Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 42,332
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on May 22, 2018 7:44:58 GMT -5
Using the FBI as an "insurance policy" in case the election doesn't go the way you think it should is not "bias". It is treason. We know for a fact now that the FBI was working for one party / campaign against the other party / campaign. This agent was not fired for his political opinions. We all have political opinions. He was fired because Mueller was trying desperately not to get caught. The question is: What did Obama know and when did he know it? This was an astonishing look at the Washington elite's contempt for the American people, and their total corruption. The OP. For your careful consideration in light of recent news.  Still a lie. Still embroidering the story though. For your consideration, Trump knows nothing for fact. Remember how you've taught us he doesn't care about facts, only feelings? He feels he's persecuted so he's spinning new threads into his story along with his enablers.
We still have a President not man enough to admit he hired Russian agents/folks with strong ties to Russia.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 42,332
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on May 22, 2018 8:25:54 GMT -5
Actually, Trump is channeling Fox.
Yes, our president is actually Hannity.
I would have "Liked" that post, but how can you like that point? That would be an interesting poll. Who's worse - Trump or Hannity?  
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 21,751
Member is Online
|
Post by happyhoix on May 22, 2018 8:26:57 GMT -5
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,662
|
Post by tallguy on May 22, 2018 8:27:33 GMT -5
Actually, Trump is channeling Fox.
Yes, our president is actually Hannity.
I would have "Liked" that post, but how can you like that point? Oh, come on, it's easy to like that post. All you have to do is click the button. It's breaking away from the orderlies trying to give you your meds, crash into the locked nurses' office, and get on her computer that's tough. |
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448 
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on May 22, 2018 9:40:47 GMT -5
...denounce this circus... Paul: I am right as right can be. Paul: Soooooo very right. Hoo-rah! Paul: Right! Right! Right! Demin: Rush Limbaugh doodyhead!  Happy: Hannity doodyhead! Optimist: Doodyhead! Doodyhead! Demin: How do I 'like' your doodyheads? Happy (appearing with first glimmer of sanity on page 63): Here are some links. Somebody should denounce this circus. Somebody should denounce the circus all right, but not the one in Washington.  |
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 64,834
|
Post by Tennesseer on May 22, 2018 9:44:33 GMT -5
The circus seems to be quartered in Florida.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 42,332
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on May 22, 2018 9:56:22 GMT -5
...denounce this circus... Paul: I am right as right can be. Paul: Soooooo very right. Hoo-rah! Paul: Right! Right! Right! Demin: Rush Limbaugh doodyhead! Happy: Hannity doodyhead! Optimist: Doodyhead! Doodyhead! Demin: How do I 'like' your doodyheads? Happy (appearing with first glimmer of sanity on page 63): Here are some links. Somebody should denounce this circus. Somebody should denounce the circus all right, but not the one in Washington. Says the man creating his own circus narrative. Was it that hard to follow for you that Happyhoix and I are mocking Trump? |
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,662
|
Post by tallguy on May 22, 2018 10:02:18 GMT -5
The circus seems to be quartered in Florida. What? Now that Ringling Brothers closed they needed to bring in the Ding-a-ling show instead? |
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 42,332
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on May 22, 2018 10:16:49 GMT -5
Exactly. Happy and others can bring in articles from more sane news sources, but its not stopping the circus narrative machine. Trump is still crazily tweeting, apparently trying to prove to me he is guilty as sin. He acts more and more guilty as the investigation continues. As Happy's NY Times article wrote, Trump has more avenues at his disposal to craft a narrative than Nixon or Bill Clinton did. Bill's huge mistake was not admitting he slept with that woman. Trump refuses to learn from history though. So to me it appears his guilt and involvement is much larger than 'I did hire those Russia connected folks into my campaign'.
He'll do anything to pretend he's not at fault. Its a very odd thing to watch as someone not sold on the Trump personality cult. He's seen as strong by them because of his authoritarian asshole bent. Yet, his longest running narrative from the campaign on, is Trump as a victim. That is not a strong manly man position. Who he is a victim of, changes based on what he wants to sell, but Trump the rich billionaire white guy victim is a story that really resonates with his base. I think its basically because they feel like victims themselves. |
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 64,834
|
Post by Tennesseer on May 22, 2018 10:25:59 GMT -5
Presidential historian: Impeachment will be the 'season finale' of Trump
Presidential historian Jon Meacham said Monday that he thinks impeachment will be the "season finale" to President Trump's time in office. Meacham told "Morning Joe" that Trump's vow to ask the Justice Department to investigate whether the FBI spied on his campaign is similar to former President Nixon's behavior ahead of firing special prosecutor Archibald Cox, and that his presidency is likely to end the same way as Nixon's. Meacham said that the midterm elections present a likely opportunity for Democrats to impeach Trump. Full article here: Presidential historian: Impeachment will be the 'season finale' of Trump
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on May 22, 2018 10:29:00 GMT -5
Paul: I am right as right can be. Paul: Soooooo very right. Hoo-rah! Paul: Right! Right! Right! Demin: Rush Limbaugh doodyhead! Happy: Hannity doodyhead! Optimist: Doodyhead! Doodyhead! Demin: How do I 'like' your doodyheads? Happy (appearing with first glimmer of sanity on page 63): Here are some links. Somebody should denounce this circus. Somebody should denounce the circus all right, but not the one in Washington. Says the man creating his own circus narrative. Was it that hard to follow for you that Happyhoix and I are mocking Trump? I know what you're doing. But countering Paul's barrage of articles and... shall we say... great exuberance, isn't well accomplished with vague indictments of Pres. Trump and right-wing punditry. If I may be so bold: The readership here, down to a man, knows how little you think of Pres. Trump, Mr. Hannity, Mr. Limbaugh, Mr. Jones, FOX News, the CTH, et al. What you want to do is break away from the right's stereotype of the left as spurned babes howling, giggling, or lobbing ad hominems when confronted with facts you can't rebut, and instead present counterfactuals, rebuttal articles, and the like. Happy has the right idea with #1876. You, Demin, and I (with my satire in #1878) are presently just part of the circus. I have no stake in what Paul is saying, and have no particular objection to any of it, hence I presently don't mind being part of the circus. I get the impression that you do consider Paul's conclusions, mirroring those of the pundits you're deriding, dangerously wrongheaded. Hence do something about it. This thread has far too much "Paul is crazy. The right is crazy. This is all a conspiracy theory." ipse dixit. Are you here to clown around or are you here to see that truth prevails? |
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 21,751
Member is Online
|
Post by happyhoix on May 22, 2018 10:38:39 GMT -5
Presidential historian: Impeachment will be the 'season finale' of Trump
Presidential historian Jon Meacham said Monday that he thinks impeachment will be the "season finale" to President Trump's time in office. Meacham told "Morning Joe" that Trump's vow to ask the Justice Department to investigate whether the FBI spied on his campaign is similar to former President Nixon's behavior ahead of firing special prosecutor Archibald Cox, and that his presidency is likely to end the same way as Nixon's. Meacham said that the midterm elections present a likely opportunity for Democrats to impeach Trump. Full article here: Presidential historian: Impeachment will be the 'season finale' of Trump Do you think that could happen, with the dems in the minority in congress?
I still think Trump has not yet been caught doing something so unlawful or anti-American that the meek GOPers in congress would dare stand up against him.
He's getting close, though. As Mueller continues his investigation, and Cohan's legal troubles start piling up, Trump is getting more and more erratic, depending less on what his WH staff says and more on what an outside group of supporters (and Fox) is telling him to do - a group that contains the Arch Villain Bannon, now back from the dead. www.washingtonpost.com/politics/bannon-pitches-white-house-on-plan-to-cripple-mueller-probe-and-protect-trump/2018/04/11/1ec5b1b2-3d9f-11e8-a7d1-e4efec6389f0_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.b5f6631e00cf
You would think Trump would have learned his lesson about that baggy sack of cigar ashes and beer stains, but apparently, Bannon is again Trump's trusted advisor.
That unholy alliance will probably end up as poorly as it did the last time.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 21,751
Member is Online
|
Post by happyhoix on May 22, 2018 10:43:07 GMT -5
Says the man creating his own circus narrative. Was it that hard to follow for you that Happyhoix and I are mocking Trump? I know what you're doing. But countering Paul's barrage of articles and... shall we say... great exuberance, isn't well accomplished with vague indictments of Pres. Trump and right-wing punditry. If I may be so bold: The readership here, down to a man, knows how little you think of Pres. Trump, Mr. Hannity, Mr. Limbaugh, Mr. Jones, FOX News, the CTH, et al. What you want to do is break away from the right's stereotype of the left as spurned babes howling, giggling, or lobbing ad hominems when confronted with facts you can't rebut, and instead present counterfactuals, rebuttal articles, and the like. Happy has the right idea with #1876. You, Demin, and I (with my satire in #1878) are presently just part of the circus. I have no stake in what Paul is saying, and have no particular objection to any of it, hence I presently don't mind being part of the circus. I get the impression that you do consider Paul's conclusions, mirroring those of the pundits you're deriding, dangerously wrongheaded. Hence do something about it. This thread has far too much "Paul is crazy. The right is crazy. This is all a conspiracy theory." ipse dixit. Are you here to clown around or are you here to see that truth prevails? Well, do you honestly think anything any of us says on here will in any tiny way make a dent in Paul's steadfast belief in our fearless POTUS? If it isn't from a handful of approved secret sources, it's fake news.
So - my vote is for clowning around. Might as well have some fun while the ship sinks.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,662
|
Post by tallguy on May 22, 2018 11:06:32 GMT -5
The rule I have come around to for him is this:
If it is more than four lines long, the post will almost never be worth reading. Even those that fit within that guideline are unlikely to be worth reading, but they are at least shorter. If there is a quote and a citation, it will never be worth reading, and the site will not be one that should be respected anyway. If there is a video, it will never be worth watching and there is no way to get that wasted time back. It's gone for good. And there is no way anyone should listen to or respect someone who went successively all-in on the two worst candidates and individuals running in the last election.
I had to read a lot of stupid sh** before. I don't have to now. Life is too short.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,704
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 22, 2018 11:18:45 GMT -5
I'm so right I can barely stand you should have that looked into. balance is an issue for older folks. |
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,704
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 22, 2018 11:25:02 GMT -5
i had not made my mind up weeks before the election. so, there is one. i bet i am not alone. Do you recall the response you sent me over my saying I wasn't voting for Trump, I was voting against Hillary! Under no uncertain terms you expressed your hatred for Trump. yeah, what does that blather have to do with my assertion? nothing. i recall everything with perfect clarity, oc. i recall that i voted absentee because i was in Costa Rica at the time of the election. i recall that i would rather have voted for YOU than the guy who won, which is really saying something. and i also recall that i didn't vote for Clinton, for what it is worth. i don't recall ever saying that you were voting against Hillary, but i am sure others did. after all, you voted for asshole in the primary- and yeah- i found that utterly offensive. still do.
but it doesn't change the fact that i was still debating who to vote for one week before i handed in my ballot. you asked the question as if it were rhetorical.
it wasn't.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 38,410
|
Post by billisonboard on May 22, 2018 11:27:22 GMT -5
I'm so right I can barely stand it. ... I can understand that. Being that far onto the right edge of the political spectrum has to be tough. |
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on May 22, 2018 11:54:11 GMT -5
I know what you're doing. But countering Paul's barrage of articles and... shall we say... great exuberance, isn't well accomplished with vague indictments of Pres. Trump and right-wing punditry. If I may be so bold: The readership here, down to a man, knows how little you think of Pres. Trump, Mr. Hannity, Mr. Limbaugh, Mr. Jones, FOX News, the CTH, et al. What you want to do is break away from the right's stereotype of the left as spurned babes howling, giggling, or lobbing ad hominems when confronted with facts you can't rebut, and instead present counterfactuals, rebuttal articles, and the like. Happy has the right idea with #1876. You, Demin, and I (with my satire in #1878) are presently just part of the circus. I have no stake in what Paul is saying, and have no particular objection to any of it, hence I presently don't mind being part of the circus. I get the impression that you do consider Paul's conclusions, mirroring those of the pundits you're deriding, dangerously wrongheaded. Hence do something about it. This thread has far too much "Paul is crazy. The right is crazy. This is all a conspiracy theory." ipse dixit. Are you here to clown around or are you here to see that truth prevails? Well, do you honestly think anything any of us says on here will in any tiny way make a dent in Paul's steadfast belief in our fearless POTUS? If it isn't from a handful of approved secret sources, it's fake news.
So - my vote is for clowning around. Might as well have some fun while the ship sinks.
I don't understand or share your certainty that Pres. Trump's presidency is in serious jeopardy, by the Mueller investigation or otherwise. The same is true for your inexplicable certainty that nothing major will come of this affair with spies (informants, agent provocateurs, whatever you want to call them) in Pres. Trump's campaign. What makes your certainty in the incorrectness of Paul's conclusion any less worthy of ridicule than his certainty in its correctness? He seems to be the only one interested in building a case for his argument. The rest of you (excepting rare highlights such as your editorial in #1876) are dabbling in tu quoque, appeals to incredulity, ad hominems, and other fallacies. I don't know what you think you're accomplishing, but I assure you you're not hurting Paul's case to the masses one whit. If this doesn't concern you and your only purpose is getting a few chuckles out of mocking Paul's overconfidence (the irony shouldn't be lost on you), please disregard. But I don't think that's why you're here.
|
|
midjd
Administrator
Your Money Admin
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:09:23 GMT -5
Posts: 17,720
|
Post by midjd on May 22, 2018 12:14:07 GMT -5
What case is Paul building, exactly? Anne81 actually had some analysis in her posts. Paul's posts seem limited to spamming the thread with editorials from CTH and the opinion wing of Fox.
From page 1:
Yet here we are, more than 6 months later, and while a number of Trump's campaign helpers and other collaborators have been indicted, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama walk free. Paul continues to crow about his "right"-ness -- based on what? Benghazi showed that there is no shortage of motivation to investigate Hillary Clinton, even under a Democratic president. Republicans hold the House, Senate, and Presidency. So where are the treason charges? Shouldn't they get on that before November, when they risk losing their majority in Congress?
I will give him credit that he has set up the "deep state" argument so that, if Clinton & Co. aren't indicted, it's not because Paul was ridiculously and overzealously wrong, but because of government corruption. A good way to create a win-win for yourself in just about any situation... and Trump uses it often.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on May 22, 2018 12:45:31 GMT -5
None of this is in dispute:
Stephen Halpert sought to be hired by the Trump campaign well before the official timeline of the beginning of the Trump-Russia probe:
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 16, 2024 16:54:49 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2018 12:52:50 GMT -5
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on May 22, 2018 12:54:08 GMT -5
I'm so right I can barely stand it. Fixed! |
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 64,834
|
Post by Tennesseer on May 22, 2018 13:05:13 GMT -5
I'm so right I can barely stand it. Fixed! Advanced Parkinson's disease. Two weeks tops. |
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on May 22, 2018 13:43:03 GMT -5
Advanced Parkinson's disease. Two weeks tops. Want to chip in on a wreath? |
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 21,751
Member is Online
|
Post by happyhoix on May 22, 2018 13:49:43 GMT -5
None of this is in dispute: Stephen Halpert sought to be hired by the Trump campaign well before the official timeline of the beginning of the Trump-Russia probe: You approach everything as a dark lord/black hat/deep throat conspiracy driven by evil dems and satanic Hillary - you need to instead use common sense and Occam's razor.
Halper is a life long republican who worked for Nixon,Ford, Reagan and donated to Bush's campaign. He actually got pulled into a scandal about stealing some of Jimmy Carter's debate papers. He's also a foreign policy wonk.
Is it more likely that the FBI turned a dedicated GOPer into a secret mole serving the evil Hillary by infiltrating the Trump campaign to try to get damaging info on Trump, or more likely that the FBI, having already been tracking (and in some cases, interviewing) three people known to have close and maybe questionable ties with Russia, got Halper to contact them and try to find out if the 3 were possibly Russian plants?
After all, if Hillary really wanted damaging info on Trump, it was readily available without even using the FBI. If you recall, Trump had a few bumps along the road, most notably with that p***** grabbing video. No need to take the highly risky option of getting the FBI (an organization generally filled with more than it's fair share of ex military, right leaning GOPers) to create a plan to infiltrate a spy in Trump's campaign, when a plain jane PI could get more dirt, for less money and no political risk.
www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2018/05/22/how-the-fbi-informants-outreach-to-trump-staffers-fits-into-overall-investigation/?utm_term=.9b080b131213
Congratulations, your side has outed what was probably a pretty decent FBI informant, he'll never be able to work in that capacity again, since Trump's hysteria has his face plastered all around the internets. Yah for your side. 
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 21,751
Member is Online
|
Post by happyhoix on May 22, 2018 15:30:25 GMT -5
On Sunday, via Twitter, Trump demanded that the Justice Department concoct a transparently political investigation, with the aim of smearing veteran professionals at Justice and the FBI and also throwing mud at the previous administration. Trump’s only rational goal is casting doubt on the probe by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III, which appears to be closing in.
Trump’s power play is a gross misuse of his presidential authority and a dangerous departure from long-standing norms. Strongmen such as Russia’s Vladimir Putin use their justice systems to punish enemies and deflect attention from their own crimes. Presidents of the United States do not — or did not, until Sunday’s tweet: www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/the-constitutional-crisis-is-here/ar-AAxBHHM?li=BBnb7Kz |
|
Rukh O'Rorke
Senior Associate
Joined: Jul 4, 2016 13:31:15 GMT -5
Posts: 10,329 
|
Post by Rukh O'Rorke on May 22, 2018 16:27:52 GMT -5
What case is Paul building, exactly? Anne81 actually had some analysis in her posts. Paul's posts seem limited to spamming the thread with editorials from CTH and the opinion wing of Fox. From page 1: Yet here we are, more than 6 months later, and while a number of Trump's campaign helpers and other collaborators have been indicted, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama walk free. Paul continues to crow about his "right"-ness -- based on what? Benghazi showed that there is no shortage of motivation to investigate Hillary Clinton, even under a Democratic president. Republicans hold the House, Senate, and Presidency. So where are the treason charges? Shouldn't they get on that before November, when they risk losing their majority in Congress? I will give him credit that he has set up the "deep state" argument so that, if Clinton & Co. aren't indicted, it's not because Paul was ridiculously and overzealously wrong, but because of government corruption. A good way to create a win-win for yourself in just about any situation... and Trump uses it often. You'll give him credit for an elaborate fantasy that can never be proven untrue? What kind of credit are we taking about here, exactly? |
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 21,751
Member is Online
|
Post by happyhoix on May 22, 2018 16:32:10 GMT -5
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,858
|
Post by thyme4change on May 22, 2018 20:17:41 GMT -5
Fox news coverage from John Decker about this spy shit was basically 'This is an unsubstabtiated rumor, with no proof. And no evidence Obama was involved' And then he remembered who signed his paycheck 'If it is true, and Obama is involved, that would be huge.'
Lol.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,704
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on May 22, 2018 22:54:40 GMT -5
Fox news coverage from John Decker about this spy shit was basically 'This is an unsubstabtiated rumor, with no proof. And no evidence Obama was involved' And then he remembered who signed his paycheck 'If it is were true, and Obama is was involved, that would be huge.' Lol. yeah. and if i farted gold bricks i would be rich. edit: richer |
|
