Skip to main content

ProSys posted:

From a Salon article:

Always impulsive, the president increasingly believes he does not need advisers, according to people close to him.  He is on his third chief of staff, third national security adviser, sixth communications director, second secretary of state, second attorney general and soon his second defense secretary.  Turnover at the top has reached 65 percent, according to the Brookings Institution.

Some left in a cloud of corruption allegations, including his health and human services secretary, his Environmental Protection Agency chief and, most recently, his interior secretary.  Others left after clashing with Mr. Trump.  Mr. Mattis was the last of the so-called axis of adults seen by some as tempering a volatile president, following the ouster of Rex W. Tillerson as secretary of state, H.R. McMaster as national security adviser and John F. Kelly as chief of staff.

 
Definitely the hall marks of a self-described "very stable genius"..... 
 

I know how to fix things. Let me hire a Secretary of Defense with zero military experience. Genius!

No doubt Napa and his ilk are very proud and I can only hope Napa is one of those not getting paid during the orange dumps childish temper tantrum. 

wineart 2 posted:
g-man posted:

we should make it a panel of 19 supreme court judges.

If they're there for life, then they can be there arguing for life!

🙃... The Supreme Court with its lifetime appointments and with no reasoning of when one gets appointed is a curious branch of our government. Look at the last 7 presidential elections. The Democratic presidential candidate has won the popular vote in 6 of the last 7 elections, yet a democrat has only four current justices and with RBG’s health, it may very well be only 3 of 9 sooner than later. 

wineart 2 posted:
g-man posted:

we should make it a panel of 19 supreme court judges.

If they're there for life, then they can be there arguing for life!

🙃... The Supreme Court with its lifetime appointments and with no reasoning of when one gets appointed is a curious branch of our government. Look at the last 7 presidential elections. The Democratic presidential candidate has won the popular vote in 6 of the last 7 elections, yet a democrat has only four current justices and with RBG’s health, it may very well be only 3 of 9 sooner than later. 

One can only hope.

wineart 2 posted:
jcocktosten posted:
wineart 2 posted:

Thank you, Chief Justice!

Perhaps we have a new swing vote to replace Kennedy.

Not remotely IMO.  An extremely conservative justice albeit one who has some respect for precedent and some intellectual honesty unlike Alito, Gorsuch and and Thomas.  That he is being viewed as a swing vote shows just how dramatically the Court has moved to the right 

He has clearly been the swing vote just like yesterday. Kennedy was too a very conservative judge, and in fact had an equal conservative rating as Roberts with one major exception, gay rights. Remove Kennedy’s correct view ( my opinion) on all things gay rights and he voted 23 out of 25 times with the extreme right judges over the past decades on major split vote issues.

Don’t forget Kennedy voted to overturn Obamacare and I’m not sure he would not have voted with the right yesterday based on his past. It was Roberts that saved Obamacare six years ago, not Kennedy. I guess my point is, “if” there is a swing vote, it will be Roberts as there seems to be a lock 4-4 vote almost guaranteed anymore all too often, IMO.  

I always appreciate hearing your opinion, JC. 

Roberts is sane and principled and very Conservative. He is the Conservative version of RBG or John Paul Stevens (R appointment). Sotomayor is probably more moderate than either. By most reasonable metrics, Kagan and Breyer are only Liberal by a hair. Souter (R appointment) and Merrick Garland were/are straight down the middle and Sandra Day O’Connor was Conservative, but not very. There simply is no modern SC Liberal equivalent to Thomas, Scalia, Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh. And there is no 21st century precedent for a Republican to appoint moderately Conservative justices*, despite at least 3 of the last five Democratic appointments being roughly moderate, with one straight down the middle.

*who are not the lunch lady. 

The reason I post this is the recent R insistence on elevating to the SC activist justices who are outside the mainstream has the very real (and intended) possible outcome of fundamentally altering our rights and usurping normal legislative functions. And people like to say, “both sides do X,” or, “both sides do X, just to varying degrees,” and it is often true. But that simply is not the case re: SC appointments since Souter’s appointment almost 30 years ago.  And the extreme-ifying of the Conservative side of the SC is causing politicization around it, generally (eg. McConnell’s Garland blockade). Which, in turn, is causing a general public skepticism regarding the most sacred of our institutions whose decisions are incredibly difficult to undo. 

Last edited by winetarelli

in the first two years of his reign, President Trump had promised a border wall. The Republicans controlled the Senate. The Republicans controlled the House.  No border wall.

So, why now? Why when the Dems control the House (shortly) and there will not be funding for a wall?  It's pure distraction.  Border wall + shut down on the front burner; Mueller investigation on the back burner.

 

I want to point out, that, throughout history, there has been a particular country that has built a gigantic border wall.

And it failed, miserably.  The mongols had no trouble invading the country even with a massive wall.

Also, in modern times, more foreigners, now cross, step on, across, take pieces off the wall than ever before.

g-man posted:

I want to point out, that, throughout history, there has been a particular country that has built a gigantic border wall.

And it failed, miserably.  The mongols had no trouble invading the country even with a massive wall.

Also, in modern times, more foreigners, now cross, step on, across, take pieces off the wall than ever before.

I think you've hit on a great idea, G-Man.  We build the wall.  It becomes a great tourist attraction.  We make it a national monument. We charge admission for people to touch it, kick it, etc.  We recoup the $5 Billion.  If we charge $5 per person, and we get 10,000 visitors per year, that would be $50,000 per year, and it would only take..................never mind.

irwin posted:
g-man posted:

I want to point out, that, throughout history, there has been a particular country that has built a gigantic border wall.

And it failed, miserably.  The mongols had no trouble invading the country even with a massive wall.

Also, in modern times, more foreigners, now cross, step on, across, take pieces off the wall than ever before.

I think you've hit on a great idea, G-Man.  We build the wall.  It becomes a great tourist attraction.  We make it a national monument. We charge admission for people to touch it, kick it, etc.  We recoup the $5 Billion.  If we charge $5 per person, and we get 10,000 visitors per year, that would be $50,000 per year, and it would only take..................never mind.

Irwin, but it would offer a wonderful canvas for graffiti artist! 

The facts are we have a willfully ignorant president who has averaged over 10 lies per day, 10! That can’t be easy.

The POS wants $5B. That would allow enough money for between 150 and 200 miles of wall for a 1900 mile border. Now that would not include any annual or long term maintenance, additional  personnel required to monitor forever, additional technologies required, just some dumbass wall that would only be 1700 miles short of the entire border. The fact is the overwhelming numbers of illegals enter through border crossings, not some remote location.

The facts are only half of illegal immigrants are from Mexico and half of those came here legally and have overstayed their visa due to outdated work visa laws. A wall does nothing to address these issues. 

The president knows that the 1/3 of the voting Americans that support him are also willfully ignorant and incapable of critical thinking ( see Napa and the other troll here) so it doesn’t matter what BS comes out of his mouth. Plus, we all know Mexico is going to pay for it, trust me Trump says. 

Every time I think the orange dump has hit the bottom, he proves me wrong. 

The very man who’s father paid a doctor to create a false diagnosis of the worlds worse bone spur that took the longest in history to heal now stands in front of the men and women of our armed forces and blatantly lies his fat ass off. Trump is truly clinically ill.

Trump says they have not had a pay raise in over 10 years. What a liar. They have received pay increases for over 30 straight years. He says they were only going to get a 2% raise, or a 4% and Trump said NO, give them a 10% raise which he said they got. Again, just your trash liar known as Trump. They received the 2.4 - 2.6% as it has been for sometime. 

It was funny seeing a Trump supporter on a national news show this morning. He was asked if he was disturbed that Trump has told over 7500 lies in his first 700 days. Of coarse he said no. He then said why didn’t the fact checkers count Obama’s lies? The interviewer then said that in fact his lies were counted. He told 18 in 8 years. Trump is on pace for nearly 16,000! I have no doubt Napa and his ilk are so very proud. 

purplehaze posted:

I think I woulda been a good general... but who knows.  

PH

I would have been a terrible soldier.  I hate taking orders from anyone, but in particular, I hate taking orders from people who are dumber than I am.  I am also bad at delegating tasks to others, and thus, I would have been a lousy general.  Fortunately, we have people in our country who are willing to do both of these types of tasks, and many are good at it.

 

purplehaze posted:

I think I woulda been a good general... but who knows.  

PH

Just think, he could of been the first general with a personal hairdresser, and many others could have learned about back- combing, hair weaves and orange spray tans. I’m not sure the military could afford a can of hairspray used everyday. 

I have no doubt he has GI Joe pajamas. 😎

wineart 2 posted:
purplehaze posted:

I think I woulda been a good general... but who knows.  

PH

Just think, he could of been the first general with a personal hairdresser, and many others could have learned about back- combing, hair weaves and orange spray tans. I’m not sure the military could afford a can of hairspray used everyday. 

I have no doubt he has GI Joe pajamas. 😎

..not to mention the cost of orange spray tan!

 

Thank you to Chris Wallace of Fox News for calling out Sarah Sanders and her BS lies as she tried to spread the lies from the Orange Dump. As Wallace corrected her BS, there have not been some 4000 terrorist caught crossing at the Southern border. Complete and total lie.

Truth is as Fox News and Wallace pointed out, these people were questioned and vetted at airports for often having similar or same names as people on the watch list, or having unusual credentials. AIRPORTS, what a novel thought....

Napa and his ilk have zero use for facts or truth and Trump knows it. 

bman posted:
flwino posted:
bman posted:

Last time I checked.....

We and most other countries also valued life!

Sarah is losing her touch or, perhaps, as the article suggests, she's out of practice after avoiding any serious questioning from the media for the past few weeks.

How can you sleep knowing you told lies all day?

It's why she makes the big money!

when I grew up, if a lie was told, parents would wash out your mouth with soap.  They way this group goes, II better by more stock in a soap company

The President addresses the country tonight.  I've been watching these presidential addresses for many years.  I've watched LBJ, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama.    On the one hand, I think it is important to know what the President says and to think about it critically yourself, rather than rely on news media to select the highlights and feed commentary to you.  But, on the other hand, I have no anti-nausea medication on hand, and I don't think I could get through the first sentence or two tonight without it.

I don't know if all of the networks will cover this.  But, we can stream something. 

irwin posted:

The President addresses the country tonight.  I've been watching these presidential addresses for many years.  I've watched LBJ, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama.    On the one hand, I think it is important to know what the President says and to think about it critically yourself, rather than rely on news media to select the highlights and feed commentary to you.  But, on the other hand, I have no anti-nausea medication on hand, and I don't think I could get through the first sentence or two tonight without it.

I don't know if all of the networks will cover this.  But, we can stream something. 

Serious question, what would the over/under be on how many verifiable lies Trump will tell tonight? 

wineart 2 posted:
irwin posted:

The President addresses the country tonight.  I've been watching these presidential addresses for many years.  I've watched LBJ, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama.    On the one hand, I think it is important to know what the President says and to think about it critically yourself, rather than rely on news media to select the highlights and feed commentary to you.  But, on the other hand, I have no anti-nausea medication on hand, and I don't think I could get through the first sentence or two tonight without it.

I don't know if all of the networks will cover this.  But, we can stream something. 

Serious question, what would the over/under be on how many verifiable lies Trump will tell tonight? 

I think it might need to be judged per minute. 

But... realistically over the course of the speech I would think 12-14 fully distinct and verifiably false claims with another +/-10 distinct claims wholly unsupported by evidence. Most claims repeated multiple times. I would also suggest at least 2 pairs of mutually refuting claims and 23 instances of claiming personal victimization at the hands of “the media” or Democrats. 

Last edited by winetarelli

So as much as he ever has anything one might call a "strategy", here is what I think it is:

-declare a national emergency and say he is building his wall without Congressional approval

-various organizations go to court and are granted a stay on the building of the wall

-after a few weeks or months the Supreme Court renders a decision, probably in his favour since he does seem to have the power to do I

Meanwhile, his base is sated, the Republicans in Congress are divided even more, and the Democrats are united even more.  Trump's odds of being re-elected, and the Republicans' odds of holding the Senate and taking back the House get longer, thanks to the above-mentioned divisions but more due to a steady flow of reporting on how silly and wasteful the whole thing is, and how other parts of government, the military in particular, are short of funds that have been diverted to building the wall.

bman posted:

So as much as he ever has anything one might call a "strategy", here is what I think it is:

-declare a national emergency and say he is building his wall without Congressional approval

-various organizations go to court and are granted a stay on the building of the wall

-after a few weeks or months the Supreme Court renders a decision, probably in his favour since he does seem to have the power to do I

Meanwhile, his base is sated, the Republicans in Congress are divided even more, and the Democrats are united even more.  Trump's odds of being re-elected, and the Republicans' odds of holding the Senate and taking back the House get longer, thanks to the above-mentioned divisions but more due to a steady flow of reporting on how silly and wasteful the whole thing is, and how other parts of government, the military in particular, are short of funds that have been diverted to building the wall.

I am thinking something similar:

1.  Go on TV tonight and declare a National Emergency and say that he is going to build the Wall based on this declaration and using discretionary "National Emergency Funds" (whatever that means).

2.  At the same time, excoriate the Democrats for the government shutdown and declare that he is willing to sign a bill from the House/Senate that re-opens the government without the need for appropriating money for the wall, since that will come from his "National Emergency Funds".    

3.  Take credit for re-opening the government when the House and Senate send him a bill tomorrow.

4.  Various organizations go to court to fight on the Wall being built based on a National Emergency declaration.  Court fight drags on and everyone forgets about it as we move on to the next crisis.  In the meantime, continue to campaign about the need for the Wall.

5.  It doesn't matter what happens.  If he wins in court, great, he gets to build the Wall with National Emergency Funds.  If he loses in court, then excoriate the courts, the media, the Democrats, etc...

It's the only way I can see him getting out of this mess that he created, and still declare himself the Victor.

 

Last edited by Rothko
doubled posted:

It's because the state overwhelmingly voted for Hillary.  He doesn't realize that the fires occur in areas that are mostly pro-Trump if I understand the demographics correctly.

That can't be it.  No US President would rant and rave about something as serious and deadly as forest fires just to punish a perceived political opponent.  Who would do such a thing? 

So now CNN is finally giving serious thought to yesterday's revelation that Manafort's attorneys failed to properly redact information.  This was in a recently submitted response to Mueller's team stating Manfort breached their plea agreement.  I guess the buildup to the Oval Office address from Putin's Bitch last night had something to do with the delayed analysis, but whoo boy is the info that came to light pretty serious.  It completely knocks down any contention by Trump and his minions that Manafort was only doing illegal stuff before he became the campaign manager/chairman.  And the likelihood is slim to none that Manafort was acting solely of his own volition when he shared polling data with a Russian-Ukrainian political operative who ran Manafort's consulting office in Kiev for 10 years and has ties to Russian intelligence, and slim left the building a long time ago.

An interesting question is whether this was truly incompetence on the part of Manafort's legal team (wouldn't be the first time we had clear evidence of that), or if this was deliberately done to let Putin's Bitch and his remaining minions know that Mueller and his team know of these shenanigans.  Call me 50/50 on which it actually is.......

The mayor of the Texas town Trump is visiting tomorrow made an very interesting and largely overlooked point today:  if Trump builds a wall along the Rio Grande where it forms the border and doesn't put it in the middle of the river, then that wall serves no purpose.  As soon as anyone on the other side sets foot on land, including on the other side of the wall, they are legally in the US and so if they claim refugee status, they must be processed.  Which would not necessarily keep them out of the US if Trump succeeds in keeping them in Mexico while their claims are processed, but I think that remains to be seen, and of course it would just add to the backlog of claims and administrative chaos.

As someone who lived and worked many years in Central America interviewing hundreds of people applying for refugee and other kinds of humanitarian status, my view is that Trump would make America much safer by spending a lot more money supporting the economies and especially law enforcement in the source countries so that people there had less reason to try to come to the US.  While that would not solve the problem - nothing will "solve" it of course - a little money would go a long way to making it better.

bman posted:

The mayor of the Texas town Trump is visiting tomorrow made an very interesting and largely overlooked point today:  if Trump builds a wall along the Rio Grande where it forms the border and doesn't put it in the middle of the river, then that wall serves no purpose.  As soon as anyone on the other side sets foot on land, including on the other side of the wall, they are legally in the US and so if they claim refugee status, they must be processed. 

He said during the campaign that not only would Mexico pay, the wall would also be on its side of the river, since they don't want to cede the river to Mexico.  I'm sure Mr. Tangerine Man is hoping people forget about that promise, but that's what he said. 

bman posted:

Does anyone know where Trump's sudden fascination and anger about California forest fires comes from, never mind his false "facts"?  I presume it's from someone who was on Fox or some right-wing whackadoodle source?

It might be because of this.

<excerpt>
At the event, Governor Newsom also announced that he has joined with Governors Kate Brown of Oregon and Jay Inslee of Washington in requesting President Donald Trump double the federal government’s financial investment in managing federal forestlands in California, Washington, and Oregon.
</excerpt>

g-man posted:

Words don't describe Steve King

I can think of a few that come close. 

He has been an out White Supremacist in all but self-attributed name for a while now. It is nice to see public Conservatives denouncing him, but this is not really news to anyone who has been paying attention even remotely. We’ll see how Kevin McCarthy plays it, but whatever he does it will be for political reasons.

bman posted:
mimik posted:

Happy to see her as a candidate, but she's not going anywhere.  Not that anyone should trust Russia Today, the Russian government's main international propaganda tool, as a credible news source on any subject key to Russian foreign policy.

She is a waste of time as are a few others that just came on the scene.  We need a person with experience and integrity

flwino posted:
bman posted:
mimik posted:

Happy to see her as a candidate, but she's not going anywhere.  Not that anyone should trust Russia Today, the Russian government's main international propaganda tool, as a credible news source on any subject key to Russian foreign policy.

She is a waste of time as are a few others that just came on the scene.  We need a person with experience and integrity

Sherrod Brown and Amy Klobacher would both be fine selections. As would Beto; but, while his inexperience might actually be a benefit in 2020, it would be a hindrance in 2021. I like Biden, too. But I think he is too old for a hopefully-8-year gig. 

Come the General Election, I’d support a rabid porcupine over the current occupant of the WH (or Pence or any of their enablers). But regarding the Primary, there are several people running for the job whom I have serious reservations about. (Or worse.) 

winetarelli posted:
flwino posted:
bman posted:
mimik posted:

Happy to see her as a candidate, but she's not going anywhere.  Not that anyone should trust Russia Today, the Russian government's main international propaganda tool, as a credible news source on any subject key to Russian foreign policy.

She is a waste of time as are a few others that just came on the scene.  We need a person with experience and integrity

Sherrod Brown and Amy Klobacher would both be fine selections. As would Beto; but, while his inexperience might actually be a benefit in 2020, it would be a hindrance in 2021. I like Biden, too. But I think he is too old for a hopefully-8-year gig. 

Come the General Election, I’d support a rabid porcupine over the current occupant of the WH (or Pence or any of their enablers). But regarding the Primary, there are several people running for the job whom I have serious reservations about. (Or worse.) 

Washington Post comment today on Russia Today and Gabbard:

"RT, the Russia-funded news network, has run a series of glowing pieces about Gabbard, content that dredges up painful liberal memories of Russian propaganda boosting the 2016 Trump campaign.

“Establishment figures on both Right and Left are scrambling to smear the antiwar congresswoman with impeccable identity-politics bona fides,” read a typical RT dispatch this weekend."

As much as I hate to say it, I think that the White House was in a bit of a conundrum about what to serve at the Clemson event.  If you serve caviar, foie gras and filet mignon, you will get criticized for feasting in luxury as 800,000 federal employees are being forced to go to food banks.  If you serve McDonalds, pizza, etc., you come off as being a cheapskate and diminishing the grandeur of the White House.

I don't know why they couldn't have tried something in-between.  Maybe some gourmet sandwiches, salads, hors d'ouevres, etc.   Are the White House chefs part of the shutdown?

Still, given the choices, they elected to go low.  Cold fast food served on silver plates...  

I'm sure those top athletes appreciated the opportunity to dine on filet-o-fish sandwiches and other fine fare.

Oh what a great move by the President to deny the use of our aircraft for Pelosi's overseas trip.  Bet her eyes got a little wider when she learned.  They need to show up to the table.

Trump should have the SOTU anyway and play a video of Obama, Clinton, Schumer and other democrats calling for a wall / stronger border security in the past.

napacat posted:

Oh what a great move by the President to deny the use of our aircraft for Pelosi's overseas trip.  Bet her eyes got a little wider when she learned.  They need to show up to the table.

Trump should have the SOTU anyway and play a video of Obama, Clinton, Schumer and other democrats calling for a wall / stronger border security in the past.

Do you have an issue with him divulging that she was going to Afghanistan, thereby putting her and the military and other staff that were accompanying her at risk?

He can have the SOTU anywhere he likes, just not in the House.

Also, you are forgetting that Trump had agreed to sign the necessary legislation - that McConnell and the rest of the Republicans and Democrats had negotiated - until Fox News got all up in his face about it.  As he himself said - on live TV no less - he owns the shutdown and only he can end it!

Rothko posted:
flwino posted:

Colds only last 7 days as per an old wives tale

I find it takes 9 days:  three days to come down with it; three days to have it; and three days to get rid of it.

 

I miss my youth.

The days of the 3 day cold are long gone, with all the crazy viruses and mutations thereof that circulate these days.

bman posted:
napacat posted:

Oh what a great move by the President to deny the use of our aircraft for Pelosi's overseas trip.  Bet her eyes got a little wider when she learned.  They need to show up to the table.

Trump should have the SOTU anyway and play a video of Obama, Clinton, Schumer and other democrats calling for a wall / stronger border security in the past.

Do you have an issue with him divulging that she was going to Afghanistan, thereby putting her and the military and other staff that were accompanying her at risk?

He can have the SOTU anywhere he likes, just not in the House.

Also, you are forgetting that Trump had agreed to sign the necessary legislation - that McConnell and the rest of the Republicans and Democrats had negotiated - until Fox News got all up in his face about it.  As he himself said - on live TV no less - he owns the shutdown and only he can end it!

I actually don't know if the Afghan part of the trip was meant to be a secret or not.

I am aware that there was some agreement on his part to sign...but can always change his mind for whatever reason.

napacat posted:
bman posted:
napacat posted:

Oh what a great move by the President to deny the use of our aircraft for Pelosi's overseas trip.  Bet her eyes got a little wider when she learned.  They need to show up to the table.

Trump should have the SOTU anyway and play a video of Obama, Clinton, Schumer and other democrats calling for a wall / stronger border security in the past.

Do you have an issue with him divulging that she was going to Afghanistan, thereby putting her and the military and other staff that were accompanying her at risk?

He can have the SOTU anywhere he likes, just not in the House.

Also, you are forgetting that Trump had agreed to sign the necessary legislation - that McConnell and the rest of the Republicans and Democrats had negotiated - until Fox News got all up in his face about it.  As he himself said - on live TV no less - he owns the shutdown and only he can end it!

I actually don't know if the Afghan part of the trip was meant to be a secret or not.

I am aware that there was some agreement on his part to sign...but can always change his mind for whatever reason.

Travel by politicians and senior officials to areas of conflict is always a secret.  I know, I worked in several similar areas over my 30 year diplomatic career.  Trump crossed yet another line by revealing that.

And there was not "Some" agreement, there was an agreement or McConnell would never had had the Senate pass the legislation. That's why he won't bring anything to the floor unless Trump agrees in advance to sign it, Trump made him look stupid by changing his mind.  Which is of course his prerogative, but his inability to think for himself rather than following the lead of Fox News is what has led to this debacle and many others.  Sad!

Last edited by bman

Thanks, bman, for saving me the distaste of having to respond directly to trump's resident WS booster.  And governing by "changing his mind for whatever reason," is exactly what's been going on for 2 years down here.  The whatever reason was the disapproval of his TV friends.  There is no one left with any wisdom to counsel the orange menace.  He'll have to rely on Coulter, Hannity et al. for guidance going forward.  God help us.  

PH

 

purplehaze posted:

Thanks, bman, for saving me the distaste of having to respond directly to trump's resident WS booster.  And governing by "changing his mind for whatever reason," is exactly what's been going on for 2 years down here.  The whatever reason was the disapproval of his TV friends.  There is no one left with any wisdom to counsel the orange menace.  He'll have to rely on Coulter, Hannity et al. for guidance going forward.  God help us.  

PH

 

Just being my usual ever-helpful self.......  

mimik posted:
Rothko posted:
flwino posted:

Colds only last 7 days as per an old wives tale

I find it takes 9 days:  three days to come down with it; three days to have it; and three days to get rid of it.

 

I miss my youth.

The days of the 3 day cold are long gone, with all the crazy viruses and mutations thereof that circulate these days.

yea, anecdotal, but my cold this year was one of the worst I've ever gotten.

Bman, PH, 

Napa’s gotta be trolling. 

Meanwhile, I’m wholly disgusted with Barr. And it looks like he is going to be the next AG.  It is almost fortuitous for him that this shutdown is happening.  Were it not, I think a lot more attention would be being paid to his deeply disturbing answers to many questions.  Including his refusal to commit to releasing the Mueller report.

And Rudy is now openly admitting to collusion (or not denying) and saying but ‘the President didn’t commit a crime’.

Rudy is preparing the endgame for the dumpster.  Just more goalpost moving.  This latest blathering from Ghouliani leads me to believe that the cabal infesting our WH has a sense of what's on the horizon for them.  

I'm with you on Barr, but I'm not too worried about Mueller's report.  One way or the other, it'll be seen by a patriot somewhere and will see the light of day.  

PH

purplehaze posted:

Thanks, bman, for saving me the distaste of having to respond directly to trump's resident WS booster.  And governing by "changing his mind for whatever reason," is exactly what's been going on for 2 years down here.  The whatever reason was the disapproval of his TV friends.  There is no one left with any wisdom to counsel the orange menace.  He'll have to rely on Putin, the Russian oligarch mafia, Coulter, Hannity et al. for guidance going forward.  God help us.  

PH

 

FIFY

MKGA - Make Kompromat Great Again

Last edited by Insight

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×