patrick.net

Entitlemented says

I thought that between the time Clinton met the Attornee General "accidently" on the Tarmac in the west, and the announcement by Comey with him stepping into a role of attorney general "Surrogate" was terrible form.

And we'd have never know, but for an aviation enthusiast who could identify the craft.

The AG meeting with the husband of a subject under investigation stinks worse that the Fulton Fish Market.

socal2 says

bob2356 says

Tin foil hat time. Really big tin foil hat. The president can't keep getting blowjob secret.

Yet the Media and the entire Democrat party seem to believe that Trump is somehow a Russian puppet?

Talk about tinfoil hat time!

Earth to socal2. I posted quoted an article from a pro trump news source referenced by trump fan #1 patrick himself. This is the media and entire democratic party to you?

marcus says

McMaster didn't even deny it was highly classified, neither did Trump for that matter. He argued it's his prerogative to declassify on the fly - which is true, no matter how sloppy and imprudent it is.

McMaster only stated that sources and methods weren't disclosed. But evidently, the source didn't give permission to disclose the info to Russia. Although the whole thing does beg the question, why is this out in the public sphere, making it worse. Apparently it's becasue Trump needs to learn some humility about the learning curve of doing that job (never going ot happen).

C'mon socal, catch up.

This is a fair assessment.

Are you suggesting trump leaked though? Its as good a theory as Ive heard. I actually think Trump benefited greatly from this... the MSM otoh stepped on their own dick again

indc says

Hope Trump's shady behavior is for enrichment of US and the world

Well, I hate to break your hopes, but Trump's shadiness is absolutely for the enrichment of the Trump family. Ivanka will be getting rich off the trademarks that the Chinese government gave them after meeting with Trump. Trump is getting rich off all the government money that Trump is forcing the government to spend at Mar-a-Lago. And who knows what else is going on with the Russians.

Goran_K says

rando says

Please post more about Seth Rich if you find anything interesting.

It's very interesting. Extremely scary material IMO. This is all that I have gathered up until now.

- Seth Rich was killed 12 days before WikiLeaks released details about the DNC cooperating against popular Democrat Candidate Bernie Sanders. This lead to Debbie Wasserman being ousted as DNC head, and lead to a 6 point MSM polling drop for Hillary Clinton (we now know that the polling drop was probably much more drastic based on how the actual election went and revelations of "under sampling" in MSM polls).

- WikiLeaks, soon after Rich's death, offered a $20,000 reward (later upping it) for any details that lead to the capture of his killer. Julian Assange never admitted publicly that Rich was an information leaker, but he didn't deny it and claimed that he would never jeopardize or give up h...

This is exactly why the DNC wont let the FBI examine their servers, and why their private hosting company put out the fake russian report.

CBOEtrader says

This is exactly why the DNC wont let the FBI examine their servers, and why their private hosting company put out the fake russian report.

Just the thought of the DNC or elements within the DNC possibly killing Seth Rich as retribution for him leaking corruption from within the party is a frightful thought. If it's true, then the country is already on the precipice. Hillary, Trump, Obama, Comey, all irrelevant at this point.

Goran_K says

Julian Assange is part of the right wing media?

Right-wing might not be a perfect fit. Try this ...

Find me any non-liberal democracy he has damaged with his leaks/reports.

jazz, you're right about that:

Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial
independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no
independent influence. The results provide substantial support for theories of Economic-Elite Domination and for theories of
Biased Pluralism, but not for theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy or Majoritarian Pluralism.

https://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/mgilens/files/gilens_and_page_2014_-testing_theories_of_american_politics.doc.pdf

Looks like the best we can do is play one faction of wealth against another. And that's exactly what happened when Trump got elected against the will of the liberal elite plutocrats.

jazz music says

There is enough corruption dominating in recent years that the power of democracy has been shown to be completely irrelevant compared to the power of wealth.

Ever since the Reagan era, no wealthy person ever complained that the government is inept in any way. If capitalists do not get their needs met they simply invest more in lobbying, campaigning, and propaganda until they do get exactly what they wanted out of our government. Elections are subverted into a ratings boosting formality to normalize the will of the wealthiest investors.

I would agree with this. There is a reason why someone like Hillary Clinton is able to gather a $1.2 billion war chest for a campaign (though she did ultimately lose which was unexpected by most observers, myself included), and why campaign finance reforms always end up dying before they reach the floor.

rando says

And he's not Hillary.

Thank God.

www.youtube.com/embed/6ESQvJ-qlsk

The black girl's "oh fuck off" reaction is something I wish I could recreate myself on cue.

Goran_K says

Thank God.

www.youtube.com/embed/6ESQvJ-qlsk

The black girl's "oh fuck off" reaction is something I wish I could recreate myself on cue.

This is the second closest thing to likeable Ive ever seen from H. The closest was when she showed actual emotions after she lost.

Im probably just a misogynist who likes a crying woman.

Goran_K says

campaign finance reforms always end up dying before they reach the floor.

That was one of Obama's biggest promises, part of why libertarians liked him in 2008

rando says

Any change at all to our extremely corrupt campaign system is a good change. It used to seem utterly impregnable, but Trump proved it isn't.

I think he was the first President in a long while to win while being outspent to a ridiculous degree by his opponent.

Lashkar_i_Trumpi says

Whereas Hillary, Schumer, Pelosi, Waters, etc. are all out for the little guy. hahahahaha

So you agree that Trump is as shady as anyone else in DC then? Actually worse. So, why did you vote for him again?

Lashkar_i_Trumpi says

I'm for giving Trump a fair swing

I'm for giving him a fair swing too. But fair doesn't equal--being unable to admit when he makes mistakes. Fair doesn't mean ignoring his obvious ineptitude.

Let me know when you decide to start being fair.

joeyjojojunior says

So you agree that Trump is as shady as anyone else in DC then? Actually worse. So, why did you vote for him again?

Not Hillary. Of course, if the DNC had run Bernie, we may not be here today.

Actually, given how the media is being a total swampy Corporate Stooge, we probably would be here today.

"Bernie is a dangerous commie who endangers American Prosperity by forcing non-profits with millions of assets to pay the minimum wage and provide health care."

I see "Childish" is the latest Monolithic Opposition Media smear being Beta tested, after "dangerous" and "crazy"...

CBOEtrader says

That was one of Obama's biggest promises, part of why libertarians liked him in 2008

Yep, and it died like every other good idea at the hands of the Republicans. So, what did you do--vote for more Republicans!

Newsflash--you're the problem.

joeyjojojunior says

Yep, and it died like every other good idea in the hands of the Republicans. So, what did you do--vote for more Republicans!

Did the Republicans force Obama to prosecute more whistleblowers under the Espionage act than all other Presidents Combined?

Lashkar_i_Trumpi says

Not Hillary

I beg to disagree. I doubt Hillary would have traded concessions in State policy towards China in return for trademarks on Chelsea's clothing line.

errc says

So what have The plutocrats given up so far with the Trump presidency?

I agree--Trump has been the plutocrat's wet dream so far. He doesn't care about policy. He'll do whatever you want as long as you feed his ego.

errc says

So what have The plutocrats given up so far with the Trump presidency?

How about the Media backs off inventing the Watergate of the Week via an "anonymous Source" for a couple of weeks and let's see what gets done.

Obama's job was to run down the clock on the Statute of Limitations on Financial Crimes and prevent sweeping reforms, by distracting with a massive health insurance corporation subsidy program.

The Media's job right now is to shield Republicans from having to implement Trump policies, until they run the clock down to 2018.

They are going to hang him by the balls in a public place.
They will make an example.
It won't be pretty.

jazz music says

Are you tired of wining yet?

no.

By this time Obama already had a Nobel Prize!

He's a scud, launched into the corporate process known as the US government, by people disenfranchised on so many levels.
Bring back the manufacturing jobs, Trump goes away.
Scale back political correctness to sane levels, Trump goes away.
Give us our private bathrooms, Trump goes away.
At least appear to protect our borders, Trump goes away.
and on and on and on...

rando says

Heraclitusstudent says

He's a clown, an egomaniac, a liar, childish, incompetent, doesn't agree with the establishment ideas.

Not sure he's incompetent, but otherwise yes, all true.

Hillary had it in the bag at the wire.
All she had to do was show up in the blue wall states to seal the deal.
But the presidency was ripped out of their grip at the last moment.
Couple that with the hiway robbery of the SCJ pick, and you wind up with a most severe case of
Election ButtHurt, plain and simple.

socal2 says

rando says

You really believe Trump told the Russians our most guarded secrets?

See - this is a prime example of Democrats going absolutely ape-shit.

They are so over the top - it is hard to discern if it is satire or not. They have become a total joke.

Yes.
Because Trump unclassified it by uttering it.

joeyjojojunior says

Do you have reason to believe it wasn't highly classified information?

joeyjojojunior says

Lashkar_i_Trumpi says

Not Hillary

I beg to disagree. I doubt Hillary would have traded concessions in State policy towards China in return for trademarks on Chelsea's clothing line.

Nah but she might just ink the largest arms deal in history w Saudi Arabia while acknowledging SA as the primary source of clandestine support for ISIS.

Oh...nm...she already did that.

CBOEtrader says

joeyjojojunior says

Lashkar_i_Trumpi says

Not Hillary

I beg to disagree. I doubt Hillary would have traded concessions in State policy towards China in return for trademarks on Chelsea's clothing line.

Nah but she might just ink the largest arms deal in history w Saudi Arabia while acknowledging SA as the primary source of clandestine support for ISIS...AND at the same time accept a few dozen millions in cash for the clinton foundation.

Oh...nm...she already did that.

"Nah but she might just ink the largest arms deal in history w Saudi Arabia while acknowledging SA as the primary source of clandestine support for ISIS. Oh...nm...she already did that."

Except we're talking about how Trump uses his position to enrich his family.

YAW... Yet another Watergate

Anonymous source
Media flips out, "this is it"
Info doesn't add up
Media backs off
Find new anonymous source, repeat

The goal is simply to overwhelm Trump with a boatload of baseless stories now but I think Trump fatigue is in. At this point non blue loyalists are not paying attention anymore, and simply view the media as his opponent with biases

Meanwhile, Watch Ryan, and watch him close.

Patrick says

Are They Really Out to Get Trump? Sometimes paranoia is justified

It's politics. Every high ranking politician is targeted by the opposition and competition. Trump is only different because he's committed clear crimes already. The other politicians were all criminals, too, but they were more subtle.

"Anonymous source
Media flips out, "this is it"
Info doesn't add up
Media backs off"

Give me one example of that happening. Just one. (and the pee dossier doesn't work. Buzzfeed isn't MSM. MSM refused to report it)

Dan8267 says

Trump is only different because he's committed clear crimes already.

He's been accused of crimes w no proof. That IS the difference.

It isn't trump. The left has gone insane and needs to be stopped.

joeyjojojunior says

(and the pee dossier doesn't work. Buzzfeed isn't MSM. MSM refused to report it

http://us.cnn.com/2017/01/10/politics/donald-trump-intelligence-report-russia/index.html

CNN isn't MSM? Finally

Lashkar_i_Trumpi says

I'm for giving Trump a fair swing. Between the unprecedented lack of a Honeymoon and the constant:

"THIS IS THE WATERGATE!! THIS TIME WE GOTS HIM!" upteen times since January, one thing I learned is that the Media is absolutely biased beyond belief and definitely controlled by Oligarchs pushing their preferred policies.

#MAGA two Scoops.

The media has thrown their integrity to the wind.

CBOEtrader says

He's been accused of crimes w no proof. That IS the difference.

There is far more evidence of his crimes than there were of Obama's or Hillary's. You are being partisan.

Hell, we have live video of him committing the crime of conspiring with the Russians to hack into computers. And Trump admitted to firing Comely for the purpose of obstructing his investigation. This is a very serious crime, and there is not even reasonable doubt that Trump is guilty of it. And we have definitive proof that several members of his cabinet committed perjury when they testified that they had no contact with the Russian government. Any one of these crimes could result in years, even decades, in prison.

The only reason you are defending Trump is because he's on "your team" instead of the other. If Hillary did this, you could be calling for her execution as a traitor. The difference is that I would call for independent prosecution regardless of which politician did this.

Lashkar_i_Trumpi says

I'm for giving Trump a fair swing. Between the unprecedented lack of a Honeymoon and the constant:

Trump is an unprecedented precident. Considering the media's reporting after 100 days, you could call the first 100 days a honeymoon.

"http://us.cnn.com/2017/01/10/politics/donald-trump-intelligence-report-russia/index.html CNN isn't MSM? Finally"

Which part of that report isn't true? Which part doesn't add up?

The report was that Intel chiefs presented Trump with the dossier. Not that the dossier was true. In fact, CNN was painstakingly clear that the reports were unverified and unconfirmed.

Dan8267 says

There is far more evidence of his crimes than there were of Obama's or Hillary's. You are being partisan.

This is an absolute untruth. In fact Hillary's crimes were so obvious that according to the MSM, merely releasing her emails cost her the election.