If the US drops out of the West, it drops out of the West. If it recovers, it recovers. But really, the rest of the West can't force Trump out, so waiting and seeing and planning for both is the only practical approach. Letting it drop out of stuff (TPP, Paris, NAFTA, NATO, whatever), and turn back up if/when it starts acting like an adult again.

What else?

I think that pre-supposes that this is a purely Trump aberration.

Get rid of Trump = Save the international order.

But Trump didn't invent American dissatisfaction with the liberal order, he's just exploited it. An internationally co-ordinated campaign to undermine the US government seems like a great way to consolidate American nationalism.

If the US drops out of the West, it drops out of the West. If it recovers, it recovers. But really, the rest of the West can't force Trump out, so waiting and seeing and planning for both is the only practical approach. Letting it drop out of stuff (TPP, Paris, NAFTA, NATO, whatever), and turn back up if/when it starts acting like an adult again.

What else?

All of which seems to indicate to me one inescapable fact that somehow escapes the Trumpkins:

Maybe everybody doesn't "do it"... at least, not to everyone else?

John Brennan caught up with me today. "Nothing short of treasonous." Obvious "high crimes and misdemeanors." In Putin's "pocket."

But Hilary something something!

But Hilary something something!

I believe it goes: Hillary, SERVERS!, CLINTON FOUNDATION!, URANIUM ONE!, VINCE FOSTER!, SETH RICH!, SECRET MARS PIZZAGATE BASE, something something ...

One step closer to the NRA being outed as the conduit of Russian cash to the Trump campaign, but there's no collusion, none

Affidavit

On October 4, 2016, U.S. Person 1 sent an email to an acquaintance. The email covered a number of topics. Within the email, U.S. Person 1 stated, "Unrelated to specific presidential campaigns, I've been involved in secruing a VERY private line of communication between the Kremlin and key POLITICAL PARTY 1 leaders through, of all conduits, the [GUN RIGHTS ORGANIZATION]."

You Putinesque cockholsters should be dragged kicking and screaming from decent society like Jerry Lundegaard getting dragged out of his motel at the end of “Fargo”.

Where is JE, he take another sabbatical?

he always disappears whenever Trump does something extraordinarily ridiculous he doesn't have to deal with it 9and us). He'll return when things cool off a bit so he can berate us for opposing Trump so he can look only massively foolish rather than galactically foolish.

So - thanks to work, I was mostly following that.... ridiculous thing... via tweets and clips but finally got a chance to watch the thing itself.

It's... well, it's as bad as the tweets say. Worse, probably.

This was an American President so far removed from what an American President should be that it's hard to fathom - even from someone has ridiculous as Trump.

Does Trump keep Dan Coats' balls in a jar on his desk, like Putin keeps Trump's balls in a jar on HIS desk?

It's absolutely, utterly surreal.

No wonder the Trumpkins have made themselves especially scarce here today... maybe they have a shred of shame afterall... for all the good that does.

He’s clandestinly at work on his top-Secret project - The Mother of All Juanabouts!

Hey now @106 we cant say for certain *which* party is POLITICAL PARTY 1.

POLITICAL PARTY 1, by definition, is the Federalist Party. The Republican Party wouldn't make the list until POLITICAL PARTY 15 or POLITICAL PARTY 16.

What has Brett Kavanaugh written on the subject of investigating and indicting the President of the NRA while in office? That guy also has a very busy and challenging job.

I was at the beach all day. I'm watching the replay of Trump...man, he's a beaten dog, and he knows it, and he's in for a huge shitstorm when he comes home.

The NRA-aligned indictee (is that a word?) has quite a nice collection of photos...

No wonder "everybody does it" is the latest Trumpkin line.

inadvertent shoutout to BBTF today by Senator Rand Paul on CNN

In a somewhat testy exchange with a scary Wolf Blitzer about Trump's bizarre comments in Helsinki, Paul used the term "Trump Derangement Syndrome" for those, he said, who believe that Russia stealing DNCC emails and publishing them turned all those Rust Belt double-Obama voters into Trump voters - thereby flipping the election to Trump.

TDS reference on CNN!

In a very testy exchange with a scary Wolf Blitzer, Paul used the term "Trump Derangement Syndrome" for those, he said, who believe that Russia stealing DNCC emails and publishing them turned all those Rust Belt double-Obama voters into Trump voters - thereby flipping the election to Trump.

All the various Trumpkins are collapsing into a singularity of stupid.

This is not surprising.

At this point, I'm far more interested in making sure the names are noted, recorded, and remembered than I am hoping for any of the Cult45s to drink the antidote.

They all hope their little quirks and parlor games of sophistry will mean they're not permanently marked with the stink, but the stink is the stink and will always be the stink.

WELL ISN’T THIS CURIOUS

This Christopher Steele fellow is looking more credible by the day isn’t he.

TDS reference on CNN!

I've heard the term used before I saw it here.

BREAKING!

Trump moves to extradite prosecutors who brought charges against GRU agents.






Made you look.

And you probably figured it was at best, mostly not true.

What's the OTP record for consecutive non-Trumpkin posts?

We've gotta be coming close...

Anything from chinless Mitch, the haircare apparent McCarthy, or the rest?

McConnell did say something today, although he didn't criticize Trump directly:

“I have said a number of times, I’ll say it again: The Russians are not our friends. And I entirely believe the assessment of our intelligence community,” McConnell told reporters.

Cornyn was a little more explicit:

"I don't believe Mr. Putin and I believe our intelligence officials who produced the intelligence community assessment and I believe the indictment that Robert Mueller has now presented is well taken," said Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas).

"I think members of Congress believe as I do that Russia did attempt to meddle in the election. That they were unsuccessful in changing the outcome. ... I think [the president] is conflating two different things: The meddling and the collusion allegations, for which there does not appear to be any evidence."

Cornyn added that he thought the 12 Russians indicted last week by special counsel Robert Mueller should be extradited to the U.S., but acknowledged that would be “wishful thinking.”

Cornyn added that he thought the 12 Russians indicted last week by special counsel Robert Mueller should be extradited to the U.S., but acknowledged that would be “wishful thinking.”

It would be wishful thinking under a non-Trump President.

Under a Trump Presidency, I'll restate that it's probably MORE likely Trump extradites the prosecutors who brought charges to Russia.

Hey, I'd be happier than probably anyone here if the NRA gets caught in treasonous behavior with the Kremlin, but sanity compels me to note that campaign money does not equal hacked emails.

In a very testy exchange with a scary Wolf Blitzer, Paul used the term "Trump Derangement Syndrome" for those, he said, who believe that Russia stealing DNCC emails and publishing them turned all those Rust Belt double-Obama voters into Trump voters - thereby flipping the election to Trump.

Paul's usage easily passes muster in the Official TDS Style Guide.

It would be wishful thinking under a non-Trump President.

He may have them extradited, but only if it's a prerequisite to a pardon.

TDS reference on CNN!

I've heard the term used before I saw it here

Well it’s just the updated version of “Bush Derangement Syndrome”, an invective hurled against those feckless hippies who foolishly thought the Great War of Adventure in Iraq was going to be anything but an awesome victory bringing glory to our empire and the fearless War Hero President who boldly guided our nation against the terrorists who hate us and want to kill us because of our freedom.

Boy, I sure am glad nobody accused ME of BDS! I’d be so ashamed!

“President Trump must clarify his statements in Helsinki on our intelligence system and Putin. It is the most serious mistake of his presidency and must be corrected—immediately,” Newt Gingrich, former speaker of the House and an informal adviser to Trump, tweeted on Monday evening.

Well it’s just the updated version of “Bush Derangement Syndrome”, an invective hurled against those feckless

I just think it's amusing that an alleged journalist thinks the term originated here. This is a tough place to sit on the fence, yet he manages to attempt it (badly).

Of course, on the substance Trump's only real belief is that every nation's relationship with the United States boils down to the various "deals" they've made over the years with us and that he can improve on these "deals." If he can improve on the "deals," then ipso facto to him, the deals are taking advantage of us. And since he thinks he can improve on all the deals, then ipso facto to him, every country in the world is taking advantage of us.

It's a silly way of looking at the world, but there's really nothing substantive that can be implied by any of his interactions with foreign officials as he's bringing no serious substantive views to bear in those interactions. His view is almost too silly to warrant substantive comment.

Damn.

121.

Though, I kind of suspect Sugar Bear/syntax/whatever just did the equivalent of dropping a drag bunt in the 8th inning of an 11-0 game when the SP has a no-hitter going.

David French

Ah, yes, President David French. Exhibit A for how out of touch and irrelevant Bill Kristol now is.

It's a silly way of looking at the world, but there's really nothing substantive that can be implied by any of his interactions with foreign officials as he's bringing no serious substantive views to bear in those interactions. His view is almost too silly to warrant substantive comment.

Sounds like a great guy to waste time fronting for.

Good for you taking up that call.

Yup. And given that there are many possible and probable shoes that could drop, to claim that there is nothing to see here and its not headed in any particular direction is ridiculous. Every day, something new comes out that looks bad for Trump. I expect that trend to continue.

Of course. Why else do you think Trump, Giuliani, et al keep bleating that the investigation MUST. END. NOW?

As opposed to all of the people who _want_ to be under federal investigation?

Trump: Our relationship with Russia has NEVER been worse thanks to many years of U.S. foolishness and stupidity and now, the Rigged Witch Hunt!

NRO: This indictment makes it even more troubling that Trump mocks, denigrates, and undermines the Mueller investigation as a “witch hunt.” We now know that there was real wrongdoing; we just don’t yet know its extent.

So who do you believe, Ray?

You're badly confused as to concepts. "Witch hunt" does not mean that nobody anywhere in the world did anything wrong; "witch hunt" means that no evidence has been presented, after all this time, that Trump and his inner circle are guilty of collusion.

“President Trump must clarify his statements in Helsinki on our intelligence system and Putin. It is the most serious mistake of his presidency and must be corrected—immediately,” Newt Gingrich, former speaker of the House and an informal adviser to Trump, tweeted on Monday evening.

“Go #### yourself you fat arrogant whore.”

As opposed to all of the people who _want_ to be under federal investigation?

This is one of the dumbest things I've read today...but the day is still relatively young.

As opposed to all of the people who _want_ to be under federal investigation?

This is one of the dumbest things I've read today

Sure, but Ray and Sub-Beta Blanks just got here.

But let's let Jonathan Turley tell it:

The problem in the Russian investigation is that we have plenty of crimes but not necessarily plenty of colluders.


...

The demonic Internet character Guccifer 2.0 was a carefully constructed false identity of a hacker, who turned out to be Russian intelligence officers. Before we all shout “O Goody Ruskies,” we should keep in mind the distinction between criminals and colluders. Trump is correct that none of these indictments have established any crime linked to collusion by himself or his key aides. That does not mean that the investigation is rigged or improper.

After 14 months of investigation (and for the second time in a formal indictment), the Justice Department has stated that it is not alleging any knowing collusion between Trump campaign officials or associates and the Russians. Back in February, Mueller handed down his major indictment of 13 Russians for actively interfering with the 2016 election by spreading false information. Both Mueller and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein expressly noted that the evidence involved “unwitting” communications with Russians adopting false identities. This indictment shows that same pattern of clearly concealed identities in seeking to hack and distribute email information from the Democratic campaign and its associates.

When I noted at the time of the February indictment that it was strikingly silent on evidence of collusion, some insisted that the indictment did not cover the hacking operation and that Mueller was likely waiting to indict Trump officials colluding on the theft and distribution of the emails. We are still waiting. While the indictment speaks of both a reporter and a Trump campaign associate unwittingly communicating with the Russians, the indictment does not allege knowing collusion. That does not mean that no one colluded on some level, but after 14 months we have yet to see compelling evidence of collusion by Trump or his campaign.

...

As for the information shared by the Russian units, it is was rather underwhelming even to the recipients. For example, Guccifer 2.0 sends a Trump associate what is described as “the turnout model for the democrats entire presidential campaign.” The Russians were eager to help, even saying in similarly stilted language, “please tell me if i can help u anyhow … it would be a great pleasure to me.” However, the recipient simply responds that the information is “pretty standard.”

Indeed, much of this effort may have been much too “standard” for some of us to admit. The continued shock and revulsion expressed by many leaders at the thought of such interference is a tad forced. The United States has intervened in foreign elections for decades, including leaking stolen documents. Not long ago, our hacking of our own allies, including German Chancellor Angela Merkel, was revealed. Many nations regularly try to influence elections and this is nothing new for the United States, either as the culprit or as the target of such efforts.

In other words, if there were a real hunt for election witches, we would find ourselves at the head of the line to the pillory.


...We can be outraged by the Russian operation without being hypocrites as to our own history. Likewise, we can support the Mueller investigation without ignoring the fact that no credible evidence has thus far arisen against Trump on collusion.

As opposed to all of the people who _want_ to be under federal investigation?

Ah, because there's nothing unique about the current situation, right?

How about this... Trump excuses himself from the Presidency while the investigation plays out. The 25th Amendment explicitly and directly gives him a manner to temporarily recuse himself from office - all he has to do is write a letter to Orin Hatch - and Mike Pence will take (or decide it is not in the US interests to take at the present time) meetings with Putin.

Once the investigation ends, one way or another, he re-assumes office...

"witch hunt" means that no evidence has been presented, after all this time, that Trump and his inner circle are guilty of collusion.

That's your stupid definition of "witch hunt".

From the Wiki: " the word 'witch-hunt' is used as a metaphor to illustrate the brutal and ruthless way in which political opponents are denigrated and persecuted."

Your hero thinks he's being persecuted. It has nothing to do with what has or hasn't been proven yet. Dumbass.

Trump is terrified of Mueller. Remember what the called Killer Kowalski? "The Methodical Mauler". That's what Mueller is doing to Trump, and Trump knows it. Morons like Ray like to bleat that nothing has been revealed so there's nothing there. Trump would like nothing better than for Mueller to shoot his wad before all the T's are crossed and I's are dotted, wouldn't he? But no, he'll let Trump twist in the wind while he goes about his business, methodically.

Watch now, as the head betas of the Trumpkin parlor game squad pretend Friday and today didn't really happen.

It's regular as clockwork.... they're so in love with their long past glory days that they like to pretend they're back in law school glory days, where the ugly realty of real life doesn't matter - and they can just pretend it's just hypothetical created for them to strut their brilliance.

Meanwhile, here in the real world...

On Friday, the United States Justice Department just rendered a dozen indictments against elements of a foreign nation's intelligence service for committing clearly - even they know this - crimes.

On Monday, the President of the United States didn't cancel a meeting the leader of that foreign nation... he didn't even say boo about it. Indeed, he actually took the side of the leader of that nation against his own country's law enforcement and intelligence agencies.

This - to a Trumpkin - is not a problem.

Because they're just deranged and crazy beyond reckoning.

The collusion investigation stems and arises from an abuse of power by the FBI, which -- as I noted very early on -- illegitimately interfered in the 2016 presidential election.

See, the thing is that, while tribalists might think there's an "inconsistency" in thinking this while at the same time thinking the other things I've written on this page and elsewhere, there really isn't. All of it is true. Trump's a joke, but the FBI also interfered in the election. Both things happened, as logic holds they could.. I still can't begin to see how that remains perceived as somehow "inconsistent"; the only answer is TDS.

This - to a Trumpkin - is not a problem.

Because they're just deranged and crazy beyond reckoning

Stupid too, don’t forget stupid. I’ve never met a smart person who supported Trump. Certainly not on this forum.

How about this... Trump excuses himself from the Presidency while the investigation plays out. The 25th Amendment explicitly and directly gives him a manner to temporarily recuse himself from office - all he has to do is write a letter to Orin Hatch - and Mike Pence will take (or decide it is not in the US interests to take at the present time) meetings with Putin.

Is that what Clinton did?

The collusion investigation stems and arises from an abuse of power by the FBI

Keep lying and maybe you’ll get Mike Huckabee’s fat kid’s job next. You can take a leave of absence from the Fake Law Firm.

And note, above, Turley's point about how the US has meddled in plenty of elections, so "influencing elections" *per se* is not beyond bounds -- or, if it is, we're guilty of that as well (*). So what you have to do is to construct an argument that when we do it it's altruistic whereas when other countries do it it's not. And sure, you can make the argument -- and it's a very strong one -- that when we do it we're promoting human rights and democracy. But, then, the problem there is that when we examine Russia's meddling, it was to elect Donald Trump (it seems due in no small part to a sheer dislike for Hillary, because, well, who doesn't) and Trump is not, despite what his crazed detractors would have you believe, the equivalent of a Nazi.

(*) And if you don't want to believe Turley, here's Andy's beloved New York Times on the subject.

If the argument is that when *we* do it it's different then say that, instead of eliding the fact that we do it, by mindlessly repeating "influenced our election" in a Bitter Mousean way, as if the problem is the influencing per se rather than WHY an election is being influenced.

-

It's also quite hilarious that of the $1 billion or whatever that Hillary spent to try to win, folks think that a foreign government spending $95K was the real party that influenced the election. If true what does that say about how utterly incompetent Hillary and her team was?

On Monday, the President of the United States didn't cancel a meeting the leader of that foreign nation... he didn't even say boo about it. Indeed, he actually took the side of the leader of that nation against his own country's law enforcement and intelligence agencies.

Because (a) he's smarting over people thinking he won because of Russia -- he didn't; and (b) the collusion part of the investigation is in fact a joke, even though the hacking part isn't. Trump's obsessed with the collusion part, naturally, and too stupid to distinguish between the two in any event.

Is that what Clinton did?

Oh?

Wikipedia doesn't have an entry for the Nation of Starr or the People's Democratic Republic of Lewinsky, so I'm afraid I don't see the parallel.

It's also quite hilarious

You and SBB have chosen team treason. It will not be forgotten.

Oh the cockholstering is quite flaccid today. Go back to 4chan and reload with the latest pre-chewed thoughts from Qanon and his translators, you pumpkins aren’t up to the task yourselves.

Wikipedia doesn't have an entry for the Nation of Starr or the People's Democratic Republic of Lewinsky, so I'm afraid I don't see the parallel.

He didn't step aside while the investigation proceeded, as you said Trump should do. And of course, he didn't step aside when his crimes were exposed.

Because (a) he's smarting over people thinking he won because of Russia; and (b) the collusion part of the investigation is in fact a joke, even though the hacking part isn't. Trump's obsessed with the collusion part, naturally, and too stupid to distinguish between the two in any event.

I'll repeat.

Sounds a really great sort to front for.

You should be proud because lord knows, nobody is more unfairly targeted or harassed by law enforcement than sitting Presidents.

Good for you, dude... finding such a deserving target for your holy faux-Voltaire.

Sounds a really great sort to front for.

Your belief that I'm "fronting" for him is deranged. I haven't "fronted" for him a single time.

You’re more of a kneeler, really.

So what you have to do is to construct an argument that when we do it it's altruistic whereas when other countries do it it's not.

No, the President has a much lower bar to cross. To justify such behavior he merely needs to argue that it's in our best interests. That's not the same thing as altruistic.

It's also quite hilarious that of the $1 billion or whatever that Hillary spent to try to win, folks think that a foreign government spending $95K was the real party that influenced the election.

I have stated numerous times that I think Russia's role in the election was likely insignificant and that I believe there was no quid pro quo between the Trump campaign and the Russians.

But what happened today was absolutely sickening. He should be impeached tomorrow. If we have to perform sexual favors for Mike Pence, then so be it.

He didn't step aside while the investigation proceeded, as you said Trump should do. And of course, he didn't step aside when his crimes were exposed.

He's not playing kissy face with a foreign despot who is the obvious - and now indicted via proxies - target of the investigation.

Trump should step aside because he's meeting with - and actually fronting for - the despotic leader of a nation who is undeniably, inarguably, and and completely a central part of that investigation.

If you can find me a Clinton parallel, have at it... but I'm not aware of even the most tangential of instances of where Clinton's constitutionally prescribed job had a damn thing to do with Lewinsky.

Was he meeting with No Ma'am to prescribe a change to federal law?

Your belief that I'm "fronting" for him is deranged. I haven't "fronted" for him a single time.

Well, YR is right - you're more of a kneeler...

But everybody knows what you are.

Ironically, it's probably your best defense against being called a Trumpkin... the fact that, if you could survey every BBTF registrant and ask them to pick the place's foremost troll - it would certainly, beyond any discussion or even without allowing any OTP participant votes - be you.

But - sometimes, you need to pay for your trolling. And the Trump stink needs to be attached to you forever.

Ray, #146:

It's also quite hilarious that of the $1 billion or whatever that Hillary spent to try to win, folks think that a foreign government spending $95K was the real party that influenced the election. If true what does that say about how utterly incompetent Hillary and her team was?

Like any good tribute act, Ray always goes back to the classic hits.

Q: How many days has Robby Mook been sitting in jail?

But everybody knows what you are.

The straw that stirs the drink?

Fox & Friends, on Twitter:

Robert Mueller is reportedly pushing to wrap up his special counsel investigation by the end of the summer, but he still hasn't tied anyone from the Trump campaign to the probe

100% correct, except for two details: the part about the report of Mueller wrapping up his investigation, and the part about Mueller not having tied anyone from the Trump campaign to the probe.

Fox & Friends' above tweet has since been deleted. But whatever we do, please let no one call their original tweet #fakenews. Nor should we treat it as a disqualifying mistake that discredits the entire mainstream media even after having been corrected, since corrections only get 10% of the attention that false claims do. Or in this case 10% less than that, since Fox News has issued no correction at all.

Sloppy wording, the point of the tweet being that Mueller hasn't tied anyone in the Trump camp to collusion.

Because (a) he's smarting over people thinking he won because of Russia -- he didn't;

Then what does he care what people think? He's the president. Maybe he knows more about it than you do, and he's desperately trying to deflect and project. Could that be true?

Then what does he care what people think?

Because he's a narcissistic weirdo?

His act is essentially unchanged from the mid-1980s, certainly from no later than 1990.

Maybe he knows more about it than you do, and he's desperately trying to deflect and project. Could that be true?

No. It couldn't. I mean it could at some non-zero level, I guess, but we're talking sub-1%.

Turley:

Below is my column in The Hill newspaper on continued claims about undocumented immigrants and their legal status. There is a growing misrepresentation of the status issues that are deeply concerning. While undocumented status can be treated as a civil matter, it is also a criminal matter when a person enters the country illegally. Some politicians and commentators have been stating simply that all undocumented persons are non-criminals while others have suggested that persons are “perfectly legal” if they claim asylum even if they entered illegally. The point is that not all such persons should be treated criminally, but rather these statements can be dangerously misleading for families considering an illegal crossing. The Trump Administration has shifted enforcement toward greater criminal than civil enforcement. As for asylum claims, they are not the majority of illegal entries but the numbers are clearly rising. We are required under international law to consider such applications, but that does not mean that the entry was lawful or that such cases cannot raise risks of criminal enforcement. With so many lives at risk, we need to be more accurate in how we describe the legal realities of illegal entry.

...

The latest iteration came from CNN political analyst and USA Today columnist Kirsten Powers, who insisted on air that people brought by coyotes over the border are doing something perfectly legal under federal law, since most seek asylum. The greatest danger from such statements is not the risk of misleading viewers but misleading immigrants who take such statements as an accurate description of the law.

Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) has repeatedly declared, “An undocumented immigrant is not a criminal.” When asked if she meant everyone here illegally, both those who entered illegally and those who have remained illegally, she replied, “Two obvious points. It is a civil violation, it’s not a crime. Period, full stop. And the second point is that there is a whole community that is being vilified because of this misinformed, misdirected term ’illegal alien’ … It’s actually ignorant and we can’t afford to run our country that way. So they are not criminals.”

Albany Mayor Kathy Sheehan similarly stated, “Simply being in this country without documentation is not a crime,” adding that the “Supreme Court has said that.” That representation was declared “mostly true” by Politifact. This growing mantra is often sustained by the careful parsing of terms. For example, Politifact quoted Nancy Morawetz, professor of clinical law at New York University School of Law, as saying, “Being present in the U.S., that status, is not a crime.” However, people do not simply materialize within the United States. There remains the question of entry. Illegal entry into the United States has been prosecuted as a criminal matter for decades, though the percentage of cases handled criminally versus civilly has fluctuated with different administrations.

Indeed, if it were true that illegal entry was not a crime, the entire Trump administration enforcement program, and thousands of such cases under President Obama, would have been struck down months ago. In fact, the government can charge illegal entry, even for first offenders, as a crime under 18 U.S.C. 3559 with up to six months imprisonment. Subsequent offenses or reentries, which are common, can be charged as a felony with up to two years imprisonment under 8 U.S.C. 1325. Nonviolent offenders who were removed before their prison sentences were served can be imprisoned for up to 10 years after a subsequent illegal entry.

It also is not true, as suggested by both Sheehan and Politifact, that the Supreme Court has declared all undocumented status to be a purely civil matter.

...

In fairness to Powers, Section 208 of the Immigration and Naturalization Act allows asylum claims to be made at any time, including as a criminal defendant for illegal entry. That does not mean that anyone claiming asylum automatically has legal status. That deals with your filing of a claim, not the legality of your entry or ultimate status. It is not illegal to seek asylum. It is illegal to do so without entering through a port of entry without documentation. Notably, even when treated through a civil removal proceeding, it remains an unlawful entry.

how utterly incompetent Hillary and her team was?

So sad that this is the fallback. It's true. But Trump is a criminal all the same.

Let's play the game, Trump Supporter, or Member of the Resistance?

'Are you in one of the affordable units?' Director of the Harvard Humanitarian Initiative is accused of being a racist 'Sidewalk Susie' after slamming a mom and her biracial daughter, 3, for playing outside

The director of a Harvard research center has apologized after she was filmed confronting a neighbor whose daughter was playing outside her home and asking her if she lived 'in one of the affordable units.'

Alyson Laliberte filmed some of her encounter with Theresa Lund, the executive director of Harvard Humanitarian Initiative, an academic and research center in humanitarian crisis and leadership at Harvard University, on Saturday.

Dubbing the woman 'another Permit Patty,' Laliberte shared the clip on her Facebook page, where it has since attracted more than 700,000 views.

In the clip, Lund is seen sat on the sidewalk accusing Laliberte and her three-year-old daughter, who is biracial, of disturbing her children's sleep.

Laliberte wrote on Facebook that Lund, whose name she didn't know at the time, asked her repeatedly if she lived in an 'affordable unit' at the condominium complex in Cambridge, Massachusetts, near Harvard University.

Lund apologized for the incident on her personal Facebook page, saying she was 'terribly sorry' about the exchange and that she had apologized to Laliberte and her daughter in person.

'What I said was inappropriate and wrong,' Lund wrote.

No. It couldn't.

You're an idiot. Undoubtedly.

edit... and #### your edit, shitbag.

Let's play a game; how pathetically obvious is your attempt to defer the conversation away from your cult leader's treason?

Shocking that the Trumpkins have highly selective careful parsing that go in both directions.

It's difficult to find a rosetta stone - but I think I might have one.

I think it might come down to whether it's a matter of something that makes Trump look bad vs something swirling around him that needs to be defended.

Much more careful analysis will be required, but it's possible that I've cracked the code.

Let's play a game; how pathetically obvious is your attempt to defer the conversation away from your cult leader's treason?

What's the highest value?

I pick that one.

Much more careful analysis will be required, but it's possible that I've cracked the code.

Cracking the code would reveal that there are few if any "Trumpkins" here, so it doesn't appear that you have.

Cracking the code would reveal that there are few if any "Trumpkins" here, so it doesn't appear that you have.

I count 5 for sure: You, Clapper, Jason, TGF (who isn't here much) and the Omega Monkey Ray. Lance might be one, also, but he doesn't elaborate.

Cracking the code would reveal that there are few if any "Trumpkins" here, so it doesn't appear that you have.

It's like stumbling across an enigma machine the Trumpkins forgot to toss overboard.

So, this is apparently A Big Deal because now all the Trumpkins are claiming there are no Trumpkins.

Please tell me more... the bronze goddesses are spinning away.

So, this is apparently A Big Deal because now all the Trumpkins are claiming there are no Trumpkins.

No, the claim is nothing new.

Maybe put down the bottle?

I count 5 for sure: You, Clapper, Jason, TGF (who isn't here much) and the Omega Monkey Ray.

Oh, there's no doubt you do.

Where is JE, he take another sabbatical?

he always disappears whenever Trump does something extraordinarily ridiculous he doesn't have to deal with it 9and us). He'll return when things cool off a bit so he can berate us for opposing Trump so he can look only massively foolish rather than galactically foolish.

Confirmation bias. He's on a planned trip overseas. He's been sound asleep while you folks were frittering your day away here.

Oh, there's no doubt you do.

None whatsoever, Trumpkin. Wear it.

No, the claim is nothing new.

Maybe put down the bottle?

Uh-huh.

Actually, I think I'm going to open a bottle to celebrate this momentous occasion.

But, by all means, I encourage you to spend a few sentences explaining how you're not really a Trumpkin. I think you should lay out clearly - and unfettered by adjacent grudges against amorphous groups that also hate Trump - why you are a not a Trumpkin.

You've typed many, many, many a comment in defense of him.

So, it's probably a good idea to spare one, single post explaining why you are not. You should lay out clearly and without exception or footnote why you think he's an idiot, an #######, unfit, or some combination of all. You should do what you've never done: stake out some clear space, unadulterated, as to why you are NOT a Trumpkin.

Go ahead.

That the USA also engages in election-tampering in other countries, or, for that matter, that other countries besides Russia do it here, mean that we can't investigate a specific instance of it? There's a clean-hands test that has to be met before an investigation is justified? That seems not only loony but suicidal.

So, it's probably a good idea to spare one, single post explaining why you are not.

My posts speak for themselves. The primary reason is that TDSers confuse not having TDS with being a "Trumpkin." It's really no more complicated than that.

You've typed many, many, many a comment in defense of him.

I haven't typed a single word in "defense" of him. I've typed a whole lot of words analyzing his opposition, for sure.

Confirmation bias. He's on a planned trip overseas. He's been sound asleep while you folks were frittering your day away here.

Not cool, man.

Doxxing him as a bagman for the Summer Trump Payment to Putin?

Somebody better tell Jim.

My posts speak for themselves. The primary reason is that TDSers confuse not having TDS with being a "Trumpkin." It's really no more complicated than that.

I haven't typed a single word in "defense" of him.

Uh-huh.

Then it really ought to be easy for you to just compose a simple paragraph - just a few coherent sentences, really - explaining your problem with Trump.

So why can't you?

Why haven't you?

Go ahead.

We'll wait.

I'll even get you started:

I am not a Trumpkin because I believe Donald Trump is

Go for it.

Prove you're not a Trumpkin.

Why haven't you?

I have, a bunch of times. I did again like an hour ago.

That the USA also engages in election-tampering in other countries, or, for that matter, that other countries besides Russia do it here, mean that we can't investigate a specific instance of it? There's a clean-hands test that has to be met before an investigation is justified? That seems not only loony but suicidal.

The Republicans are the ‘you think we’re so innocent?’ party. Their leader really hasn’t given them much to worth with this week, so they’ve advanced to the line that what the Russian government did was a good thing because it exposed the evil DNC’s e-mails (and possibly stole critical campaign analytics to give to the Republican nominee, but the cult hasn’t yet said that was a good and moral act).

Why haven't you?

I have, a bunch of times. I did again like an hour ago.

Where?

Repeat it for me. I cannot find it.

Where?

Repeat it for me. I cannot find it.

Um, no thanks. As with Mouse and various other posters, periodically, your frothing unwillingness/inability to read is not my concern.

Doxxing him as a bagman for the Summer Trump Payment to Putin?

Really. So now the Deep State (BBTF Division) knows that Juannity is away from his home, leaving him even more vulnerable to their criminal exploits and expertise in framing idiots and making them do treason. Does Ray not think before he posts? Wait...

Um, no thanks.

No worries.

I find myself unable to reproduce things that didn't exist originally, too.

I mean, I've tried telling the lottery commission I played those number without a ticket, told the Vegas sportsbooks I placed the bet though I lack a ticket, and the SEC has been particularly impolite about my claims to unverified stock ownership... so I feel your pain.

Actually, as I think the term shold be defined, I don't think anyone here is a "Trumpkin".

Enablers, stooges, Quislings, apparatchiks, opportunists, trolls, fellow travelers, trigger-the-libs-asshats, etc, sure.

But nobody here is a #MAGA hat wearing true believer Trumpkin.

My father is a #MAGA hat wearing true believer actual Trumpkin. He went to see Trump speak* at Freedom Fest 2015 in Vegas and afterwards proudly announced to my mother and I, "I think I've just seen the next President of the United States".

* My mother and I decided to go shopping and stop by Grimaldi's for pizza. He might have been right about an outcome, but we made the far better choice on the day ...

Trumpkin hero Sheriff Clarke wrapped up in the Russian NRA imbroglio....

“President Trump must clarify his statements in Helsinki on our intelligence system and Putin. It is the most serious mistake of his presidency and must be corrected—immediately,” Newt Gingrich, former speaker of the House and an informal adviser to Trump, tweeted on Monday evening.

In response to that Gingrich comment, @NateSilver:

I think we need a scale for how much trouble Trump is in based on the most ordinarily pro-Trump Republican/conservative who criticizes him.

e.g. something like this:
10.0 Hannity
9.9 Pence
9.2 Fox & Friends
8.8 Tucker Carlson
7.5 McConnell
7.0 Laura Ingram
6.8 Gingrich
6.7 Coulter
6.1 Joe Walsh
5.5 DRUDGE
5.0 Paul Ryan
4.8 WSJ Edit Page
4.4 Ben Shapiro
3.6 Graham
2.6 McCain
1.4 Jeff Flake
0.1 Bret Stephens
0.0 Kasich

Hannity and Pence are still behind Trump, but this performance was so indefensible that even the sycophantiast sycophants like Gingrich are eyeing the exits. Of course, we saw that once before with the Access Hollywood tape, and most of the spineless losers got back on board the Trump train shortly after that. Most likely someone on the other side of the aisle will respond with something equally awful from the left, and Gingrich will breath a sigh of relief and turn his attention to attacking that guy instead of talking about Trump.

190 would seem ideal for a weekly top 25 update. it could even get a corporate sponsor - but who?

I heard a minute of angry right-wing radio host Mark Levin today. I guess he's right in the middle of this chart - kind of the 'sure, he says some goofy things and he makes mistakes, but I'm not going to attack the guy every time...' level.

Hannity's No. 1 ranking on the line in a few minutes. has a chance to create a little distance from Pence, but it's a long season/administration. meanwhile, Gingrich's 'loss' will cost him some spots and could ultimately relegate him to a lesser bowl game down the road.

I think we need a scale for how much trouble Trump is in based on the most ordinarily pro-Trump Republican/conservative who criticizes him.

McConnell shouldn't be that high. He's probably about the same as Ryan, maybe even lower, since MAGA females think Ryan is handsome.

Most likely someone on the other side of the aisle will respond with something equally awful from the left, and Gingrich will breath a sigh of relief and turn his attention to attacking that guy instead of talking about Trump.

That seems likely to me, but Putin has done so much bad stuff beyond the 2016 election, and obviously after accepting today's humiliating concession from the United States, he not's going to stop. This could drag on indefinitely.

Actually, as I think the term shold be defined, I don't think anyone here is a "Trumpkin".

Enablers, stooges, Quislings, opportunists, trolls, trigger-the-libs-asshats, etc, sure.

But nobody here is a #MAGA hat wearing true believer Trumpkin.

My father is a #MAGA hat wearing true believer actual Trumpkin. He went to see Trump speak at Freedom Fest 2015 in Vegas and afterwards proudly announced to my mother and I, "I think I've just seen the next President of the United States".

Well, with all due respect/lack of desire to go after your dad whom I've obviously never met -

I really bristle at letting the OTP's Trumpkins off the hook as if they're somehow insulated because they - excepting Clapper, who's never even gone that far - drop the VERY rare and VERY occasional 'not the way I'd have phrased it'.

In the grand scheme of things, shitbag despots have never had majorities among any national populace. They only very rarely even find highly fractious pluralities.

People can dismiss the Clown Hitler stuff all they want, but any serious reading of history - doesn't matter if you're talking about Hitler himself, Mussolini, Franco, Stalin, Pot, or you name it - pretty clearly shows that the most culpable are the mealy-mouthed pretenders.

In every nation since the dawn of nations - you're inevitably going to find an alarmingly large (where that means single digit to low teens) percent of the populace not just willing, but longing for the brute despot to stick it to the "other". They cannot be helped or reasoned with. You learn to just live with them, and leave them to their rantings - in a free and democratic society, sanction or charge them when they cross the lines a civil, democratic society creates.

Then, you'll find another layer - the disaffected, the frustrated, the angry - many of whom have legitimate complaints in an agnostic vacuum. Shopkeeps in Weimar, factory owns in Italy, educated but non-noble in Tsarist Russia, etc. It sucks that they get drawn to the One Great Man Who Can Fix It, but again.... it's pretty consistent. To a certain extent, I don't blame them - lacking an oasis, they'll drink the sand.

But - most culpable?

The Rays, the SBBs, the Clappers, and the Juannitys. These and these alone really ought to bear the most morally culpable burden. The reality is that we do not hold people like the Von Papens (or the Trotskys or the Victor Emmanuels or the Kerenskys or even Tou Samouths) culpable to the extent we should.

Doesn't matter what ideology the would-be despot espouses - in fact, more often than not - they don't really even have a consistent ideology in any real sense. It's always a pragmatic application of bits and pieces.

Time and time and time and consistently over and over and over again - it is these 'respectable' people who claim they're not a Nazi... not a Stalinist... not a Francoist... not a brown shirt.... not a Pol Pot acolyte... not a Mao disciple...

They always have the same excuse. They always claim 'whattabout'. They always pretend they're standing on some higher principle - of law, of national sovereignty, of expediency...

But - the reality - and it spans the globe, it spans ideology, it spans time... it is these people who always provide the tipping point. Always. Without exception.

Name me a despotic regime and I will be happy to explain which allegedly 'respectable' so-called non-whateverkins turned it from a mob of revolutionaries into the ruling junta.

In the context of something like Nuremberg? Sure... I guess I understand why a Hjalmar Schact got acquitted.

But - it is a mistake not to hold people like Schacht.... educated.... professional... 'respectable'.... responsible for their roles.

Maybe that's where the legal splits from the moral, IDK... but it doesn't change the reality.

It's also quite hilarious that of the $1 billion or whatever that Hillary spent to try to win, folks think that a foreign government spending $95K was the real party that influenced the election. If true what does that say about how utterly incompetent Hillary and her team was?

You always know Ray has run out steam when he falls back to "Hillary lost the election" as some sort of defensive talking point.

I think we need a scale for how much trouble Trump is in based on the most ordinarily pro-Trump Republican/conservative who criticizes him.

e.g. something like this:
10.0 Hannity
9.9 Pence
9.2 Fox & Friends
8.8 Tucker Carlson
7.5 McConnell
7.0 Laura Ingram
6.8 Gingrich
6.7 Coulter
6.1 Joe Walsh
5.5 DRUDGE
5.0 Paul Ryan
4.8 WSJ Edit Page
4.4 Ben Shapiro
3.6 Graham
2.6 McCain
1.4 Jeff Flake
0.1 Bret Stephens
0.0 Kasich

Hannity and Pence are still behind Trump, but this performance was so indefensible that even the sycophantiast sycophants like Gingrich are eyeing the exits. Of course, we saw that once before with the Access Hollywood tape, and most of the spineless losers got back on board the Trump train shortly after that.

This is true, and it speaks to their (lack of) character. But the almost certain reason they returned shortly after that tape was because

Step 1: Trump's free fall in the polls proved to be temporary; and

Step 2: Trump won the election.

Of course their complete lack of character will eventually mean that the Gingriches will return to the fold. But if Trump had lost the election his support among politicians would have completely evaporated, and if the polls were to show serious evidence that he was hurting the GOP as a whole, I doubt if these sycophants' loyalty will have been proven to have been anything more than skin deep. Even Hannity can always find some new mancrush to attach himself to. He was polluting the airwaves long before Trump emerged as a political force. From Ryan on up on Nate's list, what you see there are are just classic kiss up / kick down types. With them their attitude towards Trump is strictly business.

Ray, #160:

Fox & Friends, on Twitter:

Robert Mueller is reportedly pushing to wrap up his special counsel investigation by the end of the summer, but he still hasn't tied anyone from the Trump campaign to the probe

100% correct, except for two details: the part about the report of Mueller wrapping up his investigation, and the part about Mueller not having tied anyone from the Trump campaign to the probe.

Fox & Friends' above tweet has since been deleted. But whatever we do, please let no one call their original tweet #fakenews. Nor should we treat it as a disqualifying mistake that discredits the entire mainstream media even after having been corrected, since corrections only get 10% of the attention that false claims do. Or in this case 10% less than that, since Fox News has issued no correction at all.

Sloppy wording, the point of the tweet being that Mueller hasn't tied anyone in the Trump camp to collusion.

Ray gives a mainstream news channel's official public statement more retroactive leeway for contextual latitude and imprecise wording than he gives other posters on a baseball chat board. Yet weirdly...


Ray, four days ago:

What's unfortunate about this board is that people will take 10 seconds to vomit out some blatantly wrong but easily fact-checkable comment, as DavidFoss did in 608, and then to correct the record others have to spend 10 minutes taking the time to rebut him, as I did in 610.

It's not good for the community when this happens.

The Fox News tweet misrepresented the Washington Post's reporting, and it misrepresented the progress and results of the Mueller investigation. But Ray knows that if you read their words in the right light, you'll see that Fox & Friends' sloppy hearts were in the right place when they tweeted it. And also when they silently deleted it.

You always know Ray has run out steam when he falls back to "Hillary lost the election" as some sort of defensive talking point.

His quoted comment was also stupid on two levels. First, he has apparently never heard of the metaphor of the straw that broke the camel's back. Second, the idea he keeps expressing that winning an election is a sign of intelligence/competence/etc. The latter is a bad faith argument on his part, because he never pre-Trump pretended that elections were intelligence or competence contests. In fact, he'd usually sneeringly argue in his nihilism-posing-as-libertarianism way that they're lying contests or the like.

But - most culpable?

The Rays, the SBBs, the Clappers, and the Juannitys. These and these alone really ought to bear the most morally culpable burden. The reality is that we do not hold people like the Von Papens (or the Trotskys or the Victor Emmanuels or the Kerenskys or even Tou Samouths) culpable to the extent we should.

Doesn't matter what ideology the would-be despot espouses - in fact, more often than not - they don't really even have a consistent ideology in any real sense. It's always a pragmatic application of bits and pieces.

Time and time and time and consistently over and over and over again - it is these 'respectable' people who claim they're not a Nazi... not a Stalinist... not a Francoist... not a brown shirt.... not a Pol Pot acolyte... not a Mao disciple...

They always have the same excuse. They always claim 'whattabout'. They always pretend they're standing on some higher principle - of law, of national sovereignty, of expediency...

I was watching Trump's shameless moral equivocations today, and it hit me like a thunderbolt: 70 years ago, that could've been Wallace speaking.

But this time not George Wallace, but Henry Wallace, who once took a guided tour of the Siberian slave labor camps and compared them to----the TVA. Although in Wallace's case he wasn't saying that the TVA was as bad as those labor camps, but that those labor camps were just as praiseworthy as the TVA.

flip

flop