ChrisWeigant.com

Friday Talking Points [445] -- It's Raining Shoes!

[ Posted Friday, July 14th, 2017 – 17:13 PDT ]

In normal political crises, everyone waits for "the other shoe to drop." The Russia/Trump scandal was upgraded earlier this year (by Senator John McCain) to "a centipede, because there are so many shoes left to drop." We thought that was rather clever, at the time. But we've now entered a whole new realm of scandal -- one where it is simply raining shoes down from the sky. Americans can barely go outside before they are clobbered by a falling workboot. Somebody needs to design a much stronger umbrella to protect public safety, and quick!

The most amazing thing about this deluge of footwear is that so many of them have fallen from just one meeting. Donald Trump Junior met with two questionable Russians he thought would be giving him (and Trump's campaign manager Paul Manafort, and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner) official Russian governmental dirt on Hillary Clinton. He says no such dirt was actually handed over, but at this point there is simply no reason any sane person would believe anything Junior says about this meeting, because he has given so many shifting explanations -- from the initial misleading statement through his most recent -- that newspapers not only have been writing "Timeline Of Don Jr.'s Changing Story" articles, but they've now started updating them almost daily, through the necessity of keeping up. They've even had time to throw in some scathing humor, at this point (such as this Washington Post Junior's timeline article that helpfully gives equivalent statements from Danny Ocean of Ocean's Eleven). At this point, if Junior tried to admit he'd set up the meeting in an attempt to see if a Russian billionaire would adopt him and Ivanka, it wouldn't surprise us in the least. Which is also why more people should be taking Trump's insistence that no dirt was dished during the meeting with a very large grain of salt.

Today's revelation concerns yet another Russkie in the meeting, a man Senator Charles Grassley asked about months ago (in a letter to Homeland Security), because the man: "has been accused of acting as an unregistered agent for Russian interests and apparently has ties to Russian intelligence." So at least some Republicans still care about such things, we suppose. Then there's Joe Scarborough, who is so fed up he's officially left the party. Plenty of other Republicans are still cheerfully dancing out under the rain of shoes, though.

In the run-up to the 2016 presidential election, it was said over and over again that the voters "didn't want a dynasty" in the White House. This was when Hillary Clinton was supposed to face Jeb Bush in the general election (ah, such simple, uncomplicated times!), and creating a political dynasty was supposedly distasteful. So what do we have now? A self-contained dynasty in the White House, which is closer to a reality television show named something like Dynasty Follies. But we've covered the whole shoestorm (so to speak) down in the talking points, so we'll quickly run through the other news of the week while setting Junior's bombshells aside for the moment.

In other Trump-related news (to use a downright dynastic phrase), the Congressional Budget Office delivered some very sad news to the White House. It seems that Trump's budget proposal will not cause economic growth to magically rise to four percent... or even three percent... but even if enacted the economy will continue chugging along at 1.9 percent growth (as it has been doing for years). Sad! Oh, and instead of ending with a surplus of $60 billion, it instead will finish up with a deficit of $720 billion. That's a whopping $800-billion rounding error, folks! SO SAD!

Donald Trump, after his meeting last week with Vladimir Putin, had a downright bizarre suggestion: create a joint U.S.-Russian "cyber unit" to fix the whole hacking problem. This was roundly ridiculed, by his own fellow Republicans no less. Lindsey Graham: "It is not the dumbest idea I've ever heard, but it's pretty close." John McCain: "I'm sure that Vladimir Putin could be of enormous assistance in that effort since he is the doing the hacking." Trump was forced to quickly back away from the idea that he had proposed: "The fact that President Putin and I discussed a Cyber Security unit doesn't mean I think it can happened. It can't." Um, then why did you bring it up in the first place?

Trump's personal lawyer is apparently close to a complete breakdown. Hey, who can really blame the guy, right? He got a snarky email from a complete stranger, and then went on an unhinged rant filled with profanity (it began with a two-word response that began with an "F" and ended with a "you"). This went on to include borderline threats such as: "You are fucking with me now. Let's see who you are. Watch your back, bitch," and: "I already know where you live, I'm on you. You might as well call me. You will see me. I promise. Bro." This is the personal criminal lawyer for the president of the United States, folks, who apparently had just gotten clonked on the head by a wooden-soled platform shoe. Or something.

Trump himself may be close to losing it... or, perhaps, he's just being Donald Trump again. His plans for a southern border wall keep growing by leaps and bounds, of course making it bigger, more beautiful, and more tremendous with each passing idea. Here's Trump on his wall plans this week:

Mr. Trump said he had not been joking when he said recently that a wall on the Mexican border would pay for itself... [and said] the wall would have to be transparent, using an offbeat example to explain why. "When they throw large sacks of drugs over, and if you have people on the other side of the wall, you don't see them -- they hit you on the head with 60 pounds of stuff? It's over," he said. "As crazy as that sounds, you need transparency through that wall."

So -- you decide: is that "as crazy as it sounds," or is it just Trump being Trump? Or is there really a discernable difference, at this point?

Of course, the other big political news of the week was the belated unveiling of McConnellcare 2.0, which was just as bad as the first version (to absolutely nobody's surprise). It may be doomed to failure next week, as support within the GOP ranks has already quickly crumbled. Actually, it crumbled even before it was announced, as Senators Lindsey Graham and Bill Cassidy were undercutting Mitch McConnell's big announcement on another cable TV channel ten minutes before the big reveal. How embarrassing!

McConnell is now desperately pleading with Republicans the media routinely labels "moderates" (they're not), offering up sweet deals to fence-sitters such as Lisa Murkowski. As Bloomberg reported:

Call it the Polar Payoff. Changes made to the Republican legislation to repeal large parts of Obamacare would send hundreds of millions of extra federal dollars to Alaska, whose Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski has been holding off from giving her much-needed vote to the bill. Under formulas in the revised legislation, only Alaska appears to qualify for the extra money.

That's the best you can come up with? Instead of Polar Payoff, how about "Klondike Kickback"? Seems to roll off the tongue a bit easier, y'know? In any case, the Washington Post has a handy "whip count" page where you can see the status of all Republican senators on the bill -- the nays, the ayes, and the fence-sitters. One assumes it will be updated continuously for the next week or so.

Two footnotes before we end on a handful of amusing stories, just to lighten everyone's day. First, Hawai'i won a court decision which weakens Trump's travel ban (by allowing in grandparents and other family members Trump wanted to exclude). And the Iraqi military has successfully taken back Mosul, after a nine-month fight that started late last year. Raqqa is still being fought over, but the battle for Mosul was victorious.

OK, as promised, here are some amusing news items in case you missed them. Trump's election commission dutifully released all of the public comments it has been getting, as required by law. As the Washington Post reports: "Of more than 112 pages of comments, just two are positive; the rest range from sincere advice to colorful, obscenity-laced trolling." Note that you can read that either way -- there were only two pages of positive comments, or there were only two positive comments in 112 pages.

A big iceberg broke off in Antarctica this week. How big? Depends on where you are. In the U.S., it was "as big as Delaware." Here's a fun tongue-in-cheek list of how news headlines described it elsewhere, which started with what you'd expect: "(Europe) An Iceberg Twice the Size of Luxembourg Breaks Off of Antarctica," but quickly gets a lot funnier:

  • (Portland, Ore.) A Physical Manifestation of White Entitlement Breaks Off of Antarctica
  • (New York City) An Iceberg with Unfortunately No Vacant Apartments Breaks Off of Antarctica
  • (Russia) Iceberg Is Big Like Bear, but Also Weak and Breaks Like American Political System

Speaking of amusing headlines, Politico missed an easy one this week, in a story on how the House dress code might soon change:

Speaker Paul Ryan has asked a top House chamber official to "modernize" the Speaker's Lobby dress code after being pummeled in the media for a long-held rule that women must cover their shoulders in a hallway outside the House floor.

Really, how hard is it to come up with something like: "The Right To Bare Arms"? Seems pretty obvious, at least to us.

And finally, news is that Kid Rock is serious about running for the Senate. This might just (oh, please, please, please...!) set up a primary fight within the GOP in Michigan. After all, who could resist a political race between Kid Rock and the other rock star reportedly interested in the race? If it came down to a ballot choice of Ted Nugent versus Kid Rock, which one would you vote for? In the age of Trump, this might (oh, please, please, PLEASE!) actually come to pass. Wango Tango!

 

Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week

Debbie Wasserman Schultz deserves at least an Honorable Mention this week, for introducing a snarky big of legislation. Here's the story:

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.)... proposed an amendment targeting [Jared] Kushner during a House Appropriations Committee markup session Thursday. It was voted down, 22-30, along party lines.

The measure would have barred the government from issuing or maintaining a security clearance for any White House individual "under a criminal investigation by a Federal law enforcement agency for aiding a foreign government."

Wasserman Schultz also attempted to introduce an amendment that would bar the government from issuing or maintaining a security clearance for White House staff who "deliberately fail" to disclose meetings with foreign nationals. It was voted down by the same margin.

But this week we have to give a collective Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week award to everyone who has made their voice heard on the McConnellcare bills (both versions, 1.0 and 2.0). This means everyone who wrote, emailed, called, or even "town-halled" their representatives in the Senate -- and especially Democrats from red states who made their views known to Republican senators. Keeping this pressure up is a large reason why there are now so many reluctant Republicans.

Of special note are the ones who protested in person, either in Washington or in their senator's local offices across the country. This is grassroots at its best, folks. Republicans are getting educated that healthcare is not some meaningless campaign slogan useful for whipping up the voters, it is an actual life-or-death matter for millions of citizens. Putting faces to this concept was a crucial thing to do, and the protesters have admirably done so for weeks now.

So, for everyone from the people in wheelchairs who got arrested for civil disobedience in Washington to the stressed-out worker who took the time to call up their senator's office -- this week's Most Impressive Democrat Of The Week is for you. And for what we believe is the first time, we are pro-actively awarding it to anyone who lets their voice be heard in the upcoming days and weeks as well -- because now is the most crucial time to keep the pressure on these senators as high as possible.

[If you'd like to contact your senator to add your voice to the rising chorus, please start at the Senate's "how to contact" page for information on how to do so -- they do listen, so this is important!]

 

Most Disappointing Democrat Of The Week

Well, he might have slipped the legal hook, but we're still going to continue shaming him every time his name hits the news.

Former New York State Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver had his corruption conviction overturned this week, due to an earlier Supreme Court decision which radically redefined such corruption so tightly that you pretty much have to take a bribe in the courtroom, in full view of the judge to get convicted, anymore.

Because of this legal precedent, Sliver has slipped off the hook. But that doesn't make what he did any less disappointing (and even that's being charitable). So while he avoids paying for his crimes in court, we'd like to hand him another MDDOTW (his fourth, so far), just to remind him this is far from any sort of vindication.

[Sheldon Silver is no longer in public office, so we cannot provide contact information for him, sorry.]

 

Friday Talking Points

Volume 445 (7/14/17)

We do realize there is a critical battle going on in the Senate over healthcare, but so far Democrats have been doing a pretty good job of getting the public on their side of that argument. The GOP "repeal-and-replace Obamacare" bill is the most-hated piece of legislation pretty much since pollsters began asking people about such issues. The pressure is on, and Democrats should keep it up, but there really won't be any good specific talking points until the C.B.O. report comes out next week.

So instead, we're just going all-in on the collusion thing. As James Carville once said: "When your political opponent is drowning, throw him an anchor." Blub blub blub....

 

1
   It's raining shoes!

Two notes for this one (and for our article's subtitle today): first, the obvious nod to The Weather Girls ("It's Raining Men") and the 1980s. But more importantly, we cannot claim originality for the "raining shoes" phrase, as we saw it in one of the many articles we read this week, down in the comments section. However, we failed to link to it at the time, so at this point we have no idea who should get the proper credit for coming up with such a brilliant metaphor. But we certainly can't claim the phrase as our own. Just wanted to be fully transparent, as they say.

"Instead of waiting for another shoe to drop, the Russia scandal is now raining shoes down from the sky on a regular basis. Call it cloudy with an excellent chance of wingtips. People have all but given up saying: 'Well, that's certainly the most damning evidence of collusion I've heard yet,' because they all know that another shoe will soon fall that ups the ante yet again. Every one of these falling shoes, if you pick them up and flip them over, has Cyrillic characters on the sole. Except for the ones with the Trump brand on them, of course. Robert Mueller's office now ought to have a shoe collection to rival the closet of Imelda Marcos."

 

2
   Hey, Rocky!

...Watch Trump attempt once again to pull a rabbit from this hat! Seriously, we all better start binge-watching some old Rocky And Bullwinkle episodes.

"At this point, it wouldn't surprise me in the least if I heard breaking news that two other Russians were present in the meeting with Donnie Junior and his brother-in-law -- Boris Badenov and Natasha Fatale. Other participants in the meeting have now revealed that their only contribution was to insist repeatedly: 'Trumpski must help kill moose and squirrel!' Folks, we've now gone from living through a bad Hollywood movie's plot to living in a surreal cartoon starring a flying squirrel. I guess the only thing left to do is practice your best Boris-and-Natasha accent, so you can yell 'Da, Comrade!' in every Republican congressman's face who still insists there is no collusion to be found."

 

3
   Not just smoke

Let's all agree where we now are, shall we?

"What astonishes me most is that for possibly the first time ever, the smoking gun was actually freely offered up to the public by a key player. There was a blatant attempt by the Trump campaign -- including two of Trump's relatives and his campaign manager -- to collude with a hostile foreign government to influence an American presidential election. The Washington Post got it right in the title to their editorial: 'The Russia Hacking Story Is No Longer Just Smoke, It's Fire.' No matter how hard the White House tries to insist that it's just a big 'nothingburger,' the truth is there is indeed meat to the story and there has been all along. The only things we don't know at this point are how much collusion there was, and how successful these efforts were. Was this a small campfire? A bonfire? Or a blazing inferno that devoured many square miles of forest? But the whole smoke/fire question has been definitively answered, at this point. Anyone who still denies this has his own pants on fire, to be blunt."

 

4
   But, officer...

Charles Krauthammer, ultra-conservative commentator, has apparently had enough. He easily won the "best metaphor of the week" contest, hands down:

It's a hell of a defense to say your collusion might be incompetent. If you get a call to go to a certain place in the middle of the night to pick up stolen goods and it turns out the stolen goods don't show up but the cops show up, I think you're going to have a very weak story saying: "Well, I got swindled here."

 

5
   There's that guy named Boris again...

Even Trey Gowdy is visibly frustrated. The House Oversight Committee he chairs really wanted to spend all their time investigating Democrats, but these hopes have been dashed by the hailstorm of shoes falling from the sky. He had some advice for Team Trump this week, and it seems like he also might have been watching a few moose-and-squirrel cartoons:

If you had a contact with Russia, tell the special counsel about it! Don't wait until the New York Times figures it out! Someone needs to get everyone in a room and say: "From the time you saw Dr. Zhivago until the moment you drank vodka with a guy named Boris, you list every single contact with Russia."

 

6
   All kidding aside

On a more serious note, we (once again) don't even have to turn to Democrats for quotes such as the following. This is what Republican ethics lawyer Richard Painter, who used to work in the George W. Bush White House, had to say about Junior's revelations this week:

This was an effort to get opposition research on an opponent in an American political campaign from the Russians. We do not get our opposition research from spies, we do not collaborate with Russian spies.... If this story is true, we'd have one of them if not both of them in custody by now, and we'd be asking them a lot of questions.... This is unacceptable.... This borders on treason, if it is not itself treason.

 

7
   Spinning in his grave

We saved the most scathing for last. Remember Ronald Reagan? Remember his views towards Russia? It seems many Republicans have forgotten, so here is none other than Ronald Reagan's daughter Patti Davis, doing her best to remind them:

In six short months Donald Trump, the president who doesn't know how to be one, has tipped America off its position as the most powerful country in the world and left us scrambling in the dust, trying to remember who we are and who we are supposed to be on the international stage. David Gergen pointed out how sad and sobering it was to see, at the G-20 summit, that America is no longer the major player. I would add that what is particularly sobering is how quickly power can be dismantled. Our democracy was supposed to be invincible -- that's what many of us had come to believe. But that isn't true. One man, whose arrogance and ego lead him trippingly into chaos of his own making, can turn a shining city on the hill into a shadowy, taudry [sic] replica of itself. Where once we had currency in the world, we are now left holding fool's gold.

I would just like to point out that I have never seen a group of people acquainted with so many Russians. I've met two Russian people in my entire life, and one of them was a refrigerator repair man. The fact that every other person the Trumps know is Russian should have tipped us off a year ago that something was amiss. But I digress.

The almost Shakespearean irony of Donald Trump as president is that his worst fear -- that of being ridiculed and disregarded -- is precisely what he has created by his own actions. If he was quiet for five minutes he might hear the echo of Putin's laughter carried on the wind across countries and oceans. But Trump's ego is a loud, boisterous thing and will never allow him to hear anything that might cause him to reflect.

-- Chris Weigant

 

All-time award winners leaderboard, by rank
Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

Cross-posted at: The Huffington Post

 

212 Comments on “Friday Talking Points [445] -- It's Raining Shoes!”

  1. [1] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Trump wouldn't be able to do a ride along with his ties to criminal figures, yet he CAN be President... And we wonder why our country is in the condition it is in!

    As for Trump's love of all things Russian, I thought this article was incredibly thorough at pointing out just how reliant on Russian money Trump has been. I imagine if we ever get to see his tax returns, it will be far worse than anyone would have guessed. The article tracks Russian money pouring into Trump properties for decades.

    https://newrepublic.com/article/143586/trumps-russian-laundromat-trump-tower-luxury-high-rises-dirty-money-international-crime-syndicate

  2. [2] 
    michale wrote:

    That's the best you can come up with? Instead of Polar Payoff, how about "Klondike Kickback"? Seems to roll off the tongue a bit easier, y'know?

    Are you SERIOUSLY complaining about kickbacks to put TrumpCare over the line???

    Have you forgotten the Louisiana Purchase or the Cornhusker Kickback???

    It's like ya'all have been lobotomized and that the terrible things Odumbo and the Dumbocrats did to make TrainWreckCare a reality never happened..

    Denial is NOT just a river in Egypt, I guess...

    Whatever ya'all gotz to do to sleep at night, I guess.. :D

  3. [3] 
    michale wrote:

    The article tracks Russian money pouring into Trump properties for decades.

    And, of course, you ignore the tens of millions of dollars of Russian money that has flowed to the Clintons for decades...

    How is this not blatant hypocrisy???

    I know, I know... Yer going to bleat next that it's a "FALSE Equivalency"...

    You won't provide ANY FACTS to support yer bleat, but you will bleat it nonetheless... :^/

  4. [4] 
    michale wrote:

    In memo, Trump administration weighs expanding the expedited deportation powers of DHS

    The Trump administration is weighing a new policy to dramatically expand the Department of Homeland Security’s powers to expedite the deportations of some illegal immigrants.

    Since 2004, the agency has been authorized to bypass immigration courts only for immigrants who had been living in the country illegally for less than two weeks and were apprehended within 100 miles of the border.

    Under the proposal, the agency would be empowered to seek the expedited removal of illegal immigrants apprehended anywhere in the United States who cannot prove they have lived in the country continuously for more than 90 days, according to a 13-page internal agency memo obtained by The Washington Post.

    The new guidelines, if enacted, would represent a major expansion of the agency’s authority to speed up deportations under President Trump, who has made border security a top priority.
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/in-memo-trump-administration-weighs-expanding-the-expedited-deportation-powers-of-dhs/2017/07/14/ce5f16b4-68ba-11e7-9928-22d00a47778f_story.html?utm_term=.47b79ec918f1

    President Trump....

    Making America Great Again.....

  5. [5] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @CW,

    a snarky big of legislation?

    i can't quite figure out whether that was supposed to be a snarky bit of legislation, or a bit of big, snarky legislation. perhaps i'm just jaded against DWS, but that seems a bit too tongue in cheek considering the severity of the charges.

    JL

  6. [6] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    RE: FTP1

    there are a few mentions of "raining shoes" in the comments section at democraticunderground, and there was a mother jones article back in march:

    http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2017/03/its-raining-shoes-jeff-sessions-affair-today/

    there were earlier references to shoefall from the campaign, but i don't think any of them stuck.

    JL

  7. [7] 
    michale wrote:

    The measure would have barred the government from issuing or maintaining a security clearance for any White House individual "under a criminal investigation by a Federal law enforcement agency for aiding a foreign government."

    So, that would have totally wrecked NOT-45's campaign! :D

    Not that her campaign needed any help in the WRECKING department... :D

  8. [8] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    How is this not blatant hypocrisy???

    I know, I know... Yer going to bleat next that it's a "FALSE Equivalency"...

    @michale,

    this argument misses the point entirely. appeals to hypocrisy are a big fat fallacy, regardless of whether or not the proposed equivalency is valid. for reference:

    https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/tu-quoque

    maybe it turns out that members of donald's campaign committed a crime, maybe it turns out to just be "extreme carelessness." but in either case it doesn't matter one iota what bill and hillary may or may not have gotten away with.

    JL

  9. [9] 
    michale wrote:

    Two footnotes before we end on a handful of amusing stories, just to lighten everyone's day. First, Hawai'i won a court decision which weakens Trump's travel ban (by allowing in grandparents and other family members Trump wanted to exclude).

    Democrats haven't won ANYTHING.. The Trump administration has appealed that obviously partisan decision by that ONE activist judge to the SCOTUS...

    Who constitutes "close" family is explicitly laid out in established immigration law and President is following that law to the letter...

    The Democrats will LOSE on this, just like they lost on the SCOTUS ruling...

  10. [10] 
    michale wrote:

    Targeting police will not be tolerated - pass the Thin Blue Line Act

    The U.S. House passed my Thin Blue Line Act, H.R. 115, earlier this year making the murder or attempted murder of a police officer, firefighter or other first responder an “aggravating” factor in death penalty determinations. The Senate needs to get the bill to the president’s desk as quickly as possible.
    http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/07/14/targeting-police-will-not-be-tolerated-pass-thin-blue-line-act.html

    Anyone here have a problem with this???

  11. [11] 
    michale wrote:

    appeals to hypocrisy are a big fat fallacy, regardless of whether or not the proposed equivalency is valid.

    That's your opinion and I respect that.. I just don't agree with it..

    this argument misses the point entirely.

    No, my argument *IS* the point..

    Liz got all upset about my accusations of hypocrisy.. I was merely pointing out that if the hypocrisy stopped or was at least conceded, then the accusations would stop as well..

    maybe it turns out that members of donald's campaign committed a crime, maybe it turns out to just be "extreme carelessness." but in either case it doesn't matter one iota what bill and hillary may or may not have gotten away with.

    In THAT regard, you are correct..

    But my comments were based on the fact that no one has moral or ethical authority to condemn President Trump if they are going to give a pass to NOT-45 or Bubba for similar but worse "crimes"...

    THAT's the point you are missing.. Constantly...

  12. [12] 
    michale wrote:

    It's quite simple..

    If ya'all want to condemn President Trump for all the money going into his legitimate business from Russia, it's easy..

    I know, I know.. I really don't have any moral foundation here cuz I have given the Clintons a pass, but... blaa blaaa Trump blaaa Bad blaaaa blaaa Russians blaaa blaaaa

    See how easy that is??

    If ya'all acknowledge ya'all's own hypocrisy and THEN go on to mouth off all ya want, you won't hear a peep out of me...

    And ya'all's integrity level rises considerably....

    "Yer stock is rising, Number Two.."
    -Dr Evil

    :D

  13. [13] 
    michale wrote:

    In keeping with #10

    Running Toward, When Others Run Away

    The Left has been struggling to disassociate the anti-cop hatred spewed by the Black Lives Matter movement from the assassination of New York police officer Miosotis Familia during the Fourth of July holiday. Police Commissioner James O’Neill demolished those efforts in his blazing funeral oration for Officer Familia on Tuesday. Assassin Alexander Bonds “hated the police,” O’Neill said, because he had heard and read “countless times” in conversation, on television, and in the newspapers that the cops were the “‘bad guys.’” That hate “has consequences,” O’Neill warned. “When we demonize a whole group of people—whether that group is defined by race, by religion, or by occupation—this is the result.” Bonds had mental problems, but it’s no coincidence that they culminated in the deliberate slaying of a cop.
    https://www.city-journal.org/html/running-toward-when-others-run-away-15319.html

    Thank you Dumbocrats for (ONLY) Black Lives Matter and hundreds of dead police officers.. :^/

    The scorn the Dumbocrat Party by millions of patriotic Americans is well-earned...

    How ANY LEO can call themselves a Democrat is beyond me...

  14. [14] 
    michale wrote:

    But my comments were based on the fact that no one has moral or ethical authority to condemn President Trump if they are going to give a pass to NOT-45 or Bubba for similar but worse "crimes"...

    Robin Williams did a stand up routine once where he ridiculed a PSA from Motley Crue warning children about the evils of drugs....

    That's the type of blatant hypocrisy that rolls off of ya'all in waves....

    If ya'all want me to stop pointing out ya'all's hypocrisy, then stop being so hypocritical...

    I really can't make it any simpler than that...

  15. [15] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    nypoet22 [8] - thank you, JL. I sometimes wonder if he intentionally ignores how poorly he tries to shift the debate in order to deflect or if he just does not care.

    michale,

    And, of course, you ignore the tens of millions of dollars of Russian money that has flowed to the Clintons for decades...

    How is this not blatant hypocrisy???

    I know, I know... Yer going to bleat next that it's a "FALSE Equivalency"...

    You won't provide ANY FACTS to support yer bleat, but you will bleat it nonetheless... :^/

    I provided you with the link to the article, if you cannot read it ask a grandchild to read it to you for nap time!

    Am I supposed to prove that you are making a false equivalency argument, are those the facts you are whining about not knowing? Fine.

    How many Russian mobsters that had offices in a property owned by the Clintons have been charged with money laundering or other felonies?

    How do the Clintons benefit directly from any money given to the Clinton Foundation?

    How many times have the Clintons filed for bankruptcy? If you cannot understand why the two are vastly different....

  16. [16] 
    michale wrote:

    Am I supposed to prove that you are making a false equivalency argument,

    Yea, it would be kinda nice... I mean, if you are going to accuse me of making a false equivalency argument or you are going to accuse me of racism..

    It would be nice if you could actually BACK IT UP...

    How many Russian mobsters that had offices in a property owned by the Clintons have been charged with money laundering or other felonies?

    A dozen or so..

    How do the Clintons benefit directly from any money given to the Clinton Foundation?

    Yer kidding, right???

    How many times have the Clintons filed for bankruptcy? If you cannot understand why the two are vastly different....

    Ahhhh So filing for bankruptcy means that someone is scum of the earth???

    13% of businesses filed for bankruptcy in 2016...

    Oh..I get it.. Only those businesses run by people with -Rs after their names are scumbags...

  17. [17] 
    michale wrote:

    Oh..I get it.. Only those businesses run by people with -Rs after their names are scumbags...

    As I say, I admire your transparency..

    You Party bigotry is VERY transparent....

  18. [18] 
    michale wrote:

    President Trump may not be as good as I claim he is..

    But it's DAMN certain that he is not as bad as ya'all claim he is...

    If President Trump had a '-D' after his name, most of ya'all would be swooning..

  19. [19] 
    michale wrote:

    I sometimes wonder if he intentionally ignores how poorly he tries to shift the debate in order to deflect or if he just does not care.

    I am not shifting the debate..

    I have already proven beyond ANY doubt that ya'all have absolutely NO FACTS that prove any kind of collusion, even IF collusion was a crime. Which it's not.. I have also proven beyond ANY doubt that ya'all don't have a SCINTILLA or a WHIFF of factual evidence that indicates a SINGLE NOT-45 vote was changed to a Trump vote..

    So, there IS no debate in those areas to shift...

    No, MY point, as always, is ya'all's blatant hypocrisy and blatant Party bigotry..

    And even THAT point is not debatable as I have proven THAT case ALSO beyond ANY shadow of a doubt..

    Ergo, the ONLY recourse left to you is childish and immature personal attacks and totally bogus accusations of racism...

  20. [20] 
    michale wrote:

    FEC Shoots Down Democrat’s Plan to Target Conservative Media
    http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2017/07/14/fec-shoots-down-democrats-plan-to-target-conservative-media/

    Sorry Dumbocrat Party..

    Ya'all don't get to censor speech you don't like...

    It's now how we do things in America...

    Perhaps Iran or North Korea would be more to your liking..

    Don't let the door hit ya on the arse as ya trip yer way out...

  21. [21] 
    michale wrote:

    https://youtu.be/qwXtMvs1bmY

    Brain Dead Democrat leadership...

    No wonder they can't win elections...

  22. [22] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    if the hypocrisy stopped or was at least conceded, then the accusations would stop as well..

    @michale,

    i don't believe that statement for a second, and neither does anybody else.

    as spurious as the claims are, let us presume for a moment that such hypocrisy actually did exist and was fully acknowledged. all the quatloos in the world say that these fallacious arguments would continue in full force - they'd just be focused upon an amorphous "ya'all"[sic] instead of at any particular individual.

    refusing to address the content of an argument is the game you like to play, and i don't see that changing in the event of someone deciding to agree with your claims.

    JL

  23. [23] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    The Emperor has no clothes.

    :-)

  24. [24] 
    michale wrote:

    i don't believe that statement for a second, and neither does anybody else.

    That's your choice..

    But I have proven it time and time again, so my credibility is beyond reproach in this issue..

    as spurious as the claims are, let us presume for a moment that such hypocrisy actually did exist

    As I have proven beyond ANY doubt, it does exist..

    refusing to address the content of an argument is the game you like to play,

    I have already addressed the content of the argument.

    NO FACTS whatsoever that prove ANYTHING...

    and i don't see that changing in the event of someone deciding to agree with your claims.

    One way to find out...

    Concede the hypocrisy which is simply undeniable...

    If you're right, then you have a GREAT talking point..

    If you're wrong, you don't have to listen to me bitch about the hypocrisy...

    For you, it's a win-win...

    BUT...

    For YOU....

  25. [25] 
    michale wrote:

    But I have proven it time and time again, so my credibility is beyond reproach in this issue..

    When I asked you and Liz to step in when Weigantians resorted to name-calling, ya'all stepped up and I stood down...

    I am a man of my word in that regard...

    And what is so mind-boggling to me is that it's so simple to do...

    Every time I make a SCOTUS prediction, I *ALWAYS* start with the caveat, "Yea, I know, I know.. I don't have the most stellar record when it comes to SCOTUS predictions......."

    It's so EASY to acknowledge the shortcomings..

    Yet ya'all simply REFUSE to do it...

    Which indicates that ya'all simply CANNOT admit ya'all's shortcomings..

    And so it goes and so it goes....

  26. [26] 
    michale wrote:

    I mean, honestly... Think about it..

    How can I bitch and moan about ya'all's hypocrisy when ya'all already ACKNOWLEDGE ya'all's hypocrisy???

    That would be redum-nant and re-donk-ulus... :D

  27. [27] 
    michale wrote:

    The problem is, is that ya'all don't THINK ya'all are being hypocritical, even though the hypocrisy is blatant and obvious to anyone not a Party zealot...

    One only has to compare ya'all's reaction to the NOT-45 scandals and the President Trump scandals to see the blatant hypocrisy..

    With NOT-45, the evidence had to be mathematically precise and beyond ANY six-ways from Sunday doubt...

    With President Trump, the evidence is NOTHING but rumor, innuendo, and anonymous sources/accusations...

    How is that NOT blatant and unequivocal hypocrisy???

    I won't even bother pointing out ya'all's hysterical reactions to Bush's counter-terrorism, drone and domestic surveillance programs versus ya'all's NON-EXISTENT reaction to Odumbo enhancing and increasing those exact same programs..

    Once again, the hypocrisy is blatant, unequivocal and obvious, yet you can actually sit there and say that the hypocrisy doesn't exist!???

    If ANYONE here lacks credibility in this issue, it's ya'all....

  28. [28] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Me thinks he doth protest too much. Very too much, indeed.

  29. [29] 
    michale wrote:

    Somehow I expected that the Russian lawyer who met with Donald Trump Jr would look.... different....

    http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/07/14/20/423AA12B00000578-4697784-image-a-27_1500059412801.jpg

    :D

  30. [30] 
    michale wrote:

    Me thinks he doth protest too much. Very too much, indeed.

    Just the facts, ma'am... Just the facts..

    :D

    Now, if you have any facts of yer own that would COUNTER what I have posted...

    "I'm all ears"
    -Ross Perot, 1992 Presidential Elections

    :D

  31. [31] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Facts about what?

  32. [32] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Who else said, "I'm all ears."?

  33. [33] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    And, no, I'm not talking about Spock.

  34. [34] 
    michale wrote:

    Facts about what?

    Facts about the blatant hypocrisy that is a daily occurrence here in Weigantia...

    Who else said, "I'm all ears."?

    Dean Winchester

    And, no, I'm not talking about Spock.

    I doubt he would say that.. But I am sure Dr McCoy said it ABOUT Spock.. :D

  35. [35] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Dean Winchester

    Wrong answer.

  36. [36] 
    michale wrote:

    Wrong answer.

    Nu uh...

    "Hey, you got another snappy one liner, I'm all ears. "
    -Dean Winchester, SUPERNATURAL, Alex Annie Alexis Ann

    :D

  37. [37] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I'm afraid that your facts, Michale, are not in evidence.

  38. [38] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I didn't say it was incorrect, just wrong.

    "I'm all ears."
    James Bond, Casino Royale (2006 Ed)

  39. [39] 
    TheStig wrote:

    CW-

    This week's FTP must have been a pleasure to write.

    I think Danny Ocean's quotes are pithier than Junior's knockoffs.

    FTP 2. And what does Rocky say to Bullwinlkle's hat trick? "That trick never works!" Surprised you didn't use that line. Dept. of 6 Degrees of Separation: My aunt went to high school with June Foray, the voice of Rocky, Natasha and every other female character voiced on the R&B show. By some trick of fate, I can do a dead on Bullwinkle impression. Also Kermit the Frog...basically B. J. Moose with a slight drawl. Cosmic...

    FTP 3. It's a Tire Fire. Impossible to extinguish, spontaneously reignites.

  40. [40] 
    michale wrote:

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/insurers-oppose-cruz-amendment-to-republican-health-care-bill-1500087886

    Looks like ya'all are on the same side as the money-grubbing insurance companies...

    Isn't that ALWAYS the way it is....

    Party Uber Alles

    :D

  41. [41] 
    michale wrote:

    Why Republicans Exempted Their Own Insurance From Obamacare Rollback
    The unusual nature of staff and member health benefits

    http://www.rollcall.com/news/politics/republicans-exempted-insurance-obamacare-rollback

    Morons...

    Take the same health insurance they want to force on the rest of us.....

  42. [42] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    Looks like ya'all are on the same side as the money-grubbing insurance companies...

    Actually, I think you have us all confused with ya.

    You want to keep the insurance companies involved in the US healthcare insurance system and (most of?) the rest of us here would like to see them completely out of the system.

    I thought that much was clear, no?

  43. [43] 
    michale wrote:

    Actually, I think you have us all confused with ya.

    Nope, not at all... :D

    Did you read the article...

    Health Insurance companies oppose the GOP bill, just like ya'all do...

    Under the GOP bill, they won't make as much $$$....

  44. [44] 
    michale wrote:

    You want to keep the insurance companies involved in the US healthcare insurance system and (most of?) the rest of us here would like to see them completely out of the system.

    And that simply is NOT going to happen... California and Vermont PROVED that beyond any doubt...

  45. [45] 
    michale wrote:

    You want to keep the insurance companies involved in the US healthcare insurance system

    Actually, I would prefer to have humans injected with nanites that would cure all sickness and injuries and do away with health care altogether...

    I also like puppies and unicorns and rainbows and long walks on the beach with my beautiful wife...

  46. [46] 
    michale wrote:

    OK, now THAT is just nonsense.. :D

  47. [47] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    So, you're not on the same side as the money-grubbing insurance companies, then ... or, you are on the same side. I'm confused as to where you stand on this basic issue ...

  48. [48] 
    Paula wrote:
  49. [49] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Why is he joining the Democrats? Because they have such a great message and method of communicating it?

    That was a little joke.

  50. [50] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Speaking of jokes, here's an interesting piece about the evolution of thinking on healthcare insurance and how the idea of 'single-payer' may be on the rise, fraught with difficulty as it will certainly be given its inherent complexity.

    Which is why President Trump would be wise to announce a 'Blue-Ribbon Commission on Pathways Toward a Single-Payer Healthcare Insurance System For America'. He could even call it the Trump Gold-Ribbon Commission, if that suits him better.

    He could gather up all of the stakeholders, sans the insurance companies - unless, of course, any of them of anything of value to add to the discussion - and task the panel to study all possible schemes, taking lessons from similar systems in other countries and devising a system that would be the envy of the industrialized world.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/15/opinion/sunday/medicare-for-all-isnt-sounding-so-crazy-anymore.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-left-region&region=opinion-c-col-left-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-left-region&_r=0

  51. [51] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    The above remark about jokes didn't come out right, at all!

    I meant to infer that the current goings on in congress over the GOP and their healthcare bills are one big collective joke but, apparently, nobody gets it.

    Single-payer is most decidedly ... NOT A JOKE.

  52. [52] 
    michale wrote:

    Liz,

    So, you're not on the same side as the money-grubbing insurance companies, then ... or, you are on the same side. I'm confused as to where you stand on this basic issue ...

    As I have oft stated, when it comes to health insurance, I am not on any side...

    I have no skin in that game...

    But I know TrainWreckCare is a train wreck so ANYTHING that gets rid of that dunsel is a good thing..

  53. [53] 
    michale wrote:
  54. [54] 
    Kick wrote:
  55. [55] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    NO FACTS whatsoever that prove ANYTHING...

    see FTP#3, then check pants for scorch marks.

    JL

  56. [56] 
    michale wrote:

    see FTP#3, then check pants for scorch marks.

    Where's the crime??

  57. [57] 
    michale wrote:

    Don't tell me, let me guess..

    It's illegal to obtain information from a foreign adversary...

    hehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehehe

    If true, NOT-45 should have been locked up long ago..

  58. [58] 
    michale wrote:

    THERE CAN now be no doubt: The Russia meddling story is not just smoke but fire. Donald Trump Jr.’s interactions with Russians during last year’s presidential campaign were abnormal and alarming.

    But NOT-45's interactions with Russia's puppet during last year's presidential campaign was perfectly normal and absolutely NOTHING to worry about...

    Yea....

    Absolutely NO hypocrisy there!! :D

  59. [59] 
    michale wrote:

    OK, OK.. I'll address your hilarious issue.. :D

    I's use the Socratic method...

    Question #1
    Is Donald Trump Jr's interactions with some Russian that Odumbo helped get into the country during a presidential election abnormal and alarming??

    Question #2
    Is NOT-45's interactions with Putin's Ukranian leader/puppet during a presidential election abnormal and alarming??

    There...

    Your "issue" is completely and utterly refuted as the lame-ass mound of bullshit it factually is...

    Now, let's talk about ya'all's hypocrisy...

  60. [60] 
    michale wrote:

    Here's a little wisdom for you, JL...

    JUST because WaPoop says it's an issue, says it's "fire".....

    Doesn't make it so...

    WaPoop has had to print so many retractions and made so many boneheaded and utterly WRONG accusations, they can't be trusted when they say water is wet and ice is cold..

    You WANT to believe it, so you do...

    That is the beginning and end of that "issue"....

  61. [61] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @michale[55-59],

    your use of illogical fallacy is so pervasive i'm running out of words in latin to describe it.

    JL

  62. [62] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    18

    President Trump may not be as good as I claim he is..

    Your love for Trump is well-documented on these boards; you have proven beyond doubt that you are indeed a member of the cult of personality of the celebrity President that is Don the Con.

    But it's DAMN certain that he is not as bad as ya'all claim he is...

    I don't presume to speak for everyone like you do incessantly, but I can tell you with no reservation that he is EXACTLY who I said he was since my first post on this board. He is a modern-day Benedict Arnold who would turn coat on America for money and in order to feed his insatiable ego... Benedict Donald.

    If President Trump had a '-D' after his name, most of ya'all would be swooning..

    He did have a "D" after his name for the majority of his life, and I can assure you that it didn't change my opinion of him one iota. He has been a con artist and huckster for decades, and he knew he could never have been elected on the Democratic ticket so he opportunistically chose the Party he thought he could successfully exploit. It's sad how so many in the GOP are turning a blind eye while he turns the Grand Old Party into the Grifters of Putin.

  63. [63] 
    Kick wrote:

    John McCain drops his very own shoe and will be out for a week and unable to vote on the health care bill for next week. So there's vote #3... even if temporarily.

  64. [64] 
    Aloysius McG wrote:

    I broke a long-standing rule when reading this blog today. I decided to read the comments of Michale.

    I have reinstated the rule, and I will not violate it again.

    Why on Earth would any of you continue to engage him? His predictable comments, disrespect and failure to deal with facts have not changed and will not change. The time wasted in replying to him detracts from the productive discussion.

    Peace, out.

  65. [65] 
    Paula wrote:

    [63] Aloysius: Yep!

  66. [66] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @aloysius,

    despite his faulty logic and paleo-regressive political orientation, michale has great movie knowledge and a sense of humor, which is more than i can say for most folks. kick gets it, and so do liz, russ, LB and for that matter chris weigant. if it gets too tedious for you then don't join in, but there's no need to rain on other people's fun.

    i wouldn't go so far as to call a dog filthy, but they definitely dirty. but a dog's got personality, and personality goes a long way.
    ~pulp fiction

    https://youtu.be/61g2-EVJ-mo

  67. [67] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @kick,

    perhaps someone should tell senator mccain how much his surgery would cost him if he had no health insurance, like the twenty-something million americans who would become uninsured under DonTcare 3.0

    JL

  68. [68] 
    michale wrote:

    your use of illogical fallacy is so pervasive i'm running out of words in latin to describe it.

    Your habit of ignoring the point in an attempt to apply liberal koom-bye-yaa "logic" is a constant source of inspiration for me..

    It indicates how right I am.. :D

    The simple fact that WaPoop has been hysterical in it's Anti-Trump coverage is well-sourced and well-documented and that it has had to print numerous retractions is a stone cold fact...

    Putting your faith in WaPoop is like putting your faith in InfoWars...

    michale has great movie knowledge and a sense of humor, which is more than i can say for most folks. kick gets it, and so do liz, russ, LB and for that matter chris weigant. if it gets too tedious for you then don't join in, but there's no need to rain on other people's fun.

    Thank you...

    despite his faulty logic and paleo-regressive political orientation,

    I think.... :D

  69. [69] 
    michale wrote:

    Al,

    Why on Earth would any of you continue to engage him? His predictable comments, disrespect and failure to deal with facts have not changed and will not change. The time wasted in replying to him detracts from the productive discussion.

    And yet....

    Ya'all have been consistently and SPECTACULARLY wrong about President Trump and his effect on this country and *I* have been consistently and SPECTACULARLY accurate about President Trump and his effect on this country..

    And *THAT* just burns ya'all up to no end.. :D

  70. [70] 
    michale wrote:

    Paula, [68]

    Yep... :D

  71. [71] 
    michale wrote:

    Victoria,

    He did have a "D" after his name for the majority of his life, and I can assure you that it didn't change my opinion of him one iota.

    Of course you would say that. Your Party zealotry and enslavement demands no less..

    But here's the thing and there is just NO getting around it...

    *IF* your opinion of President Trump hasn't changed "one iota" from when President Trump had a '-D' after his name, you should have absolutely *NO PROBLEM* finding me ONE hysterical Anti-Trump comment from that time when President Trump had a -D after his name..

    A single "Benedict Donald" comment?? A single "TRUMP IS THE WORST" comment??

    Nope.. You can't point to a SINGLE anti-Trump comment from back when he had a -D after his name..

    So, CLEARLY... the ONLY logical conclusion is that you are full of shit and that your opinion of President Trump *HAS* changed a whole buttload of iotas....

    "Simple logic"
    -Admiral James T Kirk, STAR TREK IV, The Voyage Home

    :D

  72. [72] 
    michale wrote:

    perhaps someone should tell senator mccain how much his surgery would cost him if he had no health insurance, like the twenty-something million americans who would become uninsured under DonTcare 3.0

    Maybe those alleged 20-something million Americans don't WANT to carry health insurance...

    As should be their right....

    For people who go on and on about the evils of Russia, ya'all sure don't seem to have a problem with instituting that style of government here in the US...

    I'm just sayin'....

  73. [73] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    "Take a break. You don't have to be a prick EVERY day of your life, you know."

    I'm just quotin' ...

  74. [74] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Kick [53]

    Glad to share it with the group!

  75. [75] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    For people who go on and on about the evils of Russia, ya'all sure don't seem to have a problem with instituting that style of government here in the US...

    Russia doesn't require citizens to purchase health insurance or face a fine, so it seems like you don't have a clue as to what style of government they actually have, do ya?

  76. [76] 
    michale wrote:

    I'm just quotin' ...

    Yes, you are. And a damn fine PLATOON quote it was... :D

    "Maybourne, you are an idiot *every* day of the week! Couldn't you take just one day off!!?
    -Amanda Tapping, STARGATE SG-1

    I'm just quotin' :D

    But seriously, as has been aptly proven beyond ANY doubt, I simply respond to people in the manner that they respond to me..

    Take Ally McGee up there. He's being a prick, so I be a prick right back...

    "Ya'all wouldn't START none, there wouldn't BE none"
    -Will Smith, INDEPENDENCE DAY

    :D

  77. [77] 
    michale wrote:

    By the bi... Yer up early...

  78. [78] 
    michale wrote:

    Russia doesn't require citizens to purchase health insurance or face a fine, so it seems like you don't have a clue as to what style of government they actually have, do ya?

    No but Russia is a dictatorship ruled by a prissy ignoramus who thinks he knows what is best for his entire people..

    Kinda like Odumbo was... :D

    Too bad Odumbo's legacy is being taken out to the dump of history where it belongs, eh? :D

  79. [79] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    70

    Of course you would say that. Your Party zealotry and enslavement demands no less..

    Of course you would say that; your pathological lying and obsession with discussing posters versus political issues demands no less and produces nothing more than repetitive bullshit and mindless drivel.

    But here's the thing and there is just NO getting around it...

    You're ignorant and can't write in complete sentences or compose paragraphs.

    *IF* your opinion of President Trump hasn't changed "one iota" from when President Trump had a '-D' after his name, you should have absolutely *NO PROBLEM* finding me ONE hysterical Anti-Trump comment from that time when President Trump had a -D after his name..

    Wrong. "President Trump" never had a "D" after his name, you stupid knuckle-dragging neanderthal.

    Nope.. You can't point to a SINGLE anti-Trump comment from back when he had a -D after his name..

    Of course you would say that; you are enslaved by your obsession with pathological lying and your few repetitive arguments. Also, private citizens don't exactly have Party designations attached to their names like politicians.

    So, CLEARLY... the ONLY logical conclusion is that you are full of shit and that your opinion of President Trump *HAS* changed a whole buttload of iotas....

    Wrong again, you brainless boor. He wasn't "President Trump" when he had a "D" after his name, and I can assure you that my opinion of "President Trump" hasn't changed a single iota. You LOSE AGAIN because you didn't think that one through due to the FACT that you are limited by your anencephaly.

    "Simple logic"
    -Admiral James T Kirk, STAR TREK IV, The Voyage Home

    As I have agreed many times, your logic is nothing if not simple. :)

    sim·ple
    ?simp?l
    adjective
    4. of low or abnormally low intelligence.
    synonyms: having learning difficulties, having special (educational) needs

  80. [80] 
    michale wrote:

    Victoria,

    Of course you would say that; your pathological lying and obsession with discussing posters versus political issues demands no less and produces nothing more than repetitive bullshit and mindless drivel.

    Fine..

    PROVE me wrong....

    You can't because I am dead on ballz accurate...

    Wrong. "President Trump" never had a "D" after his name, you stupid knuckle-dragging neanderthal.

    Ohmygods!! Are you really THAT obtuse... :D

    Nice dodge, but you can't escape the FACT that you are lying when you claim you opinion of Trump hasn't changed "one iota" from when Trump had a -D after his name...

    synonyms: having learning difficulties, having special (educational) needs

    Wow.... Now you are capping on special needs people...

    What a total bitch thing to do, Veronica...

    Can't say I am surprised... It's par for the course for you...

  81. [81] 
    michale wrote:

    Liz,

    "Take a break. You don't have to be a prick EVERY day of your life, you know."

    I'm just quotin' ...

    And YOU wonder why I am a prick every day of my Weigantian life...

    It's because I have to deal with morons like Victoria/Veronica...

  82. [82] 
    michale wrote:

    Victoria,

    Wrong. "President Trump" never had a "D" after his name, you stupid knuckle-dragging neanderthal.

    That's pretty lame, Veronica.. Even for you... Which says something...

    Yes, President Trump once had a 'D' after his name..

    Just like President Obama once lived in Indonesia...

    The fact that Trump/Obama wasn't President when those things occurred does not make the occurrences any less factual...

    You got caught in a total bullshit lie and now yer trying to weasel your way out of it with semantical games...

    "Whatta maroon.."
    -Bugs Bunny

  83. [83] 
    michale wrote:

    And, since I KNOW most of ya'all would rather cut off your fingers than acknowledge a good point of mine, allow me to render some assistance..

    "Kick,

    As much as I hate to say it, I gotta agree with Michale on this one. That was a pretty lame gambit and was glaringly obvious what you were trying to pull.

    And, just let me staple the vicar, that was a pretty awesome rebuttal on Michale's part..."
    -Weigantians

    :D heh

  84. [84] 
    Kick wrote:

    JL
    66

    perhaps someone should tell senator mccain how much his surgery would cost him if he had no health insurance, like the twenty-something million americans who would become uninsured under DonTcare 3.0

    I know, right! I am guessing Senator McCain's surgery might have only cost him a $25 copay since he's probably covered by TRICARE For Life. Oh, who knows? Maybe he paid more since he probably enjoys medical care/insurance choices that many people don't have. I can assure everyone it's great single-payer insurance and has saved me literally a fortune in medical costs for the low, low price of decades of service to the United States.

    https://www.hnfs.com/content/dam/hnfs/tn/common/pdf/cost_chart.pdf

    Thank you America for my single-payer insurance with $20 ambulance rides and $30 emergency room copays where they stitch and staple my wounds on an as-needed basis. :)

  85. [85] 
    michale wrote:

    Wow.... Now you are capping on special needs people...

    What a total bitch thing to do, Veronica...

    "Dick move, Banner!!"
    -Tony Stark, AVENGERS: AGE OF ULTRON

  86. [86] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    79

    Fine..

    PROVE me wrong....

    You can't because I am dead on ballz accurate...

    Nope. I won't because it's confidential, and I have absolutely no need whatsoever to prove anything to an asshole like YOU. :)

    Nice dodge, but you can't escape the FACT that you are lying when you claim you opinion of Trump hasn't changed "one iota" from when Trump had a -D after his name...

    My opinion of him has not changed because he has not changed. You continuing to LIE about posters is what you do here frequently on these boards.

    synonyms: having learning difficulties, having special (educational) needs

    Wow.... Now you are capping on special needs people...

    I see you are enslaved by your Party bigotry. Do you snowflakes ever get tired of your PC bullshit? I was quite simply capping on YOU; I knew you were ignorant, but thank you ever so much for giving definition to your special needs. Besides, capping on people exactly like you is a thing these days:

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

    I think the big problem this country has is being politically correct. I've been challenged by so many people, I don't frankly have time for total political correctness. And to be honest with you, this country doesn't have time either.

    What a total bitch thing to do, Veronica...

    Well, he can't help himself; he has been doing "total bitch" things for a very, very long time... which goes a long way to explaining why my opinion of him hasn't changed one iota. :)

  87. [87] 
    michale wrote:

    Victoria,

    Nope. I won't because it's confidential, and I have absolutely no need whatsoever to prove anything to an asshole like YOU. :)

    It's "confidential" yet you spew it all over a public forum.. :D

    Yea... Right.. Whatever you say.. :D

    You "won't" because you CAN'T... It's that simple.. :D

    My opinion of him has not changed

    Prove it.. Show me a comment from when he was a Dumbocrat that is on par with your comments today..

    You can't because, as a Dumbocrat, you LOVED Trump.. :D

    You continuing to LIE about posters is what you do here frequently on these boards.

    PROVE it's a lie...

    You can't because it is 100% factual...

  88. [88] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    82

    And, since I KNOW most of ya'all would rather cut off your fingers than acknowledge a good point of mine, allow me to render some assistance..

    I'd say it's a safe wager that most of them would rather cut off your fingers. Your ever present peevish neediness is again duly noted. Pathetic. *LOL* :)

  89. [89] 
    michale wrote:

    Victoria,

    I'd say it's a safe wager that most of them would rather cut off your fingers.

    Naw, only a couple here are that violent and willing to cross any line to silence people...

    Your ever present peevish neediness is again duly noted.

    Says the girl who reads every comment I write.. :D

  90. [90] 
    michale wrote:

    Kick,

    As much fun as it is to insult you (you make it WAY too easy :D) I am sure it's more than tedious for the other Weigantians..

    If you want agree to a truce, I'm game....

  91. [91] 
    neilm wrote:

    Trey Gowdy and Charles Krauthammer are just killing 45 and his clown show.

    On Fox News, no less, in Gowdy's case. This means the perpetually ignorant suddenly had some reality dealt to them. Not something Fox News can allow to happen on a regular basis.

    Fox News need to make sure there is only one voice speaking - Kellyanne's for instance - even Ann Coulter is starting to get unreliable, and the wheels really came off the Glenn Beck bus.

    Oh, and Fox News' ratings are plummeting as well - and the big winners are ...

    wait for it ...

    Rachel Maddow, Lawrence O’Donnell, and MSNBC.

  92. [92] 
    michale wrote:

    “This is the darkest political moment in American history. Who’s going to argue that?”
    -Phil Donahue

    I am, ya moron..

    Darker moment than the Lincoln assassination??

    Darker moment than the Kennedy assassination??

    Darker moment than the fraking Civil War!!??

    THIS is exactly why it's impossible to take Dumbocrats seriously...

    The are so hysterical and deranged about President Trump they are reduced to blubbering and incoherent idiots...

  93. [93] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    A McG,

    I have reinstated the rule, and I will not violate it again.

    That's great!

    :-)

  94. [94] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @neil,

    ratings data? i thought morning joe would reap the most rewards...

    JL

  95. [95] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    86

    It's "confidential" yet you spew it all over a public forum.. :D

    Then you're all set and can stop your hysterical whining and begging. Now bugger off. :)

    You can't because, as a Dumbocrat, you LOVED Trump..

    I've never been a Democrat or a Dumbocrat, but Trump has ALWAYS been an asshole.

    http://trumpthemovie.com/watch/

    Is it possible that you LOVE and worship Trump so much that you cannot fathom that someone else doesn't like the asshole and has NEVER? You quite simply appear to be deluding yourself.

    PROVE it's a lie...

    PROVE it's a FACT. You can't. You can post your LYING repetitive bullshit a million times, and all you prove is that you're a prolific and pathological LIAR and obsessed with discussing other posters rather than discussing actual political issues.

    You can't because it is 100% factual...

    We know you LOVE Trump, but try to let it somehow seep into your teeny tiny little mind that not everyone does. He's been an asshole for a very, very long time so your one-size-fits-all "simple" explanation that anyone who doesn't like Trump (or whatever topic you're hysterically ranting about) must be a Democratic Party bigot is about the stupidest bullshit I have ever heard. :)

  96. [96] 
    michale wrote:

    Victoria,

    PROVE it's a FACT. You can't.

    Your actions and comments PROVE it's factual...

    Dumbocrat thru and thru... :D

    We know you LOVE Trump, but try to let it somehow seep into your teeny tiny little mind that not everyone does.

    Which has nothing to do with the fact that A> You would love Trump if he had a -D after his name and B> You are firmly enslaved by the Dumbocrat Party

    He's been an asshole for a very, very long time so your one-size-fits-all "simple" explanation that

    I never denied he's an asshole. Of COURSE he is an asshole..

    But he is also YOUR President so suck it up and deal with it.. :D

    OK, so I guess no truce...

    Fine by me...

  97. [97] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    88

    Says the girl who reads every comment I write.. :D

    *LOL* Nope!

    CONFESSION: I don't read any of the ones you "write" and only about 40-45% of the ones you type. You've read one of your repetitive posts full of monotonous bullshit, and you've pretty much read 90% of them. *LOL*

    Whose posts do I actually read every one? JL, Neil, Elizabeth, actually I can save myself some time and confess that it's just about everyone except YOU, but your peevish neediness is again... and as always... duly noted. :)

  98. [98] 
    michale wrote:

    Veronica,

    CONFESSION: I don't read any of the ones you "write" and only about 40-45% of the ones you type.

    And ANOTHER lame dodge...

  99. [99] 
    michale wrote:
  100. [100] 
    michale wrote:

    AMY GOODMAN: Some lawyers are saying it has to do with breaking campaign finance laws or campaign laws that have to do with getting something of value, not necessarily financial, from a foreign entity, a state or nonstate actor.

    GLENN GREENWALD: Right. And there’s, I think, a lot more lawyers and a lot more campaign finance lawyers who have said that just getting information about a candidate would not constitute something of value. But let’s assume that that’s true. Let’s take that theory as though it’s true. Why doesn’t it also apply then to the person working for Democrats who went to Moscow and got something of value, namely information about Trump, from Kremlin-connected people in Moscow, or Democrats, including someone working for the DNC, who got something of value from Ukrainian officials? Why isn’t that the same thing?
    https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2017/07/14/greenwald_donald_trump_jrs_emails_are_not_a_smoking_gun_for_anything_not_evidence_of_any_crime.html

    Hypocrisy....

    Pure, unadulterated, unequivocal hypocrisy....

    And ya'all STILL deny that there is any hypocrisy here..

    "Fascinating"
    -Spock

  101. [101] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    97

    And ANOTHER lame dodge...

    How do you figure it's a "dodge" when I confessed how much of your bullshit I actually do read? You really are quite intellectually challenged. The answer is in there and easy to find, but you'll first have to pull your head out of your ass. :)

  102. [102] 
    michale wrote:

    How do you figure it's a "dodge" when I confessed how much of your bullshit I actually do read?

    The fact that I have to explain it to you proves who is "quite intellectually challenged"...

    And a hint for ya...

    It ain't me.. :D

  103. [103] 
    michale wrote:

    Liz, JL et al...

    Sorry, people...

    I tried...

    Haters gotta hate....

  104. [104] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Hate doesn't have to beget hate. One can choose to be better than that.

  105. [105] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    Word.

  106. [106] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    M[99]: GREENWALD: Why doesn’t it also apply then to the person working for Democrats who went to Moscow and got something of value, namely information about Trump, from Kremlin-connected people in Moscow, or Democrats, including someone working for the DNC, who got something of value from Ukrainian officials? Why isn’t that the same thing?

    In his haste to defend the least free-speech-friendly nation in the G20, Greenwald has completely missed the distinction between being given a document by its owner, and receiving stolen goods. Moreover, he deliberately skips the context: that Russia was trying to influence the American election (Don Jr.'s email included that admission), and had penetrated the DNC with military assets to accomplish that goal. That's where it goes from file sharing to espionage, and from '2 p.m. meeting' to treason.

    It doesn't matter whether the goods were actually delivered at that meeting, Trump's people made it very clear that they welcomed Russian intervention. That's conspiracy, as surely as if a mob boss had said,'would you like to see her disappear?' and they had said, 'yeah, that would be nice'.

  107. [107] 
    LeaningBlue wrote:

    Still hearing why would the Russians stake a horse everyone knew was going to lose?

    Heard it earlier today in person. I reminded him that in Aug 15 I had emailed him that if Trump ran as a protectionist, he'd take a chunk of Upper MW and likely win, to which he had replied that he had known that from Day One. He's a smart, Country Club wing Republican.

    He smiled and shrugged the way one friend does when another catches him in some bullshit, and we went back to celebrating old folks staying on as winning athletes.

  108. [108] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    101

    The fact that I have to explain it to you proves who is "quite intellectually challenged"...

    I responded with a rhetorical question asking how you figure it was a "dodge" when I actually did address your issue. The fact that you claimed I was asking for an explanation when I actually already provided it to you goes a long way to sum up your dearth of critical thinking skills. As I already said, the answer is in there and easy to find.

    A rhetorical question is a question that one asks without expecting an answer and that sometimes actually contains the obvious answer but has been posed in the form of a question in order to make a point... that point being that a "dodge" would be someone who didn't address your issue, which I actually did do. So, to sum up:

    What kind of intellectually challenged boor would actually claim it was a "dodge" when another poster directly addressed their issue with a relevant response that even provided percentage data? <--- Yet another rhetorical question containing an explanation. :)

    And another thing: You actually dodge issues more than anyone else on this forum while presuming to dictate the manner in which posters should compose their beliefs and/or tailor their comments in order to please the DICKtater. In your comment at [12] above, you actually request that posters word their comments to contain false equivalency in order to avoid your responses... the monotonous incessant and obsessive rants where you whine hysterically about posters and deflect from the relevant issue with... you guessed it... the false equivalency issues you DICKtate should have been contained in that poster's original comment in order to avoid your rant.

    I think JL sums up this fact quite nicely, so I will simply defer to his wisdom from above.

    http://www.chrisweigant.com/2017/07/14/ftp445/#comment-105144

    as spurious as the claims are, let us presume for a moment that such hypocrisy actually did exist and was fully acknowledged. all the quatloos in the world say that these fallacious arguments would continue in full force - they'd just be focused upon an amorphous "ya'all"[sic] instead of at any particular individual.

    refusing to address the content of an argument is the game you like to play, and i don't see that changing in the event of someone deciding to agree with your claims. ~ JL

  109. [109] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Michael,

    How about you post the comments showing your support of Donald when he had a -D behind his name? Or better yet, you can either prove that I made comments supporting Trump when he had "a -D behind his name" or you can apologize for lying! One or the other!

    I, for one, was a Republican when Donald claimed to be a Democrat, but that wouldn't have been the reason I would have opposed him. Trump is a narcissistic dick who treats others like crap. His only motivation is self-promotion. The man put his name on a money-making scam calling itself Trump University that bilked thousands of people out of their money based on false promises and lies. But none of this matters! You claim we supported him, then you get to prove it or you are nothing but a lying troll.

    I asked you above how the Clinton's personally benefitted from any money donated to the Clinton Foundation and you blew off my request. I want an answer! You claim that I am not defending why I believe your arguments are false equivalencies when you never bothered to ask me to defend my statement, yet when I directly ask you a question you ignore it.

    I won't speak for anyone else on here, but I, for one, am getting sick of the lies. You make accusations, then you best be able to defend them.

  110. [110] 
    Kick wrote:

    Neil
    90

    Trey Gowdy and Charles Krauthammer are just killing 45 and his clown show.

    It's about time, too.

    On Fox News, no less, in Gowdy's case. This means the perpetually ignorant suddenly had some reality dealt to them. Not something Fox News can allow to happen on a regular basis.

    Yes, sir, and exactly right as per your usual. Which makes me wonder... so I'll ask you: Did you happen to catch Shep Smith doing some dealing?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sx7xFGCaCG0

    "Why all these lies? Why is it lie after lie after lie?... The deception, Chris [Wallace], is mind boggling, and there are still people out there who believe we're making it up, and one day they're going to realize we're not and look around and go, 'Where are we, and why are we getting told all these lies.'"

    Why indeed... Of course, it'll become obvious when the sandal drops. I'd generally use the term "shoe," but a shoe leaves so much covered whereas a sandal is much more transparent and exposes the Hallux. :)

  111. [111] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    95

    Your actions and comments PROVE it's factual...

    You naturally follow up your lies with more lies. What "actions" do you think you've seen that prove anything when quite obviously you're most likely suffering from delusions you've think you've actually seen? By the way, yet another rhetorical question not requesting explanation.

    Dumbocrat thru and thru... :D

    I'm still NOT a Democrat, and you're still lying.

    Which has nothing to do with the fact that A> You would love Trump if he had a -D after his name and B> You are firmly enslaved by the Dumbocrat Party

    And still more lying.

    I never denied he's an asshole. Of COURSE he is an asshole..

    Stipulated that Donald Trump is an asshole. Progress. This is a FACT regardless of his Party affiliation. He's cheated and defrauded countless people and left destruction in his wake for decades. He's an opportunist looking out only for Trump, and no amount of changing from Democratic to Republican to Reform Party and back erases that underlying FACT.

    But he is also YOUR President so suck it up and deal with it.. :D

    I never denied he is President, but just as the letter behind his name changes nothing, the title in front of his name does neither. I respect the office the asshole holds, but there is NOTHING in heaven nor here on Earth that will cause me to respect the asshole that now holds the title. I have this "thing" against assholes, con artists, and traitors, and when one person embodies all of those things, well... I believe Dante describes this perfectly in his Canto XXXIV wherein he depicts a journey toward the center of rock bottom where he becomes aware of a massive shape in the distance that is hidden by fog. However, directly below his feet he notices sinners covered completely by ice, sometimes several feet deep, contorted into various positions, the most evil of all, the lowest of the low... the traitors to their benefactors residing in the Fourth Ring of the Ninth Circle of Hell.

    OK, so I guess no truce...

    Fine by me...

    Been there and done that... the "truce" which you promptly ignored the following day. So your claims of wanting a truce... well, as nypoet22 would say:

    i don't believe that statement for a second, and neither does anybody else. ~ JL

  112. [112] 
    Kick wrote:

    LWYH
    108

    Very nicely stated, sir. Well done.

    I won't speak for anyone else on here, but I, for one, am getting sick of the lies.

    The only one deluded by the lies of a poster who would presume to dictate the necessary contents of the comments of other posters in order to avoid his repetitive rants and prolific lying is generally the lying DICKtater.

    http://www.chrisweigant.com/2017/07/14/ftp445/#comment-105131

    You make accusations, then you best be able to defend them.

    And as Shep Smith noted:

    "Why all these lies? Why is it lie after lie after lie?

    The well-worn shoes will eventually drop exposing the fetid soles beneath their cover, and it'll be refreshing to find out who will continue to deny the obvious stench, and who will hold their noses and claim "there's nothing to smell here." :)

  113. [113] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    just because i don't believe a statement doesn't mean i think it's a lie. there are many, many shades of delusion between an outright lie and a persuasive myth. donald's character was already 90% myth even before he decided to run for president.

    am i a hypocrite? probably. does that undermine the validity of my judgment on matters of fact and reasoning? probably not. now pardon me while i dodge falling timberlands.

    The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie, deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive and unrealistic.
    ~JFK

  114. [114] 
    michale wrote:

    Liz,

    Hate doesn't have to beget hate. One can choose to be better than that.

    And I have chosen that.. On more than one occasion...

    But for you and JL to ask ONLY me to turn the other cheek time and time again..

    Well, do you think that is fair??

  115. [115] 
    michale wrote:

    Russ,

    How about you post the comments showing your support of Donald when he had a -D behind his name?

    *I* am not the one who claimed my attitude on President Trump "hasn't changed one iota"..

    Frankly, I didn't give a rats ass about President Trump when he was a -D, just like I didn't give a rats ass about President Trump when he was an -R until he won the GOP primary...

    Victoria made the claim and I am asking her to back it up..

    When *I* make claims and can't back them up, I am called all sorts of names.. What makes Veronica so special??

    Oh yea.. That's right. Because she is a member of the Democrat Party... :^/

    , for one, was a Republican when Donald claimed to be a Democrat, but that wouldn't have been the reason I would have opposed him. Trump is a narcissistic dick who treats others like crap. His only motivation is self-promotion. The man put his name on a money-making scam calling itself Trump University that bilked thousands of people out of their money based on false promises and lies. But none of this matters! You claim we supported him, then you get to prove it or you are nothing but a lying troll.

    So, if YOU can't prove any statement you make, that makes YOU a lying troll???

    Of course not.. You have a -D after your name, so your own rules don't apply to you...

    And THAT is being a hypocrite...

    I asked you above how the Clinton's personally benefitted from any money donated to the Clinton Foundation and you blew off my request.

    I didn't think you were serious.. Because it's the most stoopidiest question in the history of Weigantia...

    Memo shows Bill Clinton's wealth was tied to Clinton Foundation
    https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/10/27/memo-shows-bill-clintons-wealth-tied-clinton-foundation/92842822/

    You ALSO asked me about Clinton's connections to Russian mobsters.. You didn't follow up on THAT one because you know that Clintons have numerous connections to Russian Mobsters and Russian Intelligence..

    I won't speak for anyone else on here, but I, for one, am getting sick of the lies.

    Then stop lying and stop the others from lying..

    You make accusations, then you best be able to defend them.

    I completely agree...

    And I will when ya'all will...

  116. [116] 
    michale wrote:

    Rollin Hand and Commander Koenig has passed on...

    He will be missed...

  117. [117] 
    michale wrote:

    JL,

    am i a hypocrite? probably.

    Confession is good for the soul..

    does that undermine the validity of my judgment on matters of fact and reasoning? probably not.

    Really?? You don't think it goes to credibility??

  118. [118] 
    michale wrote:

    She criticized the “actions of the Trump administration as relation— related to the rule of the law.”

    “The Trump administration and the Trump family have pa— eagerly ex— uh, intended to collude with a hostile foreign policy,” she said, likely intending to say “power” instead of “policy.”

    “Members of Congress take a sa— sacred oath,” Pelosi struggled to say moments later.

    “What do the Russians have politically, financially, uh, uh, or— and any— personally on Donald Trump that he fawns over Putin, uh, questions sanctions, uh—” she said, then froze.

    “Uh— is— reckless when it comes to Article V,” Pelosi finally said.

    Her statement condemning Jared Kushner lost its effect as she repeatedly herself.

    “It’s absolutely ridiculous that he should have, have that, that clearance,” she said.

    “Today we are announcing a new coo-nated effort to force votes to get answers for the American people she said, struggling to say “coordinated.”

    “We will force Republicans to take votes on the record to continue, uh, from, from hiding the facts from the American people,” Pelosi said, effectively stating Republicans are being transparent.
    http://www.theamericanmirror.com/video-nancy-pelosi-freezes-repeatedly-misspeaks-brief-remarks/

    THIS is ya'all's Dumbocrat leader!???

    No wonder ya'all's Party is in the WORST shape it's been in over a century...

  119. [119] 
    michale wrote:

    does that undermine the validity of my judgment on matters of fact and reasoning? probably not.

    So, do you think that President Trump's hypocrisy on so many different issues (which I have called him on several times) undermine the validity of HIS judgement on matters of fact and reasoning??

    Probably..

    You see the point??

    *EVERYTHING* ya'all say on here is *SOLELY* based on Party loyalty...

    Anyone here with a -D after their name, Victoria/Veronica, Russ, etc etc etc can make ANY CLAIM they want and can ignore ANY requests for citation or substantiation...

    But let someone who has an -NPA after their name make one single statement that the Dims here don't like??

    And the knives come out, the name-calling starts in earnest and it's global thermonuclear war...

    And it's ALL based on NOTHING but Party Zealotry...

    And then *I* am the one who is told, "Please Michale.. Stop the hate.." :^/

    It's completely and utterly ridiculous...

  120. [120] 
    michale wrote:

    I asked you above how the Clinton's personally benefitted from any money donated to the Clinton Foundation and you blew off my request.

    I didn't think you were serious.. Because it's the most stoopidiest question in the history of Weigantia...

    Let me expand on the stoopidity of that question..

    The Clintons were "dead broke" when they left the White House...

    And in less then 16 years they became gazillion-aires...

    And the ONLY thing that they had going for them is The Clinton Foundation...

    No real jobs that justify making gazillions... Sure a book deal here or there, but nothing that justifies their net worth...

    I realize that, in Party Slavery Land, 2+2 does NOT equal 4...

    But, in the REAL world... where... yunno.. FACTS are god....

    If you are DEAD BROKE... You open a Foundation and 16 years later you are worth an estimated THREE HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS!!???

    It's a safe bet that it's a FACT that you benefited financially from that Foundation... At least it is if you have an '-R' after your name.. If you have a '-D' you get ALL SORTS of passes around here.. :^/

    THAT is why I thought your question was totally and utterly STOOPID and why I responded to your question with a "Are You Serious!!" exclamation of disbelief...

    I honestly didn't believe that someone who is as intelligent as I know you to be would pass off such utter and complete BULLSHIT as fact.. :^/

    And the fact that OTHERS let you pass off such utter and complete BULLSHIT as fact is EXACTLY the problem here...

  121. [121] 
    michale wrote:

    If you are DEAD BROKE... You open a Foundation and 16 years later you are worth an estimated THREE HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS!!???

    Amend that to say:

    If you are DEAD BROKE... You open a Foundation and 16 years later you have made an estimated THREE HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS!!???

    My bust.....

  122. [122] 
    michale wrote:

    Hate doesn't have to beget hate. One can choose to be better than that.

    I *DID* choose to be better than that.. TWICE....

    And all I got for my compassion was more hate and name-calling and personal attacks thrown back in my face...

    TWICE.....

    It's a bona-fide and established FACT that I never start any of this crap...

    So, if ya want it stopped might I suggest, with the utmost respect and affection, that you, and whomever else wants it to stop, talk to the people who start all the name-calling and the hate etc etc...

    "It's the only way to be sure."
    -Ellen Ripley, ALIENS

    :D

  123. [123] 
    michale wrote:

    And getting back to stuff that's NOT about me.. :D

    I honestly don't understand what all the fuss is about Donald Jr's actions..

    I mean, it's not as if Don Jr sold 20 percent of the US's uranium stock to the Russians for personal profit while SecState...

    It's not as if Don Jr made a 20 min speech and got a cool half million dollars from Russian Intelligence operatives and Russian mobsters...

    It's not as if Don Jr made a personal guarantee of "flexibility" to Vlad Putin in exchange for "space" to win an election..

    Don Jr didn't do ANY of those things. Dumbocrats did..

    And ya'all don't care ONE IOTA about THOSE Russian-based things..

    Which is EXACTLY why ya'all have absolutely *NO CREDIBILITY* when it comes to condemning ANY Trump for their alleged connections to Russia...

    The FACT that ya'all give Dumbocrats a pass for doing things MUCH WORSE than ANYTHING the Trump's are accused of, proves beyond ANY doubt that ya'all don't CARE an iota about Russia connections..

    Ya'all SOLELY and COMPLETELY want to nullify a free, fair and legal election..

    The FACTS overwhelmingly support this conclusion...

    As an aside to JL....

    THAT is how hypocrisy is tied to validity of judgement...

  124. [124] 
    michale wrote:

    Russ,

    A week or so ago, you made the comment that the Clinton's Russian connections should ALSO be investigated and condemned, just like Trump's alleged Russia connections are being investigated and condemned...

    Tell me..

    Have you MADE any comments to that effect since then??

    Have you called out NOT-45 or the serial sexual harasser for their Russian connections since then??

    Have you pushed for investigations of the Russian connections of the Clinton's since then??

    Not a single word... Not a single photon from you condemning the Clinton's Russian connections.... Not an iota, not a smidgen of a comment advocating the investigation of those Russian connections of the Clinton's...

    So, what can we conclude from these FACTS??

    You were just talking out your ass and don't really care one iota about Russia connections..

    The *ONLY* conclusion that fits the FACTS is that all you care about is taking down Trump and nullifying a free, fair and legal election...

  125. [125] 
    michale wrote:

    I have found a pearl of great value STAR TREK-The Empath..

    A diamond in the rough ALADDIN

    A millennial explains: Why we melt

    As a college student living in the age of safe spaces, Bernie Sanders and obsessive tolerance, I don’t think twice about the daily morning ritual that began when my peers decided “offended” was their new favorite word — I check my social media and say “Good morning, America! What are we offended by today?”

    Today’s college campus culture is drenched in political correctness and controversy over so-called “micro-aggressions.” And that’s because the millennial generation — my generation — brings with them to campus a hyper-privileged sense of entitlement and victimization.

    Those brave enough to take on the millennial speech police are bombarded with insults and immediately accused of being racists and bigots, among many other of the left’s favorite terms for those on the other side of the aisle.

    Millennials are in a constant contest to one-up each other in showing tolerance, and when anyone or anything stands in their way, they collapse into temper tantrums.
    http://www.detroitnews.com/story/opinion/2017/07/10/kaylee-mcghee-millennial-snowflake-generation/103593314/

    A millennial who actually gets it..

    What's funny is that she is not only describing College Campuses...

    She is describing Weigantia to a 'T'.... :D

  126. [126] 
    michale wrote:

    Liz,

    At the very least, some semblance of enlightenment. And, failing that, then silencio!

    I have done my part to bring about exactly that...

    It only takes one to start a fight, but it takes two to end one...

    "If people hate and fight then they must stop it themselves. Or it is never really stopped"
    -Spock, STAR TREK, Day Of The Dove

  127. [127] 
    michale wrote:

    Balthy,

    It doesn't matter whether the goods were actually delivered at that meeting, Trump's people made it very clear that they welcomed Russian intervention. That's conspiracy, as surely as if a mob boss had said,'would you like to see her disappear?' and they had said, 'yeah, that would be nice'.

    And what is it when NOT-45's campaign went to Ukraine and obtained opposition research on Trump??

    "Oh that's just normal campaign activities and perfectly acceptable, nay.. encouraged!!"

    I honestly cannot BELIEVE you actually think your opinion of things is valid when you spew such blatant Party/Slave hypocrisy...

  128. [128] 
    michale wrote:

    LB,

    FINALLY able to get to your comment!! :D

    Heard it earlier today in person. I reminded him that in Aug 15 I had emailed him that if Trump ran as a protectionist, he'd take a chunk of Upper MW and likely win,

    Sure coulda used you around here back in Aug... It would have been nice to have SOMEONE here who could actually look at ALL the facts with an objective and non-Party Slave eye... :^/

    For me, the facts were completely clear about a Trump win at the point that Trump won the GOP Primary...

    Which is why I laughed my ass off so much around here when people were talking, as late as Sep and Oct, about NOT-45's "fifty state sweep" and NOT-45's "landslide election win"...

    It was frakin' hilarious because the FACTS clearly showed a Trump win.

    But all the other Weigantians cherry-picked their facts to paint the picture THEY wanted to see..

    It happens so much and so often, I am beginning to think that such self-delusion is a Dumbocrat Party requirement...

  129. [129] 
    michale wrote:
  130. [130] 
    michale wrote:
  131. [131] 
    michale wrote:

    Wish I had the artistry capability to do my own political cartoon...

    "Trump betrayed the US to Russia!!!"
    -Weigantian

    "Trump Jr met Russian lawyer!!!"
    -Weigantian

    "Trump colluded with Russia!!!"
    -Weigantian

    "Trump did money launderings for Russia Mob!!!"
    -Weigantian

    "Trump is a Russia stooge!!!"
    -Weigantian

    "Trump is a Russia spy!!!"
    -Weigantian

    "NOT-45 has many MANY more documented and factual connections with Russia. Ya'all not talking about them is hypocrisy."
    -Michale

    "MICHALE!!! ALL YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT IS OUR HYPOCRISY!!!!"
    -Weigantians

    :D

    Where is C Cunningham when ya need him!!?? :D

  132. [132] 
    michale wrote:

    "If the Hillary Clinton campaign had reason to think that, say, the British government had 'very high level and sensitive information' showing serious misbehavior by Trump, I think it would have had every right to get that information and see if it should be put before the American people as evidence that Trump shouldn't be elected. Limiting candidates' ability to expose their opponents' misbehavior would violate the First Amendment."
    -Eugene Volokh
    UCLA law professor
    Leading Expert on the First Amendment

    Ya'all are well and truly unhinged and whacked by Party demagoguery if you think that what Don Jr violated any kind of law...

    Let me lay it on in small words so ya'all can understand..

    It's NOT against the law to obtain information from a foreign source... EVEN if that foreign source is an "adversary"... :D

    Can we STOP with all ya'all's hysterical bullshit now???

  133. [133] 
    michale wrote:

    Can we STOP with all ya'all's hysterical bullshit now???

    I mean, seriously...

    Look at ya'all's track record??

    This is... what?? Sixth...??? Seventh...??? Eighth...??? accusation that is "sure to bring down Trump"...

    There is no case for nothing.. Ya'all simply flit from one "OHMYGODS LOOK WHAT TRUMP DID!!!" hysterical BS accusation to the next.. and to the next... and to the next...

    And NOTHING is bringing down President Trump...

    It must be so maddening for ya'all!! :D

    But there IS a silver lining.. At least for the country..

    The Dumbocrats are sure to get shellacked (AGAIN) in the 2018 midterms...

    Why??

    Because their *ONLY* message is TRUMP!!!! RUSSIA!!!!! TRUMP!!!! RUSSIA!!!!! TRUMP!!!! RUSSIA!!!!! TRUMP!!!! RUSSIA!!!!!

    GREAT message ya got there, Dumbocrats.. :D

    Keep at it..

  134. [134] 
    michale wrote:

    JL,

    113-133

    A new record??? :D

  135. [135] 
    michale wrote:

    Liz,

    You oughta like this.. :D

    Still, the aide also said he had never heard of Peter W. Smith, and didn't know of any effort to find the emails. "There was never a thought of who might have them," the aide said. "Nobody at the campaign was trying to find them."

    Both Lewandowski and the other former aide stressed the greatest political value of the missing emails, as far as Trump was concerned, was that they gave Trump a way to "poke" and "troll" his Democratic opponent. The Clinton team was BleachBitting and swinging hammers to smash devices — and she says everything was on the up and up, that she has nothing to hide? Candidate Trump could riff on that all day. It was as if Clinton were trying her best to look guilty, to Trump's political benefit.
    http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/byron-york-what-campaign-wouldnt-seek-motherlode-of-clinton-emails/article/2628812

    :D

  136. [136] 
    michale wrote:

    The Dumbocrats are sure to get shellacked (AGAIN) in the 2018 midterms...

    Why??

    Because their *ONLY* message is TRUMP!!!! RUSSIA!!!!! TRUMP!!!! RUSSIA!!!!! TRUMP!!!! RUSSIA!!!!! TRUMP!!!! RUSSIA!!!!!

    GREAT message ya got there, Dumbocrats.. :D

    Don't get me wrong..

    There is a certain amount of logic to the Dumbocrat strategy..

    Hammer at your opponent and make them look as bad as possible and THEIR votes will become YOUR votes..

    Imminently logical..

    EXCEPT....

    Except the Dumbocrats tried that in 2016 and not only did it FAIL... it SPECTACULARLY failed..

    "Failed.. Failed... IMPRESSIVELY Failed..."
    -Doctor, ARMAGEDDON

    Why on earth would Dumbocrats believe such a strategy will work this time around??

    Here are the facts and there is simply NO GETTING around them..

    President Trump and the GOP won and WON BIG because they told the American people that they (Trump and the GOP) could make their (the American people) lives better...

    Whether it's happening or not is another discussion I would be happy to have..

    But the point is, President Trump and the GOP convinced the American people (Except Californians who have their own problems :D) that their lives WOULD be made better..

    And President Trump and the GOP won...

    Now, here's the kicker...

    How is TRUMP!!!! RUSSIA!!!!! TRUMP!!!! RUSSIA!!!!! TRUMP!!!! RUSSIA!!!!! TRUMP!!!! RUSSIA!!!!! going to make ANY American's life better??

    Answer: It won't....

    And, since TRUMP!!!! RUSSIA!!!!! TRUMP!!!! RUSSIA!!!!! TRUMP!!!! RUSSIA!!!!! TRUMP!!!! RUSSIA!!!!! WON'T make a single American's life better and, since TRUMP!!!! RUSSIA!!!!! TRUMP!!!! RUSSIA!!!!! TRUMP!!!! RUSSIA!!!!! TRUMP!!!! RUSSIA!!!!! is the totality of the message and the *ONLY* message that the Dumbocrat Party has.....????

    Dumbocrats will lose (AGAIN) in 2018.....

    If there is a flaw in the logic......????

    "I am all ears"
    -Dean Winchester, SUPERNATURAL

    :D

  137. [137] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    If there is a flaw in the logic......????

    There is. Healthcare.

  138. [138] 
    michale wrote:

    Balthasar,

    There is. Healthcare.

    OK, I'll address you moving the goal posts in a second. Let's just get this resolved first..

    Do you agree that, if the Dumbocrat Party message is ONLY TRUMP!!!! RUSSIA!!!!! TRUMP!!!! RUSSIA!!!!! TRUMP!!!! RUSSIA!!!!! TRUMP!!!! RUSSIA!!!!! that they will likely lose big in the 2018 mid-terms..

    It's a simple question.. :D

  139. [139] 
    michale wrote:

    And you know what? Trump's supporters are not wrong to urge us all to truly examine historical precedents. Because all too often, Trump's fiercest critics declare his every utterance and action unprecedented without bothering to thoughtfully consider the precedents.

    Now, when "whataboutism" is used to defend the indefensible, it is obviously wrong. But not every historical comparison can be dismissed as simple "whataboutism." And there are good reasons why "What about ... " questions have so frequently been raised under this president. The case against Trump is not simply that he does things that are wrong or bad, but that he is bad in ways that are unprecedented and represent a sharp break from important political norms.

    If we are going to chastise Trump for norm violations, shouldn't we first establish how normal or abnormal his actions in a given area really are? If we are going to say he is guilty of doing the unprecedented, shouldn't we look to see if there are in fact any precedents?

    These "what about" questions also impose some accountability on Trump critics. When asked in good faith, they can be used to determine consistency and avoid double standards.
    http://theweek.com/articles/712023/resistance-that-cried-wolf

    Ding, Ding, Ding, Ding.. We HAVE a winner!!!

    By simply writing off my comments as "whataboutism" ya'all feel you get to ignore the FACT that I am making a good point...

    Ya'all scream hysterically about Donald Jr trying to get opposition research from a foreign source.. Ya'all treat it as the end of democracy as we know it..

    Yet you conveniently TRY to ignore the *FACT* that NOT-45 did the exact same thing.. Got opposition research from a foreign source..

    So, when your hysterical Party slave fear-mongering is put in it's proper context, people with more than 2 brain-cells to rub together realize that the hysterical ideology based fear-mongering bullshit is just that..

    Hysterical ideology based fear-mongering bullshit..

    THAT is how NOT-45's actions are relevant to ya'all's anti-Trump hysteria... Because it puts your accusations in their proper context as NOTHING but Party based hysteria with little to no relevance in real life..

  140. [140] 
    michale wrote:

    It's a simple question.. :D

    OK... Apparently, it's NOT a simple question... :^/

  141. [141] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @m[113-139],

    my earlier hypothesis is now supported by empirical evidence.

    for the sake of argument, i acknowledged that some degree of hypocrisy on my part is likely. in response, illogical fallacies on the matter significantly increased, and the factual accuracy of FTP#3 is still unacknowledged.

    QED

    JL

  142. [142] 
    michale wrote:

    for the sake of argument, i acknowledged that some degree of hypocrisy on my part is likely. in response, illogical fallacies on the matter significantly increased, and the factual accuracy of FTP#3 is still unacknowledged.

    That is not factually accurate.. I have acknowledged and explained FTP #3 at least twice, if not three times..

    Which simply proves my point..

    Even when I DO acknowledge, address and refute ya'all's so-called facts, I don't get any credit for it..

    for the sake of argument, i acknowledged that some degree of hypocrisy on my part is likely.

    And I addressed that as well..

    But you are the ONLY one to concede yer hypocrisy... Which is ironic because you are the LEAST hypocritical one here, next to one other. :D

  143. [143] 
    michale wrote:

    my earlier hypothesis is now supported by empirical evidence.

    And which hypothesis is that? You make so many.. :D

  144. [144] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Apparently, it's NOT a simple question

    Yeah, like, since when has politics ever been simple?

    I get the impression that you'd like it to be simple. A few catchy phrases, a simple formula for success, something like: cut taxes on the rich, de-regulate, reduce government expenditures, restrict immigration. Am I close?

    Trouble is..

    The last time this country saw 3% growth was during the Clinton administration, after he'd raised taxes to balance the budget in '93. Bush managed the largest tax cut in history, and deregulated wherever he could, and the results were anemic at best. As a matter of fact, it could be argued that Bush's laissez-faire approach to regulating Wall Street was ultimately catastrophic.

    The best, and simultaneously worst, approach to cutting government was the sequester. At least it hit the most bloated sector of government - defense - as much as it cut the rest. On the other hand, it was designed to be literally stupid, cutting program expenditures across the board with no regard to priority or need.

    But conservatives play games with the numbers, for instance deliberately confusing the statutory tax rate (maximum rate paid) with the effective tax rate (taxes paid after deductions) which is far lower - absurdly low in the case of some industries (as Warren Buffet points out, his effective tax rate is lower than that of his secretary).

    So here's a counter-factual for you, courtesy of Forbes magazine: despite Repbulicants' insistence that Obama was a 'terrible' president for business, the number of people who got into the billionaires' club last year went up by a historic 13% last year, and the number of billionaires topped a record 2000. Their total net worth rose by 18% to $7.67 trillion, also a record. These aren't Altohone's numbers (sorry Al), these are from Forbes, as conservative a source as you'd want.

    So right now a significant part of the new Healthcare proposal is an effort to cut Medicaid with the expressed intention that that money would then be spent in the form of deep tax cuts for those aforementioned billionaires. Why? Are they hurting? No. Apparently not. And their numbers are increasing, so Obama didn't drive them away, either.

    So the McConnell/Trump plan will be to cause suffering to roughly 15-25 million people (the number thrown off Medicaid by the GOP plan) so that roughly 2000 very well off folks can reduce their taxes by an amount they'll probably barely notice, but that, in turn, will generate fat donations to GOP campaigns.

    Good luck selling that turd to average voters next year. And thanks for the 15-25 million new Democrats!

    Like Trump says, "this is harder than it looks".

  145. [145] 
    michale wrote:

    JL,

    That is not factually accurate.. I have acknowledged and explained FTP #3 at least twice, if not three times..

    Which simply proves my point..

    Even when I DO acknowledge, address and refute ya'all's so-called facts, I don't get any credit for it..

    However, to be fair to you.. I post a lot.. It's easy to miss. :D

  146. [146] 
    michale wrote:

    Balthy,

    That was a very nice comment.

    But it has NOTHING to do with what I asked you...

    The question is this:

    IF the Dumbocrat Party concentrates SOLELY on the TRUMP!!!! RUSSIA!!!!! TRUMP!!!! RUSSIA!!!!! TRUMP!!!! RUSSIA!!!!! TRUMP!!!! RUSSIA!!!!! message, is it likely that they will lose and lose big in the 2018 mid-terms..

    Yes... or No.....

    When you address this, THEN we can move on to your healthcare issue...

  147. [147] 
    michale wrote:

    Border Patrol union chief praises 'miraculous' drop in illegal immigration under Trump

    The significant downturn in the number of illegal border crossers between the U.S. and Mexico is "nothing short of miraculous," National Border Patrol Council President Brandon Judd said on C-SPAN Monday.

    "As far as the Trump administration's efforts on immigration, this is something they campaigned heavily on," he said. "At six months, where we are on meeting those promises, we are seeing nothing short of miraculous. If you look at the rhetoric that President Trump has given, it has caused a number of illegal border crossings to go down. We have never seen such a drop that we currently have."
    http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/border-patrol-union-chief-praises-miraculous-drop-in-illegal-immigration-under-trump/article/2628828

    President Trump...

    Making America Great Again

    :D

  148. [148] 
    michale wrote:

    AND, under the heading of BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR...

    Facial Recognition Coming to Police Body Cameras
    http://www.defenseone.com/technology/2017/07/facial-recognition-coming-police-body-cameras/139472/

    Left Wing anti-cop fanatics pushed and pushed and pushed for cops to wear body cams..

    And NOW the anti-cop nuts have it..

    And everything that goes with it!! :D

    Ya gotta love it!!! :D

    "You wanted to be a powerful genie!?? You got it!!! And everything that goes with it!!! PHENOMENAL COSMIC POWER!!!!!! Itty bitty living space...."
    -ALADDIN

    :D

  149. [149] 
    michale wrote:

    Musical artist Joy Villa is facing violent threats because she supports President Trump, according to an exclusive report on The Todd Starnes Show.

    Joy triggered microaggressions from coast-to-coast earlier this year by wearing a stunning "Make America Great Again" dress to the Grammy's.

    "I've gotten death threats and hate mail," she told me on my nationally syndicated radio program. "All I did was wear a dress -- something that was pro-Trump."
    http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/07/17/pro-trump-singer-gets-death-threats.html

    Dumbocrats.. :^/

  150. [150] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    M [145]: sometimes I forget how bloody-minded you are.

    The answer is No. N-O.

    No, because by this time next year it will seem as though ten years had passed. Who knows what we'll be discussing then. Ecuador?

    Mueller will continue to investigate, to be sure. But if Trump goes down for conspiring to rig the election, it will because Republicans began crossing the Rubicon, er, aisle, likely after Mueller's report is unveiled.

    But the next election will turn on things we havn't even thought of yet. There will be lot of other stuff to run on, I'm confident of that.

    Besides, Healthcare.

  151. [151] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Musical artist Joy Villa is facing violent threats because she supports President Trump

    Is that THE Joy Villa?? The one who sang..uh..um,..

  152. [152] 
    michale wrote:

    M [145]: sometimes I forget how bloody-minded you are.

    No.. I just ask what ya'all demand of me which I do comply with

    Actually address the point instead of going off on a tangent re: totally non-sequitor bullcarp..

    The answer is No. N-O.

    No???

    So, you think that if Dumbocrats concentrate on TRUMP!!!! RUSSIA!!!!! TRUMP!!!! RUSSIA!!!!! TRUMP!!!! RUSSIA!!!!! TRUMP!!!! RUSSIA!!!!! til 2018 that they will actually WIN the House and Senate???

    :D

    The Party slavery is strong with this one...

  153. [153] 
    michale wrote:

    Is that THE Joy Villa?? The one who sang..uh..um,..

    Oh... Silly me.. I forgot..

    If you don't toe the Dumbocrat Party line, you ain't worth anything..

    Which is EXACTLY the attitude that has caused the Dumbocrat Party to *LOSE* over 1000 political seats in the last six years....

  154. [154] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Border Patrol union chief praises 'miraculous' drop in illegal immigration under Trump

    Considering that there's been a Zero net migration rate from Mexico since 2010, that's hardly surprising. Hope everyone is enjoying the higher food prices.

  155. [155] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    So, you think that [Democrats] will actually WIN the House and Senate???

    At least one, possibly both. Depends, as I said, on events I can't predict just yet.

    The Party slavery is strong with this one.

    Apparently. There must be some reason you've been repeating and repeating this same argument. Go watch Fox News - you need a new talking point...

  156. [156] 
    michale wrote:

    Considering that there's been a Zero net migration rate from Mexico since 2010, that's hardly surprising.

    Cite???

    What was it that Russ said?? If you can't back up your claims, you are nothing but a "lying troll". :D

    Hope everyone is enjoying the higher food prices.

    Cite???

    What was it that Russ said?? If you can't back up your claims, you are nothing but a "lying troll". :D

    At least one, possibly both. Depends, as I said, on events I can't predict just yet.

    Cite???

    What was it that Russ said?? If you can't back up your claims, you are nothing but a "lying troll". :D

    Apparently. There must be some reason you've been repeating and repeating this same argument.

    Of course, I repeat the same argument..

    Ya'all simply CANNOT logically and rationally refute it..

    I go with what works, sunshine.. :D

    Now if ya'all ACTUALLY tried to address the point instead of going off on nonsensical benders, ya might actually have a chance.. :D

  157. [157] 
    michale wrote:

    At least one, possibly both. Depends, as I said, on events I can't predict just yet.

    So, you concede the possibility that Dumbocrats, with their SOLE TRUMP!!!! RUSSIA!!!!! TRUMP!!!! RUSSIA!!!!! TRUMP!!!! RUSSIA!!!!! TRUMP!!!! RUSSIA!!!!! might choke and not win EITHER House or Senate...

    There is hope for you yet...

  158. [158] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Considering that there's been a Zero net migration rate from Mexico since 2010, that's hardly surprising.

    Cite???

    http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/jun/22/bill-clinton/bill-clinton-zero-net-migration-mexico-2010/

  159. [159] 
    michale wrote:

    Interesting to note..

    President Trump's approval rating is slightly over 40%...

    Canada's Prime Minister Trudeau's approval rating is at 42%....

    http://nypost.com/2017/07/15/why-these-canadians-would-take-trump-over-trudeau/

    :D

  160. [160] 
    michale wrote:

    http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/jun/22/bill-clinton/bill-clinton-zero-net-migration-mexico-2010/

    Politifact is a well known Left Wing mouthpiece and has absolutely no credibility...

    You might as well be citing HuffPoop, WaPoop or DailyShit...

    Further, the serial sexual harasser is talking about LEGAL migration and not illegal immigrants..

    So, even if you HAD a credible cite, it wouldn't be applicable or relevant to the initial article..

    Yer wrong.. AGAIN....

  161. [161] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Hope everyone is enjoying the higher food prices.

    Cite???

    http://modernfarmer.com/2017/01/trump-builds-wall-will-happen-food-system/

  162. [162] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    President Trump's approval rating is slightly over 40%...

    Wrong. It's lower than that:

    https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/

    And: you're bragging about a 40% approval rating?

  163. [163] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    At least one, possibly both. Depends, as I said, on events I can't predict just yet.

    Cite???

    Even I can't cite events that haven't happened yet.

    heh.

  164. [164] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Politifact is a well known Left Wing mouthpiece and has absolutely no credibility..

    And what fact-checker is your go-to site?

    WorldNetDaily?

  165. [165] 
    michale wrote:

    Wrong. It's lower than that:

    Yea, if you (per usual) cherry pick your facts...

    But the ONLY acceptable poll around here is the RCP poll of polls..

    And that shows President Trump at 40.3% approval..

    And: you're bragging about a 40% approval rating?

    Naw.. I simply find it hilarious that ya'all constantly brag about Trudeau and yet, his approval rating ain't much better than President Trumps.. :D

    Even I can't cite events that haven't happened yet.

    I asked to cite facts that support your claim that Dumbocrats can possibly take both the House and Senate..

    And remember, if you can't back up what you claim, you are a lying troll... :D

  166. [166] 
    michale wrote:

    https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/

    I think it so cute how you put your faith in such a poll that totally blew the presidential election.. :D

    Yea.. 538 has some REAL credibility there.. :D

    Granted, it has more credibility than all the rest of the Dumbocrat Polls out there...

    But THAT doesn't say very much... :D

  167. [167] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    talking about LEGAL migration and not illegal immigrants..

    Okay, so here's Pew research discussing ILLEGAL immigration specifically. Same result.

    http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/03/02/what-we-know-about-illegal-immigration-from-mexico/

  168. [168] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Naw.. I simply find it hilarious that ya'all constantly brag about Trudeau and yet, his approval rating ain't much better than President Trumps.. :D

    Really? Because, according to the Canadians, Trudeau's approval rating is much better than Trump's, and his disapproval rating is far lower:

    http://www.cbc.ca/news2/interactives/leadermeter/

  169. [169] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    I asked to cite facts that support your claim that Dumbocrats can possibly take both the House and Senate..

    So, you've never heard of a wave election? Or of the Midterms' track record for sitting presidents?

    I shouldn't have to re-state the obvious.

    And remember, if you can't back up what you claim, you are a lying troll... :D

    And if you don't stop repeating that phrase to me, you're a complete asshole. Got it the first time.

  170. [170] 
    michale wrote:

    Okay, so here's Pew research discussing ILLEGAL immigration specifically. Same result.

    No.. ILLEGAL MEXICAN immigration specifically..

    But you have, inadvertently, proven an ongoing point regarding ya'all's Party slavery....

    You can't let ANY fact that shows President Trump is doing a good job stand..

    You simply HAVE to contest it, regardless that the facts are stone cold....

    At least JL and Liz gave Trump credit when it was due...

    But you and the majority of Weigantians simply CANNOT let a fact stand if it shows President Trump is doing a good job...

    Irregardless, the simple fact is I trust the Border Patrol Chief's assessment over yours any day of the week and twice on Sunday...

  171. [171] 
    michale wrote:

    So, you've never heard of a wave election? Or of the Midterms' track record for sitting presidents?

    Yea.. AKA a "shellacking"... It's what the Dumbocrats have experienced :D

    And if you don't stop repeating that phrase to me, you're a complete asshole. Got it the first time.

    Don't blame me.. Russ made the rule.. I am just insuring that the Dumbocrats here abide by it..

    If ya don't like it, whine to him.. I don't give a rat's ass.... :D

  172. [172] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    I think it so cute how you put your faith in such a poll that totally blew the presidential election..

    They didn't take Russia into account. Couldn't have - no one in the polling world knew at the time about Moscow's elaborate intervention. We still don't know the full extent of it. But logically, when reputable pollsters all get it as wrong as they did, it's reasonable to assume that they've all missed something very important - like Russia.

  173. [173] 
    michale wrote:

    But logically, when reputable pollsters all get it as wrong as they did, it's reasonable to assume that they've all missed something very important - like Russia.

    And THERE it is...

    "And that's why it had to be, poison, right, Commander? 'Cause Lord knows, if you put a man with a serious coronary condition back on duty with a clean bill of health, and that man died from a heart related incident, you'd have a lot to answer for, wouldn't you, doctor?"
    -Tom Cruise, A FEW GOOD MEN

    Ya'all simply CANNOT believe that NOT-45 could run such a horrible campaign that she would get DEVASTATED by President Trump...

    That's why it HAS to be Russia.. Because yer frail egos simply cannot handle the FACTS...

    You have absolutely NO FACTS that even HINT that a single NOT-45 vote was changed to a Trump vote...

    This is fact...

  174. [174] 
    michale wrote:

    But logically, when reputable pollsters all get it as wrong as they did, it's reasonable to assume that they've all missed something very important - like Russia.

    Explain to me... EXACTLY... how did Russia influenced the election but NOT influence the polls???

    Provide facts....

  175. [175] 
    michale wrote:

    Explain to me... EXACTLY... how did Russia influenced the election but NOT influence the polls???

    Provide facts....

    "That oughta clinch up their sphincters!"
    -Rachael Phelps, MAJOR LEAGUE II

    :D

  176. [176] 
    Kick wrote:

    My buddies and I have a new game we've been playing called "What if Obama/Hillary had done this?" We'll be busy working and get a bit of news, and someone will invariably say "What if Obama had done this?" So imagine just working away and this news gets reported:

    On the first day of "Hire American" week, the Trump Administration announces a fairly brisk expansion of the H-2B visa program.

    One of the Democrats said: "What if Obama did this?"
    Then another Democrat said: "What if Hillary did this?"
    The Republicans looked at each other and said: "What the ____!"'
    Me? I stood up and said: "Winning!" and then ducked as all manner of things started flying toward my head.

    Trump officials open border to 15,000 more foreign workers

    By Tracy Jan July 17 at 11:09 AM

    The Department of Homeland Security on Monday announced a one-time increase of 15,000 additional visas for low-wage seasonal workers for the remainder of this fiscal year, a seeming about-face from President Trump's "Hire American" rhetoric, following heavy lobbying from fisheries, hospitality and other industries that rely on temporary foreign workers.

    The increase represents a 45 percent bump from the number of H-2B visas normally issued for the second half of the fiscal year, said senior Homeland Security officials in a call with reporters.

    The visas are for workers taking temporary jobs in the seafood, tourism, landscaping, construction and other seasonal industries — but not farm laborers.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/07/17/trump-officials-order-15000-new-visas-for-low-wage-workers/?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_wonk-visas-1120am%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.31a1e7980d29

  177. [177] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    *I* am not the one who claimed my attitude on President Trump "hasn't changed one iota"..

    No, YOU are the one accusing everyone else of flip flopping on their support of Donald Trump simply because he changed over to the Republican Party. So prove that we were Trump supporters at one time or apologize for lying.

    A week or so ago, you made the comment that the Clinton's Russian connections should ALSO be investigated and condemned, just like Trump's alleged Russia connections are being investigated and condemned...

    Tell me..

    Have you MADE any comments to that effect since then??

    Have you called out NOT-45 or the serial sexual harasser for their Russian connections since then??

    Have you pushed for investigations of the Russian connections of the Clinton's since then??

    Not a single word... Not a single photon from you condemning the Clinton's Russian connections.... Not an iota, not a smidgen of a comment advocating the investigation of those Russian connections of the Clinton's...

    So, what can we conclude from these FACTS??

    Yes, it is all that we talk about here at home. Just because I am not on here spewing off topic dribble like a busted sewage line in an attempt to shift the focus off your Shitler-wanna-be dreamboat the way that you do doesn't mean I don't discuss it in the proper circles. In fact, I just returned some Kebler Fudge Stripes cookies last week and made sure to put a note on it asking AG Sessions to look into the matter. I am sure he will get the note since I went through the proper channels for his kind.

    You still have failed to answer my question as to how money given to the Clinton Foundation directly benefitted the Clintons.

    President Prostitute Piss Partaker flat out lied to us saying it was outrageous to suggest that anyone from his campaign would have ever been willing to collude with Russia, despite knowing for weeks that his son, who he described as "high quality", had - at the very least- attempted to collude with the Russians. You are so incredibly patriotic for supporting the accused child rapist who wanted to create a internet security team with the same people accused of hacking and interfering with our elections.

    What was it that Russ said?? If you can't back up your claims, you are nothing but a "lying troll". :D

    When it comes to accusing people of saying things that they never said, you are damn right you are a fracking troll!!!

    You want to attack everyone else's opinions while quickly claiming the arguments you make against others doesn't represent your own opinion. You just want to point out to others how hypocritical THEY are.

    If anyone in here has asked you to do that for them, by all means go ahead and continue doing that for THEM!

    As for me, you can discuss the topic at hand or whatever other topic that you like; but the moment you start pointing to past events trying to compare them and calling me a hypocrite for not meeting the appropriate level of outrage that you think I should have displayed, you can go suck the baby carrot of the orange man-baby!

  178. [178] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Michale,

    The USAToday article doesn't explain how Bill benefits from money donated to the foundation, it simply points out that Bill has business contracts with some of the donors. If Bill gets paid $3 million for his services and the foundation is given $500,000 that is not stipulated in the contract, how is that a conflict? Bill is NOT the President anymore!!!

  179. [179] 
    James T Canuck wrote:

    With lawmakers in Washington running from doorway to doorway in a vain attempt to avoid the 'shoestorm' one vital point is being spun mercilessly by Trump and his acolytes. Their erroneous contention that nothing came of this 'conference' in no way sweeps the intent under the rug. They would have the right wing choir believe that explains it all away and washes their hands clean. The metaphor most apt for Trump Jr's bungling has to be, 'it's like a B and E artist breaking into your house, ransacking every cupboard and draw and coming away with nothing but an Oscar Wildean loathing of your miss-matching drapes and wallpaper, getting caught, moaning to the police about your abysmal sense of aesthetics and being driven to the outskirts of town with sawbuck and a new suit for your troubles.' Intent is being systematically glossed over and ignored by the GOP, who, almost to a man, has claimed it's how they would reacted under the same set of circumstances...The 'Centipede of scandal' has a few more Croks to drop, let's hope they can't all be amateurishly dismissed to satisfy Trump's ever shrinking base.

  180. [180] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Explain to me... EXACTLY... how Russia influenced the election but did NOT influence the polls?

    Firstly, it's important to remember that, in the 'swing' states that gave the election to Trump, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania - all states that went for Obama in 2012 - Trump won the popular vote by less than 2%, within the margin of error for most polls. Out of 120 million votes cast, the margins of victory in WI, MI and PA was less than 107,000, or 0.09%, so only one vote out of thousands had to be changed to shift the balance. Coincidentally, in all three states, Gary Johnson under-performed pre-election polls by about the same margin that Trump won by. (see cites 1,2, below).

    Shortly after last year's election, J. Alex Halderman, a Professor of Computer Science at the University of Michigan wrote about one scenario, based on actual Russian election hacking that had happened in the Ukraine in 2014:

    "First, the attackers would probe election offices well in advance in order to find ways to break into their computers. Closer to the election, when it was clear from polling data which states would have close electoral margins, the attackers might spread malware into voting machines in some of these states, rigging the machines to shift a few percent of the vote to favor their desired candidate. This malware would likely be designed to remain inactive during pre-election tests, do its dirty business during the election, then erase itself when the polls close. A skilled attacker’s work might leave no visible signs?—?though the country might be surprised when results in several close states were off from pre-election polls."(3)

    He should know. Over a decade ago, while still a graduate student at Princeton, Halderman helped write a Research paper exposing security flaws in Diebold's AccuVote-TS voting machine, which is still in use today in 15 states, five of which (GA, DE, LA, NJ & SC) use the machines exclusively.(4,5)

    To this date, none of the Secretaries of State in WI, MI or PA have allowed any forensic examination of voting machines used in the election, although I heard one expert recently say that, given the amount of time that has passed since the election, that avenue of investigation is likely moot.

    We now know that cyber breaches of local and state elections systems was far more extensive than we'd previously suspected. There were phishing expeditions, and breaches of voter data in several states. In Illinois, more than 90% of the nearly 90,000 records stolen by Russian state actors contained drivers license numbers, and a quarter contained the last four digits of voters’ Social Security numbers, according to Ken Menzel, the General Counsel of the Illinois State Board of Elections. In another case, investigators found there had been a manipulation of voter data in a county database, but the alterations were discovered and rectified. A senior official from the Department of Homeland Security, Jeanette Manfra, testified to senate and house investigators that twenty-one states saw such intrusions last year. The Russian efforts against state and local databases were so widespread that top Obama administration cyber-security officials assumed that by Election Day Moscow’s agents had probed all 50 states. Michael Daniel, who led the White House effort to secure the vote against the Russian intrusions, said, “We had to assume that they actually tried to at least rattle the doorknobs on all 50." (6)

    All this is in addition to Russia's other methods of attack, such as the hacking of the DNC and Clinton campaigns, the use of "bots" to target 'persuadable' voters on Facebook and other social media, and a disinformation campaign that planted "fake news" about Hillary all over the internet. One such bit of fake news is reported to have prompted Director Comey to give his now-infamous news conference about Clinton's emails. (7) It is not unreasonable to assume that such a massive and targeted campaign could have influenced the >2% of the vote that pushed Trump over the top.

    How EXACTLY did they do it? We'll have to wait a little while more to learn that. In the meantime, Trump's White House is both denying Russia's role in the election, and simultaneously trying to gather ALL voter data into a single location at the White House. What could possibly go wrong with that?

    Cites:

    1. Election Forecasts 2016 FiveThirtyEight

    CBS News poll: State of the race the day before Election Day CBS News Nov. 7, 2016

    2. 2016 Presidential Election Results Politico

    How Trump won the presidency with razor-thin margins in swing states By Tim Meko, Denise Lu and Lazaro Gamio, Washington Post Nov. 11, 2016

    3. Want to Know if the Election was Hacked? Look at the Ballots J. Alex Halderman Nov 23, 2016

    4. Good News For Russia: 15 States Use Easily Hackable Voting Machines by Jessica Schulberg at Huffpost 07/17/2017

    5. Security Analysis of the Diebold AccuVote-TS Voting Machine, Ariel J. Feldman, J. Alex Halderman, and Edward W. Felten, Princeton Center for Information Technology Policy — September 13, 2006

    6. Election Hackers Altered Voter Rolls, Stole Private Data, Officials Say by Massimo Calabresi, TIME online Jun 22, 2017

    7.Comey influenced by bogus Russian document, report says Fox News, May 24, 2017

  181. [181] 
    Paula wrote:

    [178] Outstanding post.

  182. [182] 
    Paula wrote:

    [176] Hilarious post!

  183. [183] 
    Kick wrote:

    LWYH
    176

    A masterpiece and absolutely correct. Well done, sir! :)

  184. [184] 
    goode trickle wrote:

    Good collection there Bathy,

    You forgot to bring up the hacking of election registration verification system companies.

    Many of the counties that saw major delays or suffered major issues also happened to be democratic leaning and used the electronic registration system verification. This resulted in delays as many places had to switch to the use of paper backups that had to be delivered.

    This resulted in roles that were incomplete being used to verify voter roles causing many to cast votes provisionally, which in many places are not counted unless certain criteria are selected.

    Another impact is that this also meant that people who did not have the time to wait to cast their vote or were to far back in the line to have an opportunity to vote were disenfranchised.

    I find it interesting that the sole argument that keeps being raised is a demand for proof that a ballot was changed. The focus on the single aspect of ballot change and the continuous assertion that, that is what we are focused on is a convenient way to ignore the fact that in a complex informational war environment it is not about some nefarious scheme to "change " ballots, but rather more about the denial of votes for the candidate you are working against.

    If we accept that ballot audit procedures are effectively being followed it would not be a winning method to change ballots to electronic votes.

    The far more untraceable method to change the vote is targeted infrastructure attacks on the pre-ballot casting day of voting portion of the system, managed by unregulated private companies.

    It doesn't take much to swing an election if this method is used in a highly targeted fashion with slightly varied forms of failure that achieve the same end goal of vote denial, think of it as the democratic version of a DOS attack, I wonder if they would call it a DOV attack. Such attacks would go largely unnoticed during the actual voting time-frame and would only be discovered as being successful after the attack.

    Alas, I am probably preaching to the choir on this one. The intercept had a great starter article born out of the Winner leak that resulted in finding a stand alone article in an industry specific journal...

    If i have time to find the bloody thing again I will post it, you would find it most illuminating...

  185. [185] 
    michale wrote:

    Russ,

    No, YOU are the one accusing everyone else of flip flopping on their support of Donald Trump simply because he changed over to the Republican Party. So prove that we were Trump supporters at one time or apologize for lying.

    It's simple.

    Ya'all support ANYTHING and ANYONE Democrat...

    Donald Trump at one time was a Democrat..

    Ergo, you supported him..

  186. [186] 
    michale wrote:

    Balthasar,

    Re: 178..

    siiggghhhhh

    Explain EXACTLY how Russia influenced the election but did NOT influence the polls..

    Provide facts..

  187. [187] 
    michale wrote:

    How EXACTLY did they do it? We'll have to wait a little while more to learn that.

    Oh.. I missed that, what with all the completely irrelevant and self-serving crap you served up..

    OK, so you admit you haven't a clue....

    That's what I thought...

  188. [188] 
    michale wrote:

    Yes, it is all that we talk about here at home. Just because I am not on here spewing off topic dribble like a busted sewage line in an attempt to shift the focus off your Shitler-wanna-be dreamboat the way that you do doesn't mean I don't discuss it in the proper circles.

    Yea.. And you have a lot of support in email. :^/

    When it comes to accusing people of saying things that they never said, you are damn right you are a fracking troll!!!

    And ya'all do the exact same thing ALL the time..

    "You don't START none, there wouldn't BE none"
    -Will Smith, Independence Day

    As for me, you can discuss the topic at hand or whatever other topic that you like; but the moment you start pointing to past events trying to compare them and calling me a hypocrite for not meeting the appropriate level of outrage that you think I should have displayed, you can go suck the baby carrot of the orange man-baby!

    Facts must really have pissed ya off, Russ.. :D

  189. [189] 
    michale wrote:

    Police: Boxer who beat girl, 3, to death wanted to teach her ‘this was a tough world’

    A Mississippi man who fatally beat a 3-year-old girl because she couldn't correctly answer questions about numbers told investigators that "this was a tough world and she had to be tough if she wanted to survive," Meridian Police Chief Benny Dubose said Monday.

    Joshua Salovich was charged with capital murder, meaning he could face the death penalty, and held without bail. Detectives testified in an initial court appearance that the 25-year-old boxer-in-training beat Bailey Salovich at maximum force with a bamboo rod, a cellphone cord and his hands.
    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/07/18/police-boxer-who-beat-girl-3-to-death-wanted-to-teach-her-this-was-tough-world.html

    Dumbocrats.. :^/

  190. [190] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    GT [182]: Great point! All of the states that put Trump over the top (WI, MI & PA) have Republican governors who, to varying degrees, engaged in a variety of voter suppression schemes. In Wisconsin, a new voter ID law had dramatic consequences: One federal judge called the law a “wretched failure” designed to suppress the African-American vote in Milwaukee. Election officials told Fox 6 Milwaukee that, overall, turnout was at a 20-year low for the 2016 presidential election, with just 66% of voters showing up. Voter suppression isn't the only effect if these laws - in Ohio, changes to the voter laws resulted in more ballots being rejected in urban neighborhoods on technicalities, while those same laws resulted in fewer ballots being rejected in rural polling places.

    We can't allow ourselves to be blasé about the goal of our foreign and domestic adversaries - it's to undermine the institution of voting in America to their benefit. Election Pearl Harbor has occurred. It is now our imminent duty to figure out and mobilize an effective response to save us all.

  191. [191] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    M [187]: Nothing in that article even hints that that sick motherfucker is a democrat. You probably jumped to that conclusion when you saw his picture.

    Typical.

  192. [192] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    OK, so you admit you haven't a clue....

    Oh, don't kid yourself, we've got a clue. We've got lots of clues, and more are coming into evidence every day. It's raining clues, hallelujah. And when every one of those clues is deciphered, and every dot is connected, I assure you, someone will do jail time.

  193. [193] 
    michale wrote:

    Balthy,

    All this is in addition to Russia's other methods of attack, such as the hacking of the DNC and Clinton campaigns, the use of "bots" to target 'persuadable' voters on Facebook and other social media, and a disinformation campaign that planted "fake news" about Hillary all over the internet. One such bit of fake news is reported to have prompted Director Comey to give his now-infamous news conference about Clinton's emails. (7) It is not unreasonable to assume that such a massive and targeted campaign could have influenced the >2% of the vote that pushed Trump over the top.

    How could that influence the voters but NOT influence the polls???

    You see how utterly LAME and totally ILLOGICAL your position is..

    You are claiming that Russia used supernatural PsyOps to push people totally against NOT-45 AT THE VOTING BOOTH but STILL have those EXACT same people completely support NOT-45 in the polls!!

    Yer deluded, dood.... You are so desperate to pin NOT-45's dismal campaign on ANYTHING, you are grasping at filaments of straws...

    You have absolutely NO FACTUAL evidence to support the claim that a SINGLE NOT-45 vote was changed to a Trump vote...

    NOT-45 lost for one reason and one reason only.. She was an ESTABLISHMENT candidate in a clearly NON-ESTABLISHMENT election who run a crappy and incompetent campaign...

    That's it...

    You can delude yerself all you want and talk about mythical Russia PsyOps...

    But the facts are clear..

    And you can't handle the facts..

    And, 7 years from now, Trump will STILL be your President...

  194. [194] 
    michale wrote:

    And, again.. Let me help out my fellow Weigantians..

    Balthasar,

    I have to go with Michale on this one.. It's completely ridiculous to think that Russians could influence voters to poll one way, yet vote the opposite way. What you are talking about is akin to mind-control and that's just ridiculous. You're wrong on this one.
    -Weigantians

    Always do what I can to help out my fellow Weigantians.. :D

  195. [195] 
    michale wrote:

    M [187]: Nothing in that article even hints that that sick motherfucker is a democrat. You probably jumped to that conclusion when you saw his picture.

    His violent actions and his violent impulse to impose his will on others is what clearly paints him as a Dumbocrat...

    Funny how you don't have any problem with others here painting an entire group with the brush of a single scumbag, on MUCH LESS evidence, when that entire group are Trump supporters..

    Yer hypocrisy is showing... :D

  196. [196] 
    michale wrote:

    Oh, don't kid yourself, we've got a clue. We've got lots of clues, and more are coming into evidence every day.

    Whatever you have to tell yourself to sleep at night.. :D

    I assure you, someone will do jail time.

    Yea... And NOT-45 is going to win the election in a landslide 50-state sweep... :D

  197. [197] 
    michale wrote:

    Russ,

    You still have failed to answer my question as to how money given to the Clinton Foundation directly benefitted the Clintons.

    And YOU still have failed to answer my question as to what law says that it's illegal to obtain information from a foreign "adversary"...

    Once again, you demand from me what you refuse to do yourself...

    Hypocrisy... Pure, blatant hypocrisy...

    Further, I DID address your question..

    How did the Clintons go from "dead broke" to making an estimated 300 MILLION DOLLARS in 16 years if they didn't benefit from their Foundation??

    Answer me THAT...

    You can't..

  198. [198] 
    michale wrote:

    GT,

    It doesn't take much to swing an election if this method is used in a highly targeted fashion with slightly varied forms of failure that achieve the same end goal of vote denial, think of it as the democratic version of a DOS attack, I wonder if they would call it a DOV attack. Such attacks would go largely unnoticed during the actual voting time-frame and would only be discovered as being successful after the attack.

    Fine..

    Do you have ANY facts that prove this happened??

    No you do not..

    All you have is a deluded desire to shift the blame from your Establishment crappy candidate...

  199. [199] 
    michale wrote:

    It is WELL established by Weigantians who have more than 2-brain cells to rub together that NOT-45 was a crappy candidate who ran a crappy and incompetent campaign.

    And THAT is why she lost to President Trump..

    Not some mythical Russian supernatural psyops or mythical phantom process where NOT-45 votes were denied the ability to vote...

    NOT-45 was a crappy candidate who ran a crappy and incompetent campaign.. And THAT's why she lost..

    And the people who saw that loss coming and KNEW that she was going to lose are the people who looked at ALL the facts (Me) and NOT the people who orgasm-ed over cherry picked polls and proudly & hysterically claimed that NOT-45 would win in a 50-state sweep (most of ya'all)....

    "These are the facts of the case. And they are indisputable"
    -Kevin Bacon, A FEW GOOD MEN

  200. [200] 
    michale wrote:

    And the people who saw that loss coming and KNEW that she was going to lose are the people who looked at ALL the facts (Me)

    And, LB as well... :D

  201. [201] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    And YOU still have failed to answer my question as to what law says that it's illegal to obtain information from a foreign "adversary"...

    I did address this in our conversation found in Jr.'s Smoking Gun in [55]. Kick went above and beyond in her explanation of this in comment [65]!

    How did the Clintons go from "dead broke" to making an estimated 300 MILLION DOLLARS in 16 years if they didn't benefit from their Foundation??

    Answer me THAT...

    You can't..

    It is not my job to prove your accusations are incorrect. You are making the allegations with no proof to support your charges. The Clinton Foundation is one of the better run non-profit charities in this country, and unless you have evidence that can show they bought portraits of themselves, paid for personal legal expenses, or bought the football helmet of an NFL player that they kept for themselves using foundation money, then I see no evidence of them misusing donations for personal gains.

  202. [202] 
    michale wrote:

    I did address this in our conversation found in Jr.'s Smoking Gun in [55].

    This is EXACTLY why I request that people quit being lazy and just quote the relevant portion rather than just refer to a comment #...

    [55] nypoet22 wrote:
    NO FACTS whatsoever that prove ANYTHING...

    see FTP#3, then check pants for scorch marks.

    JL

    Kick went above and beyond in her explanation of this in comment [65]!

    Veronica's a Dumbocrat Party tool and I wouldn't trust her if she said 'water is wet and ice is cold'...

    Yer gonna have to do better than that..

    It is not my job to prove your accusations are incorrect.

    Really??? One would not know that by your responses to me.. :D

    , then I see no evidence of them misusing donations for personal gains.

    Of course you don't. Because, like with ANYTHING having to do with the Dumbocrat Party or being hysterically Anti-Trump, you ONLY see the evidence you WANT to see...

    For example, you totally ignore Bubba's rape and sexual assault history and STILL support him and defend him..

    How ANY LEO (or, in your case, associated with LEO) can do that is simply beyond me..

  203. [203] 
    michale wrote:

    I did address this in our conversation found in Jr.'s Smoking Gun in [55].

    This is EXACTLY why I request that people quit being lazy and just quote the relevant portion rather than just refer to a comment #...

    [55] nypoet22 wrote:
    NO FACTS whatsoever that prove ANYTHING...

    see FTP#3, then check pants for scorch marks.

    JL

    Jesus h christ, Russ!! Just quote the damn thing next time!!

    When people use the term "collusion" in the political realm, you can safely assume that they are defining it as "conspiring with a foreign adversary to influence or undermine an election" -- which is a crime. Junior's email shows that he crossed the line on conspiracy to commit election fraud or conspiracy to obtain information from a foreign adversary. I

    No.. As usual, you DIDN'T address it..

    You simply make the claim without ANY citation to back it up..

    "If you can't back up what you claim, you're a lying troll"
    -YOU

    Further, even if you CAN back it up, that means that NOT-45 committed the EXACT same crime..

    Right??

    So, you lose either way...

    Either you are a lying troll or you are a hypocrite...

  204. [204] 
    michale wrote:

    Russ,

    I found where your problem was...

    You fell into the same trap that JL and most everyone here falls into...

    You think that because WaPoop says something, it MUST be factually accurate..

    You are in error... As was JL when he made the same claim..

    I am glad we finally got that settled.. :D

  205. [205] 
    michale wrote:

    You think that because WaPoop says something, it MUST be factually accurate..

    But allow me to lay your mind at ease...

    It is *NOT* illegal to obtain information from ANYONE for the purposes of opposition research...

    Unlike you, I can (and do) cite my authority for the claim..

    " Limiting candidates' ability to expose their opponents' misbehavior would violate the First Amendment."
    -Eugene Volokh
    UCLA law professor
    Leading Expert on the First Amendment

    Now, you can either concede that you were wrong, you can continue to argue that your not or you can ignore this and hope I forget all about it.. :D

    I am sure you are going to chose the latter... Just as I am sure you realize that there is absolutely NO CHANCE I will forget about it.. :D

  206. [206] 
    michale wrote:

    It is *NOT* illegal to obtain information from ANYONE for the purposes of opposition research...

    .... as long as said information is legally obtained...

    But as I have point out and no one has been able to refute..

    NONE of ya'all care one whit about NOT-45 obtaining information from foreign "adversaries" for the purposes of opposition research...

    Ya'all only care about it when Trump allegedly did it.

    That totally and completely decimates your argument...

  207. [207] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    .... as long as said information is legally obtained...

    Well, that is the operative phrase, isn't it, Michale ...

  208. [208] 
    michale wrote:

    Well, that is the operative phrase, isn't it, Michale ...

    Yes it is..

    But what Russ is claiming is that the mere act of obtaining the information from a foreign "adversary" is illegal..

    And THAT is bupkis.. His *ONLY*source for that claim is WaPoop..

    I am also constrained to remind you that the vast majority of the information ya'all have against Trump is illegal obtained information..

    According to Russ, that makes ya'all criminals.. :D

  209. [209] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    You are a real nit picker, you know that?

  210. [210] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Trump himself supplies all the information against Trump. He exposes himself as a fraud with almost every breathless tweet.

  211. [211] 
    michale wrote:

    You are a real nit picker, you know that?

    I have real good teachers.. :D I simply go by what Russ stated.. and continued to state even when I pointed out, WITH FACTS, how utterly whacked and bullshit his claims are...

    Trump himself supplies all the information against Trump.

    Really?? Trump has given ALL the leaks to WaPoop et al???

    Even the leaks that COMEY confessed to!???

    He exposes himself as a fraud with almost every breathless tweet.

    If all ya'all's accusations were JUST based on Trump's tweets, you would have a valid point..

    You know the rest...

    The simple *FACT* is Democrats have a HISTORY of using illegally obtained information to further their own Party agenda..

    This is well-documented...

    So, you will have to forgive me if I don't hysterically shed any tears because Candidate Trump MAY have availed himself some plays out of the Democrat Party playbook...

    When ya'all make the SAME case against NOT-45 in the SAME manner than you make it against President Trump then....and ONLY then... will ya'all have a rational leg to stand on..

    Not before...

  212. [212] 
    michale wrote:

    You are a real nit picker, you know that?

    "Anyone ever tell you yer bad luck?"
    "Those were my mother's dying words.."

    -VEGAS VACATION

    :D

Leave a Reply

[If you have questions as to how to register or log in, to be able to post comments here, or if you'd like advanced commenting and formatting tips, please visit our "Commenting Tips" page, for further details.]

You must be logged in to post a comment.
If you are a new user, please register so you can post comments here.

[The first time you post a comment (after creating your user name and logging in), it will be held for approval. Please be patient (as it may take awhile). After your first comment has been approved, you will be able to post further comments instantly and automatically.]