Tuesday, May 16, 2017

Shocking New Developments

I want to follow up on a huge story we featured here in 2007. I mean: huge. Ten years ago the world really was going to hell:
A "national underground network" of pink pistol-packing lesbians is terrorizing America. "All across the country," they are raping young girls, attacking heterosexual males at random, and forcibly indoctrinating children as young as 10 into the homosexual lifestyle, according to a shocking June 21 segment on the popular Fox News Channel program, "The O'Reilly Factor."

Titled "Violent Lesbian Gangs a Growing Problem," the segment began with host Bill O'Reilly briefly referencing for his roughly 3 million viewers the case of Wayne Buckle, a DVD bootlegger who was attacked by seven lesbians in New York City last August. Deploying swift, broad strokes, O'Reilly painted a graphic picture of lesbian gangs running amok. The Oh-Really Factor: Fox News' Bill O'Reilly offers up an 'expert' to claim that pink pistol-packing lesbian gangs are terrorizing the nation
On the show, Fox News Crime Analyst Rod Wheeler told the world that a national network of lesbian gangs preys on young girls -- incredibly, a hundred fifty of these gangs, who are identified by their pink pistols, exist in the Washington, D.C. area alone.

Very quietly, the police departments of the nation scoured the streets arresting and jailing these predatory lesbian gangs, carefully arranging to keep it out of the news. Anyone who was attacked by a lesbian gang with pink pistols was sworn to secrecy for, y'know, national security reasons. It was big but very hush-hush.

That's why you never heard about it.

But that was nothing compared to this week's amazing proof that the Clintons have killed, by last count, thirty three people. Or maybe there have been more since that article came out, I can hardly keep track. Fox News has the scoop:
The family of the Democratic National Committee staffer who was gunned down on July 10 on a Washington, D.C., blasted reports that he was a source of emails leaked to WikiLeaks.

Rod Wheeler, a retired Washington homicide detective and Fox News contributor investigating the case on behalf of the Rich family, made the WikiLeaks claim, which was corroborated by a federal investigator who spoke to Fox News. Family of slain DNC staffer Seth Rich blasts detective over report of WikiLeaks link
You gotta love a news story where the story is that somebody is saying the story is untrue, but that gives them an opportunity to tell you what the story was, so you can make up your own mind about it.

... Rod Wheeler ... Rod Wheeler ... why is that name familiar?

I'm sure this will be the top story on page one of The Post tomorrow, I mean "the fake news Washington Post". It's been a slow news week, I bet this blockbuster will go right to the top.

290 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

You're wrong, as usual. This story isn't going to be big tomorrow, it probably won't be in the fake news Post or the fake news New York Times or any of the rest of the lamestream media. It seems to have "fallen apart" already. Story on DNC staffer's murder dominated conservative media -- hours later it fell apart. Once again TTF shows that they have no grasp on reality.

May 16, 2017 10:46 PM  
Anonymous good ol' anonymous said...

Trump's loose lips revealed intelligence shared with us by someone else, they shriek, and that compromises national security and puts an ally in danger!

Then they add: Oh PS, it was Israel who gave us the info.

Apparently it's not a breach for a former and a current intelligence official to leak that to the New York Times (and thereby, to Russia), but it's a major thing for Trump to have revealed the info in the first place.

I thought "sources and methods" were more critical pieces of information than the information itself, in most cases. Is that no longer the rule when the Deep State and its media press operation need it to no longer be?

From the New York Times. Click their link at your own moral peril:

"The classified intelligence that President Trump disclosed in a meeting last week with Russian officials at the White House was provided by Israel, according to a current and a former American official familiar with how the United States obtained the information. The revelation adds a potential diplomatic complication to the episode.
Israel is one of the United States' most important allies and a major intelligence collector in the Middle East. The revelation that Mr. Trump boasted about some of Israel's most sensitive information to the Russians could damage the relationship between the two countries. It also raises the possibility that the information could be passed to Iran, Russia’s close ally and Israel’s main threat in the Middle East."

Gee, I wonder if this information could be passed to Iran now that it's in the New York Times.

One mystery I think is solved: I had wondered how this got out, with only three people (apart from Trump and the Reds) in the room. I had my suspicions.

But I've read that Trump's aides were upset or at least worried by what Trump said, and so they contacted the FBI, CIA, and NSA to tell them what had been divulged, so that they could themselves take any steps necessary to contain any damage (if any existed).

So it could be that the members of the Deep State then went immediately to their publicists at the National Laughingstock, as well as their Former colleagues and bosses, and divulged to those persons information those former intel people no longer had any right to be in possession of.

And at least one of them, in turn, leaked to CNN and the NYT and Washington Post.

If you're a leaker and you know it Clap your hands.

I often say of the media: Why should we treat your dire warnings of #FakeNews seriously when you're constantly trafficking in it yourselves?

And so I say to the Deep State: Why should I take your claims that this is super-serious and imperils national security when you yourselves are leaking out the same classified information to the New York Times and National Laughingstock?

You both seem to have the same idea that you're permitted to do the very same things you condemn when others do it.

No wonder you get along so famously.

May 17, 2017 1:43 AM  
Blogger JimK said...

For the record, I just deleted a comment that was nothing but a link to a PHP script. With all the malware going around these days I did not like the look of it. If you posted that comment because it was relevant to the discussion, then please write an actual comment. Normally Blogger catches spam but this looked suspicious to me.

JimK

May 17, 2017 7:13 AM  
Anonymous good ol' anonymous said...

good move, Jim. I actually never click on links here unless it's one of the regular posters. sorry guys, it's too risky these days

May 17, 2017 9:08 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

SOCHI, Russia, May 17 (Reuters) - Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Wednesday that U.S. President Donald Trump had not passed on any secrets to Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov during a meeting in Washington last week and that he could prove it.

Speaking at a news conference alongside Italian Prime Minister Paolo Gentiloni in the Black Sea resort of Sochi, Putin quipped that Lavrov was remiss for not passing on what he made clear he believed were non-existent secrets.

"I spoke to him today," said Putin with a smile. "I'll be forced to issue him with a reprimand because he did not share these secrets with us. Not with me, nor with representatives of Russia's intelligence services. It was very bad of him."

Putin, who said Moscow rated Lavrov's meeting with Trump "highly," said Russia was ready to hand a transcript of Trump's meeting with Lavrov over to U.S. lawmakers if that would help reassure them.

A Kremlin aide, Yuri Ushakov, later told reporters that Moscow had in its possession a written record of the conversation, not an audio recording.

Complaining about what he said were signs of "political schizophrenia" in the United States, Putin said Trump was not being allowed to do his job properly.

"It's hard to imagine what else can these people who generate such nonsense and rubbish can dream up next," said Putin.

"What surprises me is that they are shaking up the domestic political situation using anti-Russian slogans. Either they don't understand the damage they're doing to their own country, in which case they are simply stupid, or they understand everything, in which case they are dangerous and corrupt."

Two U.S. officials said on Monday that Trump had disclosed highly classified information to Lavrov about a planned Islamic State operation, plunging the White House into another controversy just months into Trump's short tenure in office.

Russia has repeatedly said that anti-Russian politicians in the United States are using groundless fears of closer ties with Moscow to sabotage any rapprochement and damage Trump in the process.

May 17, 2017 9:42 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Excuse me for posting the URL to the second comment above.

I did not provide a clickable link.

Do you like this URL better?

http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/trump-revealed-highly-classified-info-to-russians.504797/page-16

If you do, you will find the text to the second comment above by scrolling down to the next to the last comment on that page by "Zorro Well-Known Member."

There you will see where that Deep State fake news bullshit above came from.

Zorro's comment ends with the URL I posted yesterday, which is apparently too suspicious:

http://ace.mu.nu/archives/369786.php

Things can get nasty when you look under the rocks for creators of bullshit fake news.


May 17, 2017 9:55 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

evangelical Christianity exploding in Canada:

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2017/may/even-canada-conservative-churches-growing-mainline-theology.html?utm_source=connection-html&utm_medium=Newsletter&utm_term=251561&utm_content=513161121&utm_campaign=email

May 17, 2017 10:46 AM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Wyatt/bad anonymous said "Trump's loose lips revealed intelligence shared with us by someone else, they shriek, and that compromises national security and puts an ally in danger! Then they add: Oh PS, it was Israel who gave us the info.".

That's the trivial part of it. The real concern is that Trump gave the city the intel came from and enough details that Russia could backwards engineer the specific source and methods of collection giving them the opportunity to disrupt that source of intelligence and put lives in danger.

While sometimes American and Russian interests in Syria overlap, at other times they diverge. Russia is allies of Assad and Iran and is working against American efforts to fight both. Although they pay lip service to fighting ISIS that really isn't a concern for them, they're far more obsessed with maintaining their presence in that part of the world.

While Israel is officially saying "no problem" to Trump's leak of their information to their enemy Russia because they are so dependent on the United States, underneath that facade they are furious and will be restricting future intelligence sharing with the United States as they can't trust Trump not to blab it all over the world because that makes him feel like a big boy. Israeli officials said Trump sharing their intel with Russia and thus its enemy Iran is their worst fear come true.

The real problem in Trump's leaking of intelligence to the Russians is that it will make all American allies think twice, three times, or refuse to share at all sensitive intelligence with the U.S.

Countless terrorist plots have been stopped due to American access to intelligence from allies with access to the inner workings of ISIS and Al Quaeda. Trump has now put that in jeopardy and the threats to the U.S. are now greatly increased.

May 17, 2017 1:05 PM  
Anonymous Captain Obvious said...

Well, if PUTIN said he did get any classified info from the guy he helped put in office, then it MUST be true, right? I mean, he's a stand-up guy, right?

May 17, 2017 1:19 PM  
Anonymous Captain Obvious said...

*didn't*

May 17, 2017 1:20 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Wyatt/bad anonymous said "the electoral college ensures widespread support for a President".

You keep stupidly saying this when its obviously not true. The exact opposite is what its done. Hillary won the popular vote by almost 3 million. The electoral college has ensured that the president has less support than would otherwise be the case. The electoral college makes it so that some Americans votes are worth less than other Americans. In a real democracy all people are created equal. The American electoral college shites all over that.

I said "Remember, Putin asked Trump to meet with the Russians in the oval office and Trump said he felt like he couldn't say "no" to him"

Wyatt/bad anonymous said "big deal, it was rhetoric he actually could have said no".

Wrong. It was Trump saying how he really felt and the point is that while any competent president would have said no Trump felt like he couldn't say no because he's Putin's puppet.

I said "The Russians have got to be thinking they've gotten a great return on their investment in Trump!"

Wyatt/bad anonymous said "there was a story in the Post earlier this week saying just the opposite they feel like they were conned into supporting him and he has opposed their interests.

Bullshite. Trump has done everthing the Russians wanted of him. Even his show of firing 49 missles into Syria accomplished nothing as he warned the Russians in advance so they could get all their assets out of harms way. It was just a show to pretend he's not in Russia's pocket - everyone knows he is, especially Trump.

Wyatt/bad anonymous said "this latest thing, while possibly compromising a source, may be bad but it doesn't seem like any major coup for the Kremlin".

Trump's leak to Russia will make all American allies reluctant to share sensitive intelligence with the United States. Countless terror plots have been stopped due to intelligence from allies with knowledge of the inner workings of ISIS and Al Quaeda. Trump has ensured the U.S. will get less of this information thus weakening the country around the world and putting it at greater risk. The leak wasn't the end of the world but it was a serious blow to the U.S. and Russia is absolutely thrilled about it. This shows they can easily manipulate Trump into giving them the advantage and that's an asset that's going to keep paying dividends as long as Trump is president.

May 17, 2017 1:27 PM  
Anonymous good anonymous said...

the media, in its desperation to get Trump, has revealed classified information that endangers the lives of sources

http://nypost.com/2017/05/17/the-media-might-have-revealed-more-intel-than-trump/

May 17, 2017 2:18 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What a lovely demonstration of spin and attempt to spread fake news.

A right wing rag says "the media might have revealed" and the TTF Troll turned that into not only did the media reveal what Trump shared with our adversary, Russia, but they did it in "desperation to get Trump."

Nobody has to "get Trump."

The pussy grabber gets himself every time with his constant need to cast blame on others for his own mistakes.


May 17, 2017 3:16 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

After a New York Times report revealed that former FBI Director James Comey kept memos detailing the president's attempt to derail the FBI's Russia investigation, a former White House adviser for multiple presidents says Trump is "in impeachment territory."

The Times report highlighted one particular note from a February meeting between Comey and Trump claiming the president asked the former FBI director to "let this go," in regard to the Russia investigation.

"I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go," Mr. Trump told Mr. Comey, according to the memo. "He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go."

David Gergen served as a top adviser under Presidents Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton, and said on CNN that, if true, this note evidences that the president tried to "impede the investigation."

"I think that the obstruction of justice was the number one charge against Nixon that brought him down," Gergen told CNN. "After watching the Clinton impeachment, I thought I would never see another one. But I think we're in impeachment territory for the first time."

Gergen went on, saying this revelation on Comey's detailing damning elements of conversations between himself and Trump is "of enormous consequence for [Trump's] presidency."

"I'm a lapsed lawyer, I can not tell you if it meets all of the legal definitions, but I can tell you from a lay point of view, it looks like [Trump] was trying to impede the investigation," Gergen said. "He was using his power to do that, and when James Comey didn't go along with him, he wasn't his boy, he fired him, which I think is also relevant to the question of what he was trying to do."

Gergen's prediction comes as Rep. Justin Amash became the first Republican lawmaker in the House to suggest that Trump may have committed impeachable offenses, if the memo claims turned out to be true.

"But everybody gets a fair trial in this country," Amash added...

https://www.aol.com/article/news/2017/05/17/former-reagan-adviser-warns-president-trump-in-impeachment-territory/22095352/

May 17, 2017 3:29 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Wyatt/Bad anonymous said "news flash: Trump's a moron".

Oh, please, good anonymous and I have been telling you that since he started running for president, don't pretend you haven't been a full hearted supporter of his all along. You making 3 or 4 criticisms of him in the past two years while constantly defending his every stupid and evil move in no way absolves you of any responsibility for being a constant enthusiastic supporter.

And even though you know Trump is a moron and you said you feared he would destroy the Republic you voted for him anyway solely because you wanted him to appoint an anti-gay supreme court justice who would treat innocent LGBT people unfairly.

Think about that for a second folks, think how deeply disturbed this reveals Wyatt/bad anonymous to be. Wyatt/bad anonymous felt electing someone he considered a moron who might destroy the Republic was a good trade off in exchange for additional oppression of innocent LGBT people.

Wyatt is truly evil incarnate.

May 17, 2017 3:31 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

yes, the media is out to get Trump

and they feel anything is justified

Trump revealed a piece of information to the Russians because he thought that was the most advantageous thing to do

may not have been wise, in this instance, but the idea that this is "treason", being pushed by the press is ridiculous

virtually every President has done this in areas where we are allied with the Russians or when it seemed a policy advantage to do so

they are legally entitled to do so

there's obviously WWII

also Reagan offered to give them Star Wars technology in the 80s and George Bush even allowed Russian reps to sit in on some NSC briefings

Trump is right that the leaks to the press threaten out security much more

the press is allowed to do that when a source gives it to them but someone needs to find out who is leaking

that's a felony

the current conversation with the Russians in the Oval Office was leaked by "current and former officials"

what "former officials" would have access to such information?

the Deep State? the Trilateral Commission? the Illumnati?

are they all the same?

meanwhile, the Dem's current overreaction to everyone who talks to a Russian seems destined to land them on the trash heap of history with Joe McCarthy and the John Birch Society

May 17, 2017 3:36 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Wyatt/Bad anonymous said "the media, in its desperation to get Trump, has revealed classified information that endangers the lives of sourceshttp://nypost.com/2017/05/17/the-media-might-have-revealed-more-intel-than-trump".

Oh, please, ABC merely reported on what information Trump gave to the Russians and the Russian news media then reported on it. Trump had already leaked this, the harm was done by Trump, not ABC news.

Countless terror plots have been stopped due to intelligence the States got from allies with knowledge of the inner workings of ISIS and Al Qaeda. Trump has just ensured its allies around the world will give the U.S. less access to that kind of intelligence.

May 17, 2017 3:40 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Wyatt/bad anonymous said "Trump revealed a piece of information to the Russians because he thought that was the most advantageous thing to do".

LOL, he most certainly didn't reveal it because he thought that "was the most advantagious thing to do". He was bragging about how he gets great intelligence briefings and how important he is. He revealed it to try and make himself look like a big-shot. He's so desperately insecure he has to be constantly telling everyone he's the best, got the best people, the best information, he's the most successful and so on and he revealed this information solely to try and make himself look smart.

May 17, 2017 3:43 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"I think we're in impeachment territory"

Gergen is as big a moron as Trump

asking a prosecutor to drop a case is not "obstruction of justice"

if you ever know someone being investigated, go ahead and ask the prosecutor to drop the case

we have freedom of speech in this country

obstruction would have be something like destroying evidence or intimidating witnesses

the truth is after months of FBI investigation, three Congressional committees, and double time efforts by every investigative reporter on the planet, there is no evidence that Flynn committed any crime or even did anything improper, other than lie to the VP

so to say justice is obstructed, one would first have to establish that a crime was committed

May 17, 2017 3:45 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Trump will foolishly blurt out anything regardless of how sensitive and critical its security is if he thinks it makes him look big and important.

He's a bull in a china shop.

May 17, 2017 3:46 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

You see Trump's stories changing constantly and explanations only being good for the minute in which they're given makes reasonable people wonder whether or not he's capable of carrying out the functions of the office and whether nor not the 25th amendment should be invoked.

Wyatt/bad anonymous, you can't have it both ways, pretending to acknowledge Trump is incompetent by calling him a moron and then vigorously defending his every stupid action.

Either shite or get off the pot. If you really accept that he's a moron then stop bizarrely defending his every idiocy. If you're going to constantly defend his buffoonery then stop pretending falsely claiming you think he's a moron.

You've constantly defended and vigorously promoted this disaster, take responsibility for it.

May 17, 2017 3:53 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Wyatt/bad anonymous posted "SOCHI, Russia, May 17 (Reuters) - Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Wednesday..."

Let's be clear here, Putin is not making a good faith offer to be helpful, he's mocking the United States. The truth is the Trump administration has exposed Americans to this sort of mockery which in large part was one of the big motivating factors behind Russia's hacking of the election in 2016. One reason was to help Trump, the intelligence community has concluded that, the other was to make the U.S. democracy essentially lose its credibility and on that score they seem to have accomplished what they set out to do.

These facts should come out, but not from Russia which can't be trusted. Republicans have the power to bring it out with subpoenas but have been so far providing cover for Trump. Trump rather than attempting to shut down these investigations should be facilitating them if he has nothing to hide.

May 17, 2017 4:05 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

dissecting global warming propaganda:

http://manhattancontrarian.com/blog/2017/5/8/what-is-seen-and-what-is-not-seen-climate-edition

May 17, 2017 4:20 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Trump revealed a piece of information to the Russians because he thought that was the most advantageous thing to do"

Trump only does thing that are advantageous to Trump.

Putting our allies in danger by exposing their intelligence operatives' location to our common adversary, the Russians, is the pussy grabbers way of pre-paying for Russia's 2020 election interference.

"may not have been wise, in this instance, but the idea that this is "treason", being pushed by the press is ridiculous"

"United States Code at 18 U.S.C. § 2381 states "Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States."

"asking a prosecutor to drop a case is not "obstruction of justice""

Firing the head of the FBI because he didn't drop the investigation of Flynn when the President asked him to is the very definition of "obstruction of justice."

Obstruction may consist of any attempt to hinder the discovery, apprehension, conviction or punishment of anyone who has committed a crime. The acts by which justice is obstructed may include bribery, murder, intimidation, and the use of physical force against witnesses, law enforcement officers or court officials.

Like: Trump threatens Comey: Better hope there are no tapes

"If you really accept that he's a moron then stop bizarrely defending his every idiocy. If you're going to constantly defend his buffoonery then stop pretending falsely claiming you think he's a moron.

You've constantly defended and vigorously promoted this disaster, take responsibility for it."


Always remember he's a troll, Priya Lynn.

You cannot expect reason or responsibility from a cave-or-Mom's-basement-dwelling person having a very ugly appearance who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments by posting inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages.

May 17, 2017 5:02 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"the truth is after months of FBI investigation, three Congressional committees, and double time efforts by every investigative reporter on the planet, there is no evidence that Flynn committed any crime or even did anything improper, other than lie to the VP"

The full truth of the matter is that during all these months, Flynn has refused to voluntarily turn over the documents requested by these investigations.

Flynn's stonewalling will now come to an end as the federal grand jury and the Senate have subpoenaed those documents.

Flynn will either comply with the federal grand jury and Senate subpoenas to provide the requested documents or will risk being held in contempt of court and contempt of Congress.

May 17, 2017 5:26 PM  
Anonymous My Representative Jamey Raskin said...

Congress Could Establish a Commission to See if Trump Is Mentally Fit to Be President
Jamie Raskin proposes using the 25th Amendment to assess whether presidential incapacity exists.


"Before he was elected last year to the US House of Representatives, Maryland Congressman Jamie Raskin earned wide recognition over a quarter-century as a professor of constitutional law at American University’s Washington College of Law. So whenever Raskin weighs in on issues of presidential accountability, he speaks from experience—and with the authority of a scholar who has worked with Democrats and Republicans to make real the full promise of the nation’s defining document.

Today, however, Raskin also speaks with a sense of urgency that ought not be neglected by his House colleagues, or by citizens who have grown fretful about the lawless and erratic presidency of Donald Trump. “This is a president who has insisted that Ted Cruz’s father was involved in the assassination of John F. Kennedy and that Barack Obama was born in Indonesia and he has uttered blatant lies and never retracted them,” Raskin told The Washington Post last week. “And that is a sign of a serious mental disturbance.”

That is a harsh assessment of the 45th president of the United States. But it is no harsher than the assessments that have been voiced in recent weeks by commentators from across the ideological spectrum and by citizens who are concerned that Trump has veered into conflict not just with his critics but with his own administration.

“This is a president who seems increasingly at odds with everyone and everything around him,” says Raskin, who has introduced legislation designed to “guarantee the security of the nation and effectiveness of the government when serious concerns have been raised about the President’s ability to execute the responsibilities of the office.”

Raskin’s “Oversight Commission on Presidential Capacity Act” (H.R. 1987) would have Congress establish a commission that would be empowered to determine whether a president is fit for office. The measure seeks to bring clarity to discussions about how the 25th Amendment to the Constitution might be employed to address serious concerns about the capacity of a sitting president. The amendment, enacted after the assassination in 1963 of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy, is best known for a section that provides for the temporary transfer of power from a briefly incapacitated president to the vice president—as occurred when President Ronald Reagan and President George W. Bush underwent surgery during their tenures..."

May 17, 2017 6:02 PM  
Anonymous My Representative Jamey Raskin said...

"...But there is more to the amendment, as an assessment from Raskin’s office notes: “Section 4 of the 25th Amendment empowers Congress to establish a permanent ‘body’ that can declare that the President is ‘unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office.” The Democratic congressman’s legislation seeks to establish such a “body,” in the form of an independent Oversight Commission on Presidential Capacity.

In order to guard against the abuses and excesses of partisanship, Raskin’s plan would have the speaker of the House, the House minority leader, the Senate majority leader and the Senate minority leader each name one physician and one psychiatrist to the commission. Two more members would be prominent retired officials—selected from a list that Raskin suggests might include former presidents, vice presidents, secretaries of state, secretaries of the treasury, attorneys general, and surgeons general. Once constituted, the 10 members of the commission would select an 11th member to serve as their chair.

“In emergency situations,” suggests the assessment from Raskin’s office, “Congress could pass a concurrent resolution requiring the Commission to examine the President, determine his/her ability to execute the powers and duties of the office, and report its findings to Congress. If presidential incapacity exists, the Vice President would immediately assume the role of Acting President.”

People can debate the specifics of the Raskin proposal—and it is certain that members of Congress would do so were it to ever gain traction in a US House that is currently led by the nation’s leading Trump apologist, Speaker Paul Ryan, or in a Senate led by a cynical Trump facilitator Mitch McConnell. But Raskin has gained important support for his proposal. Former House Judiciary Committee chairman John Conyers is a cosponsor. So is New York Congressman Jerrold Nadler, the ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee’s subcommittee on the Constitution.

There’s a reason for this. The basic premise that Raskin is advancing is a sound one, not just for this moment but for the future—no matter who is president, and no matter which party dominates the executive and legislative branches of the federal government.

“The 25th Amendment was adopted 50 years ago,” explains Raskin, “but Congress has never set up the body it calls for to determine presidential fitness in the event of physical or psychological incapacity. Now is the time to do it.""

May 17, 2017 6:03 PM  
Anonymous Breaking news said...

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2017/05/17/justice-department-hands-trump-russia-probe-to-special-counsel

May 17, 2017 6:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

glad you guys don't have Islamaphobia:

BANDA ACEH, Indonesia — An Islamic Shariah court in Indonesia's conservative Aceh province has sentenced two gay men to public caning for the first time, further undermining the country's moderate image after a top Christian politician was imprisoned for blasphemy.

The court, whose sentencing Wednesday coincided with International Day Against Homophobia and Transphobia, said the men, aged 20 and 23, would each be subjected to 85 lashes for having sexual relations. One of the men wept as his sentence was read out and pleaded for leniency.

The chief prosecutor, Gulmaini, who goes by one name, said they will be caned next week, before the holy Muslim month of Ramadan starts about May 25.

The couple was arrested in late March after neighborhood vigilantes in the provincial capital Banda Aceh suspected them of being gay and broke into their rented room to catch them having sex. Mobile phone footage that circulated online and formed part of the evidence shows one of the men naked and visibly distressed as he apparently calls for help on his cellphone. The second man is repeatedly pushed by another man who is preventing the couple from leaving the room.

The lead judge, Khairil Jamal, said the men were "legally and convincingly proven to have committed gay sex."

He said the three-judge panel decided against imposing the maximum sentence of 100 lashes because the men were polite in court, cooperated with authorities and had no previous convictions.

"As Muslims, the defendants should uphold the Shariah law that prevails in Aceh," Jamal said.

Prosecutors had asked that they receive 80 lashes and said the men had waived their right to defense lawyers. Aceh implemented an expansion of Islamic bylaws and criminal code two years ago that extended Shariah law to the province's non-Muslims and allows up to 100 lashes for morality offenses including gay sex and sex between unmarried people.

Caning is also a punishment in Aceh for gambling, drinking alcohol, women who wear tight clothes and men who skip Friday prayers. More than 300 people were caned for such offenses last year.

Earlier this month, the outgoing Jakarta governor, a minority Christian, was sentenced to two years in prison for campaign comments deemed as blaspheming the Quran.

May 17, 2017 8:54 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This story is not a good idea. Not for society and certainly not for me. Because what trolls feed on is attention. And this little bit--these several thousand words--is like leaving bears a pan of baklava.

It would be smarter to be cautious, because the Internet's personality has changed. Once it was a geek with lofty ideals about the free flow of information. Now, if you need help improving your upload speeds the web is eager to help with technical details, but if you tell it you're struggling with depression it will try to goad you into killing yourself. Psychologists call this the online disinhibition effect, in which factors like anonymity, invisibility, a lack of authority and not communicating in real time strip away the mores society spent millennia building. And it's seeping from our smartphones into every aspect of our lives.

The people who relish this online freedom are called trolls, a term that originally came from a fishing method online thieves use to find victims. It quickly morphed to refer to the monsters who hide in darkness and threaten people. Internet trolls have a manifesto of sorts, which states they are doing it for the "lulz," or laughs. What trolls do for the lulz ranges from clever pranks to harassment to violent threats. There's also doxxing--publishing personal data, such as Social Security numbers and bank accounts--and swatting, calling in an emergency to a victim's house so the SWAT team busts in. When victims do not experience lulz, trolls tell them they have no sense of humor. Trolls are turning social media and comment boards into a giant locker room in a teen movie, with towel-snapping racial epithets and misogyny...

http://time.com/4457110/internet-trolls/

May 17, 2017 9:19 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

actually, if you get over yourself, you could see the post about Indonesia had a specific point

gays have somehow been deluded into thinking Islam is just another religion and treating Muslims like a persecuted minority

but that would be like calling Nazism just another political viewpoint

fully embraced, Islam calls for the death and severe persecution of homosexuals

one of their problems with our society is that we tolerate homosexuality

get the point of the post now?

making posts that disagree with your naivete is not trolling

your impulse to demonize speech you disagree with instead of engaging it is emblematic of the gay agenda's tendency to totalitarianism

May 17, 2017 9:39 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


'The full truth of the matter"

there's a fuller truth

here it is:

no one has accused or made any plausible case for any crime committed by Flynn

don't blame him at all for not turning over documents until he had to

the investigation is bogus

you make a circular argument, that goes like this:

no one has found any reason to think Flynn has committed a crime because they haven't seen all his documents

but law enforcement shouldn't be able to force people to turn over documents unless there's a reasonable possibility a crime may have been committed

there is none

and this is not a police state

May 17, 2017 9:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Trump only does thing that are advantageous to Trump.

Putting our allies in danger by exposing their intelligence operatives' location to our common adversary, the Russians, is the pussy grabbers way of pre-paying for Russia's 2020 election interference."

a baseless allegation

the Russians are allies in the fight against ISIS

ISIS kidnapped a Russian soldier and beheaded him just yesterday

"United States Code at 18 U.S.C. § 2381 states "Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States."

Trump did none of that

"Firing the head of the FBI because he didn't drop the investigation of Flynn when the President asked him to is the very definition of "obstruction of justice.""

actually, it isn't

Trump has a right to his opinion, like everyone else

"Obstruction may consist of any attempt to hinder the discovery, apprehension, conviction or punishment of anyone who has committed a crime."

bingo

no one has committed a crime

"The acts by which justice is obstructed may include bribery, murder, intimidation, and the use of physical force against witnesses, law enforcement officers or court officials."

which one are you pretending Trump did?

Like: Trump threatens Comey: Better hope there are no tapes

Priya:

"If you really accept that he's a moron then stop bizarrely defending his every idiocy. If you're going to constantly defend his buffoonery then stop pretending falsely claiming you think he's a moron.

You've constantly defended and vigorously promoted this disaster, take responsibility for it."

actually, Priya, you need to stop acting like a hillbilly where everyone has to be either fer him, or agin him

I object to much about Trump

I've said that repeatedly over the last couple of years

but I'm constantly in the position of having to defend him against the hyperbole of TTF

just maintaining a virtuous balance in contrast to your sad provincialism

idiot said:

"Always remember he's a troll, Priya Lynn."

always notice, everyone, when the left can't defend their position, they resort to demonizing those who disagree with them

"You cannot expect reason or responsibility from a cave-or-Mom's-basement-dwelling person having a very ugly appearance who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments by posting inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages."

what an ignorant comment

maybe Mom's basement is a cave

May 17, 2017 10:10 PM  
Anonymous good ol' anonymous said...

"ou keep stupidly saying this when its obviously not true. The exact opposite is what its done. Hillary won the popular vote by almost 3 million. The electoral college has ensured that the president has less support than would otherwise be the case. The electoral college makes it so that some Americans votes are worth less than other Americans. In a real democracy all people are created equal. The American electoral college shites all over that."

Hillary's strong areas were concentrated in a small section of America, so her appeal wasn't widespread

that's why she lost

there's an argument for a national popular vote and, you're right, the electoral college does make some people's votes pointless

but Trump likely would have won a national popular vote for reasons that I've explained so much that no one can say they misunderstand

May 17, 2017 10:18 PM  
Anonymous Fake news from Fox said...

A conspiratorial tale of murder, with Fox News at the center

"The conspiracy-choked story of Seth Rich’s killing has made a sudden comeback thanks to Fox News, but the latest reporting seems to have generated more controversy than credibility.

Rich’s family is demanding a retraction from Fox for airing unsubstantiated claims about the Democratic National Committee staffer, whose death last year generated a wild river of theories and innuendo about who was behind it.

Fox’s latest reporting on the unsolved crime has an odd twist: Much of its work relies on a private investigator who is also a Fox News contributor. The investigator, in turn, is being funded by a frequent Fox News guest.

Rich, 27, was fatally shot last July by an unknown assailant as he was walking home late one night. His death, which police say appeared to be the result of a botched robbery, has become the subject of a popular right-wing theory, driven primarily by social media, that alleges that he was killed as payback for handing off thousands of emails to WikiLeaks that revealed embarrassing details about the inner workings of the DNC.

The Rich story has taken on elements of the Comet Ping Pong conspiracy, a false and preposterous tale involving Hillary Clinton and her supposed operation of a child-abuse ring at a District pizza restaurant.

Fox News and WTTG-TV — the Fox-owned broadcast station in Washington — revived the buzz surrounding the Rich story with a series of reports beginning Monday night.

Most prominently, Fox News reported Tuesday that Rich sent more than 44,000 DNC emails to a source affiliated with WikiLeaks before he died. It based the claim on a federal investigator, whom it didn’t identify, and said it was confirmed by Rod Wheeler, a private investigator in Washington who has been working on behalf of the Rich family. But the family now sees Wheeler as someone who’s helped to smear the memory of their son.

Rich’s family slammed the Fox report as false, and Wheeler, a former D.C. homicide detective, appeared to back away from it on Wednesday. He said in an interview that he could not confirm the identity of a federal investigator making such an assertion and that he had no direct knowledge of it.

relationships among some of the principal players. Wheeler is a Fox News contributor, and his private investigation of the Rich case is being financed by Ed Butowsky, a Texas money manager who sometimes appears as a guest on Fox to discuss economics and personal finance.

Butowsky — who said he was once under consideration to be a contributor at the network — confirmed in an interview that he is covering the expenses of Wheeler’s investigation. He said he is doing so out of sympathy for the Rich family.

It’s rare for a news organization to have such a close relationship with the people it is covering. Between them, Wheeler and Butowsky are playing three roles at once: as a Fox source, as a paid contributor to the network and as a supposedly independent investigator of the murder.

In a segment featuring Wheeler on Tuesday’s “Hannity” program, these multiple roles weren’t disclosed to viewers..."

May 18, 2017 7:25 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Obstruction may consist of any attempt to hinder the discovery, apprehension, conviction or punishment of anyone who has committed a crime. The acts by which justice is obstructed may include bribery, murder, intimidation, and the use of physical force against witnesses, law enforcement officers or court officials."

"no one has committed a crime"

Bullshit.

Flynn shopped around an immunity deal.

People who don't commit crimes don't ask for immunity.

"which one are you pretending Trump did?"

The pussy grabber attempted to "hinder the discovery, apprehension, conviction or punishment of anyone who has committed a crime."

That would be the crime Flynn tried to win immunity for before testifying before the House and Senate Intelligence committees.

The pussy grabber also used "intimidation ("Comey better hope there's no tape") against" the head of the FBI, a "law enforcement officer."

The only one pretending Flynn committed no crime and the pussy grabber did not try to hinder the investigation as well as intimidate the lead law enforcement officer, Director Comey from doing his job is the TTF Troll, who claims to hate Trump yet constantly defends him.

It sucks to be you.

May 18, 2017 7:42 AM  
Anonymous Missing line in Fake news from Fox said...

" He said in an interview that he could not confirm the identity of a federal investigator making such an assertion and that he had no direct knowledge of it.

Fox’s reporting has an unusual background, given the tangle of relationships among some of the principal players....

May 18, 2017 7:54 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Flynn shopped around an immunity deal.

People who don't commit crimes don't ask for immunity."

well, tell us what that crime is

seeking immunity is not proof of anything but reasonable caution in a witch hunt environment

"which one are you pretending Trump did?

The pussy grabber attempted to "hinder the discovery, apprehension, conviction or punishment of anyone who has committed a crime."

That would be the crime Flynn tried to win immunity for before testifying before the House and Senate Intelligence committees."

other than suggest that the investigation be dropped, he did nothing to hinder it, and no one has identified any crime that Flynn may have committed

"The pussy grabber also used "intimidation ("Comey better hope there's no tape") against" the head of the FBI, a "law enforcement officer.""

it's intimidation to suggest there are tapes of a conversation so don't lie about the conversation?

oh yeah, truth is very intimidating but I don't think that would fly in any court in the land

The only ones pretending Flynn committed a crime and that Trump tried to hinder the investigation as well as intimidate the lead law enforcement officer, Director Comey from doing his job are Dem partisans, insane over their loss last November of any influence in our government

history will remember their role

ever read Kennedy's Profiles in Courage?

read the section on Andrew Johnson's impeachment trial

the sequel will be Profiles in Deception and Chuck Schumer will be the main character

"who claims to hate Trump yet constantly defends him"

I never claimed to "hate" Trump

I think he's not a good role model, not a good President, and I fundamentally disagree with him many issues

but he has been victimized by continual fakery and hoaxes and hyperbole

any decent person can see that

and, in that regard, he has my sympathy



May 18, 2017 8:15 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

And you predicted a President Huckabee too didn't you?

It still sucks to be you.

May 18, 2017 9:17 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"And you predicted a President Huckabee too didn't you?

It still sucks to be you."

so pathetic

you might want to get help

yes, I've made a number of predictions that didn't pan out over the years

right now, I'm predicting Nats over the Orioles in the 2017 World Series

what would really suck is if I worried what some low-level miscreant on a little-read radical fringe blog thought

fortunately, I don't

May 18, 2017 9:23 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

the media has completely lost their minds

the special counsel is welcome, just to cut through the crap, which has accelerated this week

I think even the Dems are getting nauseous

they should

history won't treat them kindly

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/columnists/adriana_cohen/2017/05/adriana_cohen_the_media_has_lost_its_marbles#.WR11K6tD41U.twitter

May 18, 2017 10:46 AM  
Anonymous Au contraire said...

http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2017/05/17/impeachment-proceedings-need-start-now/ZlymLL3b7wrjAKC2CpjOtN/story.html

May 18, 2017 10:56 AM  
Anonymous svelte_brunette said...


"fully embraced, Islam calls for the death and severe persecution of homosexuals"

So does Christianity:

New International Version
"'If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.

New Living Translation
"If a man practices homosexuality, having sex with another man as with a woman, both men have committed a detestable act. They must both be put to death, for they are guilty of a capital offense.

English Standard Version
If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.

New American Standard Bible
If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltiness is upon them.

King James Bible
If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

There were even American Christians heading over to Africa a few years ago trying to get "kill the gays" legislation passed. Having failed in America, they hoped that if they could spread the idea enough internationally, eventually it would become palatable here.

Christians here have expressed glee when homosexuals were killed and even said that more of it should have happened.


"0ne of their problems with our society is that we tolerate homosexuality

get the point of the post now?"

The point of your post was a lame attempt to show how "enlightened" "Christians" are compared to Muslims, and how LGBT people should be "thankful" for how "kind" you are.

The only rasons Christians currently don't treat LGBT people as bad as Muslims do is our country's founding as a distinctly secular state. We all know what Christians would be doing to LGBT folks if they could get away with it.

"making posts that disagree with your naivete is not trolling

your impulse to demonize speech you disagree with instead of engaging it is emblematic of the gay agenda's tendency to totalitarianism"

It's not you disagreements that are considered trolling. It's your compulsive impulse to demonize LGBT people, and characterise all of their efforts to find a better accommodation in society as "totalitarianism."

Cynthia

May 18, 2017 12:31 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"So does Christianity:"

you've taken a bunch of verses out of context

you know that, right?

why is it that in countries with a Christian heritage, gays are out in the open, and in societies with a Muslim heritage, gays have to hide to stay alive?

"The point of your post was a lame attempt to show how "enlightened" "Christians" are compared to Muslims, and how LGBT people should be "thankful" for how "kind" you are."

no, it was show that Islam is not compatible with any other point of view

"The only rasons Christians currently don't treat LGBT people as bad as Muslims do is our country's founding as a distinctly secular state."

our country was founded as non-denominational but not secular

where have you heard the Creator endowed us with the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness?

"We all know what Christians would be doing to LGBT folks if they could get away with it."

just what they are doing

trying to help them out of the trap they're in

"It's not you disagreements that are considered trolling. It's your compulsive impulse to demonize LGBT people, and characterise all of their efforts to find a better accommodation in society as "totalitarianism.""

so, if I express the thought that trying to shut down others right to speech is totalitarian, that's trolling

thanks, I had wondered what idiotic logic you were using

May 18, 2017 1:58 PM  
Anonymous We see your true colors shining through your bullshit said...

Trump will likely appoint 4 anti-gay-agenda justices in his first term

any of you who don't like it can move to chilly Canada with crazy Priya
MAY 06, 2017 1:15 AM

"with who LGBT folks may marry,"

I'm fine with them "folks" marrying anyone they want as long as they don't demand governmental recognition
APRIL 17, 2017 11:12 AM

"Any any priest, of any religion, that espouses anti-LGBTQ sentiment should be viewed as a threat to children"

actually, based on the pattern of gays trying to infiltrate religious groups as a cover for their pedophilia, they should be banned from such employment
APRIL 26, 2017 1:38 PM

"because you voted for the man whose campaign is under FBI investigation?"

show where someone has said Trump is under FBI investigation

I did vote for him, reluctantly, just to keep the SCOTUS free from the gay agenda

looks like it's working
APRIL 01, 2017 5:16 PM

meanwhile, with the cover of all this Russia distraction, the conservative movement scores victory after victory

the walls close in on the gay agenda

drip..drip..drip..drip

Neil Gorsuch has a big grin on his face

he'll have it for decades
MARCH 31, 2017 12:24 AM

May 18, 2017 2:44 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

your conceit is to find an equivalence between gays and the gay agenda

I think they're different

the gay agenda may have some gay adherents but it's primarily driven by radicals, most of whom are heterosexual, who exploit gays for political purposes

May 18, 2017 3:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

see, the fact that there is a gay agenda at all shows the tolerance of societies with Christian heritage

in Muslim societies, any nascent gay advocacy movement would be instantly annihilated

if you think I'm wrong, go have one of your gay pride parades in Mecca

May 18, 2017 3:03 PM  
Anonymous The White House’s absolutely brutal night, in 6 headlines said...

“Justice Department to appoint special counsel to oversee probe of Russian meddling in 2016 election”

“House majority leader told colleagues last year: ‘I think Putin pays’ Trump”

“Flynn stopped military plan Turkey opposed — after being paid as its agent”

“Trump Team Knew Flynn Was Under Investigation Before He Came to White House”

“Israeli Source Seen as Key to Countering Islamic State Threat”

“Trump campaign had at least 18 undisclosed contacts with Russians — sources”

May 18, 2017 3:03 PM  
Anonymous svelte_brunette said...

"you've taken a bunch of verses out of context

you know that, right?"

I know that's the kind of thing that gets told to LGBT folks all the time. In private, and in public. Anytime LGBT folks have a public event, chances are you'll find some Christians yelling put bits of Leviticus, ESPECIALLY the parts about gay people being dead.

THAT is the context I have to deal with, even from people at work.

You can have all the theocratic philosophy you can endure, but that is meaningless in the context of a crowd of people who would really rather see you dead.

"no,it was show that Islam is not compatible with any other point of view"

History shows that it is Christianity that is incompatible with other points of view.

Christians eliminated nearly all of the other regions in he Roman Empire, killed pagans, sent armies to the middle East to destroy Muslims for centuries, eliminated most of the indiginous tribes of North America, and even tried to eliminate Jews in the last century. Talk about incompatible. Now that Muslims are tired of being manipulated by Christian counties and are fighting back, THEY are suddenly the ones that are incompatible. Way to spin things.


"so, if I express the thought that trying to shut down others right to speech is totalitarian, that's trolling"

You have the right to all sorts of free speech in this country. But if you are going to slander people they have the right to defend themselves, even if they have to still to your crude and insulting methods to do so.

Jim can shut you down anytime he likes because it's his blog. You are probably surprised to hear this, but their are plenty of sites out there that refuse to listen to the views of liberals and LGBT people.

If you want to start your own blog and spew all the anti-lgbt bike you like, you are free to do so. It just takes a few bucks, and you can kick off anyone who doesn't agree with you. You can be your own little God.

Your speech is only limited by your imagination.

The reason you don't is that you wouldn't be able to troll liberals and LGBT people on a daily basis. You'd just be another angry conservative yelling into the void.

Cynthia

May 18, 2017 3:07 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Go have an Easter Parade in Mecca and tell us how that goes.

May 18, 2017 3:07 PM  
Anonymous svelte_brunette said...

While Christians are accusing gays of being pedophiles and dressing up like women to invade privacy in restrooms, Baylor University (you know that BAPTIST CHRISTIAN school in the south?) has another rape scandle on its hands:

Oh, excuse me, I meant "bonding" scandal on its hands:


"New, eye-popping accusations were added to the sexual abuse scandal at Baylor University in a lawsuit made public Wednesday, alleging that football players recorded the gang-rape of a female volleyball player — and referred to it as a "bonding ritual."

The scandal at Baylor, involving multiple lawsuits alleging unchecked criminal behavior in the football program, has already led to the firing of President Kenneth Starr and football coach Art Briles.

The new lawsuit, filed Tuesday in U.S. District Court in Waco, Texas, where Baylor is based, alleges that the volleyball player was raped by as many as eight football players on Feb. 11, 2012, about a month before two other female Baylor students were allegedly gang-raped by football players.

It's at least the seventh suit brought against Baylor — the nation's largest Baptist university — under Title IX, a federal law that bars discrimination based on sex at educational institutions. At least five other lawsuits have been filed under different provisions of federal law."

I'm being forced to conclude that religious people say all sorts of sexually sordid things about gay people to distract folk's attention away from all the sexually sordid stuff they do.

Really, how many gay instutions have been guilty of the same kinds of behavior that the Catholic Church, Mormon Fundamentalists, or Baylor University has done?


Stop trying to save gay people and save yourselves.


Cynthia

May 18, 2017 3:22 PM  
Anonymous Oooof! said...

All right, Cynthia!

You go, girl!

"meanwhile, with the cover of all this Russia distraction, the conservative movement scores victory after victory"

Being so bold as to speak for some TTFettes, we sincerely hope you are enjoying that "Russia distraction" these days.

We are not even up to four months since the inauguration and already the man you voted for is under federal investigation for "this Russia distraction" and there's talk of impeachment.

May 18, 2017 3:45 PM  
Anonymous Just like My Representative Jamey Raskin said...

Conservative columnist suggests ousting President Trump with the 25th Amendment

"A conservative columnist has suggested in a recent New York Times op-ed that President Trump be removed from office using the Constitution's 25th Amendment.

According to the Cornell University Law School website, "The 25th Amendment, proposed by Congress and ratified by the states in the aftermath of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, provides the procedures for replacing the president or vice president in the event of death, removal, resignation, or incapacitation."

It was used multiple times in the 1970s; for example, to replace President Nixon after he resigned.

In his Times op-ed, Ross Douthat, in making a case for Trump's unfitness to serve, states that, in order to be president, "one needs some basic attributes: a reasonable level of intellectual curiosity, a certain seriousness of purpose, a basic level of managerial competence, a decent attention span, a functional moral compass, a measure of restraint and self-control."

He then says that "Trump is seemingly deficient in them all."

As such, Douthat suggests the option of invoking the 25th Amendment because "his incapacity to really govern, to truly execute the serious duties that fall to him to carry out, is nevertheless testified to daily — not by his enemies or external critics, but by...the men and women who serve around him in the White House and the cabinet."

According to Vox, the language of the amendment means that "one vice president and any eight Cabinet officers can, theoretically, decide to knock the president out of power at any time."

Douthat later adds that "...leaving a man this witless and unmastered in an office with these powers and responsibilities is an act of gross negligence..."

May 18, 2017 4:06 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"All right, Cynthia!

You go, girl!"

no comment

"Being so bold as to speak for some TTFettes, we sincerely hope you are enjoying that "Russia distraction" these days."

you ARE bold

hope Jim doesn't delete your comment

"We are not even up to four months since the inauguration and already the man you voted for is under federal investigation"

what four months?

Comey says he's been investigating for ten months

funny, the Director of National Intelligence says there was no evidence three months ago

so, it seems, the whole thing is a hoax created for political purposes

"for "this Russia distraction" and there's talk of impeachment."

Dems have been talking impeachment for months

that's nothing new

they still haven't found any grounds

but they really want it

so, they'll make something up

it's called fake news!!

May 18, 2017 4:11 PM  
Anonymous Chelsea Manning is beautiful!! said...

https://www.instagram.com/p/BUPbwX0htrw/

May 18, 2017 5:04 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"funny, the Director of National Intelligence says there was no evidence three months ago"

He did not say "there was no evidence."

He said "there was no evidence of that included in our report."

From the Transcript of Meet The Press 03-05-17

"Todd: "...Does intelligence exist that can definitively answer the following question, whether there were improper contacts between the Trump campaign and Russian officials?"

Clapper: "We did not include any evidence in our report, and I say, ‘our,’ that's NSA, FBI and CIA, with my office, the Director of National Intelligence, that had anything, that had any reflection of collusion between members of the Trump campaign and the Russians. There was no evidence of that included in our report."

Todd: "I understand that. But does it exist?"

Clapper: "Not to my knowledge."

Todd: If it existed, it would have been in this report?

Clapper: This could have unfolded or become available in the time since I left the government..."


But what else did the Director of National Intelligence say after the media tried to spin those words into fake news?

On May 8, 2017 the Washington Post reported "Former acting attorney general Sally Yates and James R. Clapper Jr., the former director of national intelligence, are testifying at a Senate Judiciary subcommittee hearing on Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. This is the transcript of that hearing."

You might remember that testimony.

It turned the spotlight back on the Russia/Trump campaign connection story.

Here's the relevant part you want to pretend Clapper didn't add to his March testimony:

"...During my tenure as DNI, it was my practice to defer to the FBI director, both Director Mueller and then subsequently Director Comey, on whether, when and to what extent they would inform me about such investigations. This stems from the unique position of the FBI, which straddles both intelligence and law enforcement. And as a consequence, I was not aware of the counterintelligence investigation Director Comey first referred to during his testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee for Intelligence on the 20th of March, and that comports with my public statements..."

May 19, 2017 6:52 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"You might remember that testimony.

It turned the spotlight back on the Russia/Trump campaign connection story."

actually, it didn't

the media decides what to turn a spotlight on

and, at that point, they decided to try and exalt Susan Yates as some type of man for all seasons

they didn't "spotlight" Clapper's testimony

truth is, the Russian hoax has led nowhere and the public had tired of it until Trump fired Comey

the timing was bad

he should have been fired the day after his inauguration

right now, we're hearing Trump tried to obstruct justice by asking Comey to lay off Flynn

but, if so, why didn't Comey report it back in January, when it allegedly happened?

and if Trump was obstructing justice, why was Comey allowed to continue his investigation for months?

this week, classified information has been leaked to the press: Trump's private conversation with the Russian ambassador

and a list of Flynn contacts with the Russian ambassador

who's leaking this classified information?

since it's the only crime that's been known to be committed and since the FBI has stated no interest in investigating it, there's only one logical explanation

the FBI did it

May 19, 2017 7:22 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

FBI Investigating Possible Leaks To Rudy Giuliani About Hillary Clinton Email Investigation
FBI Director James Comey said he’s “very very interested” in the matter.


You remember Giuliani's boast about his FBI sources don't you or have you selectively forgotten that too?

"...Shortly before the election, Comey announced that he was reopening the probe into Clinton’s private server after more emails were found on the computer of former Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.), who was married to a top Clinton aide.

A few days later, Giuliani went on Fox News and bragged that he knew in advance about the new emails.

“Did I hear about it? You’re darn right I heard about it,” said Giuliani, a prominent Trump surrogate and former New York City mayor. He added that he had expected the news to come out weeks before.

Comey said he didn’t yet know whether anyone in the FBI had leaked information about the investigation to Giuliani or others, but it was a matter that he was “very very interested in.”

“If I find out that people were leaking information about our investigations, whether to reporters or to private parties, there will be severe consequences,” he told Sen. Pat Leahy (D-Vt.) in testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee Wednesday.

“But you are looking into it?” Leahy asked.

“Correct,” Comey replied. He said he would let the committee know the findings of this investigation, although he might not release them publicly...."

May 19, 2017 9:02 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"truth is, the Russian hoax has led nowhere and the public had tired of it until Trump fired Comey"

Maybe that's "the truth" in bubble land, but out here in the RW:

March 2017 Poll: Majority of Americans Want Special Prosecutor To Investigate Russia-Trump Allegations

"...the majority of Americans, including an overwhelming number of independent voters, are concerned about the ongoing saga and want a special prosecutor to investigate..."

May 2017 Almost 80% of Americans want a special prosecutor to investigate Donald Trump, poll finds
Just one in five approve of US President's decision to sack FBI director James Comey


"Almost four in five Americans believe an independent investigator should be appointed to look into Donald Trump’s alleged links with Russia, a new poll has found.

A massive 78 per cent of people want a special prosecutor to handle the investigation that is currently being led by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), whose director James Comey was fired by the US president last week.

In contrast, only 15 per cent want Congress to lead the probe..."

May 19, 2017 9:12 AM  
Anonymous the Russians are coming!! said...

"Comey said he didn’t yet know whether anyone in the FBI had leaked information about the investigation to Giuliani or others, but it was a matter that he was “very very interested in.”

“If I find out that people were leaking information about our investigations, whether to reporters or to private parties, there will be severe consequences,” he told Sen. Pat Leahy (D-Vt.) in testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee Wednesday.

“But you are looking into it?” Leahy asked.

“Correct,” Comey replied. He said he would let the committee know the findings of this investigation, although he might not release them publicly....""

interesting. he was very interested in whether someone leaked information about his investigation about Hillary, which is not classified, and he's nonchalant about leaks of classified discussions of the President and Flynn with the Russians, which is classified

just bolsters the theory that the upper FBI is behind the illegal leaks

hopefully, Mueller will be looking at Comey

meanwhile, it looks like Biden was colluding with the Russians too:

"Former Vice President Joe Biden had harsh words for former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton on Thursday night.

“I never thought she was the correct candidate,” Biden said at the SALT conference in Las Vegas. “I thought I was the correct candidate.”

The audience clapped at Biden’s comments.

“No man or woman should announce for the presidency unless they genuinely believe that for that moment in the nation’s history they are the most qualified person to deal with the issues facing the country,” he said.

He also didn’t rule out running himself in 2020, according to multiple reports from

And while he reluctantly supported Clinton throughout the campaign, he has since been critical of her run, saying in December that she never knew why she was running.

“I don’t think she ever really figured it out,” Biden said."

btw, the Wall Street Journal is reporting that the opening of the new football stadium for the Rams and Chargers is being delayed a year.

why?

too much rain in the LA area

that's right kids

last year at this time, TTFers were saying the California drought was proof positive of global warming and would never end

I pointed out that the same conditions existed four decades ago when I lived in Southern California

it's a normal cyclical pattern

boy, you guys are stupid

they said the same thing after Katrina

more frequent and bigger hurricanes to infinity and beyond because of global

what has followed has been the most hurricane free period in history for the eastern US

boy, you guys are stupid

May 19, 2017 9:36 AM  
Anonymous In response to the appointment of a Special Counsel, Dan Rather said...

This is the day. Up until today, President Trump has had the ability to control almost every news cycle. From this day forward, he no longer has control.

And, instead, if you will, [instead] of being the hunter, he becomes the hunted. And, I think, you know, that’s extremely important to keep in mind: from here on out…he can’t control it.

May 19, 2017 9:44 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"This is the day. Up until today, President Trump has had the ability to control almost every news cycle. From this day forward, he no longer has control.

And, instead, if you will, [instead] of being the hunter, he becomes the hunted. And, I think, you know, that’s extremely important to keep in mind: from here on out…he can’t control it."

a sad glimpse at a once influential media figure trying to say something to regain relevance

pretty sure that the only that will change is that Mueller will perform his task with discretion and won't be leaking information on a regular basis

and the President will continue to dominate news cycles

don't know what Rather would be imagining about Trump "controlling" the news

if he did, the news wouldn't dominated the Russian hoax

May 19, 2017 10:06 AM  
Anonymous Hillary in the news! said...

"NEW YORK, May 19 (Reuters) - Former U.S. Congressman Anthony Weiner was expected to plead guilty in federal court in New York on Friday, months after U.S. prosecutors opened an investigation into his "sexting" with a 15-year-old girl that eventually played a role in the U.S. presidential election.

A spokesman for the law firm representing Weiner, Covington & Burling, said he would plead guilty before U.S. District Judge Loretta Preska on Friday morning.

Closely related to the Democratic nominee for President, Weiner, 52, sent explicit messages to a 15-year-old girl in North Carolina.

Federal agents seized Weiner's laptop during the probe of his sexting with young girls and discovered a batch of emails from his wife, Huma Abedin, to Hillary Clinton, the Democratic nominee for president in 2016."

May 19, 2017 11:09 AM  
Anonymous svelte_brunette said...

"last year at this time, TTFers were saying the California drought was proof positive of global warming and would never end"

I'll bet money no one actually said that.

Go ahead, dig up the quote.

"more frequent and bigger hurricanes to infinity and beyond because of global"

...global warming maybe?

Exaggerate much?

"what has followed has been the most hurricane free period in history for the eastern US"

Don't worry, that is cyclical to. There are roughly the same number of hurricanes out in the Atlantic, they just haven't been visiting the US as much recently. Probably has something to do with that big hot are system stuck over DC.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2016/08/04/the-u-s-coast-is-in-an-unprecedented-hurricane-drought-why-this-is-terrifying/?utm_term=.20dc0faae8fd

Arguably, the best evidence for global warming is in the Arctic ice cap.

I have explained before that air doesn't absorb much heat (although it is useful for moving it around) and simply isn't a good place to measure warming effects in a system dominated by water and ice.

As I've explained before, put a pot of ice water on your stove and turn on the heat. Gently mix it and take temputure measurements over time of the water-ice mixture and the air above it. You will find that the water-ice stays pretty close to zero until most of the ice is gone. That is because is at 0 degrees absorbs a boatload of heat until it turns into liquid at 0 degrees. It then proceeds to get "warmer."

This is not a trick. It's science.

Deniers like to claim "warming" has stopped or that we have even "cooled" since 1998 - the hottest air temps until last year. Oops.

But some of the best evidence for heat energy being trapped in our earth system is the Arctic ice record. We have lost nearly half of the Arctic ice cover since satellites starting watching in 1979:


http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/charctic-interactive-sea-ice-graph/

Click on different years for yourself. You'll find that 1998 really doesn't look much lower than 1979, despite the fact that 1998 was one of our hottest years. That was when the ice just sat there at 0 degrees sucking up heat. That's not the case anymore. Click on years in the last decade and you'll see lots of ice levels below the two-sigma line. If it continues at this rate, summer Arctic ice will simply be gone in another 35 years. Winter ice won't be far behind.

NASA shows we've been losing Arctic ice at 13.3% per dacade:


https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/arctic-sea-ice/

I personally expect that rate to increase due to the loss of ice, increased heat absorbtion by water that used to be under the ice, methane relases from thawing tundra, and of course, plenty more human CO2 releases.

When Carl Sagan brought global warming to the US consciousness in the '70's, scientists weren't sure if it would be a major problem in decades, centuries, or even a millennia. Right now it looks like less than one century. Louisiana loses a football field of land to the ocean every hour, and Florida has started building their roads higher so they can keep using them.

Physics doesn't care whether you believe in anthropomorphic global warming or not. Scientists understand it well enough to know we are harming ourselves.

Cynthia

May 19, 2017 12:58 PM  
Anonymous svelte_brunette said...

Typo correction:

because ICE at 0 degrees absorbs a boatload of heat

May 19, 2017 1:05 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"interesting. he was very interested in whether someone leaked information about his investigation about Hillary, which is not classified, and he's nonchalant about leaks of classified discussions of the President and Flynn with the Russians, which is classified"

Another attempt at creating FAKE NEWS.

Let's see you document a quote of Comey's indicating his "nonchalance" about Trump/Flynn Russian leaks.

< crickets commence chirping >

Meanwhile, here in the RW we are aware of Comey's testimony you apparently have failed to grasp or remember:

From Director Comey's March 20, 2017 opening statement:

"COMEY....We need to protect people's privacy. We need to make sure we don't give other people clues as to where we're going. We need to make sure that we don't give information to our foreign adversaries about what we know or don't know. We just cannot do our work well or fairly if we start talking about it while we're doing it. So we will try very, very hard to avoid that, as we always do.

This work is very complex and there is no way for me to give you a timetable as to when it will be done. We approach this work in an open-minded, independent way and our expert investigators will conclude that work as quickly as they can but they will always do it well no matter how long that takes. I can promise you, we will follow the facts wherever they lead. And I wanna underscore something my friend Mike Rogers said, leaks of classified information are serious, serious federal crimes for a reason...

(AUDIO GAP)

COMEY: ... they should be investigated and where possible prosecuted in a way that reflects that seriousness so that people understand it simply cannot be tolerated."


And later under questioning:

"...COMEY: Any unauthorized disclosure of classified conversations or documents is potentially a violation of law and a serious, serious problem. I've spent most of my career trying to figure out unauthorized disclosures and where they came from. It's very, very hard.

Often times, it doesn't come from the people who actually know the secrets. It comes from one hop out, people who heard about it or were told about it. And that's the reason so much information that reports to be accurate classified information is actually wrong in the media. Because the people who heard about it didn't hear about it right. But, it is an enormous problem whenever you find information that is actually classified in the media.

We don't talk about it because we don't wanna confirm it, but I do think it should be investigated aggressively and if possible, prosecuted so people take as a lesson, this is not OK. This behavior can be deterred and its deterred by locking some people up who have engaged in criminal activity."...


Nothing Director Comey said indicates he's "nonchalant about leaks of classified discussions."

You should be ashamed of yourself for being part of the right wing echo chamber and lying like that to spread fake news.

Here's the URL of that full transcript of the House Intelligence Committee hearing on Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election where the above 2 quotes came from:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2017/03/20/full-transcript-fbi-director-james-comey-testifies-on-russian-interference-in-2016-election/

And there are links to two other full transcripts of Congressional hearings on Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election above in this thread.

Have fun looking for Comey's nonexistent nonchalance while crickets chirp.

May 19, 2017 4:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Republicans have lost the war on gay marriage: Support for same-sex unions at all-time high

A new poll from Gallup shows record support for same-sex marriage. Survey results released Monday show that 64 percent of Americans are in favor of the Supreme Court’s 2015 decision to legalize marriage equality — up from 61 percent last year. In addition, 72 percent of respondents told Gallup that consenting relations between individuals should not be banned by law. Just 32 percent of Americans agreed with those sentiments three decades ago.

Interestingly, Gallup notes that the historic highs register across the board. Nearly half of Republicans (47 percent) are in favor of the freedom to marry, while a majority of Protestants (55 percent) support legal recognition for same-sex unions for the first time since the polling agency began tracking the issue.

These survey results are great news for the LGBT community, which has worked for decades to show that our relationships and families deserve the same rights as everyone else’s. Twenty years ago, just 16 percent of Republicans believed that same-sex couples should be allowed to marry. In the wake of the Obergefell v. Hodges ruling, that same political party has attempted to undermine those newly won protections with legislation that contradicts the Supreme Court’s decision, but Gallup’s findings show the GOP isn’t winning back hearts and minds. Anti-LGBT conservatives are even losing their own party.

2017 has been a nonstop assault on LGBT rights across the U.S. The American Civil Liberties Union has estimated that over 200 pieces of discriminatory legislation targeting queer and trans people will be introduced at the state level this year, and a great many of those bills have gay marriage in their crosshairs. Having lost the courts, Republican legislators are trying to win the war by ensuring that same-sex unions are relegated to a second-class status.

[Sounds just like the TTF Troll who on APRIL 17, 2017 at 11:12 AM said "I'm fine with them "folks" marrying anyone they want as long as they don't demand governmental recognition." ]

The most obvious attempt to do so was a North Carolina bill which sought to ban marriage equality in the state. Known as the “Uphold Historical Marriage Act,” House Bill 780 declared the Obergefell ruling “null and void in the State of North Carolina.” Sponsored by Republican House Reps. Larry Pittman, Michael Speciale, and Carl Ford, the legislation stipulates that the state’s definition of marriage should supercede the national one. In 2012, 61 percent of N.C. voters cast a ballot in favor of a Constitutional Amendment limiting marriage to one man and one woman.

That bill, like many such efforts, failed. It was tabled in April.

These attacks, despite their varying effectiveness, have remained consistent throughout this year’s legislative session. Tennessee got its own bill threatening to block same-sex marriage in the state — called the “Natural Marriage Defense Act” — but Republican legislators also introduced a bill that would prevent same-sex couples who conceive through artificial insemination from having both parties listed on the child’s birth certificate. Neither of those bills have become law, but one bill did sneak through: Senate Bill 1085 requires that words like “mother” and “father” be treated with their “natural and ordinary meaning.”..."

May 19, 2017 5:31 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"...While Texas considers a bill that would allow same-sex couples to be turned away from adoption agencies, a new law from a state thirsty for an anti-LGBT bill would allow for Kim Davis-style discrimination. Senate Bill 522, which got a thumbs up from the House State Affairs Committee on Tuesday, would allow county clerks to refuse to issue marriage licenses based on their “sincerely held religious belief” that marriage is between a man and a woman.

These legislatures have attempted to use same-sex unions as wedge issues to drum up support for the Republican party. By playing to what they believe their base wants and taking LGBT down a peg, it helps state representatives win their reelection races, sure to be contentious in 2018. Record numbers of people of color and women are running in next year’s midterms.

Although a handful of states have passed anti-LGBT laws in 2017, there’s a good reason why more haven’t joined them: These appeals to Republican voters have fallen flat. Texas’ myriad attempts at discrimination — which include bills targeting transgender bathroom usage and trans athletes — have drummed up more opposition than they have support. The Texas Association of Business has warned that taking action against the LGBT community could lead to an $8.5 billion boycott of the state. That exact number has been questioned, but given the economic fallout after North Carolina’s troubled anti-LGBT bill, the impact wouldn’t be good.

Discriminating against LGBT people, especially same-sex couples, is as costly as it is unpopular. A poll from the Public Religion Research Institute released earlier this year showed that of all of the faith groups polled, only one supported the right of individuals to discriminate against LGBT married couples based on their sincerely held religious beliefs. White evangelical protestants were in favor of religiously-based refusals by a margin of 50 to 42. Over three-fifths of all respondents believed that LGBT and heterosexual couples should be treated equally.

Instead of driving a stake into the heart of the marriage equality movement, polling indicates that the intensifying GOP opposition only helps the cause. According to Gallup, the support for same-sex marriage has shot up in the past year by three points — a pretty significant increase.

There will continue to be efforts to strike at LGBT people’s rights. Republicans will continue to push an agenda that makes queer and transgender people into scapegoats, whether it’s a Congressional bill that would allow LGBT workers to be fired or the slow rollback of federal protections under the new administration. The GOP may score a handful of victories, including the handful of anti-LGBT adoption bills enacted this year, but the surveys show that the forces of inclusion are winning."


http://www.salon.com/2017/05/19/republicans-have-lost-the-war-on-gay-marriage-support-for-same-sex-unions-at-all-time-high/

May 19, 2017 5:32 PM  
Anonymous terri schiavo said...

Seth Rich's family sends cease and desist to Fox News contributor behind evidence-free smears
Rich family: “Your statements and actions have caused, and continue to cause, the Family severe mental anguish and emotional distress”

May 19, 2017 11:44 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Have fun looking for Comey's nonexistent nonchalance while crickets chirp"

you mean like when Trey Gowdy asked him point blank "will you pledge to investigate leaks of classified information connected to discussions between the Trump administration and Russian officials?"

and he said he can't

meanwhile, he can expound endlessly about his investigation of collusion between Trump and the Russians

Diane Fienstein, on the Senate intelligence Committee, said this week she's seen nothing to indicate that the Trump administration colluded with the Russians

so why do we have a special prosecutor?

it's because this is not about truth but about a war between the deep state and the American voter over who controls this country:

http://freebeacon.com/national-security/feinstein-says-theres-still-no-evidence-collusion-trump-camp-russia/

May 20, 2017 10:04 AM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Wyatt/bad anonymous said "funny, the Director of National Intelligence says there was no evidence three months ago".

Typical Wyatt/bad anonymous lie, take something someone said and distort it so it compeletely changes its meaning.

What Clapper said was that he was not aware of any evidence, NOT that no evidence existed. He has since clarified that he wouldn't have been in a position to be aware of such evidence given that the FBI wouldn't inform him of the state of their investigation as a matter of policy. And of course since he left the position he is not in a position to be aware of any evidence uncovered since then.

May 20, 2017 1:07 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Wyatt/bad anonymous said "Diane Fienstein, on the Senate intelligence Committee, said this week she's seen nothing to indicate that the Trump administration colluded with the Russians".

Given how you distorted what Clapper said to change its meaning there's no reason to believe your claims about what Fienstein allegedly said.

Further, the Democratic head of the House investigation into Trump/Russia said he has seen evidence of Trump collusion that goes beyond circumstancial that there was collusion.

And as I've frequently pointed out, there is a mass of circumstancial evidence that Trump campaign colluded with Russia and people have been convicted based on the weight of circumstancial evidence alone.

May 20, 2017 1:10 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Don't Impeach: The Liberal Case For Not Removing Trump

The author convinced me. Best if Trump stays on until a Democrat is elected in 2020.

Hopefully Wyatt/bad anonymous doesn't read this and stop defending Trump, LOL!

May 20, 2017 1:12 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Given how you distorted what Clapper said to change its meaning there's no reason to believe your claims about what Fienstein allegedly said"

I haven't distorted a thing Clapper said. You have

Also, stupidass, I provided a link to Feinstein's statement

"Further, the Democratic head of the House investigation into Trump/Russia said he has seen evidence of Trump collusion that goes beyond circumstancial that there was collusion."

Given your insistence on a paranoid Joe McCarthy world perspective, there's no reason to believe anything you say

"And as I've frequently pointed out, there is a mass of circumstancial evidence that Trump campaign colluded with Russia and people have been convicted based on the weight of circumstancial evidence alone."

yeah, "circumstancial" (bad spelling again) evidence, like talking to Russians

did you renew your membership in the John Birch Society yet?

btw, have you seen the photo of Chuck Schumer eating a Krispy Kreme donut with the Russian ambassador?

very circumstantial

someone needs to alert the special prosecutor!

oh, hate to disturb your fantasies, but even if the worst being suggested were true, no crime has been committed

"The author convinced me. Best if Trump stays on until a Democrat is elected in 2020.

Hopefully anonymous doesn't read this and stop defending Trump, LOL!"

actually, stupidass, I've repeatedly said I don't understand why you guys would want Trump to leave

maybe if you stop taking the anti-psychotic drugs, your memory will improve

worth a shot!

May 20, 2017 2:23 PM  
Anonymous Captain Obvious said...

If the Putin Puppet really is innocent, he should just stop doing and saying things that make him look even more guilty.

It's worth a shot.

May 20, 2017 6:44 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Wyatt/bad anonymous said "I haven't distorted a thing Clapper said. You have"

This coming from the guy who says "there are many situations where its appropriate to lie".

Contrary to your constant claims, Clapper NEVER said there was "no evidence that trump colluded with russia", he said he was not aware of any evidence. He recently clarified that there may be such evidence but he is unaware of it and wouldn't be aware of it because the FBI wouldn't inform him of any such evidence.

Wyatt/bad anonymous is completely unconcerned with what is true, his only consideration is "will this statement advance the story I want to tell" and if he thinks it will he'll make it regardless of how blatant a lie it is.

May 21, 2017 1:36 AM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

And just to prove Wyatt/bad anonymous is lying when he claims Clapper said there was no evidence Trump colluded with Russia:

Clapper rebuts Trump: 'I don't know if there was colllusion or not'

May 12

“I don’t know if there was collusion or not,” Clapper said in an interview on MSNBC. “I don’t know if there’s evidence of collusion or not, nor should I have.”

Earlier Friday, Trump tweeted, “When James Clapper himself, and virtually everybody else with knowledge of the witch hunt, says there is no collusion, when does it end?”

Trump’s tweet was evidently prompted by Clapper’s testimony to a Senate judiciary subcommittee this week regarding Russia’s attempt to influence the 2016 presidential election. During questioning, Clapper insisted that he was not aware [just as Priya has been saying] of evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin.

Actually, Clapper explained on MSNBC that in his role as head of the U.S. intelligence community, it was standard practice that he would not have been informed about the existence of an FBI investigation if it was the bureau’s judgment that the investigation may evolve from a counterintelligence probe to a criminal one.

The former intelligence chief also dismissed Trump’s assertion that the Russia investigation is “fake news,” and indirectly issued some advice to the White House to cooperate with the inquiry.

May 21, 2017 1:53 AM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

When Wyatt/bad anonymous falls in love with a lie, as he often does, he won't let it go no matter how often its debunked.

May 21, 2017 1:54 AM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Wyatt/bad anonymous said "oh, hate to disturb your fantasies, but even if the worst being suggested were true, no crime has been committed".

Wrong. If Flynn discussed removing sanctions with the Russian ambassador before he was in office (as it appears very likely he did) that is a crime - I presume this is at least part of the "underlying behavior" of Flynn's that Sally Yates testfied to that is "problematic". If the Trump campaign coordinated hacking with the Russians during the election that is a crime as well.

May 21, 2017 1:59 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

""Have fun looking for Comey's nonexistent nonchalance while crickets chirp"

you mean like when Trey Gowdy asked him point blank "will you pledge to investigate leaks of classified information connected to discussions between the Trump administration and Russian officials?"

and he said he can't

meanwhile, he can expound endlessly about his investigation of collusion between Trump and the Russians"


You continue to have comprehension problems we see.

First of all, which transcript of House testimony when Goody got to question Comey contains your quote?

Google cannot find it.

The closest I find is:

"GOWDY: ...Is the investigation into the leak of classified information -- has it begun yet?

COMEY: I can't say because I don't want to confirm that that was classified information..."


And again later:

"GOWDY: ...So I'm just simply asking you to assure the American people, you've already assured them you take it really seriously. Can you assure them that it is going to be investigated?

COMEY: I can't but I hope -- I hope people watching know how seriously we take leaks of classified information. But I don't want to confirm it by saying that were investigating it. And I'm sorry I have to draw the line, I just think that's the right way to be..."


< crickets continue chirping >

"I haven't distorted a thing Clapper said."

Now that is not simply your lack of comprehension again.

It's a bullshit lie.

Priya Lynn and I have pointed out the actual quotes made by Clapper proving you are lying and continuing to attempt to spread FAKE NEWS.

"paranoid Joe McCarthy world perspective"

That's the paranoid perspective of the pussy grabber and his supporters like you.

You know, like people who think recognizing same-sex marriage somehow destroys their own marriages.

The pussy grabber learned his "paranoid Joe McCarthy world perspective" suckling the teat of Roy Cohn, Joe McCarthy's right hand man back in the pussy grabber's Studio 54 days.

"there is a mass of circumstantial [sic] evidence that Trump campaign colluded with Russia"

... the photo of Chuck Schumer eating a Krispy Kreme donut with the Russian ambassador?

very circumstantial


Comparing one "photo" to "a mass of circumstantial evidence" shows your lack of comprehension as you try to make them comparable.

Everyone knows there is much less "circumstantial evidence" in a single disclosed photo of Senator Schumer and Russian leader Putin eating Krispy Kreme donuts in 2003 when Putin came to NY for the opening of the first Lukoil gas station in the US, a meeting that was widely covered in the press at the time than there is in a mass of secret phone calls, meetings, deals and promises, some of which involved non-registered foreign agents working for the pussy grabber's Presidential campaign.

Nobody here is buying what you are selling.

May 21, 2017 1:15 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Seth Rich conspiracy shows how fake news still works

All Fox bullshit lies.

"...TV news can be an easy mark. This iteration of the Seth Rich story started when the District's own Fox 5 ran a Monday night “exclusive,” citing one source — a Fox New legal commentator, Rod Wheeler — for a “big break in the investigation.” Reporter Marina Marraco reported that “conspiracy theories” could “be proven right,” as Wheeler was saying what had been rumored since last year: Rich might have leaked DNC emails to WikiLeaks, making him the target of an assassination.

“You have information that could link Seth Rich to WikiLeaks?” asked Marraco.

“Absolutely. Yeah. That's confirmed,” said Wheeler, who Fox 5 identified as the Rich family's investigator.

Within 24 hours, reporters at NBC News, CNN and The Washington Post had debunked the story. First, Rich's family quickly corrected the idea that Wheeler was on their payroll; he was hired by Ed Butowsky, a Texas businessman who had grown interested in the case. Next, Wheeler told CNN he hadn't actually obtained information linking Rich to WikiLeaks — Fox 5, he insisted, had told him to say so.

Marraco did not cite any sources except Wheeler — not the Rich family, not D.C. police, not the mayor's office, not the DNC. Wheeler, a very occasional TV pundit, was noticeably skimpy on details, suggesting he had a source who'd told him eyeball-to-eyeball that Rich's computer was in lock-up and that it had evidence of WikiLeaks contact. But he was murky on whether D.C. police or the FBI allegedly had the laptop, and the family quickly reported that neither did.

Most forms of reporting have guardrails that this story would have crashed against. Had the channel waited to run the story until the family or the police weighed in, it couldn't have aired. But that's the problem — there's a fluff allowance on TV..."


And Fox is the fluffiest which is why Fox viewers are so greatly misinformed.

May 21, 2017 1:28 PM  
Anonymous good anonymous said...

"If the Putin Puppet really is innocent, he should just stop doing and saying things that make him look even more guilty.

It's worth a shot"

oh, I agree

but that's really obvious

indeed, those perpetrating this Russian hoax, know that his personality is such that he will always have that reaction to being accused, whether falsely accused or not

he's a narcissist, who over reacts to everything

still, he's not as obnoxious as the media, who continually make a victim of him

perfect example was the story that Comey tried to hide behind a curtain to avoid being seen by Trump

watch the video, nothing like that happened

btw, if you think he's a puppet, you're deluded

but that's obvious

May 21, 2017 2:01 PM  
Anonymous Lying liars and the lies they tell said...

Gingrich spreads conspiracy theory about slain DNC staffer

May 21, 2017 2:05 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Study finds link between religious fundamentalism and brain damage

This would certainly explain Wyatt/bad anonymous and his stupidity.

May 21, 2017 2:10 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

good anonymous made the following good statement:

"oh, hate to disturb your fantasies, but even if the worst being suggested were true, no crime has been committed"

bad Priya told the following lie:

"Wrong. If Flynn discussed removing sanctions with the Russian ambassador before he was in office (as it appears very likely he did) that is a crime"

that's exactly what Flynn did

it's not a crime

he told the Russians that the incoming Trump administration doesn't feel the sanctions were justified and would remove them when they take office

this was in the best interest of the US, as it prevented Russia from retaliating too harshly

"- I presume this is at least part of the "underlying behavior" of Flynn's that Sally Yates testfied to that is "problematic""

oh, I'm sure this partisan would find that problematic

so what?

you ever remember Jesse Jackson going to North Korea to negotiate getting captured Americans released?

remember him saying, as leaving, we'll get rid of the Republicans in the next election

do you remember Obama telling the Russians (when he thought the mics were off), I can be more "flexible" after the election?

"If the Trump campaign coordinated hacking with the Russians during the election that is a crime as well"

absolutely no reason to think that happened

how, exactly, would hacking be "coordinated" anyway? instead of playing word games, tell us what you think happened

you remember how to think, right?

"GOWDY: ...So I'm just simply asking you to assure the American people, you've already assured them you take it really seriously. Can you assure them that it is going to be investigated?

COMEY: I can't but I hope -- I hope people watching know how seriously we take leaks of classified information. But I don't want to confirm it by saying that were investigating it. And I'm sorry I have to draw the line, I just think that's the right way to be..."

but, you see, this statement would be fine if he hadn't already discussed so much about what he's been "investigating"

so, he can tell us when he was investigating Hillary, and when he was investigating Trump, and even when he re-opened Hillary's investigation but thus is somehow off-limits

the guys leaking like the Titanic and yet can't tell us if he'll investigate who's leaking Trump's secret conversations

it's BS

the FBI is doing the leaking

good anonymous made a good comment:

"paranoid Joe McCarthy world perspective"

vile anonymous made a moronic statement:

"That's the paranoid perspective of the pussy grabber and his supporters like you"

I assume that's the way a vile piece of crap like you refers to the President

Trump, for all his faults, hasn't demonized anyone for simply talking to other human beings - unlike Priya and Vile Anon, who seem to think talking to Russians is treason

"Comparing one "photo" to "a mass of circumstantial evidence" shows your lack of comprehension as you try to make them comparable"

there's no "mass of circumstantial evidence"

"a mass of secret phone calls, meetings, deals and promises, some of which involved non-registered foreign agents working for the pussy grabber's Presidential campaign"

it's the job of Presidents to make secret phone calls, meetings, deals and promises

everyone but Joe McCarthy type TTFers realize this

"pussy grabber"

your idol, Hillary, defended a husband who raped women and had sex with a young intern in the Oval Office while President

her loyal aide was married to a guy who couldn't stop sending picture of his penis to underage girls

and you think Trump bragging that women let him touch their vagina because he's a celebrity is so singularly offensive?

things must be blurry from inside your bubble

May 21, 2017 5:38 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"this was in the best interest of the US, as it prevented Russia from retaliating too harshly"

This was in the best interest of the pussy grabber to repay Putin for his bot teams' production of fake news that careened around social media leading up to the election.

Watch Clint Watts' testimony again here:

https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/hearings/open-hearing-disinformation-primer-russian-active-measures-and-influence-campaigns

May 21, 2017 5:56 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"this was in the best interest of the US, as it prevented Russia from retaliating too harshly"

This was in the best interest of the pussy grabber to repay Putin for his bot teams' production of fake news that careened around social media leading up to the election.

Watch Clint Watts' testimony again here:

https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/hearings/open-hearing-disinformation-primer-russian-active-measures-and-influence-campaigns

May 21, 2017 5:56 PM  
Anonymous good anonymous said...

"pussy grabber"?

your idol, Hillary, defended a husband who raped women and had sex with a young intern in the Oval Office while President

her loyal aide was married to a guy who couldn't stop sending picture of his penis to underage girls

and you think Trump bragging that women let him touch their vagina because he's a celebrity is so singularly offensive?

as anyone who's not gay can tell you, bragging about women is not an uncommon male behavior

getting BJ's from the young intern in the office is

raping women is

sending pictures of your penis to random underage girls is

things must be blurry from inside your bubble

"This was in the best interest of the pussy grabber to repay Putin for his bot teams' production of fake news that careened around social media leading up to the election"

this whole line of reasoning suffers from one huge hole: we have plenty of domestic actors more than willing and capable of smear campaigns

Trump wouldn't have to pay Russia for that

truth is, Russia wasn't making up "fake news" about Hillary

they hacked her email

all intelligence agencies do that to major players that don't protect their data

they may have leaked the information received to Assange, but that's unclear

Assange says it came from elsewhere, and he has a reputation for veracity

regardless: what came from wikileaks was not fake news

it was truth

May 21, 2017 10:44 PM  
Anonymous Welcome to Trumplandia said...

Remain in your bubble and ignore Clinton Watts testimony all you want.

Special Counsel Robert Mueller won't.

"bragging about women is not an uncommon male behavior

getting BJ's from the young intern in the office is"


O'Really?

Apparently over at Fox News, the home of the leg camera, getting or at least attempting to get BJ's from staffers has been fairly common for decades now.

Bill O’Reilly Scandal Timeline: From Fox News Star to Unemployed

( Donald Trump: “I Don’t Think Bill O’Reilly Did Anything Wrong”)

The Revenge of Roger’s Angels
How Fox News women took down the most powerful, and predatory, man in media.
By Gabriel Sherman


Trump lauds Roger Ailes after Fox departure

May 22, 2017 7:20 AM  
Anonymous Trumplandia news said...

No, sir. It's not all right to sexually harass your hotel maid while she's cleaning your room.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/a-millionaire-a-hotel-maid-and-an-arrest-after-inauguration/2017/05/21/ceb3410e-397a-11e7-9e48-c4f199710b69_story.html

Meanwhile

https://www.aol.com/article/news/2017/05/22/poll-trump-approval-rating-hits-lowest-point-since-inauguration-day/22102189/

"...The latest, a survey from Reuters/Ipsos, shows Trump with 38 percent approval rating, which represents a sharp drop as well as his lowest rating since Inauguration Day when he entered the White House with historically low numbers.

The poll also found that 56 percent said they disapproved of the president's job in office, while six said they had "mixed feelings."

This latest poll adds more fuel to arguments that claim Americans, including Trump supporters, are beginning to significantly sour on the president's attempt to manage both diplomatic relations and controversy regarding the Russians.

According to a new poll out from CBS News, the majority of Americans, 63 percent, do not approve of the president's handling of the investigation into Russia's meddling in the 2016 presidential election.

Forty-eight percent also say they believe the president asked then FBI Director James Comey to end the investigations into Russia, something the president and his administration have vehemently denied..."

May 22, 2017 7:35 AM  
Anonymous Trumplandia citizen spreads BS said...

Gingrich spreads conspiracy theory about slain DNC staffer

"...By Thursday, after follow-up questioning from CNN and NBC News, Wheeler had largely recanted his story, and Rich’s family had rejected Wheeler’s most explosive claim — that Rich’s laptop was in police custody. But Friday, and over the weekend, Fox News host Sean Hannity continued to suggest that Rich was killed in a cover-up.

Like Hannity, Gingrich confidently made claims about Rich that have not been proven and that the family has denied. Police have investigated Rich’s killing, which remains one of many unsolved murder cases in the city. There is no evidence that he was “disgusted by the corruption of the Democratic National Committee,” though last week, amateur sleuths falsely claimed that Rich had posted online as “pandas4bernie.” (He may have tweeted as “panda4progress.”)

There’s also no evidence that Rich contacted WikiLeaks. Until this week, conspiracy theorists had suggested that the hacker Guccifer 2.0 used Rich to get into DNC servers, based on possibly altered direct messages between Guccifer 2.0 and a model named Robbin Young. The new theories, which were covered on Fox News even as the source recanted, rely not on criminal evidence but on the fact that WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange offered a reward for information about Rich’s killing and gave a meandering non-answer when asked whether Rich was his source.

But as the investigation into Russia’s role has picked up steam, Hannity and others have latched on to any suggestion that a source might emerge and link Rich to the DNC hack, though the FBI had spotted Russian-tied hacks as long ago as September 2015...

...On Sunday, a new hoax spread on social media, suggesting that Rich’s parents actually endorsed the crowd-sourced conspiracy theories about their son’s death.

...In fact, the video was recorded last month for donors to a GoFundMe site supported by Rich’s family...."

May 22, 2017 8:02 AM  
Anonymous Interesting development said...

Michael Flynn to plead the Fifth, not comply with Senate Intel subpoena in Russia probe

May 22, 2017 12:20 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"No, sir. It's not all right to sexually harass your hotel maid while she's cleaning your room."

That's right!

And it doesn't matter if it's Bill Clinton or Anthony Weiner or Eliot Spitzer, call the cops.

Just don't call TTF.

They'll say it's your fault.

Remember what Hillary said when a woman said Bill raped her: "It's amazing what kind of trash shows up when you drag a dollar bill through a trailer park"

May 22, 2017 1:37 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

That Hillary, she was a classy broad!

let's just say America dodged a disaster when she lost the election

May 22, 2017 2:03 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"No, sir. It's not all right to sexually harass your hotel maid while she's cleaning your room."

"He was a millionaire, in Washington to toast President Trump’s inauguration.

She was a maid, tasked with cleaning rooms that cost more in a few days than her monthly rent.

On Jan. 19, as the nation’s capital swelled with tourists and protesters, the millionaire and the maid met on the 10th floor of the Mayflower Hotel downtown, in Room 1065.

As she made his bed, he approached from behind and began rubbing her buttocks, according to a police report.

“This is very nice stuff,” he said, according to the report. “I like that!”...

...Perhaps the only thing unusual about what happened in Room 1065 was that the man was arrested.

John Joseph Boswell pleaded guilty last month to misdemeanor sexual abuse in D.C. Superior Court. He was sentenced to 10 days incarceration and six months probation, although the jail time was suspended.

The maid declined to comment. The Washington Post generally does not name victims of sexual assault.

In an interview with The Post, Boswell maintained his innocence.

“I patted her on the lower back,” said Boswell, 70, who is married and has three young children. “It was just a friendly gesture.”

The prosecutor in the case saw things differently.

“He took advantage of [her] while she was working, vulnerable, and alone,” Vivian Kim, an assistant U.S. attorney, wrote in an email to Boswell’s attorney.

Two different Americas collided at the Mayflower that afternoon...."


Mr. Boswell apparently felt he was permitted to touch his hotel maid when he came to DC to see the chief pussy grabber inaugurated.

May 22, 2017 4:00 PM  
Anonymous LOCK HIM UP, LOCK HIM UP, LOCK HIM UP said...

Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which says that no person "shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself"

May 22, 2017 4:02 PM  
Anonymous Article of Impeachment said...

On Wednesday, US forces carried out more unauthorized air strikes on pro-government forces in Syria. Though the Constitution explicitly states that the legislative branch, not the executive, has the power to initiate new military actions, Trump has steered the United States deeper into the Syrian conflict.

After initial reports that US officials had confirmed “that the US-led Coalition hit Assad regime forces with air strikes in southern Syria today,” Congressman Ted Lieu, a former active-duty officer in the US Air Force now serving as a colonel in the Reserves, who is an expert in military law, had the right response on Twitter:

If true, this is FRICKIN ILLEGAL. Trump does not have Congressional authorization to attack Syria, a country that has not attacked US. https://t.co/5cf7gBVwC7

—Ted Lieu (@tedlieu) May 18, 2017

The congressman later issued a statement:

"For the second time in as many months, the US military has conducted airstrikes against pro-Assad forces in Syria. The Trump Administration does not have congressional authorization to carry out military strikes against the Assad regime. Furthermore, the situation that led to today’s strike is precisely why I warned against getting further entangled in the Syrian civil war without a clear strategy. President Trump needs to explain his plan for Syria to Congress and the American people."

Lieu is not alone in expressing concern about this undeclared war making. After Trump ordered military strikes on Syria in April, Congressional Progressive Caucus leaders Raúl Grijalva, Keith Ellison, and Mark Pocan released this statement:

"In the absence of an imminent threat to the United States, the president must seek Congressional authorization prior to any act of war. Trump failed to seek, much less gain, Congressional authorization. If President Trump believes that US military actions should be utilized against the Assad regime, he should immediately call the House and Senate back into session to debate and vote on the use of military force. These unauthorized attacks could pull the United States into a regional war and escalate this unprecedented humanitarian crisis."

Even Republican Congressman Justin Amash said in April, “Airstrikes are an act of war. Atrocities in Syria cannot justify departure from Constitution, which vests in Congress power to commence war.” Republican Senator Rand Paul called on Trump to “come to Congress for a proper debate.”

Trump did not answer the call.

Rather, the commander in chief is presiding over the unauthorized expansion of US military involvement in Syria—and disregarding the Constitution’s most serious dictates regarding war and peace.

The commentariat can and will debate when a president’s refusal to seek congressional authorization for military action becomes impeachable. (There will even be attempts by the apologists for presidential overreach to make convoluted claims about how past authorizations of the use of military force somehow apply to every new conflict.) But, in Trump’s case, there is no evidence to suggest that he will respect the requirements of the Constitution. As such, an article of impeachment is justified.

May 22, 2017 4:20 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"No, sir. It's not all right to sexually harass your hotel maid while she's cleaning your room."

"He was a millionaire, in Washington to toast President Trump’s inauguration.

She was a maid, tasked with cleaning rooms that cost more in a few days than her monthly rent.

On Jan. 19, as the nation’s capital swelled with tourists and protesters, the millionaire and the maid met on the 10th floor of the Mayflower Hotel downtown, in Room 1065.

As she made his bed, he approached from behind and began rubbing her buttocks, according to a police report.

“This is very nice stuff,” he said, according to the report. “I like that!”...

...Perhaps the only thing unusual about what happened in Room 1065 was that the man was arrested.

John Joseph Boswell pleaded guilty last month to misdemeanor sexual abuse in D.C. Superior Court. He was sentenced to 10 days incarceration and six months probation, although the jail time was suspended."

a crime was committed and the perpetrator prosecuted

no one's arguing with that

so why are you posting this?

oh yeah, Trump's responsible for every crime that happens in America

this is similar to how Iran used to blame the CIA for earthquakes

"Two different Americas collided at the Mayflower that afternoon...."

Mr. Boswell apparently felt he was permitted to touch his hotel maid when he came to DC to see the chief pussy grabber inaugurated."

oh yeah, the Mayflower where Eliot Spitzer took advantage of women in prostitution

I suppose you are outraged at all those young interns across America who were abused after Chief Pedophile Clinton abused his

he thought he could get away with it because he was famous

May 22, 2017 4:28 PM  
Anonymous good anonymous said...

President Trump has landed in Israel amid controversy over the disclosure that Israel was the source of highly classified intelligence on details of an Islamic State plot he reportedly shared with Russian diplomats — evidence, his critics say, that Trump cannot be trusted with U.S. secrets.

One problem with that: Trump did not reveal to anyone that Israel was the source of the intelligence he shared with the Russians. So how did the New York Times, which broke the news of Israel’s role, find out? According to the Times, its sources were “a current and a former American official familiar with how the United States obtained the information” who “spoke on the condition of anonymity” because they “were not authorized to discuss the matter.” NBC News, meanwhile, reported that it had confirmed the Israeli role “with three government officials with knowledge of the matter.”

Ponder the irony: These geniuses were so appalled by Trump sharing sensitive intelligence with the Russians that they shared even more sensitive intelligence with the media — and thus the entire world — in order to demonstrate that Trump cannot be trusted with sensitive intelligence. In so doing, these leakers possibly did far more damage to U.S. national security — and intelligence-sharing between the United States and Israel — than anything Trump may have revealed to the Russians.

Don’t take my word for it. That is the assessment of John Brennan, Barack Obama’s CIA director, who said last week that “the real damage to national security is . . . what was leaked in the aftermath, what was put in the media” adding that “these individuals who still stay within the government and are leaking this stuff to the press need to be brought to task.”

Amen.

May 22, 2017 4:32 PM  
Anonymous good anonymous said...

The same is true of the initial leak to The Post that Trump had revealed details of the Islamic State plot to the Russians. When The Post broke the story, the paper noted that it was “withholding most plot details, including the name of the city” in the Islamic State’s territory “where the U.S. intelligence partner detected the threat.”

Good for The Post. But how on Earth did The Post learn the plot details? Answer: from “current and former U.S. officials.”

One U.S. official told The Post, with apparent outrage, “This is code-word information . . . Trump revealed more information to the Russian ambassador than we have shared with our own allies.”

Hello? Some rocket scientist shared more information with The Post than Trump shared with the Russian ambassador.

The U.S. official is right about one thing: All this intelligence is “code-word information” — highly classified intelligence. And the decision of these anonymous leakers to share code-word intelligence with the media is a crime that did far more damage than Trump’s apparently inadvertent disclosures to the Russians.

How many of those fulminating today about the damage done by the exposure of Israel’s role in collecting intelligence on the Islamic State were similarly outraged when the Obama administration exposed Israel’s role in the “Stuxnet” cyberattack on Iran’s nuclear program? The Times, which broke that story, quoted “members of the president’s national security team who were in the White House Situation Room” saying the Israelis were responsible for an error in the code that allowed it to replicate itself all around the world. The Times directly quoted one of the president’s briefers telling him, “We think there was a modification done by the Israelis” and added that President Obama, “according to officials in the room, asked a series of questions, fearful that the code could do damage outside the plant. The answers came back in hedged terms. Mr. Biden fumed. ‘It’s got to be the Israelis,’ he said. ‘They went too far.’ ”

How did The Times get that information about Israel’s role in this highly classified covert action program, including the top-secret code name for the program (“Olympic Games”) and the involvement Israel? Answer: A member of Obama’s national security team intentionally exposed intelligence sources and methods. The damage this leak did — both to the operation and the trust between our two countries — was incalculable. So where was the deep concern for the exposure of this intelligence or the involvement of our liaison partner? Where were all the hand-wringers questioning whether Obama could be trusted with highly classified intelligence?


It is time for decisive action to close the sieve of classified intelligence appearing in the press. Doing so will be the job of the next FBI director. One of the advantages of Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein’s decision to appoint Robert S. Mueller III as special counsel in charge of the Russia investigation is that it should free up the next FBI director to focus on finding and prosecuting the leakers. There is no evidence yet of any Trump-Russia collusion. But the evidence that leakers committed crimes is there, in black and white, on the pages of the Times, The Post and other news outlets.

Brennan is right. These leakers need to be brought to task. Because they, not Trump, are the ones who cannot be trusted with sensitive intelligence.

May 22, 2017 4:32 PM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Wyatt/bad anonymous said "bragging about women is not an uncommon male behavior".

Its really sickening how you Republicans keep trying to trivialize his criminal behavior with a nod and wink. He wasn't merely "bragging about women", he was bragging about sexually assaulting women! Sexually assaulting women is NOT a common male behavior!

Trump is an admitted felon. The day Americans elected this predator to be president will be a dark day of shame for the country for the remainder of its history.

I think Trump is unlikely to still be around in 2020. I doubt he'll be impeached but I think the pressure will make him quit or have a heart attack.

May 23, 2017 1:40 AM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Wyatt/bad anonymous said "Priya told the following lie:

"Wrong. If Flynn discussed removing sanctions with the Russian ambassador before he was in office (as it appears very likely he did) that is a crime"

that's exactly what Flynn did it's not a crime".

No, its the truth. It is against the law for a private citizen (which Flynn was at the time) to try to subvert the policy of the president. Obama was president at the time, Flynn tried to subvert his policy of sanctioning the Russians, that is a crime. And note I didn't even accuse you of lying about it because its clear you are just too ignorant to know that's a crime.

Wyatt/bad anonymous said "do you remember Obama telling the Russians (when he thought the mics were off), I can be more "flexible" after the election?".

He was president and he wasn't doing anything to subvert the policy of the president. What Flynn did was a crime, the Obama thing isn't even remotely analagous.

And in addition to that and contrary to Wyatt/bad anonymous's claim "but even if the worst being suggested were true, no crime has been committed", it most certainly is a crime as well if Trump obstructed justice by trying to interfere with or end the Russia/Trump investigation. Wyatt/bad anonymous is just a bad liar.

Wyatt/bad anonymous said "your idol, Hillary, defended a husband who raped women".

There is no evidence that Bill raped anyone. However Trump admitted to sexually assaulting women. Trump is a criminal predator, Bill Clinton is not - case closed.

Wyatt/bad anonymous was trying to con people into believing it wasn't the Russians who hacked the DNC, that it was a Democrat who was killed in a random robbery gone bad. He also falsely claimed Julian Assange said Seth Rich was the sorce of the information he got when in fact Assange merely implied that as a possiblity to try to deflect attention from the Russians who did the hacking. That story about the Democrat being the source entirely made up by Fox "News" people - listen to the truth here. 17 U.S. intelligence agencies stated there was solid proof the Russians gave the hacked info to Assange.

May 23, 2017 2:21 AM  
Blogger Priya Lynn said...

Further to Wyatt/bad anonymous saying "Priya told the following lie:

"Wrong. If Flynn discussed removing sanctions with the Russian ambassador before he was in office (as it appears very likely he did) that is a crime"

that's exactly what Flynn did it's not a crime".

Just to show Wyatt/bad anonymous falsely accused me of lying:

Mr Flynn admitted in his resignation letter that he took several calls with the Russian ambassador to the US before entering the White House, which is potentially illegal under the 1799 Logan Act against interference in foreign diplomacy by non-government officials.

That's standard Wyatt/bad anonymous behavior, falsely accuse people of lying whenever he is ignorant of the facts

May 23, 2017 2:39 AM  
Anonymous Par for the pussy grabber's course said...

Trump blasts those who take the Fifth, but he used it 97 times on adultery questions

...“The mob takes the Fifth Amendment. If you’re innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?”

That’s exactly the question Donald Trump was asked 26 years ago, in 1990 when he was in the midst of divorcing Marla Maples, according to the Huffington Post. During the divorce proceedings, which included five depositions, Trump pleaded the Fifth 97 times on approximately 100 questions related to marriage infidelity.

By pleading the Fifth, he avoided any admittance to adultery.

That worked in his favor, as Trump reportedly ended up paying Maples an amount similar to their prenuptial agreement.

May 23, 2017 7:05 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The pussy grabber takes his first foreign trip and we get Trump's stamina forces him to slip up, skip event over exhaustion

Jim Acosta‏Verified account
@Acosta
At a briefing with reporters a WH official said POTUS is "exhausted."

JSCearbhaill‏ @JSCearbhaill May 21
HRC Testified recovering from concussion. Had pnuemonia & worked til collapsed. Trump 'exhausted' after one day overseas. #NoStamina

SJ‏ @emblues2 May 21
Who knew it could be so exhausting? 🙄

donholt99‏Verified account @donholt99 May 21
@realDonaldTrump No stamina, dude. Good thing nepotism keeps your family surrogates around to bail your tired ass out.

vicki felmlee 🦉‏ @lilhistorian May 21
Replying to @Acosta
But..but..but..he said Hillary was too old, too tired, too sick, too tired. Too. Tired.

KeyserSozeBro‏ @KeyserSozeBro1 May 21
She flew over 950,000 miles in 3 years as SoS.
This trip is less than 2 days and < 7,000 miles & he's falling apart? What a pussy.

May 23, 2017 8:02 AM  
Anonymous good ol' anon said...

You know, Priya has a point. I shouldn't accuse Priya of lying. Priya is so stupid, as to actually believe these things.

Anyway, Trump didn't brag about sexually assaulting anyone. He bragged they "let" him. Sexual assault involves non-consensual activity. No proof he did anything he bragged about, although I know Priya thinks he always tells the truth.

As for the 1799 Logan Act, it's only on the books because no one has ever been prosecuted under it. Otherwise, it would have long ago been declared an unconstitutional infringement of the right to free speech. That's why Jesse Jackson was never jailed for negotiating with Cuba, Nicaragua, North Korea. We won't even bring up post-presidency Jimmy Carter, who tramps through the world undermining America's foreign policy. He's entitled to. He's an American and he's entitled to free speech. It's not like he's from Canada and has to bow to the Queen of England.

What else was illegal in 1799? It was illegal for women to vote and slaves to read. It was illegal to spit on the street or use profanity in a hotel lobby. The examples are endless.

As a matter of fact, Logan made John Adams mad by going to France and explaining to them why the American public dislikes France so much. Adams got Congress to pass this law in retaliation. It's interesting to note that after the law passed, Logan became a Senator. He later went to England and negotiated prior to the War of 1812 but no one charged even him under the Logan Act because they knew the law would never be held up in court.

It was just a political move

Just like the Russia-Trump hoax

May 23, 2017 10:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Trump didn't brag about sexually assaulting anyone."

Oh yes he did.

He said he "moved on her," added "I moved on her like a bitch," and admitted sexual assault when he said "I'm automatically attracted to beautiful... I just start kissing them. It's like a magnet. Just kiss. I don't even wait..."

From the transcript:

...TRUMP: "I moved on her. Actually, she was down on Palm Beach. I moved on her and I failed. I'll admit it. I did try and f*** her. She was married."

...TRUMP: "Nancy [O'Dell - former co-host of Access Hollywood], no this was... and I moved on her. Very heavily. In fact, I took her out furniture shopping. She wanted to get some furniture. I said 'I'll show you where they have some nice furniture'. I took her... I moved on her like a b****. I couldn't get there and she was married. And all of a sudden I see her. She's now got the big phoney t*** and she's totally changed her look."

...TRUMP: "Yeah that's her in the gold. I better use some Tic Tacs [breath fresheners] just in case I start kissing her. You know, I'm automatically attracted to beautiful... I just start kissing them. It's like a magnet. Just kiss. I don't even wait. And when you're a star they let you do it. You can do anything."

...TRUMP: "Grab them by the p****. You can do anything."


http://www.voanews.com/a/transcript-of-donald-trumps-conversation-with-billy-bush-of-access-hollywood/3542128.html

May 23, 2017 10:17 AM  
Anonymous Jiminy Anon said...

oh, no he didn't

you've obviously taken many statements out of context and conflated them

shocker

let's see where he says someone didn't consent to sexual activity and he forced himself on them anyway

Jiminy Cricket sings "when Dems wish upon a star, they don't get very far.."

May 23, 2017 11:41 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I suggest you find some woman you trust (mother, wife maybe?) explain what she thinks of men taking whatever they want from any woman without getting consent first means to them.

Better yet, do you have a daughter?

What would you do if your daughter complained to you about a rich pussy grabber "moving on her like a bitch" or even giving her "just a kiss" without "even wait"ing or asking for her consent?

May 23, 2017 2:58 PM  
Anonymous Drip, Drip, Drip said...

"Former CIA director John Brennan said Tuesday that he personally warned the head of Russia’s intelligence service last year that Moscow’s interference in the U.S. election would backfire and damage the country’s relationship with the United States.

In testimony before a congressional committee, Brennan also said that he became increasingly concerned by contacts between Russian officials and associates of then-presidential candidate Donald Trump and conveyed those concerns to the FBI.

“I encountered...intelligence that revealed contacts and interactions between Russian officials and U.S. persons involved in the Trump campaign,” Brennan said, adding that he did not see conclusive evidence of collusion but feared that Trump associates were wittingly or unwittingly being used to advance the interests of Moscow.

Brennan’s testimony before the House Intelligence Committee represented the most detailed public accounting of his tenure as CIA director during a critical period last year when U.S. intelligence agencies concluded that Russia was not only attempting to disrupt the election but also was actively seeking to defeat Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton and elect Trump.

Describing a previously undisclosed high-level discussion between Washington and Moscow, Brennan said that he used a phone conversation with the head of Russia’s domestic security service, the FSB, to warn that “American voters would be outraged by any Russian attempt to interfere in the election.”

Brennan said that such meddling “would destroy any near-term prospect of improvement” in relations between the United States and Russia. The FSB chief, Alexander Bortnikov, twice denied that Russia was waging such a campaign but said he would carry Brennan’s message to Russian President Vladi­mir Putin.

“I believe I was the first U.S. official to brace Russia on this matter,” Brennan said during his first appearance before the House Intelligence Committee as part of that panel’s investigation of a Russian influence campaign in the 2016 presidential election...."


https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/cia-director-warned-russian-security-service-chief-about-interference-in-election/2017/05/23/ebff2a7e-3fbb-11e7-adba-394ee67a7582_story.html

May 23, 2017 3:25 PM  
Anonymous jiminy anon said...

ah, I see, you think it's illegal to give someone a kiss without getting consent first

in your world, does this consent need to be written, or will oral consent suffice?

assuming you've ever been kissed before (I'm assuming the individual took Dramamine first), tell us how the whole legal procedure unfolded

Jiminy Cricket sings "when Dems wish upon a star, they don't get very far.."

May 23, 2017 3:27 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Brennan said ... that he did not see conclusive evidence of collusion"

what do you know?

another intelligence official says he saw no evidence of conclusion

I'm sure hoax denier Priya will be spinning that soon

coming to a comedy club hear you!!

May 23, 2017 3:31 PM  
Anonymous Dripping continues said...

"...Brennan was among the top officials who briefed then-President-elect Trump on Russia’s goals — which represented the consensus view of the CIA, the FBI and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.

Brennan became so alarmed by the Russian intervention last fall that he held classified meetings with top congressional officials to impress upon them the unprecedented nature of Moscow’s interference.

Brennan testified that he was disturbed by intelligence that surfaced last year showing a pattern of contacts between Russian agents or representatives and people with links to the Trump campaign.

“That raised concerns in my mind,” Brennan said. He emphasized that the information he saw did not amount to proof of collusion or cooperation between Trump associates and Russia, but he said that it “served as the basis for the FBI investigation.”

With that remark, Brennan appeared to identify the point of origin of the FBI investigation that began in July — the first time a U.S. official has provided insight into what prompted the bureau probe.

Brennan said that the targets of those Russian approaches may not have been aware of the nature of the contacts because Russian services often disguise their efforts by using intermediaries.

“Many times, [U.S. individuals] do not know that the individual they are interacting with is a Russian,” Brennan said. Russians use an array of espionage tools, including blackmail over compromising information, to coerce treason from U.S. officials who “do not even realize they are on that path until it gets too late.”

Brennan declined to name any U.S. individuals, but that remark appeared to be in reference to former National Security adviser Michael Flynn, who was forced to resign after misleading statements about his contacts with the Russian ambassador.

Brennan was also asked about Trump’s disclosure of highly classified information to the Russian foreign minister and ambassador in a White House meeting this month. Brennan said that the CIA at times provided tips about terrorist plots to the Kremlin, but he indicated that Trump violated key protocols.

Sensitive information should only be passed through intelligence services, not divulged to foreign ministers or ambassadors, Brennan said. “Neither did it go in the proper channels nor did the originating agency have the opportunity to clear language for it.”

The former CIA chief is the latest senior Obama administration official to appear publicly before Congress in hearings that have often produced damaging headlines for Trump.

Earlier this month, former acting attorney general Sally Yates testified that she expected White House officials to “take action” after warning that Flynn had misled administration officials about his contacts with Russia.

At that same hearing, former director of national intelligence James R. Clapper Jr. said that Moscow’s leaders “must be congratulating themselves for having exceeded their wildest expectations with a minimal expenditure of resource,” a reference not only to the outcome of the 2016 race but also to the chaos that has characterized the early months of the Trump administration.

Brennan has feuded publicly with Trump over the president’s treatment of intelligence agencies. In January, he lashed out at Trump for comparing U.S. spy agencies to Nazi secret police.

Brennan was particularly offended by Trump’s remarks during a speech at CIA headquarters on the day after he was inaugurated. Trump used the CIA’s Memorial Wall — a collection of engraved stars marking the lives of agency operatives killed in the line of duty — to launch a rambling speech in which he bragged about his election victory.

Brennan called the appearance “despicable” and said that Trump should be “ashamed.”

May 23, 2017 3:31 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

No women folk in your family apparently.

No wonder.

May 23, 2017 3:33 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Brennan became so alarmed by the Russian intervention last fall that he held classified meetings with top congressional officials to impress upon them the unprecedented nature of Moscow’s interference.

Brennan testified that he was disturbed by intelligence that surfaced last year showing a pattern of contacts between Russian agents or representatives and people with links to the Trump campaign."

note these are not quotes but putting words in someone's mouth

"Brennan has feuded publicly with Trump over the president’s treatment of intelligence agencies. In January, he lashed out at Trump for comparing U.S. spy agencies to Nazi secret police.

Brennan was particularly offended by Trump’s remarks during a speech at CIA headquarters on the day after he was inaugurated. Trump used the CIA’s Memorial Wall — a collection of engraved stars marking the lives of agency operatives killed in the line of duty — to launch a rambling speech in which he bragged about his election victory.

Brennan called the appearance “despicable” and said that Trump should be “ashamed.”"

sounds like someone with a bias

keep that in mind

May 23, 2017 3:49 PM  
Anonymous WOW! LOOK AT THAT!! said...

While President Trump has taken a lot of heat for firing FBI Director James Comey, it turns out Trump is more popular with the American public than Comey.

A new Harvard-Harris poll released on Tuesday concluded that Trump was "more in trouble for the way he fired Comey rather than for removing him."

According to the poll, Comey's favorability rating is only 31 percent positive.

Trump's favorability rating has declined but is still at 42 percent positive.

May 23, 2017 4:15 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

No worries!

The transcript will be available soon.

But if you want to hear the actual words when he described being "disturbed by intelligence that surfaced last year showing a pattern of contacts between Russian agents or representatives and people with links to the Trump campaign" use the URL I provided above.

Here it is again

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/cia-director-warned-russian-security-service-chief-about-interference-in-election/2017/05/23/ebff2a7e-3fbb-11e7-adba-394ee67a7582_story.html

There is a 1 minute 14 second video at the top and you can hear Brennan himself say:

"BRENNAN: As I mentioned in my opening statement, I was convinced in the summer that the Russians were trying to interfere in the election. And they were very aggressive. They had...it was a multifaceted effort. And I wanted to make sure we were able to expose as much of that as possible.

ROONEY: But was there intelligence that said that the Trump campaign was colluding with Moscow during their campaign...

(Crosstalk)

BRENNAN: There was intelligence that the Russian intelligence services were actively involved in this effort and having been involved in many counterintelligence cases in the past, I know what the Russians try to do. They try to suborn individuals. And they try to get individuals, including US persons to act on their behalf, either wittingly or unwittingly. And I was worried by a number of the contacts that the Russians had with US persons and so therefore, by the time I left office on January 20, I had unresolved questions in my mind as to whether or not the Russians had been successful in getting US persons, involved in the campaign or not, to work on their behalf, again, either in a witting or unwitting fashion. And so therefore I felt as though the FBI investigation was certainly well-founded and needed to look into those issues..."

May 23, 2017 4:23 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

FOX News retracts story about murdered DNC staffer Seth Rich

"Fox News has taken the striking step of retracting a story about murdered Democratic National Committee staffer Seth Rich, saying it did not meet the network's "high degree of editorial scrutiny."

"On May 16, a story was posted on the Fox News website on the investigation into the 2016 murder of DNC Staffer Seth Rich. The article was not initially subjected to the high degree of editorial scrutiny we require for all our reporting," the network said in a statement released Tuesday. "Upon appropriate review, the article was found not to meet those standards and has since been removed. We will continue to investigate this story and will provide updates as warranted."

Fox News was one of many right-leaning media outlets that floated unsubstantiated theories that Rich provided WikiLeaks internal DNC emails, and that he may have been killed in retribution. Rich was shot to death last July in Washington, D.C., in what police have investigated as a robbery gone wrong.

Rich's family blasted Fox News and other outlets for promoting unfounded versions of the story.

"It's sad but unsurprising that a group of media outlets who have repeatedly lied to the American people would try and manipulate the legacy of a murder victim in order to forward their own political agenda," a spokesman for the Rich family told Business Insider. "I think there is a special place in hell for people like that."

Rich's relatives weren't the only ones who were appalled.

CNN reported Monday that some Fox News staffers were "disgusted" by the network's recent coverage of Rich's death. Last week, Fox News' website ran a lead story about a "DC MURDER MYSTERY" that said Rod Wheeler, a private investigator and Fox News contributor, had claimed WikiLeaks had been in contact with Rich. The story also said an anonymous federal investigator corroborated that claim.

But Wheeler soon told CNN he had no evidence to suggest Rich had contacted WikiLeaks.

CNN also reported that Sean Hannity and the hosts of "Fox & Friends" pushed the baseless claims about WikiLeaks and Rich –"much to the dismay of the journalists who work at the network."

The retraction comes as a trying time for Fox News.

In April, the network fired its biggest ratings magnet, Bill O'Reilly, after reports that he and the network had paid out $13 million to settle complaints accusing him of sexual harassment and other impropriety. The network's visionary founder, Roger Ailes, died last week, months after he left in disgrace after facing his own accusations of sexual harassment.

Last week, MSNBC beat both CNN and Fox News in weekday primetime among both total viewers and the key news demo for the first time ever."

May 23, 2017 4:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The venerable Gallup had Trump's approval rating at 38% on 5/22, up from 37% the day on 5/21.

Some of us pine for the good old days.

At this point in his presidency during the weeks of May 20, 2009 and May 28, 2009, Obama had the approval of 64% of Americans.

Even a bubble dwelling troll can comprehend what a loser Trump is.

May 23, 2017 4:51 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"But if you want to hear the actual words"

if you have actual words, post them

you don't exactly have a lot of credibility so your paraphrases (or the liberal media's paraphrases) are not sufficient

May 23, 2017 4:59 PM  
Anonymous Again for the ignoramus said...

"BRENNAN: As I mentioned in my opening statement, I was convinced in the summer that the Russians were trying to interfere in the election. And they were very aggressive. They had...it was a multifaceted effort. And I wanted to make sure we were able to expose as much of that as possible.

ROONEY: But was there intelligence that said that the Trump campaign was colluding with Moscow during their campaign...

(Crosstalk)

BRENNAN: There was intelligence that the Russian intelligence services were actively involved in this effort and having been involved in many counterintelligence cases in the past, I know what the Russians try to do. They try to suborn individuals. And they try to get individuals, including US persons to act on their behalf, either wittingly or unwittingly. And I was worried by a number of the contacts that the Russians had with US persons and so therefore, by the time I left office on January 20, I had unresolved questions in my mind as to whether or not the Russians had been successful in getting US persons, involved in the campaign or not, to work on their behalf, again, either in a witting or unwitting fashion. And so therefore I felt as though the FBI investigation was certainly well-founded and needed to look into those issues..."

May 23, 2017 5:05 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If you don't like the WaPo one minute 14 second video, maybe you'll like HuffPo's 3 minute video better.

Here ya go, trumpling:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/john-brennan-cia-intelligence-trump-associates-russia-fbi-investigation_us_59245a35e4b094cdba57f744

May 23, 2017 5:07 PM  
Anonymous Drippin' and Droppin' said...

05/23/17

President Trump’s Average Approval Rating Dips To Just Below 40 Percent

"President Donald Trump’s average approval rating just reached a new low, according to HuffPost Pollster’s aggregation of publicly available surveys.

Trump’s ratings took a noticeable dip in March after Republicans failed to pass a bill repealing the Affordable Care Act. They stabilized in the low 40s for much of April. In the past month, however, his ratings have taken a more significant downturn. His average approval rating stands at just below 40 percent as of Tuesday afternoon, with his disapproval rating at nearly 56 percent.

Polls tend to fluctuate, and the dividing line between 40 percent and 39 percent isn’t itself especially significant. But regardless of the exact numbers, Trump, who began his term without the honeymoon period experienced by most modern presidents, is now in worse shape than ever. By comparison, former President Barack Obama never saw his average approval rating fall below 42 percent.

Individual pollsters who’ve tracked Trump’s ratings this month have measured strikingly similar downward shifts. Of the six pollsters who’ve released multiple surveys taken in May, five found Trump’s net approval rating ― the difference between his “approve” and “disapprove” numbers ― falling by between 7 and 9 points, as of Monday evening. The sixth, the Ipsos/Reuters tracking poll, shows him down by 11..."



May 23, 2017 5:22 PM  
Anonymous It's too bad the trumpling doesn't have a daughter to learn from about this said...

Billy Bush’s Daughter Had The Most Reasonable Response To The Infamous Trump Tape
“Why were you laughing at the things that he was saying on that bus, Dad?”


"...Bush told The Hollywood Reporter that his youngest daughter decided not to watch the tape and his oldest was ready to defend her father. But Bush said it was his middle daughter who called him out for his sexist and demeaning comments about women.

Bush told THR that his daughter Mary, then 15, called him crying and asked, “Why were you laughing at the things that [Trump] was saying on that bus, Dad? They weren’t funny.”

“It hit really hard, and I stopped for a second, and I said, ‘I have no answer for that that’s any good. I am really sorry. That was Dad in a bad moment a long time ago. You know me. I am really sorry that you had to hear and see that. I love you,’” Bush told THR. “She needed to hear that, and I certainly needed to tell her that.”

Bush explained that in the aftermath of the “Access Hollywood” video he really put himself in women’s shoes and realized just how damaging his behavior was.

“When a woman watches that tape ― and this is what really hit me ― they may be asking themselves, ‘Is that what happens when I walk out of a room? When I walk out of a meeting, is that what they’re saying about me? Are they sizing me up?’” Bush said. “I can’t live with that. If a moment like that arose again, I would shut it down quickly. I am in the women-raising business, exclusively. I have three daughters — Mary, Lillie, Josie — and I care very much about the world and the people they encounter.”

Off the bat, Bush sounds like a great dad who immediately owned up to his bad behavior when his young daughter called him out on it. And he most likely is a wonderful father.

His response also points to a larger, more troubling trend: Men are often not confronted with the implications of their behavior ― that women are sex objects to be “moved on like a bitch” ― until they’ve raised daughters.

When Bush’s daughter addressed his demeaning comments about women, he didn’t have a good answer for her. How can he tell her that this is how many men speak about women, when he hopes no man ever speaks about his daughter in the same way?

While Bush’s comments to his daughter are important, we shouldn’t have to wait for men to bear daughters for them to see half the population as equals. "

May 23, 2017 5:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Here ya go, trumpling:"

gee, I know I'm just an ignoramus, but still waiting to see the words "disturbed" or "alarmed" said by Brennan

say, you weren't lying when you said that, were you?

May 23, 2017 7:44 PM  
Anonymous ha-ha said...

you'll be waitin' forever

Jiminy Cricket sings "when Dems wish upon a star, they don't get very far.."

May 23, 2017 8:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

We're all "still waiting" for the transcript.

Here's a partial "RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED."

http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1705/23/cnr.04.html

It starts with Gowdy questioning Brennan:

"GOWDY: ...Did evidence exist of collusion, coordination, conspiracy, between the Trump campaign and Russian state actors at the time you learned of 2016 efforts?

BRENNAN: I encountered and am aware of information and intelligence that revealed contacts and interactions between Russian officials and U.S. persons involved in the Trump campaign that I was concerned about because of known Russian efforts to suborn such individuals and it raised questions in my mind, again, whether or not the Russians were able to gain the cooperation of those individuals.

I don't know whether or not such collusion -- and that's your term, such collusion existed. I don't know. But I know that there was a sufficient basis of information and intelligence that required further investigation by the bureau to determine whether or not U.S. persons were actively conspiring, colluding with Russian officials.

GOWDY: Do you know the basis of that information that you shared with the bureau? What was -- the nature of the evidence?

BRENNAN: I think, Mr. Gowdy, this committee has now been provided information that relates to that issue in terms of information that the agency shared with the bureau and that is something that is appropriately classified.

GOWDY: All right, and you learned that when? When in this chronology did you learn of the contacts between these official members of the Trump campaign or -- because there's kind of a tripartite hierarchy. There's Trump himself, there are official members of the campaign, and then there are folks who represented themselves as being connected with him.

BRENNAN: I'm not going to try to identify individuals nor try to parse it.

GOWDY: I don't want you to parse it, I just want you to identify the individuals. I don't want you to parse it.

BRENNAN: I'm not going to identify the individuals because this is information that, again, is based on classified sources and intelligence. And I think this committee has access to it...

GOWDY: Were they official members of the campaign?

BRENNAN: I'm going to defer to current agency officials to be able to further provide to you information related to that. But my understanding is that this committee has access to the documents that we would have provided to the bureau.

GOWDY: All right. Last question because I'm out of time, we can use the word onus, we both know what the other one's talking about. How did you test, probe, examine, cross-examine, otherwise test the reliability or believability, credibility, of that evidence you uncovered?

BRENNAN: I made sure that the components within CIA that have responsible for counterintelligence, cyber, and Russia, were actively working to understand as much as possible about the reliability, accuracy of the information that they already collected and information that was available that needed further corroboration.

GOWDY: We'll come back to it next round

May 24, 2017 8:59 AM  
Anonymous Thesaurus said...

WaPo used the words "disturbed" and "alarmed" to describe Brennan, while Brennan said he was "concerned."

Synonyms:

disturbed -

the children seemed disturbed: troubled, distressed, upset, distraught; unbalanced, unstable, disordered, dysfunctional, maladjusted, neurotic, unhinged; informal screwed up, mixed up.


alarmed -

the news had alarmed her: frighten, scare, panic, unnerve, distress, agitate, upset, disconcert, shock, dismay, disturb

concerned -

her mother looked concerned: worried, anxious, upset, perturbed, troubled, distressed, uneasy, apprehensive, agitated.

May 24, 2017 9:15 AM  
Anonymous good a said...

gotcha

"disturbed" and "alarmed" have much different connotations than "concerned"

looks like we settled the point: he didn't use those words and the Post is trying every trick in their bag of 'em to create false impressions

too bad we don't have journalists that strive for objectivity

that's a hindrance to a democracy

May 24, 2017 9:24 AM  
Anonymous Heel. Good boy. said...

Sean Hannity says he will drop the Seth Rich conspiracy theory and stay at Fox News

"Sean Hannity threaded the needle Tuesday night, telling his Fox News viewers that he would stop talking about a conspiracy theory surrounding the death of Democratic National Committee staffer Seth Rich — but only because Rich's family asked him to...

The news division of Fox News lent credence to the theory in a report on its website last week, but the network retracted the story on Tuesday afternoon, saying that "the article was not initially subjected to the high degree of editorial scrutiny we require for all our reporting."

That put Hannity at odds with his employer, and he sounded ready for conflict on his radio program shortly after the retraction.

"I am not Fox.com or FoxNews.com," he said on the air. "I retracted nothing."

On his prime-time TV show, however, Hannity was no longer defiant. But he insisted that he was not giving in to pressure or altering his approach.

"I want to say this to you, my loyal audience, which is very important: Please do not interpret what I'm saying tonight to mean anything," Hannity said. "Don't read into this. I promise you I am not doing — going to stop doing my job to the extent of my ability."

Hannity said he had spoken by phone with Rich's brother earlier in the day and that "out of respect for the family's wishes, for now, I am not discussing this matter at this time."

Got that, everyone? Fox News did not censor Hannity. Hannity cannot be censored! Hannity is merely honoring the request of a grieving family..."


Ailes - gone
O'Reilly - gone
Shine - gone

"..."I serve at the pleasure of the Fox News Channel," he added. "And I am here to do my job every night. I'm under contract, as long as they seem to want me."..."

May 24, 2017 9:28 AM  
Anonymous SAT VERBAL said...


Troll scores an EPIC FAIL

There is help available:

http://www.aplustutoring.com/blog/news/sat-verbal-practice-4-great-websites-for-test-prep

May 24, 2017 9:33 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"disturbed" and "alarmed" have much different connotations than "concerned"

anyone whose mind doesn't reside in TTF's rainbow bubble agrees with this

English must not be the first language of the person making the EPIC FAIL comment

"CIA Director Mike Pompeo made a blunt declaration Tuesday: "We are back in the business of stealing secrets.”

The remark from Pompeo, made to a small group of reporters on Tuesday, was a tacit jab at his predecessor. Former agency director John Brennan turned heads in March of last year when he told National Public Radio that the U.S. doesn’t “steal secrets.”

Pompeo's apparent swipe at Brennan came on the same day that his predecessor testified to a Senate committee about Russia's interference in the 2016 campaign. Brennan told senators he came to fear Russian agents tried to compromise President Donald Trump's campaign.

Brennan's remark about the agency's covert intelligence collection rankled some agency veterans, several of whom came forward to say that stealing secrets is precisely what the CIA does — or what it’s supposed to do. They worried Brennan’s comments would dissuade the nation’s covert operatives from doing their jobs and deter the foreign sources they work with from cooperating with them and breaking the laws of their own countries.

Pompeo said his goal as director is to be more aggressive in the realm of covert intelligence collection; he pointed to notoriously impenetrable North Korea as a particular target.

“The president has put in place a set of requirements that will require the CIA to be more aggressive,” Pompeo said."

May 24, 2017 10:30 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

FISA says Susan Rice is a liar

Obama was an enemy of civil liberties:

"The National Security Agency under former President Barack Obama routinely violated American privacy protections while scouring through overseas intercepts and failed to disclose the extent of the problems until the final days before Donald Trump was elected president last fall, according to once top-secret documents that chronicle some of the most serious constitutional abuses to date by the U.S. intelligence community.

More than 5 percent, or one out of every 20 searches seeking upstream Internet data on Americans inside the NSA’s so-called Section 702 database violated the safeguards Obama and his intelligence chiefs vowed to follow in 2011, according to one classified internal report reviewed by Circa.

The Obama administration self-disclosed the problems at a closed-door hearing Oct. 26 before the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court that set off alarm. Trump was elected less than two weeks later.

The normally supportive court censured administration officials, saying the failure to disclose the extent of the violations earlier amounted to an “institutional lack of candor” and that the improper searches constituted a “very serious Fourth Amendment issue,” according to a recently unsealed court document dated April 26, 2017.

The admitted violations undercut one of the primary defenses that the intelligence community and Obama officials have used in recent weeks to justify their snooping into incidental NSA intercepts about Americans.

Circa has reported that there was a three-fold increase in NSA data searches about Americans and a rise in the unmasking of U.S. person’s identities in intelligence reports after Obama loosened the privacy rules in 2011.

Officials like former National Security Adviser Susan Rice have argued their activities were legal under the so-called minimization rule changes Obama made, and that the intelligence agencies were strictly monitored to avoid abuses.

The intelligence court and the NSA’s own internal watchdog found that not to be true.

“Since 2011, NSA’s minimization procedures have prohibited use of U.S.-person identifiers to query the results of upstream Internet collections under Section 702,” the unsealed court ruling declared. “The Oct. 26, 2016 notice informed the court that NSA analysts had been conducting such queries inviolation of that prohibition, with much greater frequency than had been previously disclosed to the Court.”

Speaking Wednesday, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) said there was an apparent effort under the Obama Administration to increase the number of unmaskings of Americans.

"If we determine this to be true, this is an enormous abuse of power," Paul said. “This will dwarf all other stories.”

“There are hundreds and hundreds of people,” Paul added.

The American Civil Liberties Union said the newly disclosed violations are some of the most serious to ever be documented and strongly call into question the U.S. intelligence community’s ability to police itself and safeguard American’s privacy as guaranteed by the Constitution’s Fourth Amendment protections against unlawful search and seizure.

“I think what this emphasizes is the shocking lack of oversight of these programs,” said Neema Singh Guliani, the ACLU’s legislative counsel in Washington.

“You have these problems going on for years that only come to the attention of the court late in the game and then it takes additional years to change its practices.

“I think it does call into question all those defenses that we kept hearing, that we always have a robust oversight structure and we have culture of adherence to privacy standards,” she added. “And the headline now is they actually haven’t been in compliance for years and the FISA court itself says in its opinion is that the NSA suffers from a culture of a lack of candor.”

May 24, 2017 11:28 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Marc Kasowitz, tapped as Trump's private attorney in Russia probe, also represents Russia's largest bank

"Fox News and Reuters report that U.S. President Donald Trump has retained New York-based trial attorney Marc Kasowitz to defend him in the escalating federal investigations involving Russia, espionage suspicions, and possible criminal activities.

Kasowitz has represented Trump for over 15 years, and is known as a litigator, not a criminal defense lawyer.

He currently also represents OJSC Sberbank of Russia, the nation's largest bank, which is charged in an open U.S. federal court case of conspiring with granite company executives and others to raid the assets of a competitor.

Reuters:

"The outside counsel would be separate from the White House Counsel's Office, led by Donald McGahn.

Mueller was appointed as special counsel by the Justice Department last week to investigate the Trump campaign's possible ties to Russia. Several congressional committees and the FBI are also investigating the matter.

U.S. intelligence agencies concluded in January that Moscow tried to sway the November vote in Trump's favor. Russia has denied involvement, and Trump has denied any collusion between his campaign and Russia.
"

May 24, 2017 11:29 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Circa article continued after first half which was posted at 11:28AM above:

"The NSA acknowledged it self-disclosed the mass violations to the court last fall and that in April it took the extraordinary step of suspending the type of searches that were violating the rules, even deleting prior collected data on Americans to avoid any further violations.

“NSA will no longer collect certain internet communications that merely mention a foreign intelligence target,” the agency said in the statement that was dated April 28 and placed on its Web site without capturing much media or congressional attention.

In question is the collection of what is known as upstream “about data”about an American that is collected even though they were not directly in contact with a foreigner that the NSA was legally allowed to intercept.

The NSA said it doesn't have the ability to stop collecting ‘about’ information on Americans, “without losing some other important data. ” It, however, said it would stop the practice to “reduce the chance that it would acquire communication of U.S. persons or others who are not in direct contact with a foreign intelligence target.”

The NSA said it also plans to “delete the vast majority of its upstream internet data to further protect the privacy of U.S. person communications.”

Agency officials called the violations “inadvertent compliance lapses.” But the court and IG documents suggest the NSA had not developed a technological way to comply with the rules they had submitted to the court in 2011.

Officials "explained that NSA query compliance is largely maintained through a series of manual checks" and had not "included the proper limiters" to prevent unlawful searches, the NSA internal watchdog reported in a top secret report in January that was just declassified. A new system is being developed now, officials said.

The NSA conducts thousand of searches a year on data involving Americans and the actual numbers of violations were redacted from the documents Circa reviewed.

But a chart in the report showed there three types of violations, the most frequent being 5.2 percent of the time when NSA Section 702 upstream data on U.S. persons was searched.

The inspector general also found noncompliance between 0.7 percent and 1.4 percent of the time involving NSA activities in which there was a court order to target an American for spying but the rules were still not followed. Those activities are known as Section 704 and Section 705 spying.

The IG report spared few words for the NSA’s efforts before the disclosure to ensure it was complying with practices, some that date to rules issued in 2008 in the final days of the Bush administration and others that Obama put into effect in 2011.

“We found that the Agency controls for monitoring query compliance have not been completely developed,” the inspector general reported, citing problems ranging from missing requirements for documentation to the failure to complete controls that would ensure “query compliance.”

The NSA’s Signal Intelligence Directorate, the nation’s main foreign surveillance arm, wrote a letter back to the IG saying it agreed with the findings and that “corrective action plans” are in the works."


http://circa.com/politics/barack-obamas-team-secretly-disclosed-years-of-illegal-nsa-searches-spying-on-americans

May 24, 2017 11:49 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Former CIA Director John Brennan told House Russia investigators Tuesday that Russia "brazenly interfered" in US elections, including actively contacting members of the President Donald Trump's campaign -- but he stopped shy of dubbing it "collusion."

"I saw interaction that in my mind raised questions of whether it was collusion," Brennan told Rep. Trey Gowdy, saying that he supported the FBI digging further. "It was necessary to pull threads."

Brennan was speaking to the House intelligence committee on the extent of Russia's meddling in the 2016 elections and possible ties to the Trump campaign, where he was asked about how Moscow recruits sources "wittingly and unwittingly."

"Frequently, people who go along a treasonous path do not know they are on a treasonous path until it is too late," Brennan said.

Brennan said that he first picked up on Russia's active meddling last summer and, in an August 4, 2016, phone call with Alexander Bortnikov, the head of Russia's FSB intelligence agency, warned him against further interference. Bortnikov, Brennan said, denied any active efforts in the election.

Rep. Mike Turner, an Ohio Republican, grilled Brennan on whether evidence he cited amounted to collusion between Trump aides and Russia.

"Seeing these types of contacts during the same period of time raised my concern," Brennan said.

Brennan cautioned lawmakers that although he could not definitively say if those contacts amounted to "collusion," he knew that Russians were actively cultivating US contacts and, very likely, did not present themselves as Russian spies.

Brennan also said Trump might have broken protocol if he revealed highly classified information with the Russian foreign minister and Russian ambassador to the US in a White House meeting earlier this month.

The panel will get two cracks at Brennan -- the first in public at 10 a.m. ET and the second behind closed doors -- almost two months after his first appearance was dramatically canceled amid the chaos sparked by House intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes' clandestine White House trip...."

http://q13fox.com/2017/05/23/ex-cia-chief-john-brennan-russians-contacted-trump-campaign/

May 24, 2017 12:34 PM  
Anonymous Two-trillion, twice said...

One of the most glaring problems with Donald Trump’s new budget plan is that its architects are bad at arithmetic. Politico’s Michael Grunwald explained:

Budget proposals always involve some guesswork into the unknowable, and administrations routinely massage numbers to their political advantage. But this proposal is unusually brazen in its defiance of basic math, and in its accounting discrepancies amounting to trillions-with-a-t rather than mere millions or billions. […]

Trump critics in the budget-wonk world are pointing to another $2 trillion of red ink as a blatant math error – or, less charitably, as an Enron-style accounting fraud.


Budget fights can admittedly get a little wonky, but this one’s pretty straightforward: Trump’s White House unveiled a budget plan that double-counts $2 trillion. The president and his right-wing budget director, House Freedom Caucus co-founder Mick Mulvaney, specifically counts on $2 trillion in revenue to eliminate the deficit that the administration also devotes to paying for Trump’s tax cuts.

Harvard economist Lawrence Summers, the former Treasury secretary and National Economic Council director in the previous two Democratic administrations, wrote in the Washington Post that this represents “the most egregious accounting error in a presidential budget in the nearly 40 years I have been tracking them.” Summers added that the mistake is “a logical error of the kind that would justify failing a student in an introductory economics course.”

And while this is certainly a discouraging development for those hoping the White House is capable of rudimentary governmental competence – $2 trillion isn’t exactly a rounding error – what makes this especially fascinating to me is what Trump World is saying now that “the mystery money” problem has been exposed.

Mick Mulvaney, who’s chiefly responsible for the Trump administration’s budget, is currently pretending that the double-counting gimmick doesn’t exist. “We stand by the numbers,” he told reporters yesterday.

Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin, meanwhile, sat down with CNBC’s John Harwood, who asked the Trump cabinet secretary to respond to the concerns. Mnuchin responded:

“So the budget was built on, what is the administration’s economic plans, and economic numbers which we’ve talked about, which are getting to 3 percent growth. So I think [Lawrence Summers], I think in all fairness to him, the issue is more of this is a preliminary document that will be refined, as we go through a process with Congress determining how money is spent.

Oh. So confronted with evidence that the Trump budget is basically a giant fraud, the president’s budget director has decided to stick his head in the sand, while the president’s Treasury secretary intends to worry about making the numbers add up some other time.

In the immortal words of Casey Stengel, can’t anybody here play this game?

May 24, 2017 2:48 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

all you're saying is he's wrong about this reducing the deficit

so what?

not since Gingrich's Contract-with-America budgets in the 90s has a balanced budget been passed

I'd like to see that as well, but the whole "what a moronic math mistake that idiot Trump made" is again a ridiculous and biased partisan spin

if we want America to be great again (and everyone but the unpatriotic miscreants at TTF does), we need an objective press

even the pretense of objectivity would be welcome

"Where is the evidence of President Trump's collusion with Russia?

The Wall Street Journal – no particular fan of Trump – characterizes the DOJ charge to Special Counsel, Robert Mueller, as fatally open-ended, vague, and flawed. His instruction lists no federal statutes and invites a fishing expedition into trivial matters. Journalists covering the story appear to disagree on what Mueller is supposed to do: Is he to “oversee the investigation into ties between President Trump’s campaign and Russian officials” or “investigate possible coordination between President Trump’s associates and Russian officials?”

The political feeding frenzy has, to date, brought forth the following facts of Russiagate: Persons associated with the Trump campaign had contacts with Russians, some unsavory. Trump businesses, like other luxury property developers, had dealings with wealthy Russian buyers. Trump did not condemn Putin during the campaign and expressed a hope (shared by many across the political spectrum) of improved relations.

These facts shed little light, if any, on collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian state to throw the election to Trump, as is evidenced by the deafening silence of anti-Trumpists. As Jim Geraghty writes in National Review:


The FBI counterintelligence guys presumably track Russian agents on our soil as much as possible. You figure the NSA can track just about any electronic communication between Russians and figures in the Trump campaign. If there was something sinister and illegal going on…the U.S. government as a whole had every incentive in the world to expose that as quickly as possible.

Diverse figures and outlets agree that the nexus of “possible collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign” does not include any evidence of collusion. Maxine Waters (D-CA) concedes there is no proof of collusion as does Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) joined by Trump nemesis Lindsey Graham (R-SC). Fox political analyst, Brit Hume, on Sunday’s #MediaBuzz stated that he has never seen a charge get so far out in front of the available evidence over the course of his long career. Matt Taibbi, a left-wing columnist for Rolling Stone who calls Trump the “crazy clown President," points out that “despite almost daily leaks by anonymous sources, we do not know whether it is about collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian state.”

more:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2017/05/23/there-remains-no-evidence-of-trump-russia-collusion/#6d98cce8242c


May 24, 2017 4:17 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Alan Dershowitz, not exactly a Trumpster, explains how the current partisan attack on Trump will destroy our civil liberties, if not checked

"Legal technicalities are of course the difference between the rule of law and the iron fist of tyranny. Civil liberties protect us all. As H.L. Mencken used to say: “The trouble about fighting for human freedom is that you have to spend much of your life defending sons of bitches: for oppressive laws are always aimed at them originally, and oppression must be stopped in the beginning if it is to be stopped at all.” History demonstrates that the first casualty of hyper-partisan politics is often civil liberties."

more:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2017/05/24/who_will_stand_up_for_civil_liberties_133975.html

from the Bolsheviks to the gay agenda, totalitarianism usually comes from the left

May 24, 2017 4:27 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

that's right!

miscreant Bolsheviks!!

May 24, 2017 4:46 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

the leaks coming from the US intelligence agencies, that Comey refused to investigate, are causing more damage to our world standing by the day

the British have said they will share no more intelligence on the Manchester incident until they are assured the information won't be leaked to the US media

a private conversation between Trump and the President of the Philippines concerning nuclear subs headed to North Korea was leaked

Comey's dismissals looks daily more and more justified

The psychotic explosion of the Democrats and their allies in the jackal press over the Comey dismissal and his alleged memo will become a decisive victory for the president. The Mueller nomination, a hybrid arrangement that will be a supplementary investigation with the FBI, will push the question into a cul-de-sac that will entirely clear the president.

The efforts to represent the firing of Comey as an excess of authority, an attempt to discourage an exposé of a scandal between the Trump campaign and the Russian government, a replication of any aspect of the Watergate affair, now enriched by the garbled claim of an interference with the Flynn investigation: all of this is part of a madness that has gripped the American political class as it sinks beneath the brackish, fecal waters of the swamp it has filled and wallowed in happily for twenty years.

May 25, 2017 10:12 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Whatever Comey's motives and delusions, in July, he seized upon the compromising misconduct of the attorney general, Loretta Lynch in meeting with President Clinton to make the decision not to leave it to the equally publicity-eager deputy attorney general Sally Yates and not any prosecutor, that Mrs. Clinton was guilty of felonies but should not be prosecuted. When the election campaign was down to its last ten days, a mass of improperly withheld and misdirected emails came to the FBI director’s attention and he felt, presumably with some agitation percolating beneath him in the Bureau, that he must refer to them publicly. With haste that cast doubt on the FBI’s thoroughness, he then assured the country that the tens of thousands of emails confirmed his original judgment, that Mrs. Clinton should not be charged. This judgment was beyond his authority to make and an outrage to make publicly, and if he was determined to make it, he should not have announced the reopening of the email question for a few days before shutting it down again.

There is no question that he told President Trump that on the basis of all evidence, Trump was not suspected of wrongdoing in his campaign’s relations with the Russian government, and Senator Feinstein, a militant Trump opponent, confirms that Comey had said this to her and the Senate Intelligence Committee chairman, Charles Grassley. The same person who rushed before the cameras to convict but excuse from charges Mrs. Clinton, could express privately the innocence of Mr. Trump, but could give no hint of it publicly, even though he knew perfectly well that the continuing confected cloud of the Russian collusion allegation seriously impeded the ability of the administration to govern. One could ransack the annals of Hollywood and of pulp fiction to find a more deserving candidate for summary dismissal than this mountebank who apparently fancied himself an electoral college of one to determine who was a suitable occupant of the presidency. There are reasonable questions about the firing of General Douglas MacArthur by President Truman, and about the firing of Archibald Cox and Elliott Richardson by President Nixon, but there are none about Comey.

There is no question that he told President Trump that on the basis of all evidence, Trump was not suspected of wrongdoing in his campaign’s relations with the Russian government, and Senator Feinstein, a militant Trump opponent, confirms that Comey had said this to her and the Senate Intelligence Committee chairman, Charles Grassley. The same person who rushed before the cameras to convict but excuse from charges Mrs. Clinton, could express privately the innocence of Mr. Trump, but could give no hint of it publicly, even though he knew perfectly well that the continuing confected cloud of the Russian collusion allegation seriously impeded the ability of the administration to govern.

May 25, 2017 10:12 AM  
Anonymous Ignoring real news said...

"On Wednesday night, Fox News reporter Alicia Acuna described in unflinching detail how Greg Gianforte, a Republican congressional candidate from Montana, violently attacked a journalist for trying to ask him a question about health care policy the night before his state’s special election.

In an eyewitness account published on the Fox News website, Acuna described how she and two colleagues were in Gianforte’s office when the candidate “grabbed” Guardian reporter Ben Jacobs “by the neck with both hands and slammed him on the ground.” This account directly contradicts the Gianforte campaign’s claim that Jacobs, a “liberal journalist,” was the aggressor ― a claim also disputed by Jacobs’ audio recording of the incident.

But even as Fox News’ online report was being shared widely on social media Wednesday night, the network’s right-leaning primetime lineup ― Tucker Carlson, “The Five” co-hosts and Sean Hannity ― ignored it.

Meanwhile, CNN and MSNBC, which didn’t have reporters witness the event, covered the congressional candidate’s violent outburst. MSNBC brought Jacobs on air during the 8 p.m. hour and even mentioned Fox News’ online report of the incident during the 10 p.m. hour..."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/fox-news-gianforte-attack-journalist_us_5926f06ee4b061d8f81fcd29

For more info see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_the_press_in_the_United_States

May 25, 2017 3:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"A Virginia-based federal appeals court blocked the Trump administration's controversial travel ban, becoming the second circuit court to uphold lower court rulings against the policy.

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond issued the ruling Thursday, following arguments May 8.

The ruling means the Trump administration still cannot enforce its travel ban which affects six Muslim-majority countries: Iran, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, Libya and Sudan.

“We remain unconvinced [the ban] has more to do with national security than it does with effectuating the President’s promised Muslim ban," the court said.

The ruling was issued by the full, or en banc, court, in a 10-3 ruling with two abstentions.

"Congress granted the president broad power to deny entry to aliens, but that power is not absolute. It cannot go unchecked when, as here, the president wields it through an executive edict that stands to cause irreparable harm to individuals across this nation," the chief judge of the circuit, Roger L. Gregory wrote.

Judge Paul Niemeyer sharply dissented from the decision.."

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/05/25/trump-travel-ban-blocked-by-va-based-federal-appeals-court.html

For more info see
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_religion_in_the_United_States

May 25, 2017 4:04 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

oh, look what's being reaped from the seeds TTF has sown

Lou Reed is now being banned as "transphobic"

https://stream.org/banning-lou-reed-the-cultural-revolution-eats-its-fathers/

and this Bolshevik moment was brought to you by the letters "G" "B" & "T"

May 26, 2017 10:08 AM  
Anonymous Captain Obvious said...

No, one of his songs is no longer included on a playlist at one event, at one college campus, in Canada.

May 26, 2017 3:25 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Ignoring real news said...
"On Wednesday night, Fox News reporter Alicia Acuna described in unflinching detail how Greg Gianforte, a Republican congressional candidate from Montana"

oh, the press has been salivating all week how this guy is going to lose

proving the whole country is going to go blue in 2018

oops, didn't work

he won

and the media is....Ignoring real news

hahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!

May 26, 2017 10:42 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Republican Greg Gianforte defied media expectations by winning Thursday’s special election to the U.S. House of Representatives in Montana.

The race had been neck-and-neck, and then Gianforte allegedly assaulted a reporter. It seemed his chances were doomed.

But if callers to talk radio were any indication, some Montanans may have voted for the Republican precisely because he had “body-slammed” a reporter. That is how much the media are disliked.

The GOP win in Montana also illustrates something fundamental about the Democratic Party: it cannot conjure a reason for people to vote for it.

Unless you are a member of a minority that has been indoctrinated to fear Republicans in general and Trump in particular, or a coddled member of the bourgeois “Resistance,” the Democrats offer nothing.

The conventional wisdom is that the Republicans are in deep trouble in 2018 — at least in the House. That fear is one reason House Republicans cannot unite around the Trump agenda.

But after Montana, it becomes reasonable to wonder whether Democrats are actually in danger in 2018, for five reasons.

1.Nancy Pelosi. The former Speaker ought to have resigned in 2010, after she led her party to a historic defeat. But she clung to power within her party, crushing her rivals and stifling dissent. She remains deeply unpopular with the country as a whole, and has done nothing to improve her image. She offers sharp partisan jabs, but few new ideas. She is six years older than Trump — whom Democrats already mock for his age. She will unite Republican voters.

2.Keith Ellison. The Democrats balked at electing a radical leftist dogged by allegations of antisemitism as the new chair of the Democratic National Committee. But they appointed him as deputy chair anyway. Together with the foul-mouthed chair, Tom Perez, Ellison represents an increasingly radical, militant, and unhinged Democratic Party — one that has no clue or care about how to recover the working-class voters it lost to Trump in 2016.

3.Impeachment talk. The Russia conspiracy theory motivates Democratic donors and activists. But as it becomes more shrill, and prods more Democrats (and journalists) to talk about impeachment, it risks motivating Republican voters as well. Trump’s voters did not take their country back in 2016 only to have the Washington, New York and California elites snatch it away again on the basis of nonsense. It’s not about The Donald; it’s about democracy.

4.Bernie-crat backlash. There is still plenty of unfinished business from 2016 among Democrats. Bernie Sanders supporters still feel the party establishmentis thwarting them at every turn — whether in elections for the California Democratic Party leadership, or in Montana, where Bernie-crats who worked hard for Rob Quist in Montana feel the party did not do enough to help. Those activists might prefer to sit out 2018 and wait for a change in leadership.

5.The 2010 map. For all his political savvy, Barack Obama’s biggest mistake was passing Obamacare before the 2010 census. That ensured that the political backlash not only affected federal races, but state races as well. When congressional districts were redrawn, Republicans held an advantage everywhere but Illinois and California. In 2018, Democrats will be competing on that unfavorable map, with their enthusiasm concentrated in deep blue areas.

The Democrats have no policy message. They are simply anti-Trump, and find themselves carried away by the vehemence of their anger and frustration. They offer nothing to Republicans who might otherwise be tempted to send a message to the administration — whether conservatives who want faster swamp-draining, or NeverTrumpers looking for redemption.

Unless they make changes soon, the Democrats may miss their chance

May 27, 2017 8:41 AM  
Anonymous Michael Gerson said...

Well, it seems somewhere out there is one last Republican who has the ability to think:

Michael Gerson

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-conservative-mind-has-become-diseased/2017/05/25/523f0964-4159-11e7-9869-bac8b446820a_story.html?utm_term=.a13419b17b2c


...The conservative mind, in some very visible cases, has become diseased. The movement has been seized by a kind of discrediting madness, in which conspiracy delusions figure prominently. Institutions and individuals that once served an important ideological role, providing a balance to media bias, are discrediting themselves in crucial ways. With the blessings of a president, they have abandoned the normal constraints of reason and compassion. They have allowed political polarization to reach their hearts, and harden them. They have allowed polarization to dominate their minds, and empty them...

May 27, 2017 3:15 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

how sad...

for a TTFer to put up a post about how conservatives have "conspiracy delusions"

this, from a group that thinks something fiendish is up whenever anyone talks to a Russian

This is the way TTF ends
Not with a bang but a whimper...

May 27, 2017 3:36 PM  
Anonymous Captain Obvious said...

Tell us again how Obama was born in Kenya, and that his birth certificate was faked...

Loved that one.

May 27, 2017 3:51 PM  
Anonymous Teach the Facts to Power said...

Yeah, and remember how Hillary had an email server in the Russian Embassy, that she hid from the FBI, CIA, and NSA, and lied on her SF-86 security clearance form about? Man, I"m glad she isn't president now. That woulda been bad.

May 27, 2017 4:32 PM  
Anonymous Captain Obvious said...

It looks like Hillary's server was safer than the DNC's.

How many more Benghazi hearings that found nothing substantial would they have had by now if she had become president?

Have some Comet Pizza.

May 27, 2017 4:56 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I know TTT is becoming defunct but you guys should stop whimpering

it's not manly!

May 27, 2017 6:18 PM  
Anonymous Captain Obvious said...

Neither are some of the most common posters.

Did you have a point?

May 27, 2017 7:27 PM  
Anonymous Lieutenant Subtle said...

what about "you guys should stop whimpering" do you not get?

I realize someone who calls himself "Captain Obvious" is bound to miss a few nuances, but....

this is ridiculous!

May 27, 2017 8:35 PM  
Anonymous big fan of Lt S said...

ha-ha!!

good one, Lt S

May 27, 2017 8:37 PM  
Anonymous Captain Obvious said...

What part of the "It's not manly" joke did you not get?

May 27, 2017 10:07 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"This is the way TTF ends
Not with a bang but a whimper..."


And a resounding victory over the CRWhatever that includes an unscripted sex ed curriculum that expanded upon the old one by providing MCPS students with current knowledge about how to protect themselves, based on the latest science and advice from the medical and scientific communities. Also, based on mainstream science, it recognizes that sexual orientation is not a choice, and that homosexuality is not a disease.

Hooooooey!

May 28, 2017 4:30 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

whimper, whimper... but 10 years ago we won... whimper, whimper

"And a resounding victory over the CRWhatever that includes an unscripted sex ed curriculum that expanded upon the old one by providing MCPS students with current knowledge about how to protect themselves, based on the latest science"

actually, there haven't been recent major breakthroughs in birth control so this "latest science" crap is just that

in a world where the accumulated knowledge of civilization through the ages is available in every citizen's pocket, kids didn't really lack awareness of birth control

the purpose of the curriculum was about encouraging them to consider premarital promiscuity normal and to let them know that the school authorities expected them to engage in it

"Also, based on mainstream science, it recognizes that sexual orientation is not a choice,"

no scientific evidence has revealed sexual preference to be less of a choice than any other preference

no scientific evidence has indicated that sexual preference is an "orientation"

"and that homosexuality is not a disease."

science didn't decide that

it was removed from the list of mental illnesses in 1973 after radical fringe homosexual advocates launched violent attacks at professional and scientific conferences

it was done to appease the radicals, not based on scientific research

polls done years later showed most mental health professionals continued to consider homosexuality a mental illness

we have a curriculum not based on science at all, much less the latest science

and this corruption has spread throughout the institution and the result as been a decline in performance to the extent where more than half of honors students in math fail the finals

so, not only is the curriculum encouraging dangerous behavior among students, it has led to the decline of the educational program

congratulations on the "great" win a decade ago

and stop whimpering


May 28, 2017 9:57 PM  
Anonymous message from us to teh Commander in Chief said...

http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/26/opinions/trump-trip-a-success-gardiner-opinion/index.html

Here at Teach the Facts, we'd like to congratulate President Trump on a very successful trip overseas.

We appreciate all you're doing to make America great and strong so we can stay free to say whatever we damn well please.

Thank you, Mr. President!!

May 29, 2017 7:02 AM  
Anonymous the goodest anonymous said...

Democrats still aren't winning.

Four months into his administration, President Donald Trump registers the approval of barely 40 percent of the country. He is mired in an investigation that appears to expand by the day, and is continually damaged by government leakers seemingly determined to embarrass him.

Conservatives openly fret about the future of their ideological movement, given the president's rampant inconsistencies. Even with majorities on Capitol Hill, Republicans are struggling with delivering the legislative agenda they campaigned on, often burdened by papering over the latest Trump tweet or distracted by the daily Russia-related developments.

This week, they found themselves attempting to shrug off the astonishing meltdown of their Montana congressional candidate, who snapped at a reporter on the eve of Thursday's special election, allegedly slamming him to the ground and punching him.

The media narrative for the Republican Party in 2017 has teetered between dark and darker. A White House on the brink. A GOP Congress at war with itself. A slate of underperforming or uninspiring contenders.

And yet, the Democrats still aren't winning.

In the three opportunities they've had to deliver a brushback to Trump through special U.S. House elections, they've failed.

For all the raised expectations on the left and the hand-wringing on the right, the results have been the same, underscoring just how difficult it will be for the minority party to claw its way back into power. Trump is weakened, but far from vanquished. Republican candidates may be flawed, but their loyal constituencies are showing up to bail them out – if only to rebut the narrative they're constantly hearing permeate out of Washington.

May 29, 2017 10:29 AM  
Anonymous the goodest anonymous said...

Take Montana.

Even before Republican Greg Gianforte faced a misdemeanor assault charge, he was seen as a subpar candidate due to unpopularity tied to his failed run for governor last year. He was yet another white male multimillionaire running for high office.

Clad in a cowboy hat, folk-singing and guitar-strumming Democrat Rob Quist was easily the more colorful candidate. He attracted significant funding, drew large crowds – with the help of Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont – and tracked within single digits of Gianforte in polling.

After the incident involving Gianforte and Guardian reporter Ben Jacobs, there was a brief moment when the chattering class wondered if it would amount to a breaking point. But as reporters on the ground scoured for signs of the favored candidate facing a crisis, the evidence they turned up was scant.

A store clerk in the state told MSNBC that Gianforte sounded like "my kind of politician." A 75-year-old Bozeman architect who had already voted for Gianforte told The New York Times the incident "doesn't change my mind at all." CNN found a voter who, after hearing the audio of the scuffle, actually said he had compassion for Gianforte.

As Gianforte apologized for his actions during his victory speech, admitting, "I made a mistake," a supporter could be heard saying, "Not in our minds!"

Gianforte defeated Quist by 6 points in the statewide district – far from the 20-point margin Trump racked up or even the 16-point margin former Rep. Ryan Zinke collected in 2016.

But as cliche as it sounds, a win is still a win. And the overarching takeaway is that in this hyperpartisan environment – in which sides are unwilling to grant even the smallest concession to their opponents – it takes a mountain to move voters, especially those in red districts.

Even a body-slam won't do it.

"Close only counts in horseshoes," Democratic strategist David Axelrod tweeted Friday. "Outside @GOP groups outspent Ds 6-to-1, unleashing a ceaseless barrage on Quist with no counter. Will this be the norm?"

"Another question is whether in cycle [Democratic candidates] should expect the same infusion of cash online as those running in specials," Axelrod said. "Probably not."

The Democrats have nothing but margins to take solace in. Noting that Gianforte performed 14 points worse than Trump, one operative attempted to highlight the bright side by imagining that "if every GOPer in '18 does 14 pts worse than Trump, Dems win 138 House seats."

Of 30 House GOP seats desired by Democrats, 23 of the incumbents won by more than 6 points in 2016, and 17 of them won by more than 10 .

The seesaw of politics says Democrats should have the wind at their backs during next year's midterms, especially if Trump doesn't improve his own standing. Over the last 20 such elections, the president's party has lost House seats in 18. Yet even with a wave, those are towering margins to climb and topple to reclaim control.

Of course, it's foolish to read too much into just a few special elections, let alone a single one.

But observers can be assured that if Democrats had emerged victorious in any thus far, it would've sparked a fusillade of headlines and coverage portraying a coming doomsday for the GOP.

What's true is that these early elections are showing the limits of the Democratic resistance that has bubbled up across the country and into the streets. It's proved powerful, but not transformative.

And while Montana was probably never a ripe place to fire up an anti-Trump protest vote, in less than a month, yet another weather vane will appear in Georgia's special election run-off for a House seat.

Jon Ossoff and the Georgia race appear to offer the best chance yet for a Democratic victory. Gubernatorial races this fall in Virginia and New Jersey offer additional shots.

But so far, Democrats aren't winning.

May 29, 2017 10:29 AM  
Anonymous amazed anonymous said...

on this, the 100th birthday of JFK

it's a great time to consider:

what the hell ever happened to the Democratic Party?

May 29, 2017 10:31 AM  
Anonymous ha-ha said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

May 29, 2017 4:09 PM  
Anonymous the Russia hoax ended last week said...

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-trump-russia-story-starts-making-sense-1495834721?mod=e2two

May 29, 2017 5:25 PM  
Anonymous Is America Great Again Yet? said...

http://thehill.com/homenews/news/335575-clapper-aggressiveness-of-russian-interference-in-election-unprecedented

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-05-29/putin-a-bigger-threat-than-islamic-state-mccain-says/8570158

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/335570-russians-talked-about-having-potentially-derogatory-information-on-trump

http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a55294/trump-kushner-russia-money/

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/05/29/jared-kushner-didnt-suggest-russian-communications-channel-in-meeting-source-says.html

https://www.aol.com/article/news/2017/04/07/jared-kushner-omits-contacts-russian-officials-application-security-clearance/22030543/

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/06/us/politics/jared-kushner-russians-security-clearance.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/lexington-herald-leader-windows-smashed_us_592cb731e4b0065b20b7c6b5

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/05/28/530508095/after-g7-summit-merkel-says-europe-can-no-longer-completely-rely-on-u-s-and-uk

https://www.thenation.com/article/conservatives-complain-republicans-liberal-bias/

May 30, 2017 4:08 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

well, we have our problems

but restoration is under way

next order of business is to grow a new second political party for America

the Democratic party has become the new John Birch Society, with nutso conspiracy theories about the Russians and considering any conversation with a Russian to be treason

somehow, fused with that, they've become the party of the rich coastal elites that look down on the common working man

a President of the opposite party, with the lowest approval rating in history for a first semester, is in the White House....and the Democrats have lost three special elections in a row!!

the most recent, in Montana, against a guy who lost the governor's race there by large margins not long ago and who committed criminal assault on a reporter right before the election

it's just sad

no wonder TTF is whimpering!!

May 30, 2017 6:03 PM  
Anonymous Pass the Popcorn said...

The Democrats have nothing to do with anything in the news. They are just sitting on the sidelines watching the Republicans commit ritual mass suicide.

The funny thing is that eventually the Republicans are going to have to impeach their own guy. Either that, or they all go up in flames in the next election. Though now that people see what the party stands for, I don't think even impeachment will help them.

Go ahead and laugh your head off.

May 30, 2017 7:29 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Transgender Teen Wins Landmark Ruling Over Right To Use Boys Bathroom

A federal appeals court ruled on Tuesday that a transgender high school student in Wisconsin has both a constitutional and statutory right to use the bathroom that aligns with his gender identity.

The ruling, by the U.S. Court of Appeals for 7th Circuit in Chicago, is the first of its kind and could open the door for other courts — and eventually, the U.S. Supreme Court — to find that both the Constitution and federal law protect trans students from school-based discrimination.

The court described the ordeal of Ashton “Ash” Whitaker, the teen at the center of the case, as that of “a 17-year‐old high school senior who has what would seem like a simple request: to use the boys’ restroom while at school.”

With his mother’s support, Whitaker had sued his school district, the Kenosha Unified School District, after he was barred from using the facilities other boys used and was relegated instead to the girls’ restroom or a gender-neutral bathroom in the main office.

This singling out, Whitaker’s lawsuit maintained, violated both the constitutional guarantee of equality and Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which forbids sex discrimination by school entities receiving federal funding. The 7th Circuit agreed with both claims and upheld an injunction that directed the school to accommodate the student.

“Here, the School District’s policy cannot be stated without referencing sex, as the School District decides which bathroom a student may use based upon the sex listed on the student’s birth certificate,” wrote U.S. Circuit Judge Ann Claire Williams for a three-judge panel. “This policy is inherently based upon a sex‐classification and heightened review applies.”

That language matters, because it could prove persuasive to other appeals courts considering whether existing law treats gender identity as a protected category in the school context, said Joe Wardenski, a member of the legal team representing Whitaker.

The ruling “is the first federal appeals court to decisively hold that that both Title IX and the 14th Amendment provide protections to transgender students,” Wardenski said.

As timing would have it, the 7th Circuit — which covers the states of Wisconsin, Illinois and Indiana — heard oral arguments in the dispute only weeks after the Supreme Court punted on the case of Gavin Grimm, a Virginia teen who was hoping to convince the justices that federal law as interpreted by the Obama administration already forbids school officials from discriminating against transgender students.

The election of President Donald Trump, however, changed the legal landscape, and both the departments of Justice and Education — which had previously supported Grimm’s case and were responsible for pro-trans directives issued nationwide — rolled back the prior administration’s view of what accommodations Title IX requires.

That change in positions led the Supreme Court to duck the issue altogether, leaving plaintiffs like Whitaker and Grimm to argue that Title IX itself — which doesn’t expressly cover gender identity — nonetheless covers claims of “sex” stereotyping against trans students.

The 7th Circuit embraced that approach in Tuesday’s ruling, suggesting that because “a transgender individual does not conform to the sex‐based stereotypes of the sex that he or she was assigned at birth,” it’s unlawful to stigmatize a student based those stereotypes.

“A policy that requires an individual to use a bathroom that does not conform with his or her gender identity punishes that individual for his or her gender non‐conformance, which in turn violates Title IX,” Judge Williams wrote.

The ruling in favor of Whitaker arrives less than two months since the full 7th Circuit ruled in another watershed case that federal employment law forbids discrimination against gays and lesbians in the workplace.

May 31, 2017 6:54 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"the Democratic party has become the new John Birch Society, with nutso conspiracy theories about the Russians and considering any conversation with a Russian to be treason"

USA Today, that hotbed of "nutso conspiracy theories" reported last October: Yes, 17 intelligence agencies really did say Russia was behind hacking

"...On Oct. 7, the Department of Homeland Security and Office of the Director of National Intelligence issued a joint statement on behalf of the U.S. Intelligence Community. The USIC [another hotbed of "nutso conspiracy theories"] is made up of 16 agencies, in addition to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.

"The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations. The recent disclosures of alleged hacked e-mails on sites like DCLeaks.com and WikiLeaks and by the Guccifer 2.0 online persona are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts. These thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the US election process. Such activity is not new to Moscow—the Russians have used similar tactics and techniques across Europe and Eurasia, for example, to influence public opinion there. We believe, based on the scope and sensitivity of these efforts, that only Russia's senior-most officials could have authorized these activities."..."

May 31, 2017 7:08 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"USA Today, that hotbed of "nutso conspiracy theories" reported last October: Yes, 17 intelligence agencies really did say Russia was behind hacking"

ah, the old misdirection technique

no one said it's nutso to think Russia hacked emails of the DNC

it's the hype about how this affected the election and the complete baseless accusations that Trump colluded with the Russians

Russia has always done this and it's just something to shrug off

we actually do it to them as well

"The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident ... Such activity is not new to Moscow—the Russians have used similar tactics and techniques across Europe and Eurasia, for example, to influence public opinion there. We believe, based on the scope and sensitivity of these efforts, that only Russia's senior-most officials could have authorized these activities."..."

again, they have always tried to influence our politics

that's rational, we are the greatest nation on Earth and our politics impact them

American voters have always been able to cut through the disinformation

indeed, a responsible press should help with that process instead of the disingenuous crap we're getting now

communicating with and engaging the Russians is necessary to protecting the interest of the US

the Dems have become the new John Birch Society

this will all shake out and bring them even lower in November 2018

May 31, 2017 9:39 AM  
Anonymous How soon they forget said...

We see who's head faking and it's not the 17 US security agencies.

It's you Trumpettes who keep wanting to say there's no need for intelligence investigations into the work Russia did to get Trump elected.

However, in fact, "...These thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the US election process. Such activity is not new to Moscow—the Russians have used similar tactics and techniques across Europe and Eurasia, for example, to influence public opinion there. We believe, based on the scope and sensitivity of these efforts, that only Russia's senior-most officials could have authorized these activities."

You Trumpettes like to forget to mention that the big Cheetos himself requested the Russians help uncover even more emails from his political rival.

May 31, 2017 10:37 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"It's you who keep wanting to say there's no need for intelligence investigations into the work Russia did to get Trump elected"

well, there's no feasible case that their efforts got Trump elected

those who voted for Trump have never said a word about anything leaked at wikileaks being their reason

but, I, and I think most everyone, wants the US counter-intelligence effort to be robust and they should definitely try to examine how they try to influence

that being said, such information has always been classified in the past

its a perpetual game and its not in our interest to expose our side's efforts to the enemy

the leakers need to be located and prosecuted

these unelected and unaccountable agents are motivated by a struggle to preserve their power

right now, the deep state is at war with the American voter and the need to preserve democracy overarches every other concern

May 31, 2017 10:56 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

the latest on the hoax of anthropogenic global warming:

http://thefederalist.com/2017/05/30/nyt-peddles-global-warming-science-without-numbers/

May 31, 2017 11:23 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"those who voted for Trump have never said a word about anything leaked at wikileaks being their reason"

Those who voted for the pussy grabber aren't smart enough to know they fell for repeated Trump/Putin fake news con jobs.

Those voters said plenty of words about fake news items like:

- Comet Pizza child sex ring
- the 400 pound hacker guy in his mother's basement
- Obama is a Kenyan Muslim who did not attend Columbia University
- Ted Cruz's father was in on Kennedy assassination
- thousands and thousands of Muslims were cheering in New Jersey on 9/11
- Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia was murdered
- millions of people in the US voted illegally on November 8
- climate change is a trick pulled on us by the Chinese

Morons!

Warning, facts ahead:

"...As soon as the news broke a year ago that the Russians had penetrated the Democratic National Committee's computer systems, Trump launched a campaign of denial and distraction. For months, he refused to acknowledge the Kremlin's role. He questioned expert and government findings that pinned the blame on Moscow. He refused to condemn Putin. Far from treating these acts of information warfare seriously, he attempted to politicize and delegitimize the evidence. Meanwhile, he and his supporters encouraged more Russian hacking. All told, Trump provided cover for a foreign government's attempt to undermine American democracy. Through a propaganda campaign of his own, he helped Russia get away with it. As James Clapper, the former director of national intelligence, testified to Congress this spring, Trump "helps the Russians by obfuscating who was actually responsible."

...After WikiLeaks dumped nearly 20,000 DNC emails—a move that nearly blew up the Democratic convention—Trump tweeted, "The new joke in town is that Russia leaked the disastrous DNC e-mails, which should never have been written (stupid), because Putin likes me." Two days later, he proclaimed at a news conference, "Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press." Trump supporters including Rep. Mike Pompeo, who would become Trump's CIA director, and Roger Stone, the longtime political dirty trickster, cheered on WikiLeaks.

...during his first intelligence briefing as the Republican presidential nominee, Trump was reportedly told that there were direct links between the hacks and the Russian government.

During a September 8 interview with RT, the Kremlin-controlled broadcaster that has been accused of disseminating fake news and propaganda, Trump discounted the Russian connection: "I think maybe the Democrats are putting that out. Who knows, but I think it's pretty unlikely." (Yes, he did this on RT.) He repeated a similar line at the first presidential debate at the end of that month, with his famous reference to how the DNC hacker "could be somebody sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds, okay?"

Private experts and US intelligence had already determined that Russia had pulled off this caper. Trump had been told this. Yet he continued to deny Russia's culpability, actively protecting Moscow.

Many Republicans followed his lead. Trump's stance—treating a widely shared conclusion as controversial speculation—essentially foreclosed a vigorous and bipartisan response to the Moscow intervention. It is hard to imagine how this did not embolden Russian intelligence and reinforce Putin's belief that he had backed the right horse..."


http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/05/trump-putin-russia-scandal-guilty

May 31, 2017 1:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

https://www.aol.com/article/news/2017/05/31/trump-impeachment-poll/22119403/

May 31, 2017 2:34 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

A Florida woman is speaking out after she claims she was forced to marry a 20-year-old member of her church who raped and impregnated her when she was just 11 years old.

In a harrowing exposé in the opinion section of the New York Times, author Sherry Johnson reveals the horrific abuse she endured at the hands of her family's conservative Pentecostal church in her youth.

Johnson says that she was raped four times by members of her congregation, including both a minister and a parishioner, as a child and, as a result, she became pregnant at age 10.

After child welfare authorities stepped in to investigate, Johnson says her family members and church officials decided that the easiest way to avoid legal trouble was to arrange a marriage.

"It was forced on me," she told the New York Times. "My mom asked me if I wanted to get married, and I said, 'I don't know, what is marriage, how do I act like a wife?' She said, 'Well, I guess you're just going to get married.'"

Johnson mothered nine children with the man she was forced to wed until the marriage was eventually dissolved.

The former child bride says she had to miss out on school and other necessary activities to change diapers as she spent her days arguing with her husband, who struggled to pay expenses and often abandoned her.

"It was a terrible life," Johnson recalled.

Shockingly enough, Johnson's case is anything but rare in the United States.

The New York Times reports that Florida is one of 27 states that have no age minimum for children to be married with their parents' permission.

Using available data, the organization Unchained at Last was able to estimate that there were almost 250,000 child marriages in the U.S. between 2000 and 2010.

The three states with the highest rates were Arkansas, Idaho and Kentucky.

Johnson is now fighting for Florida to set a minimum marriage age so that no one else has to be robbed of their childhood like she was.

"You can't get a job, you can't get a car, you can't get a license, you can't sign a lease," Johnson said, "So why allow someone to marry when they're still so young?"

May 31, 2017 3:04 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

http://prolifetime.com/trailer

May 31, 2017 3:43 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Those voters said plenty of words about fake news items like:

- Comet Pizza child sex ring
- the 400 pound hacker guy in his mother's basement
- Obama is a Kenyan Muslim who did not attend Columbia University
- Ted Cruz's father was in on Kennedy assassination
- thousands and thousands of Muslims were cheering in New Jersey on 9/11
- Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia was murdered
- millions of people in the US voted illegally on November 8
- climate change is a trick pulled on us by the Chinese"

actually, no they didn't

please find us polls showing that people voted based on any of these

until Dems can figure out why people voted for Trump, they won't win in 2018, or any other time

it's true people don't like Trump but if they do start to move against him, it will just be to other Republicans - it's a pretty big tent, as opposed to Dems, who all must think alike or be banished forever from Dem society

the GOP has business conservatives, libertarians, supply siders, military hawks, isolationists, pro-family groups, anti-immigrant blue collar workers...

the GOP has many flavors and, not long from now, it will split and we will have two legitimate parties who will contest one another and Americans will consider between their positions

and Dems will whither away

"Morons!"

no need to call the Dems names

they're hurtin'

May 31, 2017 4:05 PM  
Anonymous Glaciers melting said...

Here's the Troll's Federalist "science" writer:

Robert Tracinski is a senior writer at The Federalist. He studied philosophy at the University of Chicago and for more than 20 years has written about politics, markets, and foreign policy. He has been published in dozens of newspapers, from the Chicago Tribune to the San Francisco Chronicle, and been featured on many radio and television shows, from Rush Limbaugh to “The O’Reilly Factor.” He is an occasional guest host of The Federalist Radio Hour and editor of The Tracinski Letter.

He knows jack shit about climate science just like the Troll.

The Japanese Meteorological Agency reports:

The monthly anomaly of the global average surface temperature in April 2017 (i.e. the average of the near-surface air temperature over land and the SST) was +0.38°C above the 1981-2010 average (+0.77°C above the 20th century average), and was the 2nd warmest since 1891. On a longer time scale, global average surface temperatures have risen at a rate of about 0.76°C per century.

The monthly anomaly of the global average surface temperature in March 2017 (i.e. the average of the near-surface air temperature over land and the SST) was +0.47°C above the 1981-2010 average (+0.92°C above the 20th century average), and was the 2nd warmest since 1891M. On a longer time scale, global average surface temperatures have risen at a rate of about 0.86°C per century.

The monthly anomaly of the global average surface temperature in February 2017 (i.e. the average of the near-surface air temperature over land and the SST) was +0.46°C above the 1981-2010 average (+0.88°C above the 20th century average), and was the 2nd warmest since 1891. On a longer time scale, global average surface temperatures have risen at a rate of about 0.80°C per century.

The monthly anomaly of the global average surface temperature in January 2017 (i.e. the average of the near-surface air temperature over land and the SST) was +0.39°C above the 1981-2010 average (+0.78°C above the 20th century average), and was the 2nd warmest since 1891. On a longer time scale, global average surface temperatures have risen at a rate of about 0.76°C per century.

May 31, 2017 5:24 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"He knows jack shit about climate science just like the Troll"

and, yet, that's jack shit more than professional politician Al Gore

you've heard of Al

he's the voice of "let's start a world government to stop global warming" crowd

he's got a sequel to Inconvenient Truth coming out

that one turned out to need some inconvenient revisions

I've got tickets to a showing at AFI Docs next week

should be a hoot!

of course, even Al doesn't know that much less than the climate scientists, whose projections and forecasts are regularly, ahem, errant

I see you've slapped up some crap about the temperatures rising over the last century

no one argues with that

the issues:

1. how much will it go up moving forward?
2. what will the effects be?
3. what caused it?
4. what needs to be done to stop it?

to these questions, climate "scientists" ain't got a clue!

about their predictions: follow the history

May 31, 2017 7:08 PM  
Anonymous Captain Obvious said...


please find us polls showing that people voted based on any of these

That poll happened last November.

May 31, 2017 11:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

then, you should have no trouble producing it Captain Stupid Liar

polls actually indicated that people made up their minds based largely on the SCOTUS nomination

of course, that's overall

there were many local focuses

for example, the NAFTA issue was big in the Midwest

no significant number of people thought Ted Cruz's father killed JFK or that Hillary ran a child prostitution ring

that Russia planted a bunch of false stories that affected the election is just a stupid lie

right, Captain?

May 31, 2017 11:06 PM  
Anonymous drip drip drip said...

Looks like we're closing in on who's going to jail for releasing classified information.

The FBI, the CIA, and the National Security Agency were all served today with subpoenas issued by the House Intelligence Committee. Sources say each of these subpoenas referenced unmasking and each named as figures of interest three senior Obama era officials.

Former White House National Security Adviser Susan Rice was identified by multiple news agencies last month as someone who requested the names of Trump associates whose names had appeared in coded form in classified intelligence reports be identifed for her -- or 'unmasked.' Rice at the time denied wrongdoing and told us today through a spokesperson that she is unaware of any subpoenas 'directed at her.'

Former CIA Director John Brennan is also named in the subpoenas. In testimony last week, Brennan decried the leaks of classified information that had bedeviled the Trump administration, and which some believe is linked to the unmasking activity. Brennan declined our request for comment.

Most noteworthy was the committee's naming of Samantha Power, the former UN ambassador has not previously surfaced in the unmasking controversy. A Pulitzer prize-winning historian, Power served in Barack Obama's Senate office before joining his administration.

House investigators said they are now devoting more scrutiny to Power, and they have come to see her role in the unmasking as 'larger than previously known.' Allegedly eclipsing the others named.

Power declined to comment.

May 31, 2017 11:10 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Looks like we're closing in on who's going to jail for releasing classified information."

Not to mention who was colluding with our adversaries, the Russians as they interfered with the 2016 US Presidential election.

Michael Flynn and Trump's personal lawyer among seven subpoenaed in Russia investigation

Comey preparing to testify before Senate about Trump conversations

June 01, 2017 8:29 AM  
Anonymous Captain Obvious said...

"then, you should have no trouble producing it Captain Stupid Liar"

Apparently I wasn't obvious enough for some.

The poll was last November 8th - you know, election day?

It was a jibe and a joke.

Wake up and smell the covfefe.

June 01, 2017 11:52 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"The FBI, the CIA, and the National Security Agency were all served today with subpoenas issued by the House Intelligence Committee. Sources say each of these subpoenas referenced unmasking and each named as figures of interest three senior Obama era officials."

By the most corrupt member of the House Intelligence Committee, self-removed from the Russian investigation, Devin Nunes.

"...the House committee said it had issued subpoenas seeking “testimony, personal documents and business records” from Flynn and Cohen. It also approved subpoenas for the Flynn Intel Group LLC and for Michael D. Cohen & Associates PC....

...The latest subpoenas sparked new partisan wrangling on the House panel, with aides to Democratic lawmakers complaining that the chairman, Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Tulare), had approved three subpoenas without their knowledge.

The three subpoenas — to the CIA, the FBI and the National Security Agency — suggested Nunes was moving independently of the panel’s main investigation into Russian meddling and focusing instead on an issue that the White House preferred.

The three agencies were asked to provide records of any requests to “unmask,” or reveal, names of Trump’s associates by President Obama’s former national security advisor, Susan Rice, former CIA Director John Brennan and former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power, according to an aide familiar with the requests.

Nunes came under intense criticism in March when he told a hastily called news conference that an unidentified source had told him of “dozens” of intelligence reports from court-authorized surveillance that included the names of Trump transition team members. He said he was going immediately to the White House to brief Trump on the information.

Nunes subsequently admitted he had received the information in the White House complex, explaining it was the only safe place to examine the classified material. He stepped down from the Russia investigation in April after the House Ethics Committee said it had opened an inquiry into whether he had improperly disclosed classified information.

In most cases, the identities of U.S. citizens picked up in such surveillance are supposed to be kept confidential in intelligence reports. But authorized U.S. officials can request that the names be revealed to them — a process known as “unmasking” — if knowing the name is necessary to understand the intelligence....

...[Trump's personal attorney] Cohen has acknowledged meeting in January with Felix Sater, a Manhattan real estate developer who worked on several projects with Trump, and a Ukrainian lawmaker who asked them to bring the White House a pro-Russian peace deal for Ukraine.

Cohen was quoted in the New York Times in February saying he gave the envelope containing the proposal to Flynn, but Cohen later denied delivering it to the White House.

In a separate development, a senior Justice Department lawyer and FBI veteran with experience in complex financial fraud investigations has agreed to join the special counsel’s investigation"

June 01, 2017 2:47 PM  
Anonymous Three countries are out of the Paris climate agreement said...

Syria
Nicaragua
USA



Sad!

June 01, 2017 5:01 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Shifting from his previous blanket denials, President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia said on Thursday that “patriotically minded” private Russian hackers could have been involved in cyberattacks last year to help the presidential campaign of Donald J. Trump.

While Mr. Putin continued to deny any state role, his comments to reporters in St. Petersburg were a departure from the Kremlin’s previous position: that Russia had played no role whatsoever in the hacking of the Democratic National Committee and that, after Mr. Trump’s victory, the country had become the victim of anti-Russia hysteria among crestfallen Democrats.

Raising the possibility of attacks by what he portrayed as free-spirited Russian patriots, Mr. Putin said that hackers “are like artists” who choose their targets depending how they feel “when they wake up in the morning.”

“If they are patriotically minded, they start making their contributions — which are right, from their point of view — to the fight against those who say bad things about Russia,” he added.

His remarks echoed ones by Mr. Trump, who has dismissed accusations of Russian meddling and said that the person responsible for the attack on the Democratic National Committee “could be somebody sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds.”

All the same, Mr. Putin stuck firmly to earlier denials that Russian state bodies or employees had been involved, an accusation leveled by United States intelligence agencies. They concluded in January that Mr. Putin himself had directed a Russian “influence campaign” involving cyberattacks and disinformation intended to tilt the November election in Mr. Trump’s favor.

“We’re not doing this on the state level,” Mr. Putin said on Thursday.

The boundary between state and private action, however, is often blurry, particularly in matters relating to the projection of Russian influence abroad. Nominally private Russian citizens have fought alongside Russian-speaking rebels in eastern Ukraine and have taken part in various campaigns to advance Moscow’s agenda in Eastern and Central Europe.

Perhaps worried that American intelligence agencies could release evidence linking last year’s cyberattacks to Russia, Mr. Putin also put forward a theory that modern technology could easily be manipulated to create a false trail back to Russia.

“I can imagine that someone is doing this purposefully — building the chain of attacks so that the territory of the Russian Federation appears to be the source of that attack,” Mr. Putin said. “Modern technologies allow to do that kind of thing, it’s rather easy to do.”

In this, Mr. Putin appeared to be repeating an argument he first made earlier in the week in an interview with the French newspaper Le Figaro.

“I think that he was totally right when he said it could have been someone sitting on their bed or somebody intentionally inserted a flash drive with the name of a Russian national, or something like that,” Mr. Putin told Le Figaro, referring to Mr. Trump. “Anything is possible in this virtual world. Russia never engages in activities of this kind, and we do not need it. It makes no sense for us to do such things. What for?”

The evolution of Russia’s position on possible meddling in the American election is similar to the way Mr. Putin repeatedly shifted his account of Russia’s role in the 2014 annexation of Crimea and in armed rebellions in eastern Ukraine: He began by categorically denying that Russian troops had taken part before acknowledging, months later, that the Russian military was “of course” involved.

June 01, 2017 5:15 PM  
Anonymous June 8, 2017 said...

"Former FBI director James Comey to testify before Senate Intelligence Committee next Thursday

WASHINGTON — Former FBI director James Comey will testify publicly next Thursday before the Senate Intelligence Committee as part of its investigation into Russia's interference in last year's presidential election and possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian officials.

Intelligence Chairman Richard Burr, R-N.C., and Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia, the panel's senior Democrat, announced Thursday that Comey will testify at 10 a.m. on June 8. Comey's public testimony will be followed by a closed session at 1 p.m. in which he will continue answering questions that involve classified information.

Comey is expected to testify about his conversations with President Trump, including about allegations that Trump asked Comey to back off the FBI's investigation of Michael Flynn, Trump's former national security adviser. Trump abruptly fired Comey last month as Comey was leading that investigation.

Trump fired Flynn in February amid questions about whether he inappropriately talked about U.S. sanctions against Russia with a Russian official and then misled then-Vice President-elect Pence about those talks. Both the House and Senate Intelligence committees have issued subpoenas for Flynn's testimony and documents from his businesses."

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/06/01/james-comey-testify-before-senate-intelligence-committee-june-8/102386664/

June 02, 2017 7:57 AM  
Anonymous Captain America said...

I'm great again

and you're gonna hear me ROOAAARRRRRR!!!!

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/01/adp-private-sector-payrolls-may-2017.html

June 02, 2017 12:39 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

U.S. job market stumbles in May, adding just 138,000 jobs

"U.S. job growth came in below expectations in May, with employers adding just 138,000 jobs while the unemployment rate fell to 4.3 percent, the lowest it has been in more than 16 years, federal economists reported Friday morning.

Economists surveyed by Bloomberg had expected an increase of 180,000 in non-farm payrolls, which would have been in line with average monthly gains seen over the past year.

The job market has been strong in recent months, and most traders expect the Federal Reserve to raise interest rates later this month, despite the slightly weaker May figure. Yet further negative news could cause the Fed to reconsider its plan of gradually raising interest rates later this year, as the central bank eases off its efforts to stimulate the economy.

“The overall report still leaves the Fed on target for June, but it underscores their trepidation about moving in December,” said Diane Swonk, a Chicago-based economist. “They’ve got good reason to be cautious.”

The unemployment rate was down slightly from 4.4 percent last month, a figure economists had already seen as low. Yet economists said the drop was due in part to a contraction in the labor force, since the unemployment rate measures only those who are actively looking for work but can't find it. The labor force participation rate declined by 0.2 percentage points to 62.7 percent in May.

“The unemployment rate fell for all the wrong reasons,” said Elise Gould, a senior economist at the Economic Policy Institute. “The slight drop in the unemployment rate is due to would-be workers leaving the labor force and not getting jobs.”

To some economists, these trends suggest that the economy is already well on its way to providing some kind of a job for nearly all Americans who are willing and able to work. “The May number makes it look more likely that we have hit a plateau with people coming back off the sidelines,” said Jed Kolko, chief economist for jobs site Indeed.

The employment gains were led by the service sector, including health care, which has seen business expand as America's aging population demands more medical services. The mining sector, which has been a focus of President Trump's, also added 7,000 jobs, continuing a rebound since a low point in October 2016. Yet the manufacturing sector shed jobs — a reminder, said Kolko, that most of America's growth is now coming from services...

The Labor Department also revised its estimates for job gains in March and April, lowering the combined figure by 66,000 jobs. Average hourly earnings were up by 2.5 percent from the previous year to $26.22, continuing a streak of relatively weak wage growth..."

June 02, 2017 1:44 PM  
Anonymous captain america rooooaaarrrs!!!!! said...

Environmentalists should rejoice!

That's right, rejoice. Because by getting the world's largest economy, (that's us), out of yet another amorphous and unenforceable international climate deal, President Trump has likely saved the environmental movement from itself. And now there's also a much better chance that millions of conservative and center/right Americans can rejoin the environmental fold.

The green movement in the U.S. and around the world has been off the tracks for decades mostly because of its faulty belief in globalist politics and big government as the solution to environmental challenges. In fact, big government and centrally-planned schemes like the Paris deal are the problem.

The first problem with the Paris deal is that, like an OPEC production quota, it's really hard to enforce and cheating is likely to be rampant. As many experts analyzing the agreement have noted, there are no explicit enforcement mechanisms in the accord. So nothing would happen to a country that even just ignored its contribution commitments. That leaves the countries that are more likely to adhere to the climate deal rules, like the U.S., at a distinct economic and political disadvantage.

It appears that the supposed triumph of the Paris agreement is that every nation coming into it publicly acknowledged the reality and challenges of climate change coming into the negotiations. Like so many other things in politics, words have become more valuable than deeds. And with no real mechanism to punish countries that cheat on this agreement, there's a chance that the Paris deal could lead to more environmental pollution, not less.

People who are really concerned with lowering emissions worldwide need to come to grips with the fact that international agreements where bad actors can't be effectively punished aren't the way to go. It may be intoxicating to see their activism rewarded with the pomp and ceremony of an accord like the Paris climate deal, but they're ultimately meaningless.

If the U.S. government wants to do something about the environment, it doesn't need to collude with foreign nations. It would be much better if it started with fixing its own house in a series of moves that conservatives and libertarians could join with liberals to support. They include:

•Stop having all taxpayers subsidize and otherwise bolster expensive and environmentally harmful home building in coastal areas. The national flood insurance program, long opposed by liberals and anti-crony capitalist conservatives, does exactly that.

•Government at all levels continues to build more roads when more and more evidence shows that no new roads are needed and money would be better spent on repairing old ones. Liberals have long decried the government's anti-environmental road obsession along with conservatives who oppose the continued deficit spending needed to build them.

•Excessive regulation has basically killed new nuclear-power plant construction in this country, although nuclear power is safer and pollutes less than many traditional power sources, including coal and natural gas.

June 02, 2017 2:30 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

More right winger opinion crap from the TTF Troll.

Jake Novak is a senior columnist for CNBC.com. Jake joined CNBC in 2012 as the supervising producer of "The Kudlow Report" with Larry Kudlow and began his additional role as a contributing op-ed columnist for CNBC in 2013. He was named senior columnist in 2016. Novak's columns focus on politics, economic and social issues, and American culture. Prior to joining CNBC, Novak co-created and oversaw the "Varney and Company" program on the Fox Business Network along with anchor Stuart Varney. He also spent seven years at CNN, producing financial news programs including launching the successful "In the Money" show with anchor Jack Cafferty. Novak has a bachelor's degree in political science from Columbia University and a master's degree from Northwestern's Medill School of Journalism.

He knows jack shit about climate science just like TTF's Troll.

SAD!

June 02, 2017 3:24 PM  
Anonymous Putting Party Ahead of Country said...

White House orders agencies to ignore Democrats’ oversight requests
Trump’s aides are trying to shut down the release of information that could be used to attack the president.


The White House is telling federal agencies to blow off Democratic lawmakers' oversight requests, as Republicans fear the information could be weaponized against President Donald Trump.

At meetings with top officials for various government departments this spring, Uttam Dhillon, a White House lawyer, told agencies not to cooperate with such requests from Democrats, according to Republican sources inside and outside the administration.

It appears to be a formalization of a practice that had already taken hold, as Democrats have complained that their oversight letters requesting information from agencies have gone unanswered since January, and the Trump administration has not yet explained the rationale.

The declaration amounts to a new level of partisanship in Washington, where the president and his administration already feels besieged by media reports and attacks from Democrats. The idea, Republicans said, is to choke off the Democratic congressional minorities from gaining new information that could be used to attack the president.

"You have Republicans leading the House, the Senate and the White House," a White House official said. "I don't think you'd have the Democrats responding to every minority member request if they were in the same position."

A White House spokeswoman said the policy of the administration is “to accommodate the requests of chairmen, regardless of their political party.” There are no Democratic chairmen, as Congress is controlled by Republicans.

The administration also responds to “all non-oversight inquiries, including the Senate’s inquiries for purposes of providing advice and consent on nominees, without regard to the political party of the requester,” the spokeswoman said. “ Multiple agencies have, in fact, responded to minority member requests. No agencies have been directed not to respond to minority requests.”

Checks and Balances

June 02, 2017 5:47 PM  
Anonymous svelte_brunette said...

The 2016 estimate for cleaning up the Hanford nuclear site was 107 BILLION dollars, which is paid for by the US tax payer at roughly 2 billion dollars a year - for the next 50 years - assuming there are no more cost over-runs. (Don't hld your breath.)

There is a million gallons of nuclear sludge oozing underground towards the Co!umbia river which provides provides water for Washington state's agriculture economy. I haven't seen any detailed plans on how to stop that.

Excelon is trying to convince Illinois to give it subsidies because its nuclear power plants can't compete with all the cheap wind power coming in from Iowa. It's trying to milk Pennsylvania for subsidies there too because it can't compete with all the natural gas they have from fracking.

India recently cancelled 13.7 GIGAwatts of coal plant construction because they they could get solar energy at a cost per watt that was about 30% cheaper.

We are starting to get to the point where renewables can compete on cost alone at some locations. Coal plant operators are getting concerned that they now own what are called "stranded assets."

Conservatives can expell all the fact free air they like, but in the mean time, in the real world, green companies are out there making profits.

June 02, 2017 5:59 PM  
Anonymous all my words to TTF have 4 letters said...

"He knows jack shit about climate science just like TTF's Troll"

you're the one making a false statement to get a reaction, so you must be TTF's troll

as it is, Jake Novak wasn't arguing against the global warming alarmists

he was giving advice on how to politically achieve their goals

but he seems to be giving the alarmists the benefit of the doubt on the science of AGW

he was just pointing out that global agreements won't achieve any reduction in greenhouse gases

say, have you ever had an IQ test?

because it's a little hard to detect any in your statements

SAD!

but hope is on the way!

soon, AI will be available for morons like you

of course, those walking computers will give off a lot of heat!!

"We are starting to get to the point where renewables can compete on cost alone at some locations"

if so, you can be sure that renewable energy will become widespread

we call it capitalism

of course, TTF thinks that's a 4-letter word!!

June 02, 2017 7:29 PM  
Anonymous svelte_brunette said...

TTFers don't have a problem with capitalism.

It's crony capitalism that's the problem. We no longer live in the democracy our forefathers fought for. Our Congress votes for what corporations want - even when polls show Americans want something else.

We now vote for who is to lead our plutocracy. That is the problem.

Cynthia

June 02, 2017 7:45 PM  
Anonymous svelte_brunette said...


"if so, you can be sure that renewable energy will become widespread"

I'm looking forward to it. With more liberally minded enterprises in seats at our plutocratic table, maybe we can get our government turned back towards a functioning democracy.

June 02, 2017 7:57 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home