patrick.net

Although I admit that anything from Roscoes would keep a normal man at bay, by smell alone, I don't think it's enough to keep Donald off a ménage à trois with his wife and daughter.

Maybe if you got some of the Roscoes' patrons to stand by the ring... And yes, this video appears on the Roscoes' website front page.

www.youtube.com/embed/cU7rtj7vRA0

Too many white people here.

That's what good, suck it down. Dark meat!

In his defense, the video does make the disclaimer in all caps:

WARNING, ONLY EAT THIS TWICE A YEAR.

APOCALYPSEFUCK_is_ADORABLE says

What's with the Ritz cracker?

Yeah, an ostrich would have made more sense. Although the rotating cracker does probably stimulate the butt more.

I keep confusing Secretary of FUCK! YOU! with
President SUCK! MY! DICK!

Maybe while I'm being FUCKED! & SUCKING! DICK!
my confusion will clear up.

PCGyver says

And that's why I keep going. Dumbass fucked up and they can't bear to look in the mirror and admit it.

Things the democrats refuse to grapple with:

They lost several states that they considered safe and didn't even bother campaigning in, and were totally flabbergasted by it.
That their Superdelegates, mostly Clintonistas or Clinton-aligned Donors and ex-Lobbyists, ended up nominating the weakest candidate (popular vote is not how we pick candidates, both party strategists and leaders know this, so it's a red herring).
That they had TWO (2) Democratic Chairs resign within weeks of each other over nomination rigging and shady dealings, and other big players as well, thanks to O'Keefe. Robert Creamer is such a big shit he's met with Obama 45 times.
That many of the same real journalists suspicious of WMD are the same ones suspicious of "Russia Done Stole Our Election by revealing DNC underhandedness!"

The DEPARTMENT! Of BEND! OVER!

Headed by PRESIDENT LAY DOWN And LICK YOUR LIPS, COW! PUSSY!!

Putin on the Ritz! Obv!

YES, YES, AND YES AGAIN! DID I SAY YES, YET! This is a First Lady who can perform with the greats, like Nancy Reagan.

The Donald's entourage carries a variety of pussy prostheses for him to grab and gnaw on so that he can control himself during public appearances. In private, nobody is safe.

"Where's my pussy pacifier, I'm jonesing watching Melania and Ivanka doing their thing!"

T L Lips says

Putin is a statesman. He has a vision he lays out, takes hours of questions directly from the public - and most of them not 'boxer or brief?' fluffy questions, he's always willing to talk, when you fuck with him he punches back open and honestly.

Obama, like other Western leaders, is a technocratic managerial functionary...

When this topic was fresher, and interested me as a social phenomena, I'd ask a russian-speaking person the same question: "Who do you think took down MS-17?" The answer (which I didn't expect to be exact, yet it was in all but one cases) would usually do awesome job classifying the person and spare me from talking to lunatics.

First and foremost, Putin is a liar. Whether he's a sociopath by birth or managed to pull it off through training is irrelevant. The best way to "unhypnotize" yourself with regards to Putin is to watch him talking to media years ago about facts that are now common knowledge but weren't back then:
"is Russia planning military operation in Ukraine?" (2013)
"was it Russian military that blocked Ukrainian troops in Crimea?" (April 2014)
"who took down MS-17?" (oh, that's a good one, there is absolutely no way to invite that question without inviting another one, about presence of Russian military in Ukraine)

Now that we know the facts, you just can't perceive that "honest and straightforward" approach that he uses without disgust. However, it's also admirably convincing - neither Obama, nor Hillary, nor Trump come close.

I think that it's irrelevant whether or not Russia influenced the elections (because "influence" was in revealing info that public had the right to know in the first place) However, I'm more inclined to believe it because Putin denies it.

More Behavioral/Circumstantial evidence.

If the US had solid evidence MH-17 was shot down, we would have heard it already. It's been years. You have Dutch investigators quitting in disgust. The Russians released satellite photos showing a Ukrainian BUK battery in the area that disappeared within 24 hours of the incident.

With all the NATO/US OTH radars, that can see ~30,000 ft. big ass airliners flying as far as the Urals, "the proof is out there".

We've never heard the Ukrainian explanation as to why they didn't re-route this one plane out of dozens that entered Ukrainian airspace and re-routed away from Donbass in the preceding weeks.

Russia had no motive; the Ukrainians had every motive: 1) Putin was supposed to be flying that day back from Europe and 2) Since they use the same weaponry, they can put discredit on the Russians in the absence of evidence and 3) The Ukrainian Intel Services are stunningly mediocre, since anybody worth their salt leaves to work with Oligrachs - or is in the pay of a third party like Ace Tomato Company..

We have one poster here who correctly points out Saddam had no incentive for developing WMDs. Assad had no reason to initiate the use of Chems as he knew the US was begging for an excuse to intervene. So what incentive did Russia have to shoot down a third party aircraft? None.

Leaving the issue largely unresolved (and the lack of formal accusations and penalties) is to the advantage of anti-Russian elements - it's something they can pull out to increase suspicion. The Russians would rather have the whole thing be done already.

Dutch report points at Russian-made missile shot from "rebel-controlled territory". Solid evidence has been presented, but you refuse to accept it as such. For folks like you, only Putin's own admission is proof solid enough, just like it was with Crimea: denial all the way until that government-sponsored movie "Crimea: way back home" (he must be super vain to allow bragging rights for this admittedly masterful military operation to run over pretense of integrity)
Please stop this nonsense about not having a motive. Swapping result and intent for the sake of seeking motive is intellectually dishonest, otherwise every convicted murderer would be screaming "I didn't have a motive!" and demanding retrial.
Of course they didn't have a motive in the end result of this major screw-up. Evil intent (Russian or Ukrainian) was never a working theory for anybody in the right mind. All they wanted was to have some fun with easy target (transport aircraft), shoot down some kakhly (because they deserve to die for fighting for their country), and enjoy some positive media (hey, we got another one down, stay out of our skies!). Some dumb ass mistake - and instead they got international investigation and all the crap that comes with being labeled baby killers.

Your arguments are fully consistent with the approach to investigation that Putin's team employed from day 1: death by a thousand paper cuts. Thousand red herring theories, each one taking time and energy to rebutt. Among them: Dutch team quitting (ordinary attrition made sound as something else), re-routing the plane (ordinary practice in the industry given the conditions), Russian satellite photos (Bellington says that they are forged and explains why) Let me help you with others: Ukrainian SU-25 (they temporarily changed SU-25 flying characteristics on Wikipedia to make it fit!!!), Spanish dispatcher, HIV scientists, they were already dead, what else? Oh, good one: that photo of the air-to-air missile flying towards the aircraft.

This issue is resolved

mostly reader says

Dutch report points at Russian-made missile shot from "rebel-controlled territory". Solid evidence has been presented, but you refuse to accept it as such. For folks like you, only Putin's own admission is proof solid enough, just like it was with Crimea: denial all the way until that government-sponsored movie "Crimea: way back home" (he must be super vain to allow bragging rights for this admittedly masterful military operation to run over pretense of integrity)

For Russophobes, Russia is always guilty. Russia should be under a mafia figurehead until it can be split into 5 pieces. Saudi Arabia agrees (that's who really influences US elections)

Let's play your game:
mostly reader says

1: death by a thousand paper cuts.

Domino Theory! If Vietnam Falls, they all Fall, even Thailand!!! (Within a few years of independence, Cambodia and Vietnam were at war).

mostly reader says

Thousand red herring theories, each one taking time and energy to rebutt.

Believe the intelligence services! They've never lied! Remember the Anthrax Warheads, ready to be launched in 15 minutes! The Mobile Biolabs!

mostly reader says

Bellington

Bellingcat. About as unbiased as Salon on the subject of 32 Genders.

And don't forget the big budget for 'correct' opinions on the internet:

The US military is developing software that will let it secretly manipulate social media sites by using fake online personas to influence internet conversations and spread pro-American propaganda.

A Californian corporation has been awarded a contract with United States Central Command (Centcom), which oversees US armed operations in the Middle East and Central Asia, to develop what is described as an "online persona management service" that will allow one US serviceman or woman to control up to 10 separate identities based all over the world.

The project has been likened by web experts to China's attempts to control and restrict free speech on the internet. Critics are likely to complain that it will allow the US military to create a false consensus in online conversations, crowd out unwelcome opinions and smother commentaries or reports that do not correspond with its own objectives.

The discovery that the US military is developing false online personalities – known to users of social media as "sock puppets" – could also encourage other governments, private companies and non-government organisations to do the same.

The Centcom contract stipulates that each fake online persona must have a convincing background, history and supporting details, and that up to 50 US-based controllers should be able to operate false identities from their workstations "without fear of being discovered by sophisticated adversaries".

I'm not accusing YOU of being a paid shill. I only want you to be aware there's an "Obama Shill Army" out there.

Not just the government. Correct The Record has volunteer and paid shills.

Ironman says

ASSANGE: Yes. We can say, we have said, repeatedly that over the last two months that our source is not the Russian government and it is not a state party... Obama is trying to say that President-elect Trump is not a legitimate President....

As I've been saying, the key question is "Who else Hacked the DNC?".

The FBI, CIA, etc. are being tendentious, only talking about breaches and evidence they can circumstantially leak with Russia. They probably have a lot more breaches done by random kids all over the world, hell there's probably a file uploaded that sez "THIS WAS HACKED BY FINNISH METAL DEATH COMPUTER CLUB. We are BROTHERS OF METAL. Hail Odin!!! Check out our latest C64 Demo with a Gwar MIDI file at fun.fi.net".

www.youtube.com/embed/-0FwiHstrhQ

Remember, they aren't lying if they say they think Russia hacked the election. They just didn't mention that they can see plenty of other actors did.

T L Lips says

For Russophobes, Russia is always guilty. Russia should be under a mafia figurehead until it can be split into 5 pieces. Saudi Arabia agrees (that's who really influences US elections)

Putting aside your emotional non-sequitur about splitting Russia and Saudi Arabia... Are you blaming results of the official Dutch investigation on russophobia? Really?? Please answer this one. It's not a tricky question, and a simple "yes" or "no".

T L Lips says

Let's play your game

You are not playing my game. I pointed out: from day one, team Putin came up with thousand theories, most of them obviously nonsensical. They invented and/or fabricated "facts" and "witnesses". They forged documents. They threw it all into the wall hoping that something would stick and seed "reasonable doubt". That's what I called "death to investigation by thousand paper cuts" - they overwhelmed informational space with conspiracy theories and demanded that each one of them be considered. Your references to Vietnam, Thailand, and intelligence services are complete non-sequitur to that.
T L Lips says

Bellingcat. About as unbiased as Salon on the subject of 32 Genders.

Bellingcat, indeed. And your response is a textbook Ad Hominem.
I referred to something very specific: image that you used as an argument is a forgery. You did nothing to rebutt their reasons, but chose to attack the source instead. Here, enjoy: http://www.armscontrolwonk.com/archive/1201635/mh17-anniversary/ Remember: Tungstène (used to analyze the photos) is just software, it's not russophobic.

Funny you decided to talk about paid shills. You may have heard about Russian troll farm in Olgino.

Ironman says

that you're an idiot. No make that, VERY possible.

LOL

I thought he was just going to starve Rosie O'Donnell and lena Dunham, keep them in a pit and throw his victims to them to devour alive??

He enlisted Kim Jong-un as his hanging advisor, but that turned out to be a mistake, because all of the first round of names were Korean.

Trump just told Putin "tell them to take a vacation, they'll all be back Jan. 20th."

The US Government Publishing Office has been ordered to include Ayn Rand centerfolds in each day's copy of the Congressional Record.

Tim Aurora says

So if you cannot argue a point and are totally outsmarted , call the guy names.

Shhh. He doesn't know that everyone knows that.

If it could be easily destroyed by the very people it was meant to police, then it was sadly flawed at inception, just like most of Democrat-inspired legislation.
I'm for oversight, but it needs to be a real law not just a "rule" that can be overturned as soon as it becomes unpopular to the people it is supposed to police.

Assange is not clairvoyant. He can be duped as well as the next guy and is going out on a limb to claim he knows the source of his info. He has also offered no proof as far as I know.

YesYNot says

Assange is not clairvoyant. He can be duped as well as the next guy and is going out on a limb to claim he knows the source of his info. He has also offered no proof as far as I know.

EXCEPT he's released millions upon millions of documents and has yet to have been duped by an fraudulent one.

An unbelievable accuracy record.

Tim Aurora says

And surely the Russians would tell him that. It is quite possible that they used a American ( or somebody from a different country say Nigel Farage) middleman, provided him with all the data to distribute. You can always provide the data to a person whom you know will follow a predictable path.

Or, it was one of the other half dozen or more actors that hacked into the DNC we weren't told about, because if the government talks about other breaches, their circumstantial case falls apart.

Again "Who else hacked into the DNC?" Question needs to be asked.

T L Lips says

EXCEPT he's released millions upon millions of documents and has yet to have been duped by an fraudulent one.

I don't know if he's been duped or not. There's no proof of his record. Plus, comparing him to a news organization that regularly publishes on all newsworthy topics is silly. Assange publishes on a tiny subset of 'news' that he has access to. In addition, if no one has tried to dupe him into publishing fake news, it's only a matter of time. Does he have examples where someone tried to dupe him and he figured it out? Why should we suspect he has a better handle on the source of the leaked info than the CIA/FBI etc?

Here's the proof:

States all over the world have had their dirty laundry aired by Wikileaks. They have every incentive to find any leaked document that is fraudulent, so thy can say "Aha, one document out of millions was fraudulent. Now anything Wikileaks puts out is suspect."

It hasn't happened.

YesYNot says

The vast majority of women perform at minimum 200% of work at home then men.

Because unlike the FBI/CIA, Wikileaks has a perfect record, and doesn't have a boss over him who wants him to push a particular narrative.

Ironman says

Please give us the list of people who have been prosecuted an have gone to jail since 2008.

I'm sure that list is extremely long....

We had a freaking Wall Street criminal as Treasury Secretary. But is is bad PR.

I'll spell out my argument for you.
Corruption is bad, especially when politicians commit it.
They should be policed.
The fact that the politicians were able to easily cancel their oversight means that it wasn't strong enough to do its job.
We need more effective oversight.

Quigley says

I'll spell out my argument for you.

Corruption is bad, especially when politicians commit it.

They should be policed.

The fact that the politicians were able to easily cancel their oversight means that it wasn't strong enough to do its job.

We need more effective oversigh

Yup and trump agrees. I think the GOP base hates the GOP congress critters more than they hate dems and have been trying several seasons to try and bring in soem new blood and egt rid of the corrupt trash. Wish the dems would wake up-Bernie was clsoe, but the dems need the same energy, the same questioning. Then finally we will realize that on most important things dems/repubs are probably aligned 95% -jobs, economy etc-the remaining stuff we cna figure out. United we stand, divided we fall.
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/01/trump-blasts-idiot-gop-leaders-focus-tax-reform-healthcare-not-ethics-watchdog/

I didn't say anything about the vast majority of women doing anything. There appears to be a glitch in the matrix. As for Assange, the absence of objections is not proof that something is true. I suspect his record is good. But, people have an incentive not to go through and confirm or deny information piece by piece.

Oops

YesYNot says

But, people have an incentive not to go through and confirm or deny information piece by piece.

Wikileaks puts out the stuff only after serious vetting. That's why the time between receiving source material and publishing the leaks is weeks and months.

Maybe the FBI/CIA should put out the server 'evidence' and have 1000s of highly competent independent experts weigh in.

Quigley says

We don't like old guard republicans any more than we like democrats, and we look forward to working with democrats who actually represent the people and not the plutocrats. The old two parties are being destroyed or subsumed. The democrats are self destructing in an orgy of ridiculousness. The republicans have been infected with the Trump parasite that is slowly purging the elitism from the party until the organism can be ready to MAGA.

This move by the congress is just elite GOPers pushing back against popular will.

They will be reigned in.

The thing the Republicans don't realize is that they have something very much in common with the Democrats: they lost the 2016 election.

This seems to be the case. It'll be interesting to see the Media attempt to lionize the old guard GOPe when they offer resistance to Trump's reforms, esp. on Trade and possibly Corporate Inversions. They've already done so by celebrating Bushite support for Hillary.

May the 6th/7th Political System be inaugurated, least we remain trapped in the culture war BS.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/after-backlash-house-gop-backs-down-from-plan-to-gut-ethics-office-172736628.htmlegas-170017907.html

And The GOPe rethinks their move after Trump jerks their chain.

Trump put those fuckers back in place. All of your corruptions is reserved for the executive branch. Thank you for your concern.

Should Obama attend all his PDBs, too?

Given that he is still President, with all the terror attacks around the world?

Here's the WaPo defending Obama not having an in-person briefing every day:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/the-bogus-claim-that-obama-skips-his-intelligence-briefings/2012/09/22/100cb63e-04fc-11e2-8102-ebee9c66e190_blog.html?utm_term=.e448deb93f30

In other words, Trump is reading some of the briefings instead of having it in-person. Other times Pence is going. When Obama reads instead of goes, that's okay. But when Trump, who is not even President yet, reads instead of attends, that's irresponsibility.

"Oh, but Pence isn't POTUS." Well neither is Trump yet, but according to WaPo's Fact Checker :

That column also includes the White House’s response — that Obama reads his PDB every day, but he does not always require an in-person briefing every day. The White House argument is that this is how Obama structured his White House operation, so it is specious to say he has “skipped” a meeting that was not actually scheduled.

Looks like the WaPo forgot to consult their own Fact Checkers. Wouldn't be Confirmation Bias at all, Amirite?

How's the Vermont Power Grid Russian Hack going?