Today’s infuriating banana republic horror
Looking forward to the excuses.
Looking forward to whataboutism attempts.
Looking forward to anyone saying this isn’t putting himself over country.
Link: https://twitter.com/abc/status/1138936855573999616?s=21
Replies to: Today’s infuriating banana republic horror
A blast from 2004 on Kerry: He claimed he’d met with foreign leaders who privately endorsed him
(no message)
Link: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2004/mar/12/20040312-120719-7926r/
If you actually listen rather than take the misleading headline, Trump says
that if he thought it was significant, he would notify the FBI depending on what kind of information was presented.
Now, you simply cannot exclude "whataboutism" completely here :
What exactly do you think the HRC campaign was doing taking oppo research from Christofer Steele ('retired" MI6) and his Russian sources for the Dossier?
You see, this is all perfectly legal unless you want to make new laws, and the Dems have been doing the same thing for years.
Now, I still think it was foolsih of Trump to give such an interview to Snufflumpigus. There was no need. It was so stupid on the surface of it to give grist to the Dems that it has me wondering if he is trying to force Pelosi's hand on impeachment. After the House files their articles, the trial would take place in the senate where Trump would be able for the first time to mount a defense.........." I call James Comey to the stand". Or Peter Strzok, or Clapper, etc. Not only do the Dems not want those people ever called UNDER OATH to explain their previous conflicting testimony to legislative committes, they do not want Trump getting a "not guilty" verdict (which would happen since in the end, the Dems have got nothing) just prior to the next election.
I am speculating on this, and i haven't decided yet if Trump is pulling a move or whether he is simply self destructive. I'm leaning toward the latter at present though.
It is hard to wrap one's head around Frank's and your apoplectic reaction to all things Trump.
(no message)
Weird that Trump worshipers wouldn't understand that...
(no message)
I would expect that from an Obama Worshipper...
Who is the person you guys are supposed to worship now? Bernie? Pelosi?
I try to see this in a non partisan context.
Never could stand, didn’t support and have been vocally opposed to both Clintons and Barry.
Orange has zero moral compass. He could easily be doing his shit as a liberal D which he was for MOST of his life. I would say the same things if he was in under their banner.
To me he is below the lib/rightie game. He’s a cancer on our nation and people.
LOL. Are you talking about yourself or Trump? Is your TDS from your self-hatred?
(no message)
Of course you can’t address the substance so you retreat to your pablum.
At least the sentences were properly structured for a change, tool.
Substance remains same: the best R always is ex-D. I don't know why you made this a big deal.
(no message)
Stop babbling. Sit. Think. Try to make sense.
(no message)
So, I actually agree with most of that.
But, he is no worse a cancer on this country than his main political opponents. And, opposing him plays into their hands. We only have two choices, and we have to pick the best option available.
I will say that Trump is more noble than the Dems to the extent he hasn't lied to get warrants to investigate people, or otherwise politically weaponized the DHS/DOJ, or otherwise tried to remove people from elected office based on fabricated evidence. Right now, I think he is just trying to play their game (which infuriates them), and I think many of the things he is trying to do are good. But, when he weaponizes the DHS/DOJ in exactly the same manner they have done, I expect all hell will break lose. Will be interesting to watch.
The first sentence is where we disagree the most.
I also disagree strongly that the previous admin weaponized the DOJ against him. If anything, they were extremely cautious in how they dealt with the unprecedented level of contact and influence between one of our biggest foes and a major party candidate. Finally, he has certainly weaponized the DOJ against those who investigated him and wanted to do so long before he found the perfect lackey “Bob” Barr for the job. It’s the oldest trick in the book, try to put the investigators on trial when you are guilty. However, he is in the position to be able to do it.
If the engineer gets the locomotive rolling into a dangerous area, and then jumps off...
...he can't later claim he didn't weaponize the locomotive. That's what the past administration did. And it worked for a while.
Seriously, give me the facts established that show anyone from the past Admin
directed the FBI to illegally target Orange or his campaign.
You guys were always the ones saying where is the evidence? Saying it even if you believe it doesn’t make it true.
I'm willing to wait for the results of the investigation.
Either way, I sure as hell know I will not take on the sisyphean endeavor of trying to convince you. Totally not worth it.
True dat.
(no message)
It should be obvious.
I'm hoping for a tailgater with you and Ned and anyone else who wants to come from the board....
....any games you guys see as good as i am buying tickets.
Undecided RE games. I usually don't decide this early.
(no message)
UVA, USC, and one of the easier games NM or BG.
Maybe both NM and BG.
These four years aren't going to last forever.
I have a wedding on USC weekend (MSU groom so niece protected his fball scedule)...........
......sigh.
All other games are open for me.
We could come to the wedding.
Hold a table for the Open.
On man would that be funny. Can I trust Conor not to hit on the hot bride though?
(no message)
Elvis and he will soon be returning in a Pink Caddy Canoe for the rapture concert.
(no message)
Will he have all of his digits?
(no message)
Will he need to shoot the bird at the crowd?
(no message)
The One would never “admit” to doing this...
although it would be fully justified to “fundamentally” change such an unjust country.
There will be a reckoning.
Indefensible.
Since when doing opposition research needs to be reported to FBI? The only potential violation of
the law (campaign finance) is the dirt of this opposition research obtained from a foreigner is paid with $25,000 or more. Don Jr didn't pay a penny, didn't get any dirt from Russia. What happened is a classical Bait-and-switch. But we all know who paid a foreigner much more than $25,000 to get so-called dirt, dossier.
When it is done by Republicans...at least, that is the view of the two posters below.
(no message)
I suspect it's a setup of narrative by media for incoming conclusion of FISA investigation. They
will have new narrative as excuse on why FBI spy Trump campaign.
Because it’s espionage
(no message)
That's police state tactics. During Maoist era every citizen has obligation to report his contact
with foreigners to the state. If you go to a foreign country for meeting or visit, except a few countries (North Korea, Vietnam, Romania, Albania..), when you come back you have to report every person you met and the content of conversation with this person. The reason for doing this is exactly what you said: it's espionage.
No it isn’t. A candidate/campaign is prohibited from taking assistance from foreign govts by the
election laws.
Which law? Did you read Mueller report?
(no message)
Yeah, I did. Did you? If you did, you would know why there weren’t charges over the
Tower meeting.
Why bother. You are talking to people who would side with the Russians over “liberals”.
Orange is just the ultimate symbol of what we have become and what we want.
People whom Trump himself has conceded wouldn't care if he shot someone on Fifth Avenue.
(no message)
This is who demagogues first target.
(no message)
It is a crime. It is how foreign nations obtain a foothold to gain influence.
US Presidents set the standard.
Trump just told the world that he will is willing to commit a crime.
There is a reason why Trump obstructed the investigation re 2016 campaign.
Yesterday was a clear signal to Russia to do it again in 2020.
There are three reactions to this
1) the patriot: fury. He’s a traitor.
2) the partisan: I don’t care, because of judges and taxes (this from the party of law and order and patriotism) MAGA!!
3) the rube: so funny! I love it because I hate the liberals more than I love America.
Fourth reaction: he’s just the Donald being the Donald.
He has no notion that anyone might see this as inappropriate. Now If he were just another politician he would report it to the FBI in a public forum. Two birds with one stone and his ass us covered.
That’s reaction number two
(no message)
There are Number Two's on both sides.
Hypocrite.
(no message)
At what age did you decide that your allegiance was for sale?
(no message)
Accuse others of that which you are guilty. Good job.
(no message)
Is there no lie, no crime, no murderous dictator Don can befriend, that would change your view ?
(no message)
Yeah, you guys sure have the moral high ground.
How far back does your memory go? Dial it back about twenty years. Many of the same folks sputtering and displaying histrionics right now were making the same argument Republicans/conservatives make right now: they will support the president, despite his moral defects, because of what he's doing or will do on Issues A, B and C. Chances are, you were one of those people back in the 90s. I didn't vote for the morally defective Bill Clinton and I didn't vote for the morally defective Trump. I think self-described Christian conservatives ought to be embarrassed for voting for Trump. But I'm not interested in listening to hypocritical partisan hacks go on about the morals of people voting for him when they have and will again behave in the same exact way when one of their tribal members is the candidate who will put their people on the benches of our courts system or keep abortion legal or grant amnesty. The only people who want to listen to you on this count are other hypocritical partisan hacks.
And then to top it off, I have to listen to lefties who now make arguments like, "Trust the CIA." Are you kidding me? I know most your memories barely go back to the last president, but I'll bet you recall what your ilk was saying about the CIA under Dubya, right? Not to mention its illustrious history helping to topple democratically-elected leaders in various nations over time. But now we can trust those reliable, honest people, right? Yeah, I'm sure you believe that. "Trust the FBI." That's what liberals have contended for decades, right? Like back in the Civil Rights Era. Bless the FBI. And then let's ramp up anti-Russian rhetoric, because that's what liberals have always stood for, right?
These last couple years have been just mind-boggling for those of us who aren't partisan hacks, watching this elongated temper tantrum give birth to lefties stoking the flames with Russia and telling us that we should venerate and trust the intelligence apparatus of the state. I sometimes wonder if you guys ever pause to consider what you're saying or if you're just so fixated on getting Trump removed, that you never even think about how silly and stupid you sound with this stuff. You're losing and you'll continue to lose and you deserve to lose. Honestly, do you really care about winning? Do you think these are winning tactics? Do you think the American people really care if he passes on information to the FBI? Do you think most Americans think we're headed for a "banana republic?" Does it seem like most voters are as outraged as outrage overachievers here and elsewhere over his stupid tweets? What issues that poll high among voters do you put on the back burner when you devote all this time to this stuff?
Bravo, you managed to couple your usual 'I'm above it all' self-absolution with false suppositions.
(no message)
He's our most effective strawman assassin on our board.
(no message)
Negative, son!
We can run down a list together of people currently arguing that it's indefensible to vote for Trump for moral reasons, even if you agree with most of his policies, and you will find they were folks who supported Bill Clinton twenty years ago based on the exact same rationalizations. In fact, we can probably find a few honest lefties on this board who will 'fess up to voting for Bill and for those very reasons. How about if we start with current Democratic politicians, than move to commentators, then to personalities on this board. I'm looking at you, Conor.
I'll start: Joe Biden. Nancy Pelosi. Jerry Nadler. I was about to say Hillary Clinton, but I'm not certain she voted for Bill.
This is kind of fun. I'd be much obliged if you threw in the names of some more politicians, then we can move on to the commentators.
He pretty much nailed it.
(no message)
There probably is.
It would help if you guys offered up a person who doesn't support killing babies. That would help me a lot. But, for now, Trump is the moral option.
So the singular element of morality for you is a woman's right to choose ?
(no message)
So you feel the female infants should live?
(no message)
No, not singular. But don't you agree that the right to life, to not be killed, is most important?
(no message)
Actually, my reaction to recent pro-choice initiatives is encapsulated pretty well by Fr. John.
So you agree that the right not to be killed trumps most other moral considerations?
Then why do you oppose Trump?
Or, do you actually think that stopping twitter obscenity is more important than saving lives?
Is it just me but I find the term “Banana Republic” extremely racist that white European males
used to demean an entire race of native Americans. I would suggest you edit this post so some of us will not have to retreat to our safe space.
PB, you ran in the Pride Parade. You should know that the infuriating Banana Republic horror
is that they ran out of 7" shorts.
The old Fila tennis shorts? Not a good look on me anymore
(no message)
Whataboutism is a noble defense. All a whataboutist wants is fairness.
(no message)
No they don’t. They want to commit the same wrongs they formerly criticized.
Two wrongs don’t equal fairness in any rational world.
Of course they do. That's the point.
(no message)
That's just what Hillary did, who you voted for.
(no message)
Hillary confessed in advance to treasonous felonies she plans to commit in the 2020 election ?
(no message)
You guys are the ones saying it was treasonous. Her campaign was the one receiving foreign info.
(no message)
Few things are more dangerous to a republic than willful ignorance.
(no message)
No. Freakin. Kiddin.
(no message)
Exactly. He only wants the Dems to be able to do this.
(no message)
If Chris thinks this is a crime, then he should've advocated for the arrests of
the DNC, Perkins Coie, Fusion GPS and Hillary years ago.
What foreign govt, hostile or otherwise supplied them with negative opponent information?
(no message)
Again what foreign govt supplied info to the D’s? That’s what you leave out.
They expect something for it and you arguably owe them.
What you go out and get from private firms that you pay for the service is not what the Orange squad did.
They knew where it was coming from, took the meeting and didn’t inform the FBI.
That is traitorous.
I know of Ukraine, Russia, England. Even Australia helped fabricate stuff. Maybe there are others.
Others follow this more closely than I do. If you are interested, you may want to look into this yourself.
Link: FN: Dems hammer Trump for openness to foreign campaign intel, stay silent on Clinton, DNC outreach
What info was given to the campaign by these govts? Please don’t confuse intelligence given to our
govt about the nefarious activities of the Orange gang.
Your article reveals none.
That's what we are talking about Frank. Maybe you need to read Chris94's post again.
Perhaps you meant that reply for someone else.
No it was meant for you. No other foreign govt offered dirt to the Clinton campaign as was offered
directly to the Orange squad. You can try the shuffle but that’s a fact.
You didn't read my link, I guess. Whatever. Remain in denial. No worries at my end.
(no message)
I read yer link. It doesn’t support yer assertions.
There is no indications of those govts giving or offering any dirt to the Clinton campaign.
If you disagree point to it in the article.
Orange will always put self interest over country. And you guys enable it.
Thankfully for all of us, his self interest is aligned with the country at this point.
(no message)
Peace. Out.
(no message)
Peace.
(no message)
Responds to Ned below.
(no message)
No doubt. How does he not see how hypocritical he is being.
(no message)
What foreign govt gave her information?
(no message)
It's just opposition research when Dems do it. If Trump does it, it is treason.
(no message)
Exactly. Remember, Biden sought help from the Ukraine against Trump. But no one cares.
(no message)
None. She paid for it.
(no message)
See Dossier, Steele
(no message)
So none.
(no message)
Don't ask me. You should ask FBI to conduct counter-intel investigation to find it out.
(no message)
Did Joe report it to FBI when foreign leaders asked him to run against Trump? Did he report
those info about how bad they said on his potential election opponent (Trump) in 2020 to FBI?
Love how he uses Norway as an example instead of the clearly hostile, nuclear armed Russia.
He’s a fookin disgrace. It’s the new normal though. Wait until you read the crappy here defending it.
We deserve him as we don’t have the morel strength to repudiate and throw his fat ass over to his pals in Russia.
Meant to respond to 94.
(no message)
Well done, dipshit.
(no message)
Done only to you, hypocrite. Using your logic, it's clearly foreign interference to U.S. election.
(no message)
Well said by Schindler
(no message)
Link: https://twitter.com/20committee/status/1138961580497002497?s=21