Malcador Posted February 2, 2018 Posted February 2, 2018 McCain had my vote until he chose Palin as his running mate. That's when things got too weird for me. Remember how everyone really liked Sarah Palin at first? Until she started.. you know... saying things. As always "si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses" applies Why has elegance found so little following? Elegance has the disadvantage that hard work is needed to achieve it and a good education to appreciate it. - Edsger Wybe Dijkstra
Hurlshort Posted February 2, 2018 Posted February 2, 2018 McCain had my vote until he chose Palin as his running mate. That's when things got too weird for me. Remember how everyone really liked Sarah Palin at first? Until she started.. you know... saying things. I'm not even sure about there being a period of like. She was not even well regarded by the few Alaskans I knew. But yeah, that was a bummer because I was a fan of McCain.
Pidesco Posted February 2, 2018 Posted February 2, 2018 McCain was also always terrible, he just had a good political image, mavericking his way into always voting against his principles. "My hovercraft is full of eels!" - Hungarian tourist I am Dan Quayle of the Romans. I want to tattoo a map of the Netherlands on my nether lands. Heja Sverige!! Everyone should cuffawkle more. The wrench is your friend.
HoonDing Posted February 2, 2018 Posted February 2, 2018 he's been dining off his war hero status his entire life, i prefer ppl who don't get captured The ending of the words is ALMSIVI.
Gromnir Posted February 2, 2018 Posted February 2, 2018 McCain had my vote until he chose Palin as his running mate. That's when things got too weird for me. Remember how everyone really liked Sarah Palin at first? Until she started.. you know... saying things. I'm not even sure about there being a period of like. She was not even well regarded by the few Alaskans I knew. But yeah, that was a bummer because I was a fan of McCain. most important quality for Gromnir, when voting for president, is character. am knowing such might not be the most important quality for a president, but it remains paramount to us. were too young to vote carter v. ford, but am suspecting such woulda' been the most difficult election choice in our lifetime. woulda' had us facing a genuine crisis when deciding. ford and carter were both solid human beings with unimpeachable character. mccain and obama weren't quite same situation as carter v. ford, but we were nevertheless confident both men were honest concerned with the wellbeing o' the American People. as much as we disliked obama's presidency, we wouldn't have felt dirty if we had voted for him in 2008. as to the nunes memo, is 'course most significant for what it does not include. nunes memo doesn't actual claim the steele dossier were the only evidence utilized for granting o' the initial warrant. if steele dossier is the only evidence, we would indeed have concerns, but can't tell from the memo. to not point out that the steele dossier were singular in granting the warrant seems like more than a simple oversight on the part o' the republicans who crafted the talking points memo. am suspecting the steele dossier were only one piece o' evidence utilized in granting the page warrant, but is impossible to tell from the memo, which strikes us as intentional rather than accidental. furthermore, even if the memo were granted based 'pon steele dossier, the talking points memo fails to address how the warrant were kept active. such warrants is anything but interminable. unless the warrant were producing credible evidence w/i a short period o' time, it would have died. would very much like a nunes explanation 'bout how such a fraudulent and skewed basis for the page warrant seeming resulted in enough credible intelligence to maintain the warrant. and yeah, the timing o' the partisan memo, released just ahead o' mueller attempts to interview trump, should be viewed as a bit suspicious. mueller is largely unimpeachable, so trump and his allies is resorting to deep-state silliness to undermine the investigation? regardless, am having no way to formulate any kinda meaningful opinion 'til we get a few important questions answered, especial those questions regarding basis for warrant beyond the steele dossier, and what were basis for maintaining the warrant. seems like essential questions needing answers. unlike others, the memo doesn't bother us much as am always the guy cautioning patience in such situations. don't rush to judgement. wait for more info before deciding right or wrong, win or lose. seeming black and white is likely to get muddied and grey 'fore we get any kinda real clarity, but there is a tendency, particular in the polarized world o' 2018, for people to make snap decisions and then defend 'em through fire and storm, regardless o' new info. wait for the dems response, and then wait a bit more. won't hurt to delay any kinda personal judgments for a week or so, eh? HA! Good Fun! 3 "If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927) "Im indifferent to almost any murder as long as it doesn't affect me or mine."--Gfted1 (September 30, 2019)
Raithe Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4VGwfkTW4WU 1 "Cuius testiculos habeas, habeas cardia et cerebellum."
Gromnir Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 (edited) https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-02-02/what-the-gop-probe-memo-claims-and-how-that-squares-with-reality worth a look. a couple noteworthy aspects as is kinda direct responses to Gromnir concerns. "The FISA warrant concerning Page remains classified, but warrant applications are lengthy documents that often run 60 to 80 pages where officials need to show “probable cause” that the target is a foreign power or an agent of one. Obtaining a FISA warrant to spy on a U.S. citizen requires multiple levels of review that on average involves 10 government officials, according to a former U.S. national security official. Democrats on the House Intelligence panel issued a statement Friday saying “the investigation would persist on the basis of wholly independent evidence had Christopher Steele never entered the picture.”" "Representative Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the Intelligence Committee, said Friday that the Republicans “cherry-picked” information from McCabe’s testimony, leaving out what he said about the “genesis of the investigation that did not involve the dossier.” Page -- who denies wrongdoing and said he welcomes release of the memo -- was on the FBI’s radar long before the dossier: In 2013, Russian spies tried to recruit him, according to an FBI criminal complaint filed in 2015." "Democrats on House Intelligence said the GOP description of the warrant application contains “serious mischaracterizations” that are laid out in a still-classified Democratic memo. For one thing, the Page warrant was renewed three times, steps that the former U.S. official said would have required the Justice Department to show the FISA court that useful intelligence had been obtained and an extension was needed." edit: please note, Gromnir is not suggesting the memo is garbage 'cause o' linked bloomberg fact-check article. am clear not convinced by a largely hypothetical democrat rebuttal any more than by the republican release. however, is reassuring to us that the dems and media sources is seeing the same issues as does Gromnir. frequent we observe media and politicians arguing over trivialities or tangential aspects. simple get folks to talk 'bout the relevant issues is often the biggest challenge. HA! Good Fun! Edited February 3, 2018 by Gromnir "If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927) "Im indifferent to almost any murder as long as it doesn't affect me or mine."--Gfted1 (September 30, 2019)
Zoraptor Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 Trump's memo is hardly convincing. If they want to go after the FBI or the investigation they'd be far better off catching them leaking, which they've done extensively and for obvious political purposes. Bit difficult to do when the people who should be catching the leakers are the ones leaking though. Just another sign that the whole US intelligence apparatus is a law to itself and uncontrollable though. Speaking of which, using a warrant from that abject rubber stamp FISA court as evidence of anything is a joke, and is either a sign of ignorance or deliberate obfuscation from Bloomberg. It rejects one warrant application every four years on average, or one out of every 4500 cases if you prefer. That's out and out kangaroo court territory- you're more likely to have the 'prosecution case' rejected in North Korea than in FISA. 1
Valsuelm Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 (edited) Trump's memo is hardly convincing. If they want to go after the FBI or the investigation they'd be far better off catching them leaking, which they've done extensively and for obvious political purposes. Bit difficult to do when the people who should be catching the leakers are the ones leaking though. Just another sign that the whole US intelligence apparatus is a law to itself and uncontrollable though. Speaking of which, using a warrant from that abject rubber stamp FISA court as evidence of anything is a joke, and is either a sign of ignorance or deliberate obfuscation from Bloomberg. It rejects one warrant application every four years on average, or one out of every 4500 cases if you prefer. That's out and out kangaroo court territory- you're more likely to have the 'prosecution case' rejected in North Korea than in FISA. If you were not convinced prior to the memo leaking that the investigation into Trump colluding with the evil Russians, or the evil Russians hacked our election, or whatever you want to call it is 100% pure BS (on a cartoonishly epic scale), then the memo wasn't like to convince you. Likewise, if you had much faith that the FBI was trustworthy, honest, law abiding, honorable organization, then the memo is like to not convince you otherwise. What did you expect the memo to do? What were you looking for a memo to convince you of? Or think others were looking for? Edited February 3, 2018 by Valsuelm
Zoraptor Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 I wasn't expecting it to do anything much, and that's exactly what it delivered. The way both sides were talking about it it would have been easy to expect it to have some actual substance though.
Bartimaeus Posted February 3, 2018 Posted February 3, 2018 (edited) It didn't help that the two things that seemed interesting - Comey calling the Steele dossier unverified but then apparently using it to justify FISA surveillance (bad), and Steele's apparent extreme bias against Trump (especially bad when combined with the previous point) - turned out to be a lie in the former case, and a half-truth at best in the latter. Edited February 3, 2018 by Bartimaeus Quote How I have existed fills me with horror. For I have failed in everything - spelling, arithmetic, riding, tennis, golf; dancing, singing, acting; wife, mistress, whore, friend. Even cooking. And I do not excuse myself with the usual escape of 'not trying'. I tried with all my heart. In my dreams, I am not crippled. In my dreams, I dance.
Zoraptor Posted February 4, 2018 Posted February 4, 2018 Comey calling the Steele dossier unverified but then apparently using it to justify FISA surveillance We don't really know what happened with respect to that, nor will we, given the nature of the FISA court. Is it even possible to independently check at what time/ date a FISA warrant is issued and for what reason, or do we have to take interested parties such as the FBI/ NSA's word for it? Rhetorical question, that. There certainly seems to have been leaks made based on the surveillance which is a direct intervention by someone in the FBI/ NSA, even if was not by the NSA or FBI as organisations. So far as I am concerned as vaguely neutral that is where the strongest point of attack for Trump lies- and manipulation by the intelligence community is far more of a risk to US democracy than anything the Russians can do. Everyone who isn't a nationalism induced moron knows that the US tries to influence Russian politics and the Russians try and influence US politics; the problems are always worse when you have the state's own security apparatus deciding to interfere politically. Plus in a more general case, if it were collaboration with the Saudis or Israel that were regarded as being worthy of surveillance the only candidate in 30 years likely to avoid monitoring would be- maybe- Obama. Steele's apparent extreme bias against Trump (especially bad when combined with the previous point) - turned out to be a lie in the former case, and a half-truth at best in the latter. Steele was picked by the Democrats in the first place because he was biased. if someone wrote a piece on Hillary or Bernie paid for by the Republican Party it would clearly be biased since, well, neither R nor D are interested in an unbiased scientific type analysis but in generating maximum political capital. They will deliberately employ people who will give them what they want, not a disinterested academic. Steele's dossier is replete with gossip, doubly removed hearsay and is almost entirely unverifiable even when it drifts towards direct information- and is also at multiple points self contradictory (eg, Russians cultivating Trump for 5 years, offering him deals etc and Trump turned them down; yet later in dossier (p8) saying Trump's lack of property in Russia was "not for lack of trying"). That's what they wanted and what they paid for. That stuff is also very easy to 'soft' corroborate either by using the same source speaking to a different person/ organisation or a different person reporting the same rumour.
Katphood Posted February 4, 2018 Posted February 4, 2018 Is it okay that I'm scared of her?! There used to be a signature here, a really cool one...and now it's gone.
Katphood Posted February 4, 2018 Posted February 4, 2018 Spokesperson for the United States Department of State She keeps showing up on TV recently. There used to be a signature here, a really cool one...and now it's gone.
injurai Posted February 4, 2018 Posted February 4, 2018 Isn't that the reason for a spokesperson? Anyways, she looks like Cameron Diaz.
Malcador Posted February 4, 2018 Posted February 4, 2018 From Fox and Friends, heh 1 Why has elegance found so little following? Elegance has the disadvantage that hard work is needed to achieve it and a good education to appreciate it. - Edsger Wybe Dijkstra
BruceVC Posted February 4, 2018 Posted February 4, 2018 https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/01/putins-game/546548/ Guys here is an excellent read around how the Russians interfered in the USA election I am always surprised how our American friends dont seem concerned with this type of attempt to undermine the Democratic process in a country like the USA? "Abashed the devil stood and felt how awful goodness is and saw Virtue in her shape how lovely: and pined his loss” John Milton "We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing.” - George Bernard Shaw "What counts in life is not the mere fact that we have lived. It is what difference we have made to the lives of others that will determine the significance of the life we lead" - Nelson Mandela
HoonDing Posted February 4, 2018 Posted February 4, 2018 "I am always surprised how our American friends dont seem concerned with this type of attempt to undermine the Democratic process in a country like the USA?" because "their team" is winning The ending of the words is ALMSIVI.
Raithe Posted February 4, 2018 Posted February 4, 2018 5 "Cuius testiculos habeas, habeas cardia et cerebellum."
PK htiw klaw eriF Posted February 5, 2018 Posted February 5, 2018 That's unrealistic, a maga chud wouldn't be talking to a girl, let alone have one in his home. 1 "Akiva Goldsman and Alex Kurtzman run the 21st century version of MK ULTRA." - majestic "you're a damned filthy lying robot and you deserve to die and burn in hell." - Bartimaeus "Without individual thinking you can't notice the plot holes." - InsaneCommander "Just feed off the suffering of gamers." - Malcador "You are calling my taste crap." -Hurlshort "thankfully it seems like the creators like Hungary less this time around." - Sarex "Don't forget the wakame, dumbass" -Keyrock "Are you trolling or just being inadvertently nonsensical?' -Pidesco "we have already been forced to admit you are at least human" - uuuhhii "I refuse to buy from non-woke businesses" - HoonDing "feral camels are now considered a pest" - Gorth "Melkathi is known to be an overly critical grumpy person" - Melkathi "Oddly enough Sanderson was a lot more direct despite being a Mormon" - Zoraptor "I found it greatly disturbing to scroll through my cartoon's halfing selection of genitalias." - Wormerine "I love cheese despite the pain and carnage." - ShadySands
Guard Dog Posted February 5, 2018 Posted February 5, 2018 (edited) https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/01/putins-game/546548/ Guys here is an excellent read around how the Russians interfered in the USA election I am always surprised how our American friends dont seem concerned with this type of attempt to undermine the Democratic process in a country like the USA? I'm not really concerned because when we all go in the voting booth there are no Russians in there with us. Yeah maybe they are spreading disinformation. But considering who are last three Presidents were and the four nominees who didn't get elected I'd say it was all just a choice of bad options. Not one of them would have been better than any other. And some maybe a good deal worse. So because of the Russians unflattering things end up in the news? OK, I figure most Americans aren't watching anyway. You know the problem with all those ugly e-mails and other info released to wikileaks? If the principles in the DNC and Hillary Clinton's campaign had conducted their business in a professional manner, like people do at their jobs every single day, there would not have been much to release. I'd hazard a guess and say no one with any sense voted for either Clinton or Trump. They voted against the alternative. And until people figure out there are more than two options the race to the bottom will continue. Edited February 5, 2018 by Guard Dog 2 "While it is true you learn with age, the down side is what you often learn is what a damn fool you were before" Thomas Sowell
Valsuelm Posted February 5, 2018 Posted February 5, 2018 https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/01/putins-game/546548/ Guys here is an excellent read around how the Russians interfered in the USA election I am always surprised how our American friends dont seem concerned with this type of attempt to undermine the Democratic process in a country like the USA? I'm not really concerned because when we all go in the voting booth there are no Russians in there with us. Yeah maybe they are spreading disinformation. But considering who are last three Presidents were and the four nominees who didn't get elected I'd say it was all just a choice of bad options. Not one of them would have been better than any other. And some maybe a good deal worse. So because of the Russians unflattering things end up in the news? OK, I figure most Americans aren't watching anyway. You know the problem with all those ugly e-mails and other info released to wikileaks? If the principles in the DNC and Hillary Clinton's campaign had conducted their business in a professional manner, like people do at their jobs every single day, there would not have been much to release. I'd hazard a guess and say no one with any sense voted for either Clinton or Trump. They voted against the alternative. And until people figure out there are more than two options that voting is not the answer the race to the bottom will continue. Bottom was achieved quite awhile back. We're currently digging deeper and deeper into the darkness. To what end I'm not yet sure, but it's not looking good.
injurai Posted February 5, 2018 Posted February 5, 2018 https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/01/putins-game/546548/ Guys here is an excellent read around how the Russians interfered in the USA election I am always surprised how our American friends dont seem concerned with this type of attempt to undermine the Democratic process in a country like the USA? I'm not really concerned because when we all go in the voting booth there are no Russians in there with us. Yeah maybe they are spreading disinformation. But considering who are last three Presidents were and the four nominees who didn't get elected I'd say it was all just a choice of bad options. Not one of them would have been better than any other. And some maybe a good deal worse. So because of the Russians unflattering things end up in the news? OK, I figure most Americans aren't watching anyway. You know the problem with all those ugly e-mails and other info released to wikileaks? If the principles in the DNC and Hillary Clinton's campaign had conducted their business in a professional manner, like people do at their jobs every single day, there would not have been much to release. I'd hazard a guess and say no one with any sense voted for either Clinton or Trump. They voted against the alternative. And until people figure out there are more than two options that voting is not the answer the race to the bottom will continue. Bottom was achieved quite awhile back. We're currently digging deeper and deeper into the darkness. To what end I'm not yet sure, but it's not looking good. There is no bottom to the pits of hell. It's why you never stop climbing, even when it's a red queens race.
Recommended Posts