Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Monday, April 30, 2018

OTP 2018 Apr 30: Republicans in Congress return to baseball field nearly a year after gunman opened fire

As a light rain trickled down Wednesday, Republican members of Congress returned to a baseball field where a gunman critically wounded teammate Rep. Steve Scalise and shattered their sense of security nearly a year ago.

“Today is an emotional day,’’ said Texas Rep. Joe Barton, manager of the Republican congressional baseball team. “But it’s also a rebirth, a renewal. I’m proud of the team.’‘

On June 14, Republican lawmakers practicing for their annual charity baseball game against Democrats found themselves scrambling to dodge gunfire from a man behind a chain-link fence.

 

(As always, views expressed in the article lede and comments are the views of the individual commenters and the submitter of the article and do not represent the views of Baseball Think Factory or its owner.)

Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: April 30, 2018 at 07:56 AM | 1655 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: congress, off topic, old people's medicine for fuel, politics, shooting

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 2 of 17 pages  < 1 2 3 4 >  Last ›
   101. Lassus Posted: April 30, 2018 at 01:48 PM (#5662997)
He hates the job as it is
He won't run.


Nah. He gets talked about 24/7, internationally, it's his dream existence.
   102. . Posted: April 30, 2018 at 01:48 PM (#5662998)
He won't run.


Then what's the problem?
   103. McCoy Posted: April 30, 2018 at 01:48 PM (#5662999)
Trump isn't getting impeached unless the Dems win congress and Trump doesn't just declare total war on the Democrats and Congress but actually follows through on that declaration. He basically has to pull an Andrew Johnson to the extreme. He can't merely be in the way, he has to actively sabotage the political abilities of the Federal government.
   104. McCoy Posted: April 30, 2018 at 01:49 PM (#5663001)
Trump will absolutely run again and if reelected he'll look into seeing how he can run for a third term. This guy has no intention of leaving office if he can help it.
   105. . Posted: April 30, 2018 at 01:52 PM (#5663005)
Of course. I don't think wanting this embarrassing excuse for a festering pustule removed sooner through proper parliamentary/constitutional means, procedural or otherwise, is a moral failing the way you do, however.


It's not, but there's no serious chance it would be done any quicker than 2 years absent some bombshell that would likely have already been reported.

The outer limit on his pustularity is 2.5 years, therefore I'm not going to lose a lot of sleep over it. If he gets through it, and gets reelected in 2020 then it just proves he's the people's cherce -- and I'm not going to lose a lot of sleep over that either. He's done little to no real harm to date. Net-net, he's at worst a push. If that changes, wake me.
   106. Lassus Posted: April 30, 2018 at 01:53 PM (#5663006)
He's done little to no real harm to date.

Clap harder.
   107. . Posted: April 30, 2018 at 01:58 PM (#5663011)
Trump will absolutely run again and if reelected he'll look into seeing how he can run for a third term.


Kenya probably has some law he can turn to.
   108. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: April 30, 2018 at 02:14 PM (#5663017)
Nope. Met with an emissary from the Russian government. To discuss how the Russian government could help them with the election. Some -- i.e., those familiar with the English language -- might even call that "collusion."

No -- no one would call that "collusion."
I said people familiar with the English language; you're not qualified to take part in the discussion.
And of course -- we're getting to the yawn point now -- so did the Clinton campaign. Many more times, and at its own behest. And with success in gathering opposition research dirt.
Nope. The Clinton campaign never met with, talked to, or interacted with the Russian government. Let alone discussed or reached an agreement with them about a strategy to win the election.


LOL, ok. Which word, "met"? So collusion requires face-to-face meetings now, and Steele never met anyone in person?
Nope, that's not it. Think harder; maybe you'll get it. (Probably not, given that there were multiple factors you got wrong and you misunderstood all of them.)


(*) Trump or Clinton were entirely within their prerogatives to meet with Putin to seek election help,
LOL.™ Concession accepted.™
   109. . Posted: April 30, 2018 at 02:17 PM (#5663020)
Gotta love how the dossier, a 2016 production, throws in the second "part" dated 26 July 2015. It doesn't match any of the other parts in tone or style or content, or even subject -- it doesn't mention a single name. It's pretty clearly just glommed in there.

Good chance this was done to try to throw off lazy people from noticing the first on-point one was dated June 20, 2016 -- just about when the FBI "investigation" started.

All roads lead back to the dossier.
   110. . Posted: April 30, 2018 at 02:21 PM (#5663023)
Nope. The Clinton campaign never met with, talked to, or interacted with the Russian government. Let alone discussed or reached an agreement with them about a strategy to win the election.


It did the former, unquestionably -- and your continual denials of it are starting to sound kind of unhinged. You only have to go a few paragraphs to find, "Source A, a senior Russian foreign ministry figure" and from there, you get all manner of Russian sources every bit as connected to the government as NKL, and probably more.

It did do the latter, but the latter is just your last-minute irrelevancy about "agreements" and isn't worth actual discussion in any event.

Nope, that's not it. Think harder; maybe you'll get it. (Probably not, given that there were multiple factors you got wrong and you misunderstood all of them.)


Oh, as we can tell from your first part, you meant the Clinton campaign. You would have done way better with "met." Well, I tried to do my part for universalism, throw you a bone and help you out -- but obviously to no avail.

Trump or Clinton were entirely within their prerogatives to meet with Putin to seek election help,

LOL.™ Concession accepted.™


???

This was "conceded" long ago. Indeed, your acceptance of my concession is itself a concession.

I appreciate the trademarks, but I'm happy to make them open source.
   111. Karl from NY Posted: April 30, 2018 at 02:46 PM (#5663049)
There is nothing on earth that will cause Trump to resign. Not even a Nixon level scandal. He will retain his seat of power unless driven out by absolute force. Speculating about Trump resigning is entirely wishful projecting. He's President and he's staying that way. He may not like the job, but there's no way on earth he's giving up the power.
   112. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: April 30, 2018 at 02:52 PM (#5663059)
I have no problem socializing with Jason or Ray, despite their obvious failure to defend the republic. But if it would remove Trump from office, I'd gut either like a fish.
   113. Cleveland (need new name) fan Posted: April 30, 2018 at 02:58 PM (#5663064)
The definition for the word "collusion" seems to morph into whatever is need in any particular discussion. In the following hypothetical, do we agree on what is collusion?

A republican candidate hired my firm Oppo is Us to conduct opposition research on Hillary. We sent investigators to several countries where the Clinton Foundation operates to determine if there were any issues with the charity. Several charity directors claimed that in order to get CF money, they had to kickback 30% to Hillary through a cut-out named "oSB". We validated these claims through bank records the charities provided supplemented by information obtained from government associates in each country. Further, a person associated with one of the government's intelligence agency that I know told me that Clinton kicked a beggar on her last trip in order to get him to move out of her way and broke his nose. The CF paid to cover up the incident. Also an agent of a government's intelligence agency told me that his government hated Clinton, wanted her to lose, and had dug up some major dirt on her. They offered to share it with the campaign, but will only provide it to senior campaign officials. If the campaign wants the info, they should call Joe at xxx-xxx-xxxx to arrange a meeting.

So what is collusion:

a. nothing
b. everything (since it all came from foreign nationals)
c. information supplied by a government associate (since it all came from foreign governments)
d. information supplied by an intelligence agency associate (since it came from foreign intel sources)
e. Intel dirt on Clinton provide to a senior campaign official (since it a foreign government was explicitly involved and required active participation by campaign officials)

My take: (b) doesn't make sense because they you are effectively removing bad actions that happened overseas from consideration since you need foreign sources to understand activities outside of the US. (d) is a subset of (c) and the difference doesn't seem important. So I can see (a), (c), and (e) as potential answers.
   114. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: April 30, 2018 at 03:02 PM (#5663066)
There is nothing on earth that will cause Trump to resign. Not even a Nixon level scandal. He will retain his seat of power unless driven out by absolute force. Speculating about Trump resigning is entirely wishful projecting. He's President and he's staying that way. He may not like the job, but there's no way on earth he's giving up the power.
And from a more practical perspective: as long as he's president he probably can't be prosecuted for anything (unless/until he's impeached); if he resigns he could be.
   115. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: April 30, 2018 at 03:06 PM (#5663067)
In your 113, only (e) is a relevant form of collusion.

EDIT: You probably should've added an extra element, which is an explicit quid pro quo. But even without that.
   116. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: April 30, 2018 at 03:08 PM (#5663071)
Seriously, can anyone explain why FLTB keeps saying "NKL" for someone whose initials aren't remotely NKL? At first it was clearly just his ignorance. But is it now (a) a feeble attempt at trolling; (b) stubborn unwillingness to correct an error; or (c) the product of brain damage?
   117. . Posted: April 30, 2018 at 03:10 PM (#5663072)
"Collusion" is some kind of secret or quasi-secret agreement to do something. It only becomes bad -- or even worth paying attention to -- if the something is illegal or has some obviously nefarious purpose. "Winning an election" is obviously not a nefarious purpose under any sane definition. There isn't some "Hillary Clinton" exception to that rule, anymore than there's a "Donald Trump" exception. It's not nefarious to try to win an election in which Hillary Clinton is a candidate.
   118. . Posted: April 30, 2018 at 03:11 PM (#5663073)
Seriously, can anyone explain why FLTB keeps saying "NKL" for someone whose initials aren't remotely NKL?


You don't actually think I'm going to spell out her name every time, do you? It's like 15 letters long. And the "K" stands for Kremlin, which I thought you'd like.
   119. The usual palaver and twaddle (Met Fan Charlie) Posted: April 30, 2018 at 03:13 PM (#5663075)
83

Absolutely correct. Obviously I was just mocking the insistence that we all immediately denounce comments by comedians and cable news commentators whom some of us have never even heard of.


And while all the caterwauling about the WHCD goes on, there's an extremely loud silence from the WH wrt the Waffle House hero.

So I guess a good (white) guy with a gun is not the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun...
   120. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: April 30, 2018 at 03:16 PM (#5663080)

Actually, an agreement to do something is bad if either the end or the means to the end are improper. Winning an election is not inherently a bad end. But paying bribes or having people killed or conspiring with an enemy government are all improper means to that end.
   121. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: April 30, 2018 at 03:21 PM (#5663083)
Actually, an agreement to do something is bad if either the end or the means to the end are improper. Winning an election is not inherently a bad end. But paying bribes or having people killed or conspiring with an enemy government are all improper means to that end.


It is really funny watching the Trumpkins decide which hill they are going to defend to the last, and clearly "Collusion" is the hill they have decided on. I guess in their mind anything that is not collusion (specifically with the Russian government) is perfectly OK and if Trump can't be fingered for that then magically we should ignore any and every thing else.

The wonder is that they seem to really believe this is true. For them Trump really could shoot someone in broad daylight and they wouldn't care so long as Russia was not conspiring in the deed.

Such a weird mindset.
   122. . Posted: April 30, 2018 at 03:23 PM (#5663084)
"Conspiring with an enemy government" isn't an "improper means" of winning an election if the only end of the "conspiracy" is winning the election. If there's some illegal or independently nefarious purpose, then maybe, depending on facts and circumstances.

Nor of course is Russia an "enemy government." That's insane. It's a rival government, and a #### disturber nonpareil, but in no serious sense an enemy. It's a fellow G-20 member state; there were three NATO-Russia counsel meetings in 2016, etc., etc.
   123. The usual palaver and twaddle (Met Fan Charlie) Posted: April 30, 2018 at 03:25 PM (#5663085)
I wouldn't exactly call 'em an "ally," either.

EDIT: you softened it up with your edit, but I stand by my statement.
   124. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: April 30, 2018 at 03:34 PM (#5663087)

Trump didn't collude and in any case it's okay to collude with an enemy government and Russia isn't an enemy and Hillary did it worse.
   125. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: April 30, 2018 at 03:37 PM (#5663088)
So what is collusion:


Regarding GOP President Trump, who cares?

Yes, that is a flip answer, but really what really matters are the legal and political aspects. The legal parts will be handled by lawyers after the Mueller report arrives and speculating in advance seems a bit silly (but hey, you lawyers and fake lawyers have a good time with that).

The political aspects really don't depend on any particular definition either. Trumpkins will deny that most anything is actual collusion (see evidence on this very page) and Trump haters will act in a mostly opposite fashion. Plus the actual misdeeds documented will be evaluated for based on many factors, but collusion is not high on that list.

Really collusion, yes or no, is largely a red herring IMO.
   126. The Yankee Clapper Posted: April 30, 2018 at 03:41 PM (#5663089)
It is really funny watching the Trumpkins decide which hill they are going to defend to the last, and clearly "Collusion" is the hill they have decided on. I guess in their mind anything that is not collusion (specifically with the Russian government) is perfectly OK and if Trump can't be fingered for that then magically we should ignore any and every thing else.

"Collusion" is the issue the Dems created, and pushed until it appeared ready to collapse on top of them. Those folks now seem a bit worried that there could be a bit of a backlash if no collusion case is ever brought. However, no matter how many times people attempt to imply otherwise, listening to folks who claim to have the goods on Hillary is not a crime. Even Manafort & Gates haven't been charged with any campaign-related crimes, and it's getting a bit late in the game to expect something will now develop.
   127. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: April 30, 2018 at 03:45 PM (#5663094)
"Collusion" is the issue the Dems created, and pushed until it appeared ready to collapse on top of them. Those folks now seem a bit worried that there could be a bit of a backlash if no collusion case is ever brought.


Sure. It is the Democrats that are really worried about the Mueller investigation. And yeah the public is really going to be pissed at Democrats* if a bunch of things are found and none of them are collusion. Because the public has shown such a hatred of empty investigations. Yeah Democrats are really worried, terrified even.

However, no matter how many times people attempt to imply otherwise, listening to folks who claim to have the goods on Hillary is not a crime. Even Manafort & Gates haven't been charged with any campaign-related crimes, and it's getting a bit late in the game to expect something will now develop.


This is much higher quality than stretchy's normal bit, as I would expect. Still not great, but the material to work with is pretty threadbare, so really this is about the best that can be done.

EDIT: Despite the fact that the investigation came from a GOP led administration. Because Democrats are evil, duh.
   128. Omineca Greg Posted: April 30, 2018 at 03:48 PM (#5663096)
K is for Кремль, a Russian fortified complex
From which elections are fixed, and other various projects
   129. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: April 30, 2018 at 03:49 PM (#5663097)

My take: (b) doesn't make sense because they you are effectively removing bad actions that happened overseas from consideration since you need foreign sources to understand activities outside of the US. (d) is a subset of (c) and the difference doesn't seem important. So I can see (a), (c), and (e) as potential answers.

I'm not a lawyer, but I think the problems would be if any of the information
- was obtained illegally
- was obtained in coordination/collaboration with the campaign
- if there was a quid pro quo
- maybe also if disclosing the information publicly (vs. simply reporting it to the relevant authorities) could compromise national security
   130. DavidFoss Posted: April 30, 2018 at 03:56 PM (#5663102)
"Collusion" is the issue the Dems created, and pushed until it appeared ready to collapse on top of them.

Didn't the Republicans appoint the special counsel? Don't they control both houses of congress?

There's been a lot of normalization over the past year. If you had told Clapper 12 months ago that a special counsel would be appointed, that meetings between the Trump campaign and Russia would be confirmed and that Trump's campaign chair would be indicted, he'd have claimed that to be absurd and that Democrats were delusional. Trump and his campaign would do no such things.

Now it's like "meh, big deal, everyone does all that stuff. Wake us up when you find real treason".
   131. . Posted: April 30, 2018 at 03:58 PM (#5663103)
Trump didn't collude and in any case it's okay to collude with an enemy government and Russia isn't an enemy and Hillary did it worse.


Pretty much, yeah. It's kind of a swing and a miss Golden Sombrero on all the "elements."
   132. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: April 30, 2018 at 04:01 PM (#5663105)
There's been a lot of normalization over the past year. If you had told Clapper 12 months ago that a special counsel would be appointed, that meetings between the Trump campaign and Russia would be confirmed and that Trump's campaign chair would be indicted, he'd have claimed that to be absurd and that Democrats were delusional.


Clapper has one goal, and that is to maintain power in the service of court packing. He gives no #### whatsoever about Trump's obvious crimes and misdemeanors. He has no moral spine.
   133. . Posted: April 30, 2018 at 04:03 PM (#5663107)
I'm not a lawyer, but I think the problems would be if any of the information
- was obtained illegally
- was obtained in coordination/collaboration with the campaign
- if there was a quid pro quo
- maybe also if disclosing the information publicly (vs. simply reporting it to the relevant authorities) could compromise national security


This is close to right, I think -- though I probably disagree with the first one insomuch as the recipient doesn't know the info was obtained illegally. But we don't need the concept of "collusion" to get at the right answer. The second, as I read it, would be a conspiracy to illegally hack or something -- which is illegal. The third is bribery. The fourth is treason or at least treason-ish. All of them are independently bad substantively without the superfluous "collusion" concept.

   134. Zonk is Just the Right Amount of Wrought Posted: April 30, 2018 at 04:03 PM (#5663108)
Didn't the Republicans appoint the special counsel? Don't they control both houses of congress?


It varies, depending on whether Rod Rosenstein is a deep state co-conspirator with his FBI/DOJ buddies or a man of unquestioned integrity.

Without looking it up, I think the latest windsock reading is towards the latter so I believe so... but it changes weekly.
   135. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: April 30, 2018 at 04:18 PM (#5663121)
I just saw someone again claim that Trump's statement on Fox and Friends that Cohen does only a tiny percentage of his legal work means that only a tiny percentage of Cohen's work is Trump legal work (and thus privileged ). No one ever gets called on this mangling of basic English, not even Trump supporters on the same panel. What gives? I mean, it could be true, but it doesn't follow simply from Trump's statement.
   136. The Yankee Clapper Posted: April 30, 2018 at 04:24 PM (#5663125)
The New York Times seems a bit worried that possibly unelectable Dennis Kucinich could win the Ohio Democratic Gubernatorial Primary - he has the support of the Bernie Sanders faction - so they have run this devastating hit piece, although burying the lede until the final paragraphs:
Discussing his campaign over a vegan veggie burger and coconut water — “I like it right out of the coconut. Have you ever had it?” he asked the waitress, who had not — Mr. Kucinich set off on a consumption strategy that confounded even his wife, seated beside him: He cut around the bun with a knife and fork to eat only the patty, waited several minutes, then returned to the bun on its own, again with a knife and fork.

“There’s no method,” he confirmed. “Just madness,” Mrs. Kucinich said.

There was a flap over Bobby Kennedy requesting a knife & fork to eat pizza during his 1964 carpet-bagging Senate campaign against Ken Keating. Alas, it happened the day before the election, and news traveled slower in those days, but I remember my Italian-American social studies teacher commenting that he wished he had know about that before voting. Times have changed, but can you really thumb your nose at Cheeseburger America and win Ohio?
   137. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: April 30, 2018 at 04:33 PM (#5663131)
Prize puzzle: Guess what prominent politician just said this?

“There is still a lot of thinking on the right that if big corporations are happy, they’re going to take the money they’re saving and reinvest it in American workers,” [Mystery Man] told the Economist in a recent interview. “In fact they bought back shares, a few gave out bonuses; there’s no evidence whatsoever that the money’s been massively poured back into the American worker.”


HINT: It wasn't a Democrat

So if Mystery Man goes off message, can JE be far behind?
   138. perros Posted: April 30, 2018 at 04:39 PM (#5663133)
I have no problem socializing with Jason or Ray, despite their obvious failure to defend the republic. But if it would remove Trump from office, I'd gut either like a fish.

Like you can gut a fish.
   139. BDC Posted: April 30, 2018 at 04:50 PM (#5663137)
Discussing his campaign over a vegan veggie burger and coconut water — “I like it right out of the coconut. Have you ever had it?” he asked the waitress, who had not

This reminds me of this diner I used to go to, in a town in the Northwoods of Wisconsin. On the menu they advertised "Mixed Drinks." We asked them what "Mixed Drink" people ordered most often. The waitress said, "Beer."
   140. perros Posted: April 30, 2018 at 05:12 PM (#5663154)

except that the winning candidate had already started the delegitimization process before the campaign was over.

How many times can voters be offered a choice between a Clinton and a Bush before they finally go for "the third option"? You had Perot, and then Nader as warmups to the most opportunistic of infectors against the weakest members of the competing clans.

What folliws Trump is the truly frightening prospect, particularly after the next rounds of war and economic turmoil.
   141. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: April 30, 2018 at 05:20 PM (#5663160)
How many times can voters be offered a choice between a Clinton and a Bush before they finally go for "the third option"?


When was the last time the choice was Clinton, Bush, or Other? (Hint: Not 2016, sure both Clinton and Bush appeared in Primaries that year, but not against each other)
   142. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: April 30, 2018 at 05:47 PM (#5663165)
This is close to right, I think -- though I probably disagree with the first one insomuch as the recipient doesn't know the info was obtained illegally.

I think there's more of a responsibility than that -- especially with information like emails from within the campaign where it's highly unlikely that they were obtained legally. It's like if you're a banker and a client comes to you with a briefcase full of cash they want to deposit into their account -- you can't simply rely on the fact that you don't know how they obtained the money and accept the deposit.

But we don't need the concept of "collusion" to get at the right answer.

I would think we still do -- if the campaign itself didn't steal or disclose the information, the improper act is the collusion with those who did.
   143. PepTech, the Legendary Posted: April 30, 2018 at 05:53 PM (#5663167)
OK, OTP Legal Dept: #FakeLawsuit? Stormy files for defamation:
"By calling the incident a 'con job,' Mr. Trump's statement would be understood to state that Ms. Clifford was fabricating the crime and the existence of the assailant, both of which are prohibited under New York law, as well as the law of numerous other states," Avenatti wrote in the lawsuit.

"It was apparent that Mr. Trump meant to convey that Ms. Clifford is a liar, someone who should not be trusted, that her claims about the threatening encounter are false, and that she was falsely accusing the individual depicted in the sketch of committing a crime, where no crime had been committed. ... Mr. Trump made his statement either knowing it was false, had serious doubts about the truth of his statement, or made the statement with reckless disregard for its truth or falsity."
Try to answer the question as if it weren't all about Trump.
   144. Lassus Posted: April 30, 2018 at 05:57 PM (#5663169)
“I like it right out of the coconut. Have you ever had it?” he asked the waitress, who had not

I had this for the first time in the Bahamas a few years ago, and hated it.
   145. . Posted: April 30, 2018 at 06:01 PM (#5663170)
I think there's more of a responsibility than that -- especially with information like emails from within the campaign where it's highly unlikely that they were obtained legally. It's like if you're a banker and a client comes to you with a briefcase full of cash they want to deposit into their account -- you can't simply rely on the fact that you don't know how they obtained the money and accept the deposit.


Pentagon Papers.
   146. McCoy Posted: April 30, 2018 at 06:18 PM (#5663173)
iscussing his campaign over a vegan veggie burger and coconut water — “I like it right out of the coconut. Have you ever had it?” he asked the waitress, who had not — Mr. Kucinich set off on a consumption strategy that confounded even his wife, seated beside him: He cut around the bun with a knife and fork to eat only the patty, waited several minutes, then returned to the bun on its own, again with a knife and fork.

I've been trying to get our chef to ordered it in so that we could try it but so far he hasn't, but there is a new product out there that is a vegetarian burger that looks like a regular burger and bleeds like a regular burger as well. Apparently they use some sort of plant based compound to get it to bleed and supposedly taste like a burger. I've never really understood that. You don't eat meat for reasons but yet you want items that taste like meat. What you should be doing is developing your palate to like non meat items not trying to fool your palate.
   147. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: April 30, 2018 at 06:26 PM (#5663175)

Pentagon Papers

Triangle Scissors

Octagon Rocks
   148. zenbitz Posted: April 30, 2018 at 06:28 PM (#5663176)
if this is an "impossible burger" -- let me tell you they are quite possible, but barely palatable. I mean, compared to actual meat.
   149. McCoy Posted: April 30, 2018 at 06:37 PM (#5663178)
yep, that is the one. I was at Costco yesterday and one of the stands was handing out samples of their bean burgers. They looked absolutely disgusting. I can't remember where I was at but for some reason I found myself with a bean burger on my plate. It was horrible.
   150. strong silence Posted: April 30, 2018 at 06:40 PM (#5663180)
To this vegetarian, the impossible burger tastes like meat, which is both delicious and disgusting.
   151. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: April 30, 2018 at 06:46 PM (#5663183)
It was apparent that Mr. Trump meant to convey that Ms. Clifford is a liar, someone who should not be trusted, that her claims about the threatening encounter are false, and that she was falsely accusing the individual depicted in the sketch of committing a crime, where no crime had been committed. ... Mr. Trump made his statement either knowing it was false, had serious doubts about the truth of his statement, or made the statement with reckless disregard for its truth or falsity."


How would Trump, a fat, bald, lazy, impotent ignoramus with a spray tan like a Jersey Shore hooker, have any idea if Davis was threatened? Either Trump knew she was threatened because he helped orchestrate it, or he doesn’t know anything about the veracity of the event at all. I don’t see any middle ground here.
   152. perros Posted: April 30, 2018 at 07:10 PM (#5663189)
the impossible burger tastes like meat, which is both delicious and disgusting.


Imagining something out of a Cronenberg movie.

Or novel.
   153. The Yankee Clapper Posted: April 30, 2018 at 07:10 PM (#5663190)
North Korea shifting its time zone 30 minutes to align with South Korea:
North Korea will shift its time zone 30 minutes earlier to align with South Korea starting May 5 "as a first practical step for national reconciliation and unity," the North's state media said Monday.

North Korean leader Kim Jong Un said it was "a painful wrench" to see two clocks showing different Pyongyang and Seoul times on a wall at the summit venue during the historic meeting Friday with President Moon Jae-in, KCNA said.
. . .
The time change report confirmed news from South Korean officials on Sunday that Kim pledged to scrap the northern time zone, which was created in 2015 to mark the 70th anniversary of Korea's liberation from Japanese rule after World War Two.

Pretty small potatoes, but something. I don't think anyone is going to give that much credit for mostly symbolic gestures, or just take Kim Jong Un's word on the important stuff.
   154. The Yankee Clapper Posted: April 30, 2018 at 07:27 PM (#5663194)
How many times can voters be offered a choice between a Clinton and a Bush before they finally go for "the third option"?

When was the last time the choice was Clinton, Bush, or Other? (Hint: Not 2016, sure both Clinton and Bush appeared in Primaries that year, but not against each other)

Bitter Mouse is either being unnecessarily pedantic, or his usual obtuse self. A Bush and/or Clinton has been on the national ticket for 8 of the last 10 presidential elections, and if Hillary had been a better candidate in 2008, it might have been 10 of 10. Bush-Clinton fatigue was a real thing in 2016, even if not sufficiently strong among Democrats to deny Hillary the nomination. If Hillary had been a "fresh face", she might have won the general election. But maybe I'm wrong, in which case the Dems should probably run her again in 2020.
   155. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: April 30, 2018 at 07:54 PM (#5663203)
Yep, it's the evil Democrats who torpedoed Dr. Jackson's nomination:

Pence's doctor alerted WH aides about Ronny Jackson concerns last fall

Vice President Mike Pence's physician privately raised alarms within the White House last fall that President Donald Trump's doctor may have violated federal privacy protections for a key patient -- Pence's wife, Karen -- and intimidated the vice president's doctor during angry confrontations over the episode.

The previously unreported incident is the first sign that serious concerns about Ronny Jackson's conduct had reached the highest levels of the White House as far back as September -- months before White House aides furiously defended Jackson's professionalism, insisted he had been thoroughly vetted and argued allegations of misconduct amounted to unsubstantiated rumors.

The episode -- detailed in three memos by Pence's physician -- is also the first documentation that has surfaced involving a specific allegation of medical misconduct by Jackson. It adds to a series of significant allegations leveled by unidentified current and former colleagues, including that he casually dispensed prescription drugs.


Jackson is completely innocent of these false charges by Democrats. But, um, he will no longer be the President's physician.
   156. Buck Coats Posted: April 30, 2018 at 07:55 PM (#5663205)
A Bush and/or Clinton has been on the national ticket for 8 of the last 10 presidential elections, and if Hillary had been a better candidate in 2008, it might have been 10 of 10.


This is Hillary running for a third time? Or winning the nomination in 2008 but losing the GE and then running again in 2012 and 2016?
   157. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: April 30, 2018 at 07:56 PM (#5663206)
This is Hillary running for a third time? Or winning the nomination in 2008 but losing the GE and then running again in 2012 and 2016?


Or Bush winning the nomination in 2016.
   158. PreservedFish Posted: April 30, 2018 at 08:13 PM (#5663211)
The episode -- detailed in three memos by Pence's physician -- is also the first documentation that has surfaced involving a specific allegation of medical misconduct by Jackson. It adds to a series of significant allegations leveled by unidentified current and former colleagues, including that he casually dispensed prescription drugs.



Ooooh, I've got a good Hillary whatabout here. A good friend of mine worked in the State Department during the Obama admin and had the good luck to fly on Hillary's plane a few times. He said that the staff doctor basically waltzed up and down the aisle handing out prescription sleeping pills to anyone that wanted them.
   159. zenbitz Posted: April 30, 2018 at 08:18 PM (#5663214)
I tried an impossible burger a month ago in a quasi controlled study; I ate one from a burger place on campus I quite enjoy. The fake meat, while edible was 100 times worse.
   160. BDC Posted: April 30, 2018 at 08:38 PM (#5663227)
Via MapPorn, the largest export of every US state in 2017. This is one of these maps that is mostly just for fun, because defining "largest export" depends mostly on how you lump or split categories of goods.

And of course displaying goods instead of less-tangible services sets the terms for the map to begin with. New York State may export $12 billion worth of diamonds a year, but many times that amount of money passes through Wall Street every day.
   161. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: April 30, 2018 at 08:41 PM (#5663229)
Bitter Mouse is either being unnecessarily pedantic


Unnecessarily? Words have meaning and I was responding to "How many times can voters be offered a choice between a Clinton and a Bush".

Do you see an "or" there? Voters have been offered a "choice between a Clinton and a Bush" once as far as I know, and that was a long long time ago.
   162. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: April 30, 2018 at 08:57 PM (#5663246)
Via MapPorn, the largest export of every US state in 2017. This is one of these maps that is mostly just for fun, because defining "largest export" depends mostly on how you lump or split categories of goods.

And of course displaying goods instead of less-tangible services sets the terms for the map to begin with. New York State may export $12 billion worth of diamonds a year, but many times that amount of money passes through Wall Street every day.


Yeah. I have a hard time believing that Rhode Island exports $5.5 billion in airplanes. maybe deals are made there, but that's not the same. In fact, 16 states have airplanes listed as the largest export.
   163. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: April 30, 2018 at 09:00 PM (#5663250)
For Ray ... Losing a dog can be harder than losing a relative or friend

Our strong attachment to dogs was subtly revealed in a recent study of “misnaming.” Misnaming happens when you call someone by the wrong name, like when parents mistakenly calls one of their kids by a sibling’s name. It turns out that the name of the family dog also gets confused with human family members, indicating that the dog’s name is being pulled from the same cognitive pool that contains other members of the family. (Curiously, the same thing rarely happens with cat names.)
   164. Ray (CTL) Posted: April 30, 2018 at 09:18 PM (#5663263)
This is the problem they can't get around.

The only thing I can't get around is how stupid a question it is. (But of course, that requires one assume that it's sincere. But it's not. It's a bad faith question that only a troll would ask.)

Repeat after me: conspiring with the Russian government: bad. Hiring an American company to get information: not bad.

Conspiring to hack into computers to get information: bad. Asking people questions to get information: not bad.


I doubt even you believe your thesis here. Which is why you had to resort to (a) accusing people who aren't pushing the conspiracy theory as "trolls" and (b) using distinctions that aren't differences.

We met yet learn that Trump colluded with Russia, but as of now there's no evidence for it, and that's what conspiracy theories are: crazy theories that are unsupported by evidence and that reflect extremely poorly -- irredeemably, actually -- on those pushing them. Your credibility has been destroyed because of your pushing this without evidence.

Mueller doesn't seem to have any trouble charging Trump associates with other crimes. But for some reason, collusion is always just around the next corner. We'll see.
   165. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: April 30, 2018 at 09:33 PM (#5663282)
We met yet learn that Trump colluded with Russia, but as of now there's no evidence for it, and that's what conspiracy theories are: crazy theories that are unsupported by evidence


Still dependent on Trump specifically in collusion with Russia, huh? Anyway, there is a difference between a theory for which there is plenty of evidence but no proof and a crazy conspiracy theory - for example "global warming is a myth promoted by liberals".
   166. Count Posted: April 30, 2018 at 09:37 PM (#5663284)
The bigger issue is that Ray repeatedly says there's "no evidence" for collusion which he has to know is false, given how many times the various pieces of evidence have been laid out for him.

In other news, a list of questions Mueller wants to ask Trump has leaked (almost certainly from Trump's team given how tight lipped Mueller's office has been). The annotated list is here.
   167. Ray (CTL) Posted: April 30, 2018 at 09:40 PM (#5663293)
You left out the "American company conspiring with the Russian government" part.

Nope. The American company had no dealings with -- let alone agreements with -- the Russian government.


They spy they hired did. It's a distinction without a difference. And laughably so. I doubt even the BBTF Team Blue members you're trying so desperately to prove your superior intellect to are falling for this one.

The "American company" that Hillary hired through an intermediary (the faux degrees of separation here fooled nobody except apparently you) hired a spy who -- if the spy's own work product is to be believed -- obtained dirt on Hillary's political opponent from the Russian government. Then the spy peddled it to the US government and to the US media. All in Hillary's name.

Really now, Perkins Cole and Fusion GPS are the David Dennisons of this entire operation. Nobody was fooled when Michael Cohen tried to pretend that David Dennison wasn't Donald Trump and nobody was fooled when Hillary hired intermediaries in an attempt to provide her with cover for what these intermediaries did in her name. Either you actually believe that she isn't responsible for what people who worked for her did for her, or you're the world's biggest patsy. She has played you and your cohorts for fools. She set up a ridiculous construct -- pretend walls of separation in a hopelessly transparent effort to insulate her from what they did -- and then got you to defend her on the basis of it.

I know it's "only" BBTF and we're just a bunch of geeks who have nothing better to do than to spend our time here but your reputation has really taken a massive hit here over the past 2-3 years and one would think you'd care more about it.
   168. zenbitz Posted: April 30, 2018 at 09:45 PM (#5663298)
@163 not sure if this counts but the wife and I would yell at/blame the cat for stuff the other spouse did.
   169. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: April 30, 2018 at 09:49 PM (#5663303)
I think Ray has forgotten that the whole hiring didn't start with Hillary and at this point I think he may actually believe it is Hillary's fault that a spy hired by a company she paid money to investigated things. Not only Hillary's fault but much worse than Trump and his family dealing directly with Russian agents and officials. It is like there is a skip in his brain or something.
   170. The Yankee Clapper Posted: April 30, 2018 at 09:53 PM (#5663307)
The Clinton campaign never met with, talked to, or interacted with the Russian government.

Using obvious cutouts usually doesn't fool this many people.
   171. Ray (CTL) Posted: April 30, 2018 at 10:04 PM (#5663327)
Trump group staffer Carl Higbie says he stands by his comments that 75% of veterans with PTSD are faking it.

Carl Higbie
‏Verified account @CarlHigbie
Replying to @NEPhilliesPhan


I stand by those comments. Comments made on a veteran hosted show with veteran audience. I am an ambassador to and involved with many Vet groups and spend much of my free time helping vets. That’s how i can accurately make those comments.
2:34 PM - 29 Apr 2018

Why haven't Ray/JE/Clapper condemned this slander? Not said that it was "stupid", but condemned it.

It's been nearly 24 hours. Where are they?


Just catching up to the day's posts now, and just learning of the above tweets for the first time. In fact this is the first time I'm seeing the name "Carl Higbie." I don't know why you think I follow every last issue and side issue on the political spectrum.

At any rate I wouldn't describe veterans as "faking it"; I think the real problem is orthogonal to that. The main problem is the _system_. The government is so lax in honoring veterans claims of PTSD that it has to be by de facto design. There are a great many people who served in the military who are living virtually completely normal lives but who are enabled to claim 70% disability or even 100% disability. A large swathe of these people who served never actually saw active combat, or never were deployed overseas. (Some of them were working in, e.g., hospital wards or cancer wards.) I wouldn't describe them as "faking it" and I don't know what the percentage is, but a large percentage of people who served in the military are (a) living virtually normal lives, and (b) collecting a lot of disability. Tens of thousands of dollars a year.

If that's the system we want -- and it seems to be -- fine. I happen to be of the mind that if we're dealing with a wounded-warrior type injury -- lost a leg in the field, for example -- that should be compensated completely and at a high sum. But the injury scale goes down from there to the point where we're paying up the wazoo to claims (both physical and psychological) that are borderline at best, or evidence-free at worst. I wouldn't call these claims "fraudulent" because - again - this is the system that's been set up. We do very little serious verifying of claims. And everyone who knows the system knows how to collect.

Why don't you start by looking up how many people who once served in the military are NOT collecting disability, and we can start from there.

Fundamentally I don't know why people who served in the military have been granted hero status, which is the status both Republicans _and_ Democrats -- and the media -- have granted them. If you're drafted into a war I can see it. If you volunteer and see combat, ok. But many military personnel aren't deployed overseas, or if they are they don't see combat or don't see a stretch in a dangerous zone, and that to me is just another job like cop or firefighter or stock broker or accountant, and I don't know why we'd deify that.
   172. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: April 30, 2018 at 10:06 PM (#5663331)
Using obvious cutouts usually doesn't fool this many people.


Probably why Trump didn't even bother with any cutouts in his dealings with Russia, right?
   173. Stormy JE Posted: April 30, 2018 at 10:12 PM (#5663342)
We want all those guys taken down. Because #### the FBI.
Thanks, zenbitz, but there's already new leadership at the Bureau. Comey and McCabe have been shitcanned. Others have quit or have been demoted or reassigned and are cooperating with investigators.
   174. Stormy JE Posted: April 30, 2018 at 10:14 PM (#5663343)
Note: This is my middle sister. Not the youngest and very liberal one in DC, nor the also liberal retired one who is an elected (very low level) official in Illinois. So not the sister you met Jason.
Understood. And you're a good guy in real life too, Mouse.
   175. Stormy JE Posted: April 30, 2018 at 10:17 PM (#5663348)
So when Trump resigns or is removed, which OTP Trumpkin will be the most fun to laugh at?
I hate to break it to you, Traderdave, but there isn't a single poster at OTP who obviously qualifies as a Trumpkin. (I suppose Good Face comes closest.)

EDIT: Coke Zero Sugar to the Bear.
   176. Ray (CTL) Posted: April 30, 2018 at 10:26 PM (#5663354)
I think Ray has forgotten that the whole hiring didn't start with Hillary and at this point I think he may actually believe it is Hillary's fault that a spy hired by a company she paid money to investigated things.


Your obfuscations aside ("hired by a company she paid money to"), why wouldn't it be?

Hillary hired people who hired people who hired someone to do something on behalf of Hillary. The something he did was not only for Hillary but paid for by Hillary with the compensation being for the work product he delivered and peddled. It's not like Steele went off and, say, started a drug smuggling operation and Hillary then said, "You know, this is not what I contracted for; I'm not paying you." Steele went off and did things that fell under the scope of what he was hired for and paid for, and he indeed got paid for doing the things that he did. Nobody said, "This isn't what we hired you for," and refused to pay him.

Not only Hillary's fault but much worse than Trump and his family dealing directly with Russian agents and officials. It is like there is a skip in his brain or something.


I don't give a rat's ass what either campaign did. Both campaigns can collude with Russia to their heart's content for all I care; this is politics and it's a dirty game played by contemptible people with no morals or honesty or dignity. But I do know a screw job when I see one, and to argue that the Trump team taking a meeting with Veselnitskaya for oppo research purposes is Horrible Collusion while Hillary paying a law firm to pay a company to pay a spy to get oppo research from the Russian government is nothing-to-see here is a screw job. It's the type of argument pushed by people who aren't being intellectually honest; instead they're trying to snow you.
   177. Stormy JE Posted: April 30, 2018 at 10:29 PM (#5663359)
Just catching up to the day's posts now, and just learning of the above tweets for the first time. In fact this is the first time I'm seeing the name "Carl Higbie." I don't know why you think I follow every last issue and side issue on the political spectrum.
The guy apologized and resigned from his administration position three months ago after it was revealed that he had made numerous offensive comments. So no shocker that he's still spewing ####. OTOH, he's a former Navy SEAL and his many years of military service is much appreciated.
   178. Ray (CTL) Posted: April 30, 2018 at 10:34 PM (#5663360)
Steele (who is not Fusion GPS, and is also not Hillary Clinton)


He's an agent of Fusion and thus an agent of Hillary.

The work he did and was paid for was within the scope of what he was hired to do by Fusion and was within the scope of what Fusion was hired to effectuate by Hillary.

We are not aware of anyone, from Hillary to Hillary's campaign to Perkins Cole to Fusion saying to Steele, "This is not what we hired you to do."
   179. Lassus Posted: April 30, 2018 at 10:34 PM (#5663362)
Traderdave, but there isn't a single poster at OTP who obviously qualifies as a Trumpkin. (I suppose Good Face comes closest.)

Ray, and it isn't close.

When you get to Rubio's new deal, be curious what you think.
   180. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: April 30, 2018 at 10:35 PM (#5663363)
Hillary hired people who hired people who hired someone to do something on behalf of Hillary.


Right. Legal things. Commonly done things, like opposition research. And? That is more than a little different than what Trump did. But hey, as I have said I have no real expectations, I am mostly waiting for the Mueller report and amusing myself by watching you tie yourself into knots in the mean time.

I don't give a rat's ass what either campaign did.


We know. You selectively don't care about many things.
   181. Count Posted: April 30, 2018 at 10:36 PM (#5663366)
Thanks, zenbitz, but there's already new leadership at the Bureau. Comey and McCabe have been shitcanned. Others have quit or have been demoted or reassigned and are cooperating with investigators.


Comey was fired for investigating Russia, as you know. McCabe allegedly lied about a leak for an anti-Hillary story (fine, he may have been engaging in CYA, doesn't change that it in no way supported your deep state theories or supported the notion that he was biased against Hillary). Nothing came of the Strzok and Page texts. You should be embarrassed you are so invested in covering for Trump.
   182. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: April 30, 2018 at 10:37 PM (#5663368)
isn't a single poster at OTP who obviously qualifies as a Trumpkin


Meh. We have plenty of people who ardently defend Trump at every opportunity and at every turn. I choose to call them Trumpkins, if you don't like the term, well too bad.
   183. Count Posted: April 30, 2018 at 10:39 PM (#5663373)
As has been explained to you repeatedly, Steele met with Russians who were not acting on behalf of the Russian government, while the Trump team met with someone explicitly said to be acting on behalf of the Russian government. Also, the dirt offered by the Russian government was acquired illegally, and everyone involved on the Trump side lied about it repeatedly and said nothing to investigators or the public when it was publicly revealed the Russian government had hacked the emails and instead kept denying it was Russia.
   184. The Yankee Clapper Posted: April 30, 2018 at 10:41 PM (#5663374)
Using obvious cutouts usually doesn't fool this many people.

Probably why Trump didn't even bother with any cutouts in his dealings with Russia, right?

There could be some naivety there, or overconfidence that just listening to someone claiming to have the goods on a political opponent wouldn't create a problem. But let's remember, those using cutouts are normally the ones that know they are up to no good.
   185. The Yankee Clapper Posted: April 30, 2018 at 10:48 PM (#5663379)
As has been explained to you repeatedly, Steele met with Russians who were not acting on behalf of the Russian government, while the Trump team met with someone explicitly said to be acting on behalf of the Russian government.

That's nonsense. If you believe Steele wasn't just making up stuff, then he was getting info from the Russian government. And that Russian who met once with the Trump team had far more contact with the Clinton camp.
   186. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: April 30, 2018 at 10:49 PM (#5663380)
But let's remember, those using cutouts are normally the ones that know they are up to no good.


Yeah right. If Hillary had been on the up and up she would have done all the opposition research by herself and not hired a firm. What kind of no good politician hires someone to help with any aspect of their campaign! It is an outrage and an obvious sign of her perfidy.

Earth to Clapper, campaigns hire people and outside companies. Calling them a "cutout" doesn't actually make it wrong or illegal or unethical. Be less dumb.
   187. Ray (CTL) Posted: April 30, 2018 at 10:55 PM (#5663384)
As has been explained to you repeatedly, Steele met with Russians who were not acting on behalf of the Russian government,


And you know this how?
   188. Ray (CTL) Posted: April 30, 2018 at 11:01 PM (#5663387)
There is nothing on earth that will cause Trump to resign. Not even a Nixon level scandal. He will retain his seat of power unless driven out by absolute force. Speculating about Trump resigning is entirely wishful projecting. He's President and he's staying that way. He may not like the job, but there's no way on earth he's giving up the power.

And from a more practical perspective: as long as he's president he probably can't be prosecuted for anything (unless/until he's impeached); if he resigns he could be.


This is why a few weeks ago I pushed back on the mindless cliche spewed at Trump that "Nobody is above the law." I noted that per the Constitution the president is above the law in various ways. IIRC you didn't agree with me then. I see you've come around now.
   189. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: April 30, 2018 at 11:02 PM (#5663390)
Just catching up to the day's posts now, and just learning of the above tweets for the first time. In fact this is the first time I'm seeing the name "Carl Higbie." I don't know why you think I follow every last issue and side issue on the political spectrum.

I'm simply applying the same standard to you that you apply to everyone who doesn't react to a random comedian or a cable news opinionator.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I hate to break it to you, Traderdave, but there isn't a single poster at OTP who obviously qualifies as a Trumpkin.

If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, and repeats Donald Duck's every quacking point.....

Jesus, you can't even bring yourself to say that Trump is a racist who's clearly trying to undermine the rule of law with his repeated attacks on our intelligence agencies and even his own Justice Department.

And you're not a Trumpkin? Give us all a break.
   190. Ray (CTL) Posted: April 30, 2018 at 11:08 PM (#5663392)
It is really funny watching the Trumpkins decide which hill they are going to defend to the last, and clearly "Collusion" is the hill they have decided on. I guess in their mind anything that is not collusion (specifically with the Russian government) is perfectly OK and if Trump can't be fingered for that then magically we should ignore any and every thing else.


Mueller can indict Trump or his campaign/administration on a million non-collusion-related crimes and I won't care; have at it. I've shed no tears for the likes of Manafort or Gates or Cohen. I've not defended the likes of Manafort or Gates or Cohen. In fact I've been extremely critical of Cohen's "lawyering." Collusion is all that interests me, because that's the ballgame you and yours set up. Trump "colluded with the Russian government to win the election." That's what you told us existed, and that's what folks like David and Count are still insisting happened. That's why it was blasphemy to fire Comey and it's why we needed a special counsel. And thus that's all I'm interested in. If no evidence of collusion is found, you can be sure I'll remind you of that constantly including the next time you want to be taken seriously on some fine point of election analysis or the next time you push a conspiracy theory.
   191. Count Posted: April 30, 2018 at 11:14 PM (#5663394)
As has been explained to you repeatedly, Steele met with Russians who were not acting on behalf of the Russian government, while the Trump team met with someone explicitly said to be acting on behalf of the Russian government.

That's nonsense. If you believe Steele wasn't just making up stuff, then he was getting info from the Russian government. And that Russian who met once with the Trump team had far more contact with the Clinton camp.


He was getting information from people in the Russian government, not people acting on behalf of the Russian government (and to answer Ray's question, we don't know that for sure but it's what Steele thought, whereas DJTJR was told he was meeting someone acting on behalf of the Russian government). There is obviously a difference between hiring someone who asks contacts in the Russian government for information and meeting someone who is an agent of the Russian government.
   192. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: April 30, 2018 at 11:15 PM (#5663395)
Mueller can indict Trump or his campaign/administration on a million non-collusion-related crimes and I won't care; have at it. I've shed no tears for the likes of Manafort or Gates or Cohen. I've not defended the likes of Manafort or Gates or Cohen. In fact I've been extremely critical of Cohen's "lawyering." Collusion is all that interests me, because that's the ballgame you and yours set up. Trump "colluded with the Russian government to win the election." That's what you told us existed, and that's what folks like David and Count are still insisting happened. That's why it was blasphemy to fire Comey and it's why we needed a special counsel. And thus that's all I'm interested in. If no evidence of collusion is found, you can be sure I'll remind you of that constantly including the next time you want to be taken seriously on some fine point of election analysis or the next time you push a conspiracy theory.

Of course not a single person here has made any such claim about Trump personally colluding,** but keep firing away at that straw horse.

** Hell, if Trump had personally colluded with the Russians, by this time he would've bragged about it at least half a dozen times. And then said he was just joking.
   193. Ray (CTL) Posted: April 30, 2018 at 11:19 PM (#5663396)
Of course not a single person here has made any such claim about Trump personally colluding,** but keep firing away at that straw horse.


You can expand my statement to Trump or his campaign; I wasn't attempting to parse words.

But yes, people here have made such claim about Trump personally colluding. David, for example, has suggested that Trump had timed his campaign statements to the release of the Wikileaks emails. And you -- let's not forget your evidence of Trump personally colluding -- said that Trump colluded by joking that he hoped the Russians would find Hillary's missing emails.

   194. The Yankee Clapper Posted: April 30, 2018 at 11:30 PM (#5663401)
He was getting information from people in the Russian government, not people acting on behalf of the Russian government (and to answer Ray's question, we don't know that for sure but it's what Steele thought, whereas DJTJR was told he was meeting someone acting on behalf of the Russian government).

Russian government officials, not acting on behalf of the Russian government? That's all spin.
   195. Stormy JE Posted: April 30, 2018 at 11:34 PM (#5663402)
And you know this how?
┐(ツ)┌
   196. Stormy JE Posted: April 30, 2018 at 11:39 PM (#5663403)
Nothing came of the Strzok and Page texts.
Don't be so sure. The texts are still being analyzed -- six months' worth of texts were forwarded to Congress a week ago -- and they highlight possible *collusion* between high-ranking Obama administration officials, the FBI, CIA, and DoJ, not to mention Harry Reid, in the Trump-Russia probe's nascent stages.
   197. Stormy JE Posted: April 30, 2018 at 11:44 PM (#5663406)
Oh, and I see the Iran nuke deal apologists didn't have a very good day.
   198. greenback slays lewks Posted: May 01, 2018 at 12:20 AM (#5663415)
Oh, and I see the Iran nuke deal apologists didn't have a very good day.

10>0
   199. Ray (CTL) Posted: May 01, 2018 at 12:48 AM (#5663423)
Pretty small potatoes, but something. I don't think anyone is going to give that much credit for mostly symbolic gestures, or just take Kim Jong Un's word on the important stuff.


The North Korea situation is interesting. We can't know whether this will ultimately mark a turning point. The only thing we can be absolutely certain of is that if the North Korea situation improves Trump will have had nothing to do with it.

But of course we should root against the situation improving because if it does people might give Trump some of the credit and, well, we can't have that, now can we. This time, for the left, it's don't keep hope alive.
   200. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: May 01, 2018 at 12:48 AM (#5663424)
This is close to right, I think -- though I probably disagree with the first one insomuch as the recipient doesn't know the info was obtained illegally.

I think there's more of a responsibility than that -- especially with information like emails from within the campaign where it's highly unlikely that they were obtained legally. It's like if you're a banker and a client comes to you with a briefcase full of cash they want to deposit into their account -- you can't simply rely on the fact that you don't know how they obtained the money and accept the deposit.
If one is the passive recipient of information obtained illegally, then under the 1A it doesn't matter if one knows that it was obtained illegally, at least if it's information about a matter of public concern. If the one using such information did not participate in the illegal acquisition of the information, then he can't be punished for using it. (That's not, as FLTB thinks, from the Pentagon Papers case, which was only about whether the publication of that information can be enjoined.)
Page 2 of 17 pages  < 1 2 3 4 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Randy Jones
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

Hall of MeritMock 2018 Today’s Game Hall of Fame Ballot
(26 - 9:20pm, Nov 12)
Last: bookbook

NewsblogOT - NBA Thread (2018-19 season kickoff edition)
(2122 - 9:19pm, Nov 12)
Last: there isn't anything to do in buffalo but 57i66135

NewsblogOTP 2018 2018 Nov 5 - The Trump dilemma hits the Boston Red Sox amid a wave of White House boycotts in sports
(2317 - 9:16pm, Nov 12)
Last: This is going to be state of the art wall

NewsblogRed Sox: Bill James “is not an employee nor does he speak for the club”
(180 - 8:47pm, Nov 12)
Last: PreservedFish

NewsblogOT - Catch-All Pop Culture Extravaganza (November 2018)
(105 - 8:33pm, Nov 12)
Last: Davo and his Moose Tacos

NewsblogDodgers release Utley to facilitate retirement
(42 - 8:27pm, Nov 12)
Last: cardsfanboy

NewsblogReport: Nationals Ownership Rejected Bryce Harper Trade to Astros
(21 - 8:06pm, Nov 12)
Last: Adam Starblind

NewsblogOT - November* 2018 College Football thread
(162 - 8:06pm, Nov 12)
Last: Voodoo

NewsblogOT: Soccer Thread (2018-19 season begins!)
(1189 - 7:26pm, Nov 12)
Last: Mefisto

NewsblogIt's not just the worst teams not spending money in baseball free agency — it's the richest, too
(41 - 7:02pm, Nov 12)
Last: the Hugh Jorgan returns

NewsblogJoe Mauer Retires After 15 Seasons
(57 - 4:43pm, Nov 12)
Last: The Yankee Clapper

NewsblogOT Gaming: October 2015
(914 - 3:18pm, Nov 12)
Last: Zonk is Just the Right Amount of Wrought

NewsblogMLB owners expected to unanimously approve extension for Rob Manfred next week, report says
(14 - 2:44pm, Nov 12)
Last: shoewizard

Gonfalon CubsNow what?
(216 - 2:28pm, Nov 12)
Last: What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face?

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 11-12-2018
(19 - 2:04pm, Nov 12)
Last: Kiko Sakata

Page rendered in 0.7461 seconds
46 querie(s) executed