROLLING. TO STOP BEING ASSHOLES.
How could that be so hard?
And now I hope he shits his pants every time he thinks about OTHER people - not his cohort of laughing hyenas - judging his history of posts.
So anyway ... anyone up for a rational, fact-based, and civil discussion about the topic?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:You likely hit on it there. The hyenas were spending so much time in their circle jerk threads until they realized nobody else was visiting those barren wastelands, and now they've deserted those threads and ventured into threads which were productive until they polluted them.
Originally posted by 1kiki:Quote:Whatever. I don't care. He's an idiot who couldn't be bothered to google 'lawyer internet libel' and see that there are pages of lawyers doing a brisk business crushing libelers like him. That getting a lawyer is a matter of 'pick and chose', not some far-fetched fantasy.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
KIKI, at this point I really think THUGR etc are really just trying to yank our chain, nobody could be THAT stupid! THUGR in particular insists on making defamatory and blatantly untrue statements (statements which can be PROVEN to be untrue) so he's just digging his hole deeper and deeper. Let him dig. And if the others want to follow him into that hole of total idiocy/ culpability, let them follow.
I wasn't asking for him to swear to chastity and join Mother Teresa's Missionaries of Charity, and devote the rest of his life to good works.
I just wanted him - and others - TO STOP TROLLING. TO STOP BEING ASSHOLES.
How could that be so hard?
And now I hope he shits his pants every time he thinks about OTHER people - not his cohort of laughing hyenas - judging his history of posts.
So what minimal sense they had eroded during their circle jerk marathons.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by THGRRI:Lech Walesa
I remember my dad saying sumthing unfavorable about Lech. That wuz way befor I payed any attention to politics. Probably sumthing to do with my dad being a loyal GoP herd beast.
Apparently, Lech iz still able to get a crowd riled up. Unfortunately to boo him, I assume kuz he iz agenst Trump.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jul/08/polish-president-lech-wa
lesa-hospital-solidarity
----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early
http://www.7532020.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:God, it's amazing what happens when people face consequences for assholeness, isn't it?
I just wanted him - and others - TO STOP TROLLING. TO STOP BEING ASSHOLES.
How could that be so hard? - KIKI
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
America is an oligarchy
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by THGRRI:
This video answers your question better than I can Jack. Watch it, and if you think it is fake news than there is nothing further to discuss. This is about one aspect of the damage Trump is doing to America's foreign policy. This is a serious discussion by serious men.
Everything changed with these 13 Russian indictments. And it's far from being over. Not even close. Wiki leaks, the DNC hacking and then Trump. Now Jack, now everyone, now it begins.
T
In Munich, Russian Amb. Kislyak won't answer meddling question]
That didn't answer my question at all.
I asked you to humor me and pretend that there was no Russian narrative and then tell me what Trump has done that has made him the worst president we've ever had.
I'll say that I'm fully on board with throwing the book on him if he his found guilty of a nefarious collaboration with Russia that is against American interests. Of that you can be certain.
Short of that though, why do you think he's so bad?
And again, I'll mention that I wish he'd STFU on Twitter. I found it quite amusing before the election and even a while into it, but at this point his constant trolling doesn't seem to be doing anything but making people on your side rabid.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Historians and Scholars decide if a president is good or not Jack. Very educated people. Historians and Executive Branch experts. These experts, Democrat, Republican and Independent, together rated Trump dead last ( worst ever ). And you, you Jack, can't see for yourself any reason why. Any reason Jack. Do you realize how stupid that makes you?
That video had very valid reasons why he is a bad president. All our foreign policy people were telling our allies at this summit, don't worry about Trump listen to us. Trump isn't forever. That's hundreds of our people at this summit Jack. Hundreds of our foreign policy experts. Including Trumps hand picked people. That video showed all our allies were calling Trump stupid and untrustworthy.
The reasons for treating you like someone who's opinion should be respected are non existent Jack, non existent.
T
How Does Trump Stack Up Against
the Best — and Worst — Presidents?
Overall rankings.
Presidents since World War II in boldface.
Presidents whose rank changed since last survey
0 = FAILURE
50 = AVERAGE
100 = GREAT
2014 RANK
CHANGE
IN RANKING
UP OR
DOWN
TOP 10 IN 2018
1. Lincoln
95
2. Washington
93
3. F.D. Roosevelt
89
4. T. Roosevelt
81
5. Jefferson
80
6. Truman
75
7. Eisenhower
74
8. Obama
71
8. Clinton
–5
9. Reagan
69
9. Jackson
–6
10. L.B. Johnson
69
10. Wilson
–1
11. Wilson
67
11. Reagan
+2
12. Madison
64
12. L.B. Johnson
+2
13. Clinton
64
13. Madison
+1
14. J. Adams
63
14. Kennedy
–2
15. Jackson
62
15. J. Adams
+1
16. Kennedy
62
16. Monroe
–2
17. G.H.W. Bush
61
18. Monroe
61
18. Obama
+10
19. McKinley
55
19. Polk
–1
20. Polk
54
20. Taft
–2
21. Grant
53
21. McKinley
+2
22. Taft
52
22. J.Q. Adams
–1
23. J.Q. Adams
52
23. Cleveland
–1
24. Cleveland
51
24. Ford
–1
25. Ford
47
25. Van Buren
–2
26. Carter
45
27. Van Buren
44
27. Coolidge
–1
28. Coolidge
42
28. Grant
+7
29. Hayes
42
29. B. Harrison
–3
30. G.W. Bush
40
30. Hayes
+1
31. Arthur
40
31. Garfield
–3
32. B. Harrison
38
32. Arthur
+1
33. Nixon
37
33. Taylor
–2
34. Garfield
37
34. Nixon
+1
BOTTOM 10
35. Taylor
33
35. G.W. Bush
+5
36. Hoover
33
36. Tyler
–1
37. Tyler
31
37. Fillmore
–1
38. Fillmore
28
38. Hoover
+2
39. Harding
25
39. W.H. Harrison
–3
40. A. Johnson
25
40. Pierce
–1
41. Pierce
23
41. A. Johnson
+1
42. W.H. Harrison
19
42. Harding
+3
43. Buchanan
15
44. Trump
12
Methodology: Each expert was invited to rate each president on a 0-100 scale, with 0 = failure, 50 = average, and 100 = great. Scores were then averaged for each president, with presidents then ranked in order of highest average to lowest.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/02/19/opinion/how-does-trump-
stack-up-against-the-best-and-worst-presidents.html
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
You Don’t Think Smart People Can Be Scammed?
https://andrewtobias.com/you-dont-think-smart-people-can-be-scammed/
Do you really think the massive Russian disinformation campaign was not able to get millions of people to think less of Hillary Clinton?
> It got one well-intentioned North Carolina man to so believe she ran a child sex ring out of a DC pizza parlor that he showed up with an AR-15 and shot the place up!
> It got millions to think there was “there” there with Benghazi, even though eight Congressional investigations found no wrongdoing.
> It got millions — including my friend Matt’s hedge-fund uncle Mitch — to think Hillary gave Russia our uranium. (Snopes, among many others, points out this is false.)
I don’t know whether any of these three phony smears originated with the Russians. Let’s assume not. But once they were in the air — perhaps from Trump pal Alex Jones, who claims the Sandy Hook massacre was a hoax? — the Russian operation amplified them.
Even with all this, Hillary won nearly 3 million more votes than Trump. Trump gets 47.3% and Hillary 47%, then the electoral college gives Trump 100% of the vote. Does that seem fair when nobody got 50%? Has any state ever had a runoff election for President when no one wins a majority? No. www.nytimes.com/elections/results/michigan-president-clinton-trump
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
And now I hope he shits his pants every time he thinks about OTHER people - not his cohort of laughing hyenas - judging his history of posts.
How long does it take a stupid person hearing something before they get it? Nothing about you or what you post scares me. I have said many times here what we post is out there on google, and it shows the truth of it.
It shows you always come to the aid of Russia. It shows you always criticize America. It shows you lie and spin the truth into fiction. It shows most of, and nearly all the shit you've posted and laid claim to, was proven wrong after time, time and time again.
It shows I've given you every opportunity to call out Putin on something, anything these past few years and you never did. Even G's lost threads debating you about Russia are out there. Someone with any kind of talent can retrieve them. It further shows everything I've been posting here is true, or is in the process of being proven true and better yet, right.
So kiki comrade troll, do you get it? This is the focus now, and with the investigation it only gets worse for you. The facts are winning the day, and that makes it impossible for you to spin a good face onto Russia. It makes it impossible for you and sig to move the focus off Russia. Think wiki leaks and indictments. Mueller is working from the outside in. Trump is experiencing this like a noose tightening slowly around his neck and it shows.
Come on, you must be a little impressed with Mueller. You must wish Russia could get their act together and work the way our democracy is working. Utilizing the rule of law. All the gripes of late by you sig and others about our democratic institutions being corrupt, now working together so well to expose an outside threat. And to then clean house the way we have begun to do. Come on admit it, you're a bit envious comrade aren't you?
T
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:EXCEPT WHEN YOU POST DEFAMATORY LIES ABOUT OTHER POSTERS.
Nothing about you or what you post scares me. I have said many times here what we post is out there on google
You have been told that you're wrong, you have been given evidence that you're wrong, even YOUR OWN POSTS demonstrate that you lie. If there is any threshold about what you know or should have known which separates an honest mistake from a malicious lie, you passed that threshold a long time ago.
All of this so-called "history" of posts simply demonstrate that KIKI has a different opinion than you; it does not make KIKI a "comrade" anything, but your insistence that it does makes YOU legally liable for any damages that might happen. So I'd stop lying, if I were you.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
America is an oligarchy
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by THGRRI:
Historians and Scholars decide if a president is good or not Jack. Very educated people. Historians and Executive Branch experts. These experts, Democrat, Republican and Independent, together rated Trump dead last ( worst ever ). And you, you Jack, can't see for yourself any reason why. Any reason Jack.
The reasons for treating you like someone who's opinion should be respected are non existent Jack, non existent.
T
Quote:
How Does Trump Stack Up Against
the Best — and Worst — Presidents?
Overall rankings.
Presidents since World War II in boldface.
Presidents whose rank changed since last survey
0 = FAILURE
50 = AVERAGE
100 = GREAT
2014 RANK, CHANGE IN RANKING, UP OR DOWN, TOP 10 IN 2018
1. Lincoln 95
2. Washington 93
3. F.D. Roosevelt 89
4. T. Roosevelt 81
5. Jefferson 80
6. Truman 75
7. Eisenhower 74
8. Obama 71 8. Clinton –5
9. Reagan 69 9. Jackson –6
10. L.B. Johnson 69 10. Wilson –1
11. Wilson 67 11. Reagan +2
12. Madison 64 12. L.B. Johnson +2
13. Clinton 64 13. Madison +1
14. J. Adams 63 14. Kennedy –2
15. Jackson 62 15. J. Adams +1
16. Kennedy 62 16. Monroe –2
17. G.H.W. Bush 61
18. Monroe 61 18. Obama +10
19. McKinley 55 19. Polk –1
20. Polk 54 20. Taft –2
21. Grant 53 21. McKinley +2
22. Taft 52 22. J.Q. Adams –1
23. J.Q. Adams 52 23. Cleveland –1
24. Cleveland 51 24. Ford –1
25. Ford 47 25. Van Buren –2
26. Carter 45
27. Van Buren 44 27. Coolidge –1
28. Coolidge 42 28. Grant +7
29. Hayes 42 29. B. Harrison –3
30. G.W. Bush 40 30. Hayes +1
31. Arthur 40 31. Garfield –3
32. B. Harrison 38 32. Arthur +1
33. Nixon 37 33. Taylor –2
34. Garfield 37 34. Nixon +1
BOTTOM 10
35. Taylor 33 35. G.W. Bush +5
36. Hoover 33 36. Tyler –1
37. Tyler 31 37. Fillmore –1
38. Fillmore 28 38. Hoover +2
39. Harding 25 39. W.H. Harrison –3
40. A. Johnson 25 40. Pierce –1
41. Pierce 23 41. A. Johnson +1
42. W.H. Harrison 19 42. Harding +3
43. Buchanan 15
44. Trump 12
Methodology: Each expert was invited to rate each president on a 0-100 scale, with 0 = failure, 50 = average, and 100 = great. Scores were then averaged for each president, with presidents then ranked in order of highest average to lowest.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/02/19/opinion/how-does-
trump-stack-up-against-the-best-and-worst-presidents.html
Golly. EXPERTS!!
So Expert that they think the Next Addition to Mt. Rushmore should be Washington, T Roosevelt, or Lincoln!! Hint: they are already there.
So how might history look upon Trump? In this survey of Liberal experts, White House Alumni trends from 2014 to 2018 show GOP Nixon up one spot, Reagan up 2 spots, Bush 41 settled at 17 - the top half, Bush 43 up 5 spots. And Democraps Carter settled in the bottom half, and Clinton dropping 5 spots. The future polls look bad for Obama and good for Trump.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Trump's mouth gives Experts all they need to know Trump spouts nonsense. Trump’s claim Mueller found ‘NO COLLUSION’ is Literal Nonsense.
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Golly. EXPERTS!!
So how might history look upon Trump?
One of Trump’s favorite methods to defend his innocence in the Russia investigation is to claim that any piece of evidence that does not explicitly assert his guilt is in fact evidence of his innocence. It is exactly like Trump saying he was cleared by the Warren Commission because the Warren Commission report makes no conclusion about Trump and Russia. However, Trump misread the indictment.
In fact the indictment declared that collusion has been detected. It didn’t name all of the conspirators, but the grand jury did definitely claim to know the names of conspirators who were not named in the indictment.
I quote paragraph 2 of www.justice.gov/file/1035477/download :
From in or around 2014 to the present, Defendants knowingly and intentionally conspired with each other (and with persons known and unknown to the Grand Jury) to defraud the United States by impairing, obstructing, and defeating the lawful functions of the government through fraud and deceit for the purpose of interfering with the U.S. political and electoral processes, including the presidential election of 2016.
The indictment explicitly states that there are known unindicted co-conspirators. It does not address the question of whether one is, say, named Donald Trump.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Very well stated second. Funny how some here only want to argue and not discuss the facts as they are. Some of the responses to posts that are true representations of the facts as we are learning them are ignorant beyond belief. And there's that word again, conspiracy. tick tockQuote:
Originally posted by second:Quote:
Trump's mouth gives Experts all they need to know Trump spouts nonsense. Trump’s claim Mueller found ‘NO COLLUSION’ is Literal Nonsense.
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Golly. EXPERTS!!
So how might history look upon Trump?
One of Trump’s favorite methods to defend his innocence in the Russia investigation is to claim that any piece of evidence that does not explicitly assert his guilt is in fact evidence of his innocence. It is exactly like Trump saying he was cleared by the Warren Commission because the Warren Commission report makes no conclusion about Trump and Russia. However, Trump misread the indictment.
In fact the indictment declared that collusion has been detected. It didn’t name all of the conspirators, but the grand jury did definitely claim to know the names of conspirators who were not named in the indictment.
I quote paragraph 2 of www.justice.gov/file/1035477/download :
From in or around 2014 to the present, Defendants knowingly and intentionally conspired with each other (and with persons known and unknown to the Grand Jury) to defraud the United States by impairing, obstructing, and defeating the lawful functions of the government through fraud and deceit for the purpose of interfering with the U.S. political and electoral processes, including the presidential election of 2016.
The indictment explicitly states that there are known unindicted co-conspirators. It does not address the question of whether one is, say, named Donald Trump.
T
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by THGRRI:
Historians and Scholars decide if a president is good or not Jack. Very educated people. Historians and Executive Branch experts. These experts, Democrat, Republican and Independent, together rated Trump dead last ( worst ever ). And you, you Jack, can't see for yourself any reason why. Any reason Jack. Do you realize how stupid that makes you?
That video had very valid reasons why he is a bad president. All our foreign policy people were telling our allies at this summit, don't worry about Trump listen to us. Trump isn't forever. That's hundreds of our people at this summit Jack. Hundreds of our foreign policy experts. Including Trumps hand picked people. That video showed all our allies were calling Trump stupid and untrustworthy.
The reasons for treating you like someone who's opinion should be respected are non existent Jack, non existent.
So... no good reasons outside of the Russian narrative then, huh?
lol. You're a funny dude.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The greatest Presidents?
George Washington, as general, was so hated that soldiers were deserting from his army.
Abraham Lincoln was hated... HATED ... as President, for many of the same reasons that Trump is hated
Quote:http://knowledgenuts.com/2014/01/02/abraham-lincoln-was-actually-hated
When Lincoln took office in March 1861, he was entering a presidency he had won with only 39.8 percent of the popular vote. Reactions from the public were so negative that on the eve of his inauguration he had to be smuggled into the capital during the dead of night in a disguise. He was looked down upon for everything from his humble beginnings and lack of education to his awkward appearance and high voice. Even the commanding general of his armies, George McClellan, called him the “original gorilla.” (Gives a whole new meaning to to term “OG.”)
In 1861, Lincoln inherited a nation in crisis. With the United States on the brink of civil war, the American public was on edge and blamed Lincoln for everything going wrong in the country. Of course, Southerners hated him for trying to change the way of life they’d known for years. They resented him for trying to abolish slavery and declared their secession from the Union on February 4, 1861. But Northerners weren’t fond of him either, unimpressed with his slow start at the presidency. They expected him to being doing more and to be doing it sooner.
People even hated his speeches. The Gettysburg Address—now revered as one of the greatest speeches of all time and memorized by school children across the nation—was panned by many. One Chicago Times writer said: “The cheek of every American must tingle with shame as he reads the silly flat dishwatery utterances of a man who has to be pointed out to intelligent foreigners as the President of the United States.” Ouch.
Lincoln’s wife, Mary Todd Lincoln, said the constant deluge of insults wore on the president’s feelings, and Lincoln himself reportedly said, “I would rather be dead than, as President, thus abused in the house of my friends.”
-when-president/
Truman was VERY unpopular at the end of his term
Quote:
Why was Harry Truman so unpopular at the end of his presidency?
In February 1952, Gallup polls placed President Harry S. Truman's approval mark at 22%, one of the lowest-ever ratings for an active American president, only matched by Richard Nixon in 1974.
Essentially, Truman’s unpopularity mostly stemmed from the pressures placed on his Presidency by the Cold War with the Soviet Union and the ‘hot’ war in Korea. Among American voters, these played out as discontent with the conduct of the war, fears about communist influence, anger about industrial disputes, added to perceived corruption and nepotism.
Jackson, a populist, was disdained by the elites as being uncouth and uncultured OUTSIDER; the "party" that his supporters gave him wrecked the White House.
Quote:
To many voters, the presidential candidates of 1824 were a lackluster, squabbling batch of what we’d today call Washington insiders. Known as “Old Hickory,” Jackson was the exception—the humble boy veteran of the Revolution and heroic victor at the Battle of New Orleans in the War of 1812, who had proved his mettle and virtue against the British and Indians alike... Supporters assured voters that the general’s natural talents far outshone the specious, elite distinctions of his chief competitor, John Quincy Adams—the son of a president, raised in royal capitals, who’d been a member of Phi Beta Kappa, a Harvard professor and secretary of state. [SOUND FAMILIAR?]
“The Majesty of the People had disappeared,” she shuddered. “A rabble, a mob, of boys, negroes, women, children, scrambling fighting, romping …. The whole [White House] had been inundated by the rabble mob.”
... Jackson’s conduct in office made official Washington no happier. Mrs. Smith’s husband was president of the Washington branch of the Bank of the United States (a rough counterpart of today’s Federal Reserve), and eventually lost his job whenNOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Here's my response to your last post comrade troll sig
T
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Oh... BTW. I got home from work this morning and Trump was still president.
How's that impeachment clock working out for you?
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Keep digging.
Here's my response to your last post comrade troll sig
BTW, the greatest threat to our democracy is people like you. You're willing to trample the Constitution because you're too stupid to put two thoughts together, and so your poor brain needs "protection" from scary facts and uncomfortable ideas.
Did you hear the patronizing from Friedman? The President would "explain" the problem in simple terms that the people would understand?? Jeez.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
America is an oligarchy
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
At times we reflect back on history. We remember events that have happened, especially ones of importance. Some of those historical events so boggle the mind they elicit a common response. How could people be so stupid?
Well, I give you Jack. People this stupid really do exist. The history of Trump and Russia is already being written. The truth of it will never penetrate Jacks sphere of ignorance. And people like Jack always move on to their next insane interpretations of current events. Sadly, another thing history has taught us is that there is never a shortage of stupid people.
Being stupid is not a crime. Nor should people be punished and ridiculed for being inflicted with this abnormality. Unless, I'll say that again, Unless, they are being stupid in a mean spirted way. Again, I give you Jack. He is an angry drunk lashing out, choosing to troll rather than offer substantive feedback or acknowledge even the simplest of truths.
T
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:Quote:Keep digging.
Here's my response to your last post comrade troll sig
BTW, the greatest threat to our democracy is people like you. You're willing to trample the Constitution because you're too stupid to put two thoughts together, and so your poor brain needs "protection" from scary facts and uncomfortable ideas.
Did you hear the patronizing from Friedman? The President would "explain" the problem in simple terms that the people would understand?? Jeez.
Simple like this sig.
Part One; Friedman is saying the Russians did it so lets take action, and is dismayed our president isn't doing so.
Part two; Sig is a Russian troll and upset because Friedman just criticized both Trump and Russia.
Did you sense the patronizing from me sig? Patronizing; To treat with an apparent kindness that betrays a feeling of superiority:
T
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:We already knew there was Collusion with Hilliary. But this witch hunt was kicked off specifying Trump.
Originally posted by second:Quote:Trump's mouth gives Experts all they need to know Trump spouts nonsense. Trump’s claim Mueller found ‘NO COLLUSION’ is Literal Nonsense.
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
Golly. EXPERTS!!
So how might history look upon Trump?
One of Trump’s favorite methods to defend his innocence in the Russia investigation is to claim that any piece of evidence that does not explicitly assert his guilt is in fact evidence of his innocence. It is exactly like Trump saying he was cleared by the Warren Commission because the Warren Commission report makes no conclusion about Trump and Russia. However, Trump misread the indictment.
In fact the indictment declared that collusion has been detected. It didn’t name all of the conspirators, but the grand jury did definitely claim to know the names of conspirators who were not named in the indictment.
I quote paragraph 2 of www.justice.gov/file/1035477/download :
From in or around 2014 to the present, Defendants knowingly and intentionally conspired with each other (and with persons known and unknown to the Grand Jury) to defraud the United States by impairing, obstructing, and defeating the lawful functions of the government through fraud and deceit for the purpose of interfering with the U.S. political and electoral processes, including the presidential election of 2016.
The indictment explicitly states that there are known unindicted co-conspirators. It does not address the question of whether one is, say, named Donald Trump.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Signym, JewelStaiteFan and GOP wisdom in Washington agree that there’s little reason to believe that Robert Mueller’s ongoing investigation will end up proving much of interest.
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
We already knew there was Collusion with Hilliary. But this witch hunt was kicked off specifying Trump.
But to believe that requires belief that after a decade of paying Manafort millions for his expertise to help pro-Russian candidates win elections in Ukraine, no one from Moscow thought to consult with him about how to help a pro-Russia candidate win an election in the United States.
And we have to believe that even though we know Trump Jr was enthusiastic about the idea of collaborating with Russia on obtaining anti-Hillary dirt, when he met with Russians on this very topic, they didn’t talk about it.
And we have to believe that Trump’s public call for Putin to hack more Clinton emails was completely random.
Trump–Russia skeptics call it a bizarre series of coincidences complete with a massive cover-up for no particular reason. Cover-up means Trump’s talk about firing Mueller, Rod Rosenstein, Jeff Sessions, the FBI, etc. and Trump saying "No Collusion!" a dozen times a day.
But Trump isn’t an idiot. When he keeps on doing something, it’s probably for a reason. The cover-up is likely covering up serious wrongdoing.
Trump spent more than a year on the campaign trail consistently praising Vladimir Putin and defending him from critics, incurring political risks with no obvious upside for himself.
Jared Kushner was trying to create some kind of secure backchannel line of communication to Moscow that would be impenetrable by American intelligence.
www.businessinsider.com/jared-kushner-russia-back-channel-testimony-20
17-7
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
And so much more second. Like admitting on TV he fired Comey because the Russia thing. Telling the Russians in the Oval Office, that now that Comey was gone the Russia thing would go away. That shows intent.
Getting Trump impeached with a republican congress is next to impossible. With a democratic one it is inevitable.
T
Quote:
Originally posted by second:Quote:Signym, JewelStaiteFan and GOP wisdom in Washington agree that there’s little reason to believe that Robert Mueller’s ongoing investigation will end up proving much of interest.
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
We already knew there was Collusion with Hilliary. But this witch hunt was kicked off specifying Trump.
But to believe that requires belief that after a decade of paying Manafort millions for his expertise to help pro-Russian candidates win elections in Ukraine, no one from Moscow thought to consult with him about how to help a pro-Russia candidate win an election in the United States.
And we have to believe that even though we know Trump Jr was enthusiastic about the idea of collaborating with Russia on obtaining anti-Hillary dirt, when he met with Russians on this very topic, they didn’t talk about it.
And we have to believe that Trump’s public call for Putin to hack more Clinton emails was completely random.
Trump–Russia skeptics call it a bizarre series of coincidences complete with a massive cover-up for no particular reason. Cover-up means Trump’s talk about firing Mueller, Rod Rosenstein, Jeff Sessions, the FBI, etc. and Trump saying "No Collusion!" a dozen times a day.
But Trump isn’t an idiot. When he keeps on doing something, it’s probably for a reason. The cover-up is likely covering up serious wrongdoing.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I guarantee that the Democrats will NOT get the necessary 2/3 majority in the 2018 election. Democrats shouldn’t get their hopes up that the special counsel will “save” them or the country from Trump. And as you said, Trump appeared on national television and explained to an NBC News audience that he improperly used his powers of office to remove FBI director Comey in an effort to shield his friends and associates from criminal scrutiny. The GOP shrugged that off, and eventually, the public (both Democrats and Republicans) moved on.
Originally posted by THGRRI:
And so much more second. Like admitting on TV he fired Comey because the Russia thing. Telling the Russians in the Oval Office, that now that Comey was gone the Russia thing would go away. That shows intent.
Getting Trump impeached with a republican congress is next to impossible. With a democratic one it is inevitable.
My guess is that whatever revelations are forthcoming from Mueller will fit a similar pattern — most people already have a negative view of Trump, so it’s hard to move the needle too much more on public opinion, and the whole GOP has already wagered so heavily on the Trump experiment that they’re not going to pull the plug regardless of what happened.
I think the best a Democrat can hope for is that Trump does not get reelected. And maybe there will be enough Democrats in the Senate after 2018 election to monkey-wrench Trump from replacing Supreme Court Justices with Anthony Scalia clones. The GOP did it to Obama and maybe the Democrats can take revenge on Trump nominated Justices.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:what?
Part One; Friedman is saying the Russians did it
Quote:What?
so lets take action
Sloppy words, sloppy thinking. WHAT did the Russians "do"? You can't "take action" unless you're specific about what you're trying to correct.
As far as I can tell, Russians did two things:
1) They snooped, benignly, on various servers. Now, just because they didn't DO anything while they were snooping doesn't mean they COULDN'T HAVE. So we need to beef up our server security significantly. I've been an advocate of paper ballot voting and hand-counting ever since the 2000 election (Black box voting http://blackboxvoting.org) and have been agitating for better overall cybersecurity ever since whenever.
WHAT ELSE, pray tell THUGR, am I supposed to advocate for that will satisfy your paranoid blood-lust?
BTW, it turns out that social media is turning to hardcopy as well, since they will be sending ... get this ... postcards via USPS to verify physical addresses before allowing ad purchases.
2) They had 13 trolls operating to sway American public opinion. Wow. 13. Between you, GSTRING, KRAPO (who btw is a foreigner), JO-IDIOCRACY, TWITCHY, and DULLBADGUY, all of whom classify as trolls, we've got half that number right here! Say, did any of YOU manage to sway public opinion via social media?
I thought not.
Those 13 people did what? They forwarded and amplified ideas that were ALREADY in the public arena. So what??? The reaction for THAT is to teach people how to be more intelligent consumers of the media, NOT to clamp down on the free speech rights of Americans.
Quote:I'm a Russian troll because somebody else did something? Epic logic fail there, THUGR. You're 100% wrong about me, and I look forward to the day when I can take you to court. So keep at it.
Part two; Sig is a Russian troll and upset because Friedman just criticized both Trump and Russia.
BTW, you remind me of this asswipe character, Melvin, in Tremors especially at 1:48
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
America is an oligarchy
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:Quote:I guarantee that the Democrats will NOT get the necessary 2/3 majority in the 2018 election. Democrats shouldn’t get their hopes up that the special counsel will “save” them or the country from Trump. And as you said, Trump appeared on national television and explained to an NBC News audience that he improperly used his powers of office to remove FBI director Comey in an effort to shield his friends and associates from criminal scrutiny. The GOP shrugged that off, and eventually, the public (both Democrats and Republicans) moved on.
Originally posted by THGRRI:
And so much more second. Like admitting on TV he fired Comey because the Russia thing. Telling the Russians in the Oval Office, that now that Comey was gone the Russia thing would go away. That shows intent.
Getting Trump impeached with a republican congress is next to impossible. With a democratic one it is inevitable.
My guess is that whatever revelations are forthcoming from Mueller will fit a similar pattern — most people already have a negative view of Trump, so it’s hard to move the needle too much more on public opinion, and the whole GOP has already wagered so heavily on the Trump experiment that they’re not going to pull the plug regardless of what happened.
I think the best a Democrat can hope for is that Trump does not get reelected. And maybe there will be enough Democrats in the Senate after 2018 election to monkey-wrench Trump from replacing Supreme Court Justices with Anthony Scalia clones. The GOP did it to Obama and maybe the Democrats can take revenge on Trump nominated Justices.
It should not be easy to remove a sitting president. Still, we know so much already that demands he be removed, in MHO. What we know is like a window into what transpired between Trump and the Russians. For myself and others who hope that Trump will be removed, that may be realized by what is yet to be learned and or revealed.
Mueller is looking into everything. I heard today we are going to learn a lot about how foreign lobbyists operate, and how that effects policy. Also, Trump has adhered to corrupt business practices from day one. With Muellers' investigation, the state DA at some point, will have access to more than enough evidence of corruption to go after Trump.
One way or the other...
T
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Trump, after being criticized for his response to Russia's election meddling, challenged Jeff Sessions, his attorney general, to launch an investigation into the Obama administration for failing to do enough to stop the 2016 election foreign interference.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/966321700588711936
"He has been tougher on Russia in the first year than Obama was in eight years combined," White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said during Tuesday's White House briefing.
Why, if Trump believes the intelligence community's assessment that Russia interfered, hasn't he enforced the sanctions he signed into law last August which were passed by Congress to punish Russia for its actions?
Sanders reiterated that Trump has been "tougher on Russia" than his predecessor.
www.businessinsider.com/sarah-sanders-trump-russia-sanctions-after-mue
ller-indictments-2018-2
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SECOND:
Trump, after being criticized for his response to Russia's election meddling, challenged Jeff Sessions, his attorney general, to launch an investigation into the Obama administration for failing to do enough to stop the 2016 election foreign interference.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/966321700588711936
"He has been tougher on Russia in the first year than Obama was in eight years combined," White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said during Tuesday's White House briefing.
Why, if Trump believes the intelligence community's assessment that Russia interfered, hasn't he enforced the sanctions he signed into law last August which were passed by Congress to punish Russia for its actions?
Sanders reiterated that Trump has been "tougher on Russia" than his predecessor.
www.businessinsider.com/sarah-sanders-trump-russia-sanctions-after-mue
ller-indictments-2018-2]
I know, it's astounding isn't it. Nothing about Putin and Russia. Nope it's back to Obama, investigate Obama. This guys a bigger clown then we possibly could have imagined. And the people who back him still are much sicker that I thought.
T
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Mueller asking if Manafort promised banker White House job in return for loan
Federal investigators are probing whether former Trump campaign chair Paul Manafort promised a Chicago banker a job in the Trump White House in return for $16 million in home loans, two people with direct knowledge of the matter told NBC News.
The banker, Stephen Calk, president of the Federal Savings Bank, was announced as a member of candidate Trump's Council of Economic Advisers in August 2016.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/mueller-asking-if-manafo
rt-promised-banker-white-house-job-return-n849916
T
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
They had 13 trolls operating to sway American public opinion. Wow. 13. !
She's REALLY downplaying it AGAIN??? This wasn't a HOBBY for these people, undermining this country was their DAY JOB. No matter the EFFECT, it's the principle!
Obnoxious freaking Russians, man...
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by THGRRI:
At times we reflect back on history. We remember events that have happened, especially ones of importance. Some of those historical events so boggle the mind they elicit a common response. How could people be so stupid?
Well, I give you Jack. People this stupid really do exist. The history of Trump and Russia is already being written. The truth of it will never penetrate Jacks sphere of ignorance. And people like always move on to their next insane interpretations of current events. Sadly, another thing history has taught us is that there is never a shortage of stupid people.
Being stupid is not a crime. Nor should people be punished and ridiculed for being inflicted with this abnormality. Unless, I'll say that again, Unless, they are being stupid in a mean spirted way. Again, I give you Jack. He is an angry drunk lashing out, choosing to troll rather than offer substantive feedback or acknowledge even the simplest of truths.
T
I haven't had a drink in almost 15 months.
Again I'll mention that I've made many great improvements in my life in that amount of time instead of whining and bitching about all the things in the world that I'm absolutely powerless to do anything about.
In that time you've let this all consume you until it's become a part of who you are. I understand why you find me to be an enemy even though it is you who attack my character and intelligence every time you post to or about me. You actually believe that I'm somehow attacking you personally when I don't agree with you.
I feel sorry for you, buddy.
Do try to remember that I was the one who posted the night that Trump won that we needed to come together. A post that you actually said was righteous.
It was you and Sigs that turned that thread into a massive shit show by the next day, and your behavior has only gotten worse since then.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Seeing as you're so huffy about THE PRINCIPLE! ...
She's REALLY downplaying it AGAIN??? This wasn't a HOBBY for these people, undermining this country was their DAY JOB. No matter the EFFECT, it's the principle! - TWITCHY
Would you be so huffy if you knew that American "professionals" did the same, or worse, to other countries?
****
Quote:Sorry SIX if I turned your post into a shit show. I don't recall it; but you're right: we need to come together, on things we can really agree on, not just on hold-hands-and-sing-Kumbaya. Which is why I think it is so important that we actually discuss what AMERICA'S interests are, to find out where we agree and where we disagree. Unfortunately, most people around here seem unprepared to discuss what we should actually be defending, and insist on hyperventilating and screeching. (Oh, and launching baseless defamatory attacks on other posters.)
It was you and Sigs that turned that thread into a massive shit show by the next day, and your behavior has only gotten worse since then.- SIX
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
America is an oligarchy
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Yep, Trump was in the White House in August 2016.
Originally posted by THGRRI:
Mueller asking if Manafort promised banker White House job in return for loan
Federal investigators are probing whether former Trump campaign chair Paul Manafort promised a Chicago banker a job in the Trump White House in return for $16 million in home loans, two people with direct knowledge of the matter told NBC News.
The banker, Stephen Calk, president of the Federal Savings Bank, was announced as a member of candidate Trump's Council of Economic Advisers in August 2016.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/mueller-asking-if-manafo
rt-promised-banker-white-house-job-return-n849916
T
You fool.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
A post that you actually said was righteous.
I'm sure he just didn't have your full mental picture.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Would you be so huffy if you knew that American "professionals" did the same, or worse, to other countries?
So help me gawd, if you start blathering about Obama or The Clintons again...
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:You just really hate when relevance combats your nonsense, right?
Originally posted by Wishimay:Quote:So help me gawd, if you start blathering about Obama or The Clintons again...
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Would you be so huffy if you knew that American "professionals" did the same, or worse, to other countries?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
You just really hate when relevance combats your nonsense, right?
No, I hate it when people blather on about things no one can do anything about, or even really know the details of, and isn't really relevant TO RIGHT NOW. TODAY.
I wish we could completely do away with presidents having ANY influence on culture and make them stick to foreign relations, and military affairs.
EVERYTHING ELSE should not have a thing to do with the president. We'd have a much more stable society.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Sorry SIX if I turned your post into a shit show. I don't recall it; but you're right: we need to come together, on things we can really agree on, not just on hold-hands-and-sing-Kumbaya. Which is why I think it is so important that we actually discuss what AMERICA'S interests are, to find out where we agree and where we disagree. Unfortunately, most people around here seem unprepared to discuss what we should actually be defending, and insist on hyperventilating and screeching. (Oh, and launching baseless defamatory attacks on other posters.)/b]
It was a group effort. I do remember especially asking you to tone it down because I'd never before seen you post like that (at least not that I could recall during my drunken idiocy). That night only stands out to me because of the election. I was totally drunk that night as well. Otherwise I would have probably forgotten all about it like most of the rest of them. I didn't even know T or G before I had turned into a drunk, so I didn't really know anything about them until January of last year.
Less than two months later I was sober and now I see what you were talking about. The RWED is far more of a shit show than I ever remember it being. There was always fighting, but there were also a lot of rational minds here back then as well. All that's left is the crazy people.
I wouldn't bother trying to have any rational conversations here or trying to change anybodies mind about anything if that's your intention. That's a complete waste of time. I only post here because it's one of the last places I still have an online presence and I haven't yet been able to eliminate the internet from my life entirely.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Thomas Friedman felt compelled to write about Trump's Twitter reaction to the newest indictments in Robert Mueller's special counsel investigation. If Trump is so innocent, why does he go to such extraordinary lengths to try to shut Mueller down? "There was something in Trump's reaction to Mueller that was deeply off." He called it "so unpresidential, it was frightening." Trump's tweets had assailed the FBI, the media, Democrats -- but not Moscow. "To me, it really crossed a line," Friedman said. While Trump has "broken many norms as president," these tweets were different.
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
You just really hate when relevance combats your nonsense, right?
http://money.cnn.com/2018/02/20/media/thomas-friedman-new-york-times-c
olumn/index.html
Trump has shown himself unwilling to defend America against a Russian campaign to divide and undermine our democracy.
That is, either Trump’s real estate empire has taken large amounts of money from shady oligarchs linked to the Kremlin — so much that they literally own him — or rumors are true that he engaged in misbehavior while he was in Moscow running the Miss Universe contest, which Russian intelligence has on tape; or Trump actually believes Russian President Vladimir Putin when he says he is innocent of intervening in our elections — over the explicit findings of Trump’s own CIA, NSA and FBI chiefs.
In sum, Trump is either hiding something so threatening to himself, or he’s incompetent to be commander in chief.
Trump’s behavior amounts to a refusal to carry out his oath of office — to protect and defend the Constitution. Here’s an imperfect but close analogy: It’s as if George W. Bush had said after 9/11: “No big deal. I am going golfing over the weekend in Florida and blogging about how it’s all the Democrats’ fault — no need to hold a National Security Council meeting.”
The President should lead our nation’s defense against this attack on the integrity of our electoral democracy.
What would that look like? He would educate the public on the scale of the problem; he would bring together all the stakeholders — state and local election authorities, the federal government, both parties and all the owners of social networks that the Russians used to carry out their interference — to mount an effective defense; and he would bring together our intelligence and military experts to mount an effective offense against Putin — the best defense of all.
What we have instead is a president vulgarly tweeting that the Russians are “laughing their asses off in Moscow”.
www.nytimes.com/2018/02/18/opinion/trump-russia-putin.html
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Would you be so huffy if you knew that American "professionals" did the same, or worse, to other countries?- SIGNY
So help me gawd, if you start blathering about Obama or The Clintons again... - TWITCHY
You just really hate when relevance combats your nonsense, right? - JSF
No, I hate it when people blather on about things no one can do anything about, or even really know the details of, and isn't really relevant TO RIGHT NOW. TODAY.
I wish we could completely do away with presidents having ANY influence on culture and make them stick to foreign relations, and military affairs.- TWITCHY
Well, WISHY, a few points:
1) You were all hot that this was a matter of PRINCPLE! Well, I just wanted to see how far your PRINCIPLES! extend. As it turns out, they don't extend to Democratic Presidents. Got it!
Oh and BTW- I bitched a lot harder about GWB than I did about Bill Clinton, so don't go on thinking that I'm some sort of GOP partisan hack, like you're a DNC partisan hack.
2) Do you really think what what happened yesterday isn't relevant to today? No illegality to recognize, or lessons to be drawn? Ok, then stop bitching and whining about what the RUSSIANS! did "yesterday" ... not relevant to RIGHT NOW. TODAY.
3) The United States' interference in other democracies' elections IS foreign relations, and IS properly the purview of the American President. I don't know what the hell you're smoking, but your mind is sure making a lot of u-turns and detours to avoid the conflict between what you SAY are your "principles" and their even-handed implementation in real life, including to our own foreign policy.
Just my $0.02.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
America is an oligarchy
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:My two cents: My guess is what Trump is hiding has to do with money. Who can forget that quote from his son Donald Trump, Jr. from back in 2008: “Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross section of a lot of our assets.” They may own our president.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Just my $0.02.
But whatever it is, Trump is either trying so hard to hide it or is so naive about Russia that he is ready to not only resist mounting a proper defense of our democracy, he’s actually ready to undermine some of our most important institutions, the FBI and Justice Department, to keep his compromised status hidden.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
ready to not only resist mounting a proper defense of our democracy- SECOND
Elections, and how to hold them, are the purview of each State Secretary, and the counties therein. The Feds can provide assistance and guidance on cybersecurity, but they cannot legally tell the states how to run things ... unless you want to change the Constitution, that is. PERSONALLY, as I have said before, I believe the actual voting process should be paper ballots, counted by hand, in an open forum. As for voter rolls and gerrymandering ... there is so much partisan monkey-business going on there, neither of the two main parties have any interest in fixing the system because they look forward to the day when THEY have their hands on the levers of power. That's why the Dems didn't jump on the whole black box voting problem in 2000 and 2004, when it first became evident that the vote count could be electronically manipulated.
Quote:The institutions have undermined themselves. The NSA started an (illegal) universal snooping program under GWB which accelerated under Obama, as revealed by various whistleblowers including Snowden. There is, it is said, a giant NSA database of illegally-obtained surveillance which the NSA shares with other agencies, the game of which is to be able to re-create a plausible LEGAL pathway, applicable in court, for illegally-obtained information. That big data center in Utah? It's not there for shits and giggles, yanno.
he’s actually ready to undermine some of our most important institutions, the FBI and Justice Department, to keep his compromised status hidden.- SECOND
The CIA illegally snooped on the Senate Intelligence Committee (yanno, the one that's supposed to provide "oversight" for our security state) as the committee was investigating CIA torture programs, and Brennan got up and lied, bald-faced, to Congress and the American people about it. And that's not including the CIA's illegal torture, rendition, gun-and-drug-running, and media infiltration programs which have made us so popular around the world.
The FBI made a complete mockery of any investigations regarding Hillary Clinton or the DNC. They never examined the laptops or other devices that Hillary's staff might have kept copies of emails on and in fact allowed them to be destroyed (with hammers); tossed out immunity like confetti to people who weren't even CHARGED with anything but who were simply acting as witnesses, making it impossible to charge or "turn" ANYone; did not place Hillary under oath; and NEVER examined the DNC server that was supposedly "hacked" by Russians, preferring instead to take the word of a DNC-contracted company. In other words, they did everything completely bass-akwards, presumably to spoil the investigations so thoroughly that they could never be re-opened again.
DOJ, FBI, and DNC officials - thru Fusion GPS- cooked up a "dossier" on Trump; contacting, I might add, who-knows-how-many unnamed "Russians" to obtain unverifiable Russian-sourced gossip, in order to obtain a FISA warrant.
The DOJ, FBI, and NSA then collectively used the security apparatus to target a Presidential candidate, and then President with leaks. All the while ignoring anything to do with the bribes and foreign money coming in from Russia (Uranium One) and Saudi Arabia (Clinton Foundation).
This is NOT an even-handed application of the law. The agencies need a "root and branch" cleaning.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
America is an oligarchy
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Just like Trump comrade sig always wants to criticize Americans and our institutions, while shielding Russia from any blame. She is always harping on our dishonest CIA, FBI, police, media and judicial systems. Nothing however about our attackers, Russia. I'll ask again comrade sig, why's that?
Just as important, why do so many here not call her out on that. JSF, Rappy, Jack, kiki? Instead they avoid the topic of Russia as well. Except to mount a defense of Trump who doesn't mention Russia attacking us either.
Hey guys, don't you care about Russia doing what it is doing? Second, Wish, SGG, G/CC, JO KPO and others here do. Why don't you?
Enough, it's been a year and nothing about Russia attacking us. Speak up or shut up. Stop implying you represent the opinion of Americans because I don't see it. I don' believe it.
T
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Because Russia will do what Russia will do, and we have no control over what THEY do. What we CAN do is "mount a proper defense" ... which I have been harping on for longer that you've been here ... get rid of the NSA-rigged Microsoft operating system (you DO know that the NSA refused to allow proper encryption on the MS operating system so that THEY could snoop in whenever they wanted, right? That this left everyone defenseless against criminal and political hackers, in order to convenience the NSA?) ... and put in proper air-gapped servers with appropriate backup for all critical functions like banks, utilities, hospitals, and government functions .... an eliminate those giant hackable commercial databases maintained by google, FB etc whose sole purpose is advertising.
Just like Trump comrade sig always wants to criticize Americans and our institutions, while shielding Russia from any blame. She is always harping on our dishonest CIA, FBI, media and judicial systems but nothing about our attackers, Russia. I'll ask again comrade sig, why's that?
Also, we've reached a kind of "balance of power" with Russia - altho they can damage us, we can damage them too.
So altho we can't control what Russia does, we DO have control over our response, and we DO have control (or at least we're supposed to have control) over our security agencies. So, yeah, that's why I focus ON US: because we can DO something about US. Not just bitch, whine, hyperventilate, and screech.
God, you're an idiot.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
America is an oligarchy
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:Quote:Because Russia will do what Russia will do, and we have no control over what THEY do.
Just like Trump comrade sig always wants to criticize Americans and our institutions, while shielding Russia from any blame. She is always harping on our dishonest CIA, FBI, media and judicial systems but nothing about our attackers, Russia. I'll ask again comrade sig, why's that?
And there you have it folks. Sig informs us Russia will do what it will do and there is nothing America can do about it. Russia, who has the same budget as Italy yet we can do nothing. No offence meant to the Italians.
For the dummies her let me break that down to it's simplest form. Sig says we should not do anything against Russia. Nothing zip, and with that, she is stating they can do whatever they see fit to do and we should just accept it.
That's it, nothing more to say, and again no condemnation for what they are doing. As I've said for a very long time now. Sig trolls on behalf of Russia. The rest of you who don't call her out on that, you know who you are, are definitely not American. Nope, no way are you American.
Sig, kiki, Rappy, JSF, Jack, no way are you American.
T
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Signym, this is one of your typically fucking stupid, yet so articulate, arguments. These agencies are not self-funded, unlike organized crime. The Republicans, not the Democrats, in Congress could control the agencies with Congress' power over their budget. Hell, Congress could even attack a particular employee's salary, if Republicans cared to exert real pressure. But these agencies are doing what Congress wants. Congress is not threatening to lower budget by 5% or 10% or 15% to get them to obey. Congress is raising their budgets. The Republicans in Congress are not even targeting specific actions that Republicans might emptily claim they dislike.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:Quote:The institutions have undermined themselves. The NSA started an (illegal) universal snooping program under GWB which accelerated under Obama, as revealed by various whistleblowers including Snowden. There is, it is said, a giant NSA database of illegally-obtained surveillance which the NSA shares with other agencies, the game of which is to be able to re-create a plausible LEGAL pathway, applicable in court, for illegally-obtained information. That big data center in Utah? It's not there for shits and giggles, yanno.
he’s actually ready to undermine some of our most important institutions, the FBI and Justice Department, to keep his compromised status hidden.- SECOND
The CIA illegally snooped on the Senate Intelligence Committee (yanno, the one that's supposed to provide "oversight" for our security state) as the committee was investigating CIA torture programs, and Brennan got up and lied, bald-faced, to Congress and the American people about it. And that's not including the CIA's illegal torture, rendition, gun-and-drug-running, and media infiltration programs which have made us so popular around the world.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Again, you're an idiot.
For the dummies her let me break that down to it's simplest form. Sig says we should not do anything against Russia. Nothing zip, and with that, she is stating they can do whatever they see fit to do and we should just accept it. - THUGR
YES, IT'S TERRIBLE (!!!) THAT 13 RUSSIANS TRIED TO INFLUENCE OUR ELECTIONS! THAT SHOULD NEVER HAPPEN! IT'S A MATTER OF PRINCIPLE!
There, is that enough hyperventilating for you?
So, NOW WHAT?
What are we supposed to do to "make" Russia conform to our ideas of what THEY should do? Bomb them? I mean, seriously, THUGR, what's your plan here??
Russia is a whole 'nother nation, like Britain or Brazil. How would you propose that we "make" Britain do what we want (like stay in the EU) or "make" Brazil do what we want (like clean up their corruption)? Are you saying that it is the right of the USA to go rampaging around the world, "making" other nations do what we want them to? I think we've been doing that for 50 years, and look where it's gotten us.
Defense of our interests is right and proper. Why don't we at least start with that, instead of hyperventilating about what somebody else is doing?
I guess this makes me something of an "isolationist". Look it up, THUGR. Before you start hyperventilating that it's "un-American" I think you'll find it's a venerable POV which has its origins with the Founding Fathers.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
America is an oligarchy
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Signym, this is one of your typically fucking stupid, yet so articulate, arguments. These agencies are not self-funded, unlike organized crime. The Republicans, not the Democrats, in Congress could control the agencies with Congress' power over their budget. Hell, Congress could even attack a particular employee's salary, if Republicans cared to exert real pressure. But these agencies are doing what Congress wants. Congress is not threatening to lower budget by 5% or 10% or 15% to get them to obey. Congress is raising their budgets. The Republicans in Congress are not even targeting specific actions that Republicans might emptily claim they dislike.
SECOND, this is one of your typically fucking stupid, yet so articulate, arguments. You're turning a non-partisan problem in yet another endless screed against Republicans. The violations and mismanagement of the security agencies has been happening under BOTH parties. I'm not pinning this on Dems, or Repubs, but on BOTH.
I even made the point a while back that the very same Republicans who issued the Nunes memo (under the banner of transparency) were the very same Republicans who voted for the FISA 702 extension.
Your constant partisan blather doesn't excuse the fact that our security agencies have been running roughshod not only over our Constitutional protections but also our political processes. They need an investigation, from anus to head, and they need to be reined in. Whether it is the GOP that does it, or the Dems, or both - or Trump- or someone else - it needs to be done. Stop blame-shifting. This isn't a blame-game, or at least it shouldn't be, because there's enough to wrap all the way around five times over.
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
America is an oligarchy
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:You are crazy if you think CIA is NOT a partisan problem. Example: the Senate Intelligence Committee report on CIA torture was all the Democrats voting against all the Republicans except one loner.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:Quote:
Signym, this is one of your typically fucking stupid, yet so articulate, arguments. These agencies are not self-funded, unlike organized crime. The Republicans, not the Democrats, in Congress could control the agencies with Congress' power over their budget. Hell, Congress could even attack a particular employee's salary, if Republicans cared to exert real pressure. But these agencies are doing what Congress wants. Congress is not threatening to lower budget by 5% or 10% or 15% to get them to obey. Congress is raising their budgets. The Republicans in Congress are not even targeting specific actions that Republicans might emptily claim they dislike.
SECOND, this is one of your typically fucking stupid, yet so articulate, arguments. You're turning a non-partisan problem in yet another endless screed against Republicans. The violations and mismanagement of the security agencies has been happening under BOTH parties. I'm not pinning this on Dems, or Repubs, but on BOTH.
I even made the point a while back that the very same Republicans who issued the Nunes memo (under the banner of transparency) were the very same Republicans who voted for the FISA 702 extension.
Your constant partisan blather doesn't excuse the fact that our security agencies have been running roughshod not only over our Constitutional protections but also our political processes. They need an investigation, from anus to head, and they need to be reined in. Whether it is the GOP that does it, or the Dems, or both - or Trump- or someone else - it needs to be done. Stop blame-shifting. This isn't a blame-game, or at least it shouldn't be, because there's enough to wrap all the way around five times over.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senate_Intelligence_Committee_report_on_
CIA_torture
I will admit that the newest Senator, the first Democrat from Alabama, does a passable imitation of being a Republican, but if he were anything else than a faux-Democrat, the fine white people of Alabama would have voted for Trump's endorsed candidate, the child molester Roy Moore.
Occasionally Doug Jones will act as a Democrat, but he can't be relied upon because, you know, he was elected by white racists who, in a moment of weakness or mental clarity, would not tolerate the GOP's child molester. Doug Jones knows who elected him, as do I. He will please them if he can.
Doug Jones Has Been a Reliable Republican Vote
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/cortneyobrien/2018/01/25/so-far-doug-jon
es-has-voted-with-the-gop-n2439306
The Republicans don't have a big problem of Republican Congressmen voting for Democratic party ideas. On the other hand, Democrats do have big problem of Democrats voting for GOP ideas. Did I mention Doug Jones?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The CIA is everybody's problem.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:We shouldn't let this slip by unnoticed. You have posted a valid worldview.
Originally posted by Wishimay:Quote:No, I hate it when people blather on about things no one can do anything about, or even really know the details of, and isn't really relevant TO RIGHT NOW. TODAY.
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
You just really hate when relevance combats your nonsense, right?
I wish we could completely do away with presidents having ANY influence on culture and make them stick to foreign relations, and military affairs.
EVERYTHING ELSE should not have a thing to do with the president. We'd have a much more stable society.
As soon as the Federal Budget is devoid of welfare, EPA, Dept of Uneducation, Art Grants, and all other welfare, your wish will be granted. I agree, and yes, I did vote for Johnson the last 2 times.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:In most forums I've seen the political exchanges would spring up every 4 years, then settle back again mostly.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:Quote:It was a group effort. I do remember especially asking you to tone it down because I'd never before seen you post like that (at least not that I could recall during my drunken idiocy). That night only stands out to me because of the election. I was totally drunk that night as well. Otherwise I would have probably forgotten all about it like most of the rest of them. I didn't even know T or G before I had turned into a drunk, so I didn't really know anything about them until January of last year.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Sorry SIX if I turned your post into a shit show. I don't recall it; but you're right: we need to come together, on things we can really agree on, not just on hold-hands-and-sing-Kumbaya. Which is why I think it is so important that we actually discuss what AMERICA'S interests are, to find out where we agree and where we disagree. Unfortunately, most people around here seem unprepared to discuss what we should actually be defending, and insist on hyperventilating and screeching. (Oh, and launching baseless defamatory attacks on other posters.)/b]
Less than two months later I was sober and now I see what you were talking about. The RWED is far more of a shit show than I ever remember it being. There was always fighting, but there were also a lot of rational minds here back then as well. All that's left is the crazy people.
I wouldn't bother trying to have any rational conversations here or trying to change anybodies mind about anything if that's your intention. That's a complete waste of time. I only post here because it's one of the last places I still have an online presence and I haven't yet been able to eliminate the internet from my life entirely.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
Maybe the change was Obama's 8 year nonstop campaign.
But the 2016 cycle does not seem to have tapered here. The crimes and Treason of Obama, Hilliary, et al are still being investigated. And Fake News has a greater online presence than a decade ago. Liberals have obliterated the independence of the public forums.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:Quote:We shouldn't let this slip by unnoticed. You have posted a valid worldview.
Originally posted by Wishimay:Quote:No, I hate it when people blather on about things no one can do anything about, or even really know the details of, and isn't really relevant TO RIGHT NOW. TODAY.
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
You just really hate when relevance combats your nonsense, right?
I wish we could completely do away with presidents having ANY influence on culture and make them stick to foreign relations, and military affairs.
EVERYTHING ELSE should not have a thing to do with the president. We'd have a much more stable society.
As soon as the Federal Budget is devoid of welfare, EPA, Dept of Uneducation, Art Grants, and all other welfare, your wish will be granted. I agree, and yes, I did vote for Johnson the last 2 times.
I actually did agree with her comment here and was going to reply on it, but then I saw the insult she hurled my way just a few posts earlier and didn't bother.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:No, it is not. It is a Republican problem. The CIA can throw away video recordings of torturing prisoners because it would make the CIA look bad, and they can get away with it. There will be no punishment for the CIA by Congress cutting the CIA budget. The White House can't punish the CIA, when controlled by a Democrat, because it can't even discover who did what at the CIA when the CIA decides to lose all the relevant records. The only way to handle a situation where an out-of-control organization protects particular employees from their justly deserved punishment is to punish the entire organization and that means a budget cut, which only the Congressional Republicans can do. This nonsense at the CIA has been going on for decades, where it worms its way around control by any Democrat in the White House and can always run to its protectors: the GOP Congressmen.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
The CIA is everybody's problem.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Somebody has completely given up on Team America: World Police.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:Quote:Again, you're an idiot.
For the dummies her let me break that down to it's simplest form. Sig says we should not do anything against Russia. Nothing zip, and with that, she is stating they can do whatever they see fit to do and we should just accept it. - THUGR
YES, IT'S TERRIBLE (!!!) THAT 13 RUSSIANS TRIED TO INFLUENCE OUR ELECTIONS! THAT SHOULD NEVER HAPPEN! IT'S A MATTER OF PRINCIPLE!
There, is that enough hyperventilating for you?
So, NOW WHAT?
What are we supposed to do to "make" Russia conform to our ideas of what THEY should do? Bomb them? I mean, seriously, THUGR, what's your plan here??
Russia is a whole 'nother nation, like Britain or Brazil. How would you propose that we "make" Britain do what we want (like stay in the EU) or "make" Brazil do what we want (like clean up their corruption)? Are you saying that it is the right of the USA to go rampaging around the world, "making" other nations do what we want them to? I think we've been doing that for 50 years, and look where it's gotten us.
Defense of our interests is right and proper. Why don't we at least start with that, instead of hyperventilating about what somebody else is doing?
I guess this makes me something of an "isolationist". Look it up, THUGR. Before you start hyperventilating that it's "un-American" I think you'll find it's a venerable POV which has its origins with the Founding Fathers.
Can we still undermine free elections in Israel whenever we get another Communist anti-Semitic President?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:JewelStaiteFan, then Jeff Sessions will indict Obama and Hillary. Otherwise you're talking empty conspiracy theories roaming like ghosts around your skull. If Jeff doesn't indict, that makes you a hallucinating old coot.
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:
In most forums I've seen the political exchanges would spring up every 4 years, then settle back again mostly.
Maybe the change was Obama's 8 year nonstop campaign.
But the 2016 cycle does not seem to have tapered here. The crimes and Treason of Obama, Hilliary, et al are still being investigated. And Fake News has a greater online presence than a decade ago. Liberals have obliterated the independence of the public forums.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Shall we wait to hear of all the giant Budget Cuts of CIA from FY2008, FY2009, FY2010, FY2011 when Libtards controlled the purse strings?
Originally posted by second:Quote:No, it is not. It is a Republican problem. The CIA can throw away video recordings of torturing prisoners because it would make the CIA look bad, and they can get away with it. There will be no punishment for the CIA by Congress cutting the CIA budget. The White House can't punish the CIA, when controlled by a Democrat, because it can't even discover who did what at the CIA when the CIA decides to lose all the relevant records. The only way to handle a situation where an out-of-control organization protects particular employees from their justly deserved punishment is to punish the entire organization and that means a budget cut, which only the Congressional Republicans can do. This nonsense at the CIA has been going on for decades, where it worms its way around control by any Democrat in the White House and can always run to its protectors: the GOP Congressmen.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
The CIA is everybody's problem.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:In most forums I've seen the political exchanges would spring up every 4 years, then settle back again mostly.
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:Quote:It was a group effort. I do remember especially asking you to tone it down because I'd never before seen you post like that (at least not that I could recall during my drunken idiocy). That night only stands out to me because of the election. I was totally drunk that night as well. Otherwise I would have probably forgotten all about it like most of the rest of them. I didn't even know T or G before I had turned into a drunk, so I didn't really know anything about them until January of last year.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Sorry SIX if I turned your post into a shit show. I don't recall it; but you're right: we need to come together, on things we can really agree on, not just on hold-hands-and-sing-Kumbaya. Which is why I think it is so important that we actually discuss what AMERICA'S interests are, to find out where we agree and where we disagree. Unfortunately, most people around here seem unprepared to discuss what we should actually be defending, and insist on hyperventilating and screeching. (Oh, and launching baseless defamatory attacks on other posters.)/b]
Less than two months later I was sober and now I see what you were talking about. The RWED is far more of a shit show than I ever remember it being. There was always fighting, but there were also a lot of rational minds here back then as well. All that's left is the crazy people.
I wouldn't bother trying to have any rational conversations here or trying to change anybodies mind about anything if that's your intention. That's a complete waste of time. I only post here because it's one of the last places I still have an online presence and I haven't yet been able to eliminate the internet from my life entirely.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
Maybe the change was Obama's 8 year nonstop campaign.
But the 2016 cycle does not seem to have tapered here. The crimes and Treason of Obama, Hilliary, et al are still being investigated. And Fake News has a greater online presence than a decade ago. Liberals have obliterated the independence of the public forums.
I don't think there's sufficient data for this, at least in my experience. The RWED was always pretty bad, and I remember about 5 years ago basically begging that Wishy stay out of it because it wasn't a good place, and I really think she was a good person back then.
The only other sites I ever am a part of are dedicated to hobbies I enjoy and we keep the politics out of it. Every once and a while some joker will say something pertaining to politics and one of us tell them that there's no place for that here.
I don't really remember my time on Facebook. I was a drunk and I embarrassed myself in front of a lot of people I knew is all that I know. From the stories I hear about schisms it's created in my family I think it's pretty sad that everyone uses it. As terrible as I thought the RWED could be, at least you can say that this is a GREAT place for these types of conversations. At least we're not getting into heated arguments online with people we actually give a shit about and ruining REAL relationships when we argue on here.
I wasn't joking when I told Second the RWED is my dumping ground for all of this bullshit. It's actually a very important thing to me, and was especially important in those early months of getting sober. Outside of here there's only two people I talk to about politics and that's just because we largely agree on everything and we enjoy talking about it.
Hell... just the other night I met one of the day shift guys for the first time because he came out for a smoke as I was smoking mine before going in. We've said hi to each other before but that was it. We had a pretty interesting conversation but th
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:Quote:No, it is not. It is a Republican problem.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
The CIA is everybody's problem.
No it's not. It's everybody's problem.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:If it were my problem, as President, I'd send the Secret Service over to the CIA's Headquarters in the George Bush Center for Intelligence in Virginia and trash their office. Then, with guns pointed, make them open their safes and steal their secrets.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:Quote:
Originally posted by second:Quote:No, it is not. It is a Republican problem.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
The CIA is everybody's problem.
No it's not. It's everybody's problem.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Intelligence_Agency#Relationship
_with_other_intelligence_agencies
Under the Central Intelligence Agency Act of 1949, the Director of Central Intelligence is the only federal government employee who can spend "un-vouchered" government money. The Director and I will have a very ugly interrogation involving his head shoved underwater until he tells me where the money went.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:Quote:If it were my problem, as President, I'd send the Secret Service over to the CIA's Headquarters in the George Bush Center for Intelligence in Virginia and trash their office. Then, with guns pointed, make them open their safes and steal their secrets.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:Quote:
Originally posted by second:Quote:No, it is not. It is a Republican problem.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
The CIA is everybody's problem.
No it's not. It's everybody's problem.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Intelligence_Agency#Relationship
_with_other_intelligence_agencies
Under the Central Intelligence Agency Act of 1949, the Director of Central Intelligence is the only federal government employee who can spend "un-vouchered" government money. The Director and I will have a very ugly interrogation involving his head shoved underwater until he tells me where the money went.
What guns? It thought you wanted them taken away from everybody. Or do the 1%'ers get to keep their guns in your Utopia?
Have fun with your violent hero fantasies though.
They don't change the fact that the CIA is everybody's problem.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Libtards only want to take guns away from law-abiding citizens, and insensitive people. That way only Criminals and outlaws will have guns to take control of the sheeple.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:Quote:What guns? It thought you wanted them taken away from everybody. Or do the 1%'ers get to keep their guns in your Utopia?
Originally posted by second:Quote:If it were my problem, as President, I'd send the Secret Service over to the CIA's Headquarters in the George Bush Center for Intelligence in Virginia and trash their office. Then, with guns pointed, make them open their safes and steal their secrets.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:Quote:No it's not. It's everybody's problem.
Originally posted by second:Quote:No, it is not. It is a Republican problem.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
The CIA is everybody's problem.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_Intelligence_Agency#Relationship
_with_other_intelligence_agencies
Under the Central Intelligence Agency Act of 1949, the Director of Central Intelligence is the only federal government employee who can spend "un-vouchered" government money. The Director and I will have a very ugly interrogation involving his head shoved underwater until he tells me where the money went.
Have fun with your violent hero fantasies though.
They don't change the fact that the CIA is everybody's problem.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Not a fantasy, Jack. I'll give you one example of how an out-of-control bureaucrat was finally made to obey: J. Edger Hoover. Harry Truman and John F. Kennedy each considered dismissing Hoover as FBI Director, but ultimately concluded that the political cost of doing so would be too great. Hoover scared off LBJ, too, and the details are fascinating. The Republicans never had a problem with Hoover. They loved him, as they love the CIA. Eventually, J. Edger died an old man in charge of the FBI. That strategy of waiting for time to solve a problem doesn't work for Democrats when it is an immortal government agency such as the CIA, not just some gay man Republican such as Hoover protected by the GOP.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
What guns? It thought you wanted them taken away from everybody. Or do the 1%'ers get to keep their guns in your Utopia?
Have fun with your violent hero fantasies though.
They don't change the fact that the CIA is everybody's problem.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Edgar_Hoover#Late_career_and_death
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:Quote:
Originally posted by THGRRI:
Historians and Scholars decide if a president is good or not Jack. Very educated people. Historians and Executive Branch experts. These experts, Democrat, Republican and Independent, together rated Trump dead last ( worst ever ). And you, you Jack, can't see for yourself any reason why. Any reason Jack.
The reasons for treating you like someone who's opinion should be respected are non existent Jack, non existent.
T
Quote:How Does Trump Stack Up Against the Best — and Worst — Presidents?
2014 RANK, CHANGE IN RANKING, UP OR DOWN, TOP 10 IN 2018
1. Lincoln 95
6. Truman 75
7. Eisenhower 74
8. Obama 71
9. Reagan 69
10. L.B. Johnson 69
13. Clinton 64
16. Kennedy 62
17. G.H.W. Bush 61
25. Ford 47
26. Carter
30. G.W. Bush 40
33. Nixon 37
BOTTOM 10
44. Trump 12
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/02/19/opin
ion/how-does-
trump-stack-up-against-the-best-and-worst-presidents.html
Golly. EXPERTS!!
So Expert that they think the Next Addition to Mt. Rushmore should be Washington, T Roosevelt, or Lincoln!! Hint: they are already there.
So how might history look upon Trump? In this survey of Liberal experts, White House Alumni trends from 2014 to 2018 show GOP Nixon up one spot, Reagan up 2 spots, Bush 41 settled at 17 - the top half, Bush 43 up 5 spots. And Democraps Carter settled in the bottom half, and Clinton dropping 5 spots. The future polls look bad for Obama and good for Trump.
You mentioned that in this thread as well, so I copied this here, from the other thread:
Quote:One thing to notice with this survey, there is no weighted balance, which Libtards hate to do when they have 82% of their respondents as Liberals, and 5% Conservatives.
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:Quote:Of the 170 respondents, 9 (5.3%) self-identified as Conservative. 20 (12%) self-identified as somewhat conservative.
Originally posted by second:Quote:29 of the political scientists that contributed to the survey of Presidents were self-described Conservatives. 21 self-described as Republicans.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
The problem is that there aren't actually any Conservatives in Political Sciences. Their idea of a Conservative is anybody just a tad right of Karl Marx.
https://sps.boisestate.edu/politicals
cience/files/2018/02/Greatness.pdf
57% identify as Democrats. 32.5% self-identified as Liberal, 26% as somewhat Liberal, 24% as Moderates. Most telling, there was "no significant difference" and "little variation" in the results between "self-identified" Democrats, Liberals, somewhat Liberals, and Moderates.
This 82.5% block that mostly can't comprehend that they are ultra-Liberals ranked Reagan as 14th, yet the 5% of Conservatives swayed the results toward reality so much that Reagan ended up 9th overall. The study refused to breakdown the Conservative results, instead muddying them with self-identified somewhat Conservatives.
This comingled group ranked Obama 16th Greatest President? Yep, they were Commies.
And these esteemed "political Scientists" were so clueless that, when asked which President should be ADDED to Mt. Rushmore, 5 of the 170 respondents voted for Washington, T Roosevelt, Lincoln. Hint: they are already there.
Although they were able to obfuscate the actual figures for the 5% Conservatives, enough data is exposed that we can extrapolate and interpolate data to find a more accurate ranking.
A Gallup poll shows that Americans self-identify as 38% Conservative and 24% Liberal, so those figures can be used to weight the results for balance.
Since the study admits the Liberals, Somewhat Liberals, and self-identified Moderates are essentially the same, these can be used as the sample of "Liberals" representing the 24%. First I calculated the overall figure a
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:Quote:Not a fantasy, Jack. I'll give you one example of how an out-of-control bureaucrat was finally made to obey: J. Edger Hoover. Harry Truman and John F. Kennedy each considered dismissing Hoover as FBI Director, but ultimately concluded that the political cost of doing so would be too great. Hoover scared off LBJ, too, and the details are fascinating. The Republicans never had a problem with Hoover. They loved him, as they love the CIA. Eventually, J. Edger died an old man in charge of the FBI. That strategy of waiting for time to solve a problem doesn't work for Democrats when it is an immortal government agency such as the CIA, not just some gay man Republican such as Hoover protected by the GOP.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
What guns? It thought you wanted them taken away from everybody. Or do the 1%'ers get to keep their guns in your Utopia?
Have fun with your violent hero fantasies though.
They don't change the fact that the CIA is everybody's problem.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Edgar_Hoover#Late_career_and_death
I was talking about you having another one of your delusional violent hero fantasies.
Everything you're saying about the CIA is true except that the GOP loves them. That's an idiotic generalization to group a bunch of individuals onto two sides and say that their opinions about the CIA differ only based on party lines.
If the Dems are so great, how come Obama didn't do anything about the CIA? I don't ever remember them coming up once in 8 years.
Do Right, Be Right. :)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
SECOND, you have got to be kidding that the Democratic Party was any better at reining in the security agencies than the GOP
Quote:https://www.mintpressnews.com/former-cia-analyst-ray-mcgovern-obama-af
In an interview published Monday by acTVism Munich, an independent media outlet, McGovern warned that U.S. intelligence agencies are too powerful to be held accountable, even by President Barack Obama. He explained:
“I will simply say that he is afraid of them. Now I would have never thought that I would hear myself saying that the president of the United States is afraid of the CIA. But he is. He’s afraid of the NSA as well. How else to explain that the National Intelligence director, who lied under oath to his senate overseers on the 12th of March 2013, is still the director of National Intelligence?”
Statements made under oath to Congress in 2013 by James Clapper, the director of National Intelligence, in which he denied mass surveillance of Americans, were later revealed to be false by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden. In 2014, some members of Congress, including California Rep. Darrell Issa, moved to have Clapper dismissed from his post, but their efforts were ultimately defeated.
McGovern continued: “How else to explain that the head of CIA, John Brennan, who deliberately hacked the computers of the senate’s intelligence community, that’s supposed to be overseeing him, he’s still in office?”
Brennan apologized to Senate leaders in July 2014 after CIA agents hacked Senate computers during a congressional investigation of the CIA’s use of torture, but neither the torturers nor the hackers would face any consequences for their actions. In January 2015, an internal CIA review board declared the hack had been a result of “miscommunication” and cleared all agents of wrongdoing.
In the interview, McGovern lamented the fact that political leaders, including President George W. Bush and Obama, have given their approval to unconstitutional behavior by government officials:
“Our bill of rights has been shredded. The Fourth Amendment specifically prohibits the kind of activities the NSA is involved in domestically.”
He also criticized Obama’s drone program, noting that “[t]he Fifth Amendment prohibits any president or anyone else from killing anyone without due process,” and dismissed the administration’s legal justifications for the killings as a “lawyerly diversion from the truth.”
“Not even George Bush claimed the right to kill American citizens without due process,” McGovern said.
raid-cia-nsa/214602/
And what was Diane Feinstein (Senate Intelligence Committee) doing while all this was going on?
Keeping very, very quiet.
In addition, if it the FBI/NSA colluded with the DNC in the runup to the Presidential elections, like it LOOKS like they did, then Obama and the DNC are not only hip-deep in the security-agencies' illegal interference in foreign governments and in breaking the Constitution, they're also guilty of interference in our own domestic political processes.
Not saying that Obama is worse than GWB, but he's not any better. So fuck your rabid partisanship, SECOND. It's stupid, it's counterproductive, and it's nothing more than "virtue signaling" by someone whose economic status would be threatened by REAL reform. (In case you haven't figured it out, that means you.)
-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake
America is an oligarchy
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:edited, added first column:
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:Quote:One thing to notice with this survey, there is no weighted balance, which Libtards hate to do when they have 82% of their respondents as Liberals, and 5% Conservatives.
Originally posted by JEWELSTAITEFAN:Quote:Of the 170 respondents, 9 (5.3%) self-identified as Conservative. 20 (12%) self-identified as somewhat conservative.
Originally posted by second:Quote:29 of the political scientists that contributed to the survey of Presidents were self-described Conservatives. 21 self-described as Republicans.
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
The problem is that there aren't actually any Conservatives in Political Sciences. Their idea of a Conservative is anybody just a tad right of Karl Marx.
57% identify as Democrats. 32.5% self-identified as Liberal, 26% as somewhat Liberal, 24% as Moderates. Most telling, there was "no significant difference" and "little variation" in the results between "self-identified" Democrats, Liberals, somewhat Liberals, and Moderates.
This 82.5% block that mostly can't comprehend that they are ultra-Liberals ranked Reagan as 14th, yet the 5% of Conservatives swayed the results toward reality so much that Reagan ended up 9th overall. The study refused to breakdown the Conservative results, instead muddying them with self-identified somewhat Conservatives.
Although they were able to obfuscate the actual figures for the 5% Conservatives, enough data is exposed that we can extrapolate and interpolate data to find a more accurate ranking.
The list below shows the resulting balanced Rank, and then balanced Rating, for the first 2 columns. The next 2 columns of Rank and Rating are results if we pretend that PoliSci experts who self-identify as "Moderates" are really not Liberals (and those results are not used in weighted balancing). In the 5th column I included the Rank presented in the Report. Then the Name and sequence number.
Quote:
-1.32 #1 93.71 #1 93.92 #1 95.03 Lincoln 16
+0.80 #2 93.39 #2 93.48 #2 92.59 Washington 1
-5.57 #3 83.52 #3 84.36 #3 89.09 FDR 32
-3.09 #4 78.30 #4 78.39 #4 81.39 T Roosevelt 26
-2.48 #5 77.06 #5 77.46 #5 79.54 Jefferson 3
+5.30 #6 74.54 #6 73.36 #9 69.24 Reagan 40
-0.78 #7 73.25 #8 72.78 #7 74.03 Eisenhower 34
-2.50 #8 72.65 #7 73.05 #6 75.15 Truman 33
+3.26 #9 64.16 10 63.53 17 60.90 Bush 41
+0.44 10 62.60 14 62.09 15 62.16 Jackson 7
-8.69 11 62.44 #9 63.99 #8 71.13 Obama 44
-0.85 12 62.39 13 62.59 14 63.24 Adams 2
-2.13 13 62.35 12 62.93 12 64.48 Madison 4
-6.90 14 62.16 11 63.41 10 69.06 LB Johnson 36
+6.63 15 62.12 18 60.55 19 55.49 McKinley 25
-2.36 16 61.89 15 62.00 13 64.25 Clinton 42
+0.49 17 61.23 17 61.36 18 60.74 Monroe 5
-6.46 18 60.94 16 61.43 11 67.40 Wilson 28
+3.36 19 57.45 19 56.35 20 54.09 Polk 11
+4.63 20 56.59 21 56.08 22 51.96 Taft 27
-6.36 21 55.50 20 56.26 16 61.86 Kennedy 35
+2.77 22 53.78 22 52.76 24 51.01 Cleveland 22 & 24
+10.09 23 52.32 24 51.44 28 42.23 Coolidge 30
-0.19 24 51.71 23 51.96 23 51.90 JQ Adams 6
-2.11 25 50.77 25 50.78 21 52.88 Grant 18
+2.65 26 49.93 26 49.13 25 47.28 Ford 38
+6.61 27 47.03 27 46.09 30 40.42 Bush 43
+0.27 28 44.54 28 44.25 27 44.27 Van BurNOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Yanno, I wasn't going to go through the whole procedure with the lawyers.
Originally posted by THGRRI:
tick tock comrade
You made it worth my time.
See you in court.
So anyway ... anyone up for a rational, fact-based, and civil discussion about the topic?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME