Sol Rosenberg

Drip Drip Drip

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Dog said:

Do you think the FBI investigated Hillary and Co. as aggressively as it did Trump and Co?

Fuck off

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait, my intelligence agencies have said that Russia has meddled in our elections?

HOLY FUCKING FUCK!

HOW the fuck did this happen?  WHO the fuck was involved?

HOW THE FUCK can we make sure this never happens again?

How can I help this investigation?

THAT is the response of a patriot.

THOSE are the questions that should be asked by citizens of this country.

 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m beginning to think the Movie ‘Inception’ somehow described this moment.

or maybe Strauss’ opera ‘Electra’.  

Anyway, Trump is going mental tonight, if anyone wants to look at Twitter.  Reality is going haywire....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And now US officials are reaching out for re-entry back into the TPPP. 

And it transpires the administration used clauses from it to rewrite NAFTA. 

I’ve changed my mind about Trump supporters. You’re not misguided, you really are just plain stupid.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, shaggybaxter said:

And now US officials are reaching out for re-entry back into the TPPP. 

And it transpires the administration used clauses from it to rewrite NAFTA. 

I’ve changed my mind about Trump supporters. You’re not misguided, you really are just plain stupid.

They fucked the reality of a reality tv star.  They fell for it.  A pornographic dream within a dream within a dream that reached out and seduced them away from what they didn’t think was real or desirable.  And it was, campers, as unreal as you thought it was, and you can read Trump’s tweets tonight and fall completely, unreasoning, lovingly, if you feel it enough, into the madness.  I suppose you can even convince yourself that’s a reality you can permanently live in.  The limit of our binary world may inevitably be madness, if you dismiss the bandwidth necessary to deal with it.  Convince yourself that Cheney and the neocons were right, you create your own universe just by the decisions you make, but what if the decisions you made are based on nothing but a script?  A broadcast?   An advertisement?  A sales job?  A whim?  A fiction? I’d like to hear it’s better than I think it is.  :)  

Astonish us please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Raz'r said:

Fuck off

I'm taking that as a no.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Mike G said:

Wait, my intelligence agencies have said that Russia has meddled in our elections?

HOLY FUCKING FUCK!

HOW the fuck did this happen?  WHO the fuck was involved?

HOW THE FUCK can we make sure this never happens again?

How can I help this investigation?

THAT is the response of a patriot.

THOSE are the questions that should be asked by citizens of this country.

 

Well, when you see guys bragging about being Russian spies, and you see guys who are taking Russian paychecks, and you see guys who are "political consultants" to the Russian gov't, and you see guys funneling US poll data to Russians, etc etc, and you know the FBI sees all this stuff and maybe a little more...... well, the FBI should just let this all be swept under the rug because Hillary.

Seriously, I think for a lot of Trumpettes, they really do hate the idea of America now. They never really liked it that much, all this equality bullshit, but when America actually chose a black person as leader, then in their "minds," America is fucked forever now. It's like parents who find out that their child is gay and from that moment on, pray for that child to get killed in a car wreck or something.

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

Well, when you see guys bragging about being Russian spies, and you see guys who are taking Russian paychecks, and you see guys who are "political consultants" to the Russian gov't, and you see guys funneling US poll data to Russians, etc etc, and you know the FBI sees all this stuff and maybe a little more...... well, the FBI should just let this all be swept under the rug because Hillary.

Seriously, I think for a lot of Trumpettes, they really do hate the idea of America now. They never really liked it that much, all this equality bullshit, but when America actually chose a black person as leader, then in their "minds," America is fucked forever now. It's like parents who find out that their child is gay and from that moment on, pray for that child to get killed in a car wreck or something.

-DSK

Speaking of things swept under the rug, which is the more egregious, a campaign manager sharing polling data with a former Ukrainian associate or this exchange between Obama and the Prime Minister of Russia which he believed to be private?....

Obama: On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this can be solved, but it’s important for him to give me space.

Medvedev: Yeah, I understand, I understand your message about space. Space for you ... .”

Obama: This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.

Medvedev: I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dog-ski picking at his bone. Good Dog-ski. The bone doesn't have any meat on it but it helps keeps the teeth working.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Dog said:

Speaking of things swept under the rug, which is the more egregious, a campaign manager sharing polling data with a former Ukrainian associate or this exchange between Obama and the Prime Minister of Russia which he believed to be private?....

Obama: On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this can be solved, but it’s important for him to give me space.

Medvedev: Yeah, I understand, I understand your message about space. Space for you ... .”

Obama: This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.

Medvedev: I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir.

 

It's a good thing there were notes and witnesses to that exchange so you can be angry about it.

Where are the notes from Trumps meetings with Putin?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

It's a good thing there were notes and witnesses to that exchange so you can be angry about it.

Where are the notes from Trumps meetings with Putin?

Good thing that mic was hot or we never would have known.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

The problem with Trump’s Pooty calls is that even if he discloses what was discussed, he’s going to lie about the substance – he just can’t help himself. And that will only give Russia more leverage over him, bc they have receipts. It’s a scary spiral of stupid that never ends

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Dog said:

Good thing that mic was hot or we never would have known.

If there's no proof, there's no crime, right Dog? Now - Obama and Medvedev were not alone. Even without the microphone there were witnesses. But this is a level of honesty you don't possess.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Olsonist said:

Dog-ski picking at his bone. Good Dog-ski. The bone doesn't have any meat on it but it helps keeps the teeth working.

If the president directly colluding with the Prime minister of Russia to enhance his election prospects is a bone with no meat, what is a campaign manager sharing polling data with a Ukrainian?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dog said:

If the president directly colluding with the Prime minister of Russia to enhance his election prospects is a bone with no meat, what is a campaign manager sharing polling data with a Ukrainian?

Pick that bone, Dog-ski, pick at it. There's some meat on it to be found. Seriously, everyone can see the meat on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dog said:

Speaking of things swept under the rug, which is the more egregious, a campaign manager sharing polling data with a former Ukrainian associate or this exchange between Obama and the Prime Minister of Russia which he believed to be private?....

Obama: On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this can be solved, but it’s important for him to give me space.

Medvedev: Yeah, I understand, I understand your message about space. Space for you ... .”

Obama: This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.

Medvedev: I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir.

 

Did he tell any Russians that they could keep their doctor?

-DSK

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Dog said:

If the president directly colluding with the Prime minister of Russia to enhance his election prospects is a bone with no meat, what is a campaign manager sharing polling data with a Ukrainian?

Once again, your false-equivalency doggystyle distractions fail to amount to anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, shaggybaxter said:

And now US officials are reaching out for re-entry back into the TPPP. 

And it transpires the administration used clauses from it to rewrite NAFTA. 

I’ve changed my mind about Trump supporters. You’re not misguided, you really are just plain stupid.

You just figured that out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nice! said:

Once again, your false-equivalency doggystyle distractions fail to amount to anything.

False equivalence WTF? I did not suggest that a president colluding with the prime minister of Russia to improve his electoral chances was remotely equilivent to a campaign manager sharing poll data with a Ukrainian.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, badlatitude said:
 

Nixon: “I am not a crook”

Clinton: “I did not have sex with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky.”

Trump: “I never worked for Russia”.

Says the convicted fraudster and bankrupt who has sex with pornstars....... And Russian prostitutes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Deny - He never did..

Distract - Hillary did.

Minimize - Okay, he did, but it is completely legal. 

Distort - Obama admitted....  

 

Doggy Style

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

Deny - He never did..

Distract - Hillary did.

Minimize - Okay, he did, but it is completely legal. 

Distort - Obama admitted....  

 

Doggy Style

A post that is what it derides.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dog said:

A post that is what it derides.

When tactic is identified, switch to ...

I know you are but what am I. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

When tactic is identified, switch to ...

I know you are but what am I. 

Another one that is what it derides.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dog said:

Another one that is what it derides.

Please identify the derision in that post?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, shaggybaxter said:

And now US officials are reaching out for re-entry back into the TPPP. 

And it transpires the administration used clauses from it to rewrite NAFTA. 

I’ve changed my mind about Trump supporters. You’re not misguided, you really are just plain stupid.

Careful. Only "elitists" point that out. Rube nation gets angry when you point out they are ignorant and proud.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

Careful. Only "elitists" point that out. Rube nation gets angry when you point out they are ignorant and plowed.

FTFY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Dog said:

Speaking of things swept under the rug, which is the more egregious, a campaign manager sharing polling data with a former Ukrainian associate or this exchange between Obama and the Prime Minister of Russia which he believed to be private?....

Legally speaking? The campaign manager or, worse, Flynn. I know it chaps your ass, but Obama as president was legally allowed to state the obvious to Medvedev. 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Bent Sailor said:

Legally speaking? The campaign manager or, worse, Flynn. I know it chaps your ass, but Obama as president was legally allowed to state the obvious to Medvedev. 

 

 

You guys go all fucking stupid at just the thought of Trump colluding with the Russians. Imagine if had actually done it like Obama did.

BTW..."Legally speaking" there is nothing illegal about a campaign manager sharing poll data with a Ukranian.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dog said:

You guys go all fucking stupid at just the thought of Trump colluding with the Russians. Imagine if had actually done it like Obama did.

If Obama had done what Trump & his campaign did before being elected, it too would have been illegal. As one of those "guys" pointed out earlier - there are a great many things one can do regarding foreign policy as president that you cannot do when you are not authorised by the federal government to negotiate foreign policy. At least not do and remain in accordance with the Logan Act.

 

1 minute ago, Dog said:

 BTW..."Legally speaking" there is nothing illegal about a campaign manager sharing poll data with a Ukranian.

Depends on why he was doing it and what was promised in return actually. But that ambiguity is why I mentioned Flynn. That guy illegally negotiated with the Russians having no authorisation from the federal government at the time to do so. No ambiguity there. He done fucked up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Dog said:

False equivalence WTF? I did not suggest that a president colluding with the prime minister of Russia to improve his electoral chances was remotely equilivent to a campaign manager sharing poll data with a Ukrainian.

 

7 hours ago, Dog said:

Speaking of things swept under the rug, which is the more egregious, a campaign manager sharing polling data with a former Ukrainian associate or this exchange between Obama and the Prime Minister of Russia which he believed to be private?....

Obama: On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this can be solved, but it’s important for him to give me space.

Medvedev: Yeah, I understand, I understand your message about space. Space for you ... .”

Obama: This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.

Medvedev: I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump should be crumbling soon. I don't see how he keeps up the facade.

 

ETW3KzZR_normal.jpg

Cyrus Vance is under FBI investigation for allegedly taking campaign cash in exchange for NOT prosecuting Don Jr, KremlinBarbie, Harvey Weinstein, and others, so yeah, I'd certainly call that "trouble on the horizon."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Say what you want about Dog, but he has made a bigly compelling argument for not electing Obama.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, bhyde said:

Say what you want about Dog, but he has made a bigly compelling argument for not electing Obama.

Obama will never have a 3rd term, thanks to the poodle.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Mrleft8 said:

Obama will never have a 3rd term, thanks to the poodle.

We owe Dog a huge debt of gratitude. When I say the Pledge of Allegiance, with my hand over my heart, it brings tears to my eyes knowing there are good people like Dog protecting the Republic. God damn hero!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, bhyde said:

We owe Dog a huge debt of gratitude. When I say the Pledge of Allegiance, with my hand over my heart, it brings tears to my eyes knowing there are good people like Dog protecting the Republic. God damn hero!

Give the pooch a treat. Somebody agree with him.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Ishmael said:

Give the pooch a treat. Somebody agree with him.

I'll give him a ride to the 'farm'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Ishmael said:

Give the pooch a treat. Somebody agree with him.

He's an architect! That makes him one of the world's best humans....... Errrrr................. Dogs................

Like Caesar Peli-lamb chop.

 Or

Ludwig Mies Van der Roast beef.

 Or

Frank Lloyd look! A Squirrel!

Or

Steak bone Saarinen.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Cal20sailor said:

I'll give him a ride to the 'farm'.

"Freezer camp" is where all my sister's pet rabbits went..... I don't think she ever caught on....... On the other hand, she did become a vegetarian at age 15, so......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Dog said:

You guys go all fucking stupid at just the thought of Trump colluding with the Russians. Imagine if had actually done it like Obama did.

BTW..."Legally speaking" there is nothing illegal about a campaign manager sharing poll data with a Ukranian.

Trump could have done a lot more, but only Pooty knows...

why do you support traitorous behavior?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Raz'r said:

Trump could have done a lot more, but only Pooty knows...

why do you support traitorous behavior?

image.png.76e24c8b0248cf0e837b34ed21fcd8ca.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Cal20sailor said:

I'll give him a ride to the 'farm'.

This closely resembles my view of the Mutt.

image.png.1a7024f8e998f1d6981521cf5cdc80af.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Now they're picking on poor Devin -

 

Mueller Probes an Event With Nunes, Flynn, and Foreign Officials at Trump’s D.C. Hotel

https://www.thedailybeast.com/mueller-probes-an-event-with-nunes-flynn-and-foreign-officials-at-trumps-dc-hotel

 

Excerpt -

The Special Counsel’s Office and federal prosecutors in Manhattan are scrutinizing a meeting involving former House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, one-time National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, and dozens of foreign officials, according to three sources familiar with the investigations. 

The breakfast event, which was first reported by The Daily Sabah, a pro-government Turkish paper, took place at 8:30 a.m. at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C. on Jan. 18, 2017—days before President Donald Trump’s inauguration. About 60 people were invited, including diplomats from governments around the world, according to those same sources. 

The breakfast has come under scrutiny by federal prosecutors in Manhattan as part of their probe into whether the Trump inaugural committee misspent fundsand if donors tried to buy influence in the White House. The existence of that probe was first reported by the Wall Street Journal. The Special Counsel’s Office is also looking at the breakfast as part of its investigation into whether foreigners contributed money to the Trump inaugural fund and PAC by possibly using American intermediaries, as first reported by The New York Times.Robert Mueller’s team has asked Flynn about the event, according to two sources familiar with the Special Counsel’s Office questioning.

Nunes, who has not been accused of any wrongdoing, has been perhaps Trump’s most important congressional ally over the last two years. After serving on Trump’s transition team, Nunes became a vigorous defender of the president against federal and congressional inquiries. The California Republican pushed a misleading memo alleging misconduct in the FBI investigation of Trump’s associates that the bureau said contained “material omissions of fact that fundamentally impact the memo’s accuracy.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mrleft8 said:

He's an architect! That makes him one of the world's best humans....... Errrrr................. Dogs................

Like Caesar Peli-lamb chop.

 Or

Ludwig Mies Van der Roast beef.

 Or

Frank Lloyd look! A Squirrel!

Or

Steak bone Saarinen.....

OR:

Caesar Wordsalad

Mies Van der Rowf

Frank Lloyd Wrong

Error Saarinen

Michael-Anglo

Leonardo da Weensy

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Left Shift said:

OR:

Caesar Wordsalad

Mies Van der Rowf

Frank Lloyd Wrong

Error Saarinen

Michael-Anglo

Leonardo da Weensy

 

The most famous architect of all, Ayn Rand’s creation, Howard Bark.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah..... And let's not forget Franken Gherry.... Play-Doh's contribution to modern society.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Olsonist said:

 

The most famous architect of all, Ayn Rand’s creation, Howard Bark.

Winner!

 

You don't think dogs trying to be all postmodern and intelligent, do you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh and it gets better:

A Clear and Present Danger

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow/watch/trump-a-clear-and-present-danger-former-doj-counterintel-chief-1425919555601

David Laufman, former chief of the DOJ's counterintelligence and export control section, talks with Rachel Maddow about why he's speaking out about the risk posed by Donald Trump to the national security of the United States.

Cannot pull a transcript yet........about 6 mins long

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the pieces of the puzzle just clicked into place for me. 

The Trump Tower meeting, which Trumpettes always point ended with no deal, as if that fact alone exonerates Drumpf, was attended not by political aides or guides to the campaign, but by family and Manafort. Manafort was there probably because he had had significant history brokering deals with the Russians, and may well have helped set up the meeting. 

But at this point, Trump & Co had few intentions of statecraft or actually setting state policy. Remember that no one was more surprised than Trump when he won the election. Back in 2016 Trump was trying to get Trump Moscow off the ground, and the election was the brand maker that would allow him to negotiate a better deal. 

Trump was able to deliver his side of the bargain, by changing the Republican party platform completely on Russia, but Veselnitskaya didn't deliver what evidently was desired by team Trump. Hillary's emails were never the gold pot... the golden pot was literally gold, the approval by Putin to go ahead with the Trump Tower. 

Once it became plain that Putin wasn't yet giving Trump the go ahead, Trump's family declared the meeting was over, and Don Jr informed daddy that there was no deal. Not yet. (Nyet?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, phillysailor said:

One of the pieces of the puzzle just clicked into place for me. 

The Trump Tower meeting, which Trumpettes always point ended with no deal, as if that fact alone exonerates Drumpf, was attended not by political aides or guides to the campaign, but by family and Manafort. Manafort was there probably because he had had significant history brokering deals with the Russians, and may well have helped set up the meeting. 

But at this point, Trump & Co had few intentions of statecraft or actually setting state policy. Remember that no one was more surprised than Trump when he won the election. Back in 2016 Trump was trying to get Trump Moscow off the ground, and the election was the brand maker that would allow him to negotiate a better deal. 

Trump was able to deliver his side of the bargain, by changing the Republican party platform completely on Russia, but Veselnitskaya didn't deliver what evidently was desired by team Trump. Hillary's emails were never the gold pot... the golden pot was literally gold, the approval by Putin to go ahead with the Trump Tower. 

Once it became plain that Putin wasn't yet giving Trump the go ahead, Trump's family declared the meeting was over, and Don Jr informed daddy that there was no deal. Not yet. (Nyet?)

Very imaginative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Dog said:

Very imaginative.

 

That's actually a factual post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bus Driver said:

my predicition is that cohen (who should be in jail, and attending in an orange jumpsuit) will be sitting next to a doj lawyer.  that lawyer will dictate what cohen says.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, hermetic said:

my predicition is that cohen (who should be in jail, and attending in an orange jumpsuit) will be sitting next to a doj lawyer.  that lawyer will dictate what cohen says.

Care to predict whether President Trump will refrain from saying anything that could be construed as "obstruction"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mike G said:

 

 

Between him and Flynn, who is trying to placate a judge who sounded less than amused with the lenient terms of his deal, it sounds like there may be a race to ...spill.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

Between him and Flynn, who is trying to placate a judge who sounded less than amused with the lenient terms of his deal, it sounds like there may be a race to ...spill.jpg

 

A race to the bottom!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:
35 minutes ago, hermetic said:

my predicition is that cohen (who should be in jail, and attending in an orange jumpsuit) will be sitting next to a doj lawyer.  that lawyer will dictate what cohen says.

Care to predict whether President Trump will refrain from saying anything that could be construed as "obstruction"?

I don't do twitter, so I don't really care

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, hermetic said:

I don't do twitter, so I don't really care

You don't do twitter so you don't really care if the *resident obstructs justice?

One of those things is not like the other.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Left Shift said:
56 minutes ago, hermetic said:

I don't do twitter, so I don't really care

You don't do twitter so you don't really care if the *resident obstructs justice?

One of those things is not like the other.  

okay, how's this - I predict that I won't read a single twit about cohen's testimony.  nor do I care to predict what someone else might twit, because I won't read that twit either.

as to obstruction of justice, what could some congressional committee get out of cohen that mueller / sdny hasn't already?  mueller / sdny held jail time reduction in front of him, congress can't offer him shit.  however, they can twit about the hearing afterwards.  I won't read those either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, hermetic said:

okay, how's this - I predict that I won't read a single twit about cohen's testimony.  nor do I care to predict what someone else might twit, because I won't read that twit either.

as to obstruction of justice, what could some congressional committee get out of cohen that mueller / sdny hasn't already?  mueller / sdny held jail time reduction in front of him, congress can't offer him shit.  however, they can twit about the hearing afterwards.  I won't read those either.

It's not the "what", its the "who" and the "where" of the testimony.  Public sworn testimony vs. private interrogations.  Optics count.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Left Shift said:
9 minutes ago, hermetic said:

okay, how's this - I predict that I won't read a single twit about cohen's testimony.  nor do I care to predict what someone else might twit, because I won't read that twit either.

as to obstruction of justice, what could some congressional committee get out of cohen that mueller / sdny hasn't already?  mueller / sdny held jail time reduction in front of him, congress can't offer him shit.  however, they can twit about the hearing afterwards.  I won't read those either.

It's not the "what", its the "who" and the "where" of the testimony.  Public sworn testimony vs. private interrogations.  Optics count.  

I agree, it will be pure political theatre for the 2020 elections.  some of it will be interesting, some of it will be unwatchable

and the doj lawyer will assure it never gets too detailed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/15/politics/mueller-kilimnik-manafort/index.html?utm_medium=social&utm_content=2019-01-15T22%3A52%3A58&utm_source=twCNNp&utm_term=image

 

Based on recent filings from Mueller's team, Kilimnik appears to be at the heart of pieces of Mueller's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure but I think that conspiracy and obstruction of justice are a form of collusion. Also, that Kilimnik guy is Russian intelligence. Hmmm.

image.thumb.png.144fc4f2626fca4eb2260e3d7834fbbd.png

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still stuck at Flynn as a traitor. I can't believe it. Can anyone cite something where he admits that? Call me naive, but I think he thought he was a good guy doing the right thing. None of us saw what Rump was capable of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember that $400M da Vinci painting from a couple of years ago?  The one MbS paid 300M more than its worth,  Well there’s quite a story there and of course it’s rotten and of course it involves Trump, Don Jr. a Russian oligarch (who paid double Trumps old mansions asking price in 2006), Erik Prince and of course MbS. It’s a long read and will make your spin.

https://narativ.org/2019/01/02/salvator-mundi-art-of-the-deal-the-lost-davinci/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Blue Crab said:

I'm still stuck at Flynn as a traitor. I can't believe it. Can anyone cite something where he admits that? Call me naive, but I think he thought he was a good guy doing the right thing. None of us saw what Rump was capable of.

Flynn went bad at the end of his career.  He was widely disliked by his colleagues and bitter about it.  He was descending into a lot of far right ring  lunacy.  It believe he was really just about getting paid.  Felt like he deserved it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Blue Crab said:

I'm still stuck at Flynn as a traitor. I can't believe it. Can anyone cite something where he admits that? Call me naive, but I think he thought he was a good guy doing the right thing. None of us saw what Rump was capable of.

Flynn swears to negotiations with Russian diplomats on UN resolutions that were not in line with the US administration's policy at the time. This is in his plea agreement. As he wasn't authorised by Obama's administration (the president at the time), he is swearing to actions that breach the Logan Act. Whether or not that rises to the level of "treason" is always going to fall along partisan lines.

Strictly speaking, Obama was the president at the time, so negotiating with Russia against his policies is acting in opposition to the current government. No way around that legally, but the rabidly partisan will dismiss it along party lines in the same way they dismissed abhorrent dereliction of duty by the senate in regards to Garland. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Olsonist said:

I'm not sure but I think that conspiracy and obstruction of justice are a form of collusion. Also, that Kilimnik guy is Russian intelligence. Hmmm.

image.thumb.png.144fc4f2626fca4eb2260e3d7834fbbd.png

No collusion!  Other than that. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Blue Crab said:

 I think he thought he was a good guy doing the right thing.

So did Ollie North.

A true patriot. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Bent Sailor said:

Flynn swears to negotiations with Russian diplomats on UN resolutions that were not in line with the US administration's policy at the time. This is in his plea agreement. As he wasn't authorised by Obama's administration (the president at the time), he is swearing to actions that breach the Logan Act. Whether or not that rises to the level of "treason" is always going to fall along partisan lines.

Strictly speaking, Obama was the president at the time, so negotiating with Russia against his policies is acting in opposition to the current government. No way around that legally, but the rabidly partisan will dismiss it along party lines in the same way they dismissed abhorrent dereliction of duty by the senate in regards to Garland. 

So was he working for Rump then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Blue Crab said:

So was he working for Rump then?

Yes, but "Rump" was not yet president and did not have the authority to negotiate foreign policy with anyone, let alone the Russians in defiance of Obama's foreign policy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Blue Crab said:

I'm still stuck at Flynn as a traitor. I can't believe it. Can anyone cite something where he admits that? Call me naive, but I think he thought he was a good guy doing the right thing. None of us saw what Rump was capable of.

I think that you want to cut him slack him having been in uniform.

I'm looking at his resume and he seems to view himself as a Cassandra, ignored by the Obama Administration and forced out. That by itself is OK. But then he went down the slippery slope of getting paid. He retires and sets up a consulting company. There's a million consulting companies. The dude has security clearances and seriously needed to pick his clients better.

I don't think he was a traitor in 2014 but by the time he stood up at the RNC and yelled, Lock Her Up, yeah, he'd sold out. Like Manafort, he wanted to feel important again. The Russkies made him feel important. They're good at that.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Blue Crab said:

I'm still stuck at Flynn as a traitor. I can't believe it. Can anyone cite something where he admits that? Call me naive, but I think he thought he was a good guy doing the right thing. None of us saw what Rump was capable of.

No, they can't. And if the FBI had evidence he betrayed the country they would surely have charged him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Bent Sailor said:

Flynn swears to negotiations with Russian diplomats on UN resolutions that were not in line with the US administration's policy at the time. This is in his plea agreement. As he wasn't authorised by Obama's administration (the president at the time), he is swearing to actions that breach the Logan Act. Whether or not that rises to the level of "treason" is always going to fall along partisan lines.

Strictly speaking, Obama was the president at the time, so negotiating with Russia against his policies is acting in opposition to the current government. No way around that legally, but the rabidly partisan will dismiss it along party lines in the same way they dismissed abhorrent dereliction of duty by the senate in regards to Garland. 

 

Well, the issue here is that we don't know everything that Flynn has done.

We do know that he's tried to remove a person from the US to be handed over to foreign gov't so they can be punished in a political show trial

We do know that he was paid tens of millions of dollars in "consulting fees" by Russia, and he pled guilty to lying about his contacts with the Russians, when one of the subjects he talked with them about was lifting sanctions. That is a violation of the Logan Act which of course is kind of a dead letter, and not really treason.

However Flynn was a general officer in the Army, and held several intel postings. What did he know that he could have told the Russians? I assume he knew a lot, or he wouldn't be a general. What did he tell them? This may be seen as partisanship, but it's also a matter of simple honesty- a guy leading chants of "LOCK HER UP" is not an honest person, nor one who respects American ideals (like rule of law).

Last, we know that a Republican-appointed judge, who saw the unredacted list of Flynn's misdeeds, was so angry that he openly called him a traitor in court.

-DSK

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wtf steamer, "was paid tens of millions of dollars in "consulting fees" by Russia"

you made that up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dog said:

No, they can't. And if the FBI had evidence he betrayed the country they would surely have charged him.

There’s a judge who’s seen all the shit that disagrees with you.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

There’s a judge who’s seen all the shit that disagrees with you.

Do tell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dog said:
9 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

There’s a judge who’s seen all the shit that disagrees with you.

Do tell.

he did.  then he apologized

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, hermetic said:

he did.  then he apologized

Yep, it's inappropriate in a courtroom, and he apologized for that. The judge didn't say "I'm sorry, on second consideration and review, you're NOT a traitor."

BTW we've been thru the Flynn thing before.

If he were a Democrat, would you be fine with the idea of a former intel general being paid millions for "consulting" with the Russians?

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites