Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

Moose & Squirrel v Boris & Natasha: what's the deal with the rooskies and trumpland?

Jumbo

By Jumbo
in The Tailgate

 Share

Recommended Posts

Larry

Larry

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Burgold said:

Well, he probably figures since he worked with the Russians to spy on us other countries must be doing the same dance... why not the Brits?

 

On a much less conspiracy-theory note:

 

An imaginary scene has occurred to me, where the head of the CIA were to phone the head of MI6, and tell him "Gee, we've got these people who are real pains in our behinds. But we aren't allowed to spy on them, because they're in the US. But, we really want to spy on them. And it occurs to me that YOU could spy on them. And then you could send us the Intel. And I bet that you folks have some people who you'd like to spy on, but can't, (and we can), too."

 

Would not not surprise me, at all. 

 

(Not even certain that I would disapprove, if they did that.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hersh

Hersh

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said:

If he isn't "knowingly" lying, the alternative is mental illness.

 

I don't get why she would even address it. Now everyone knows she will knowingly lie. Defending Trump doesn't help one's own credibility anywhere. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sacks 'n' Stuff

Sacks 'n' Stuff

Posted
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, Hersh said:

I don't get why she would even address it. Now everyone knows she will knowingly lie. Defending Trump doesn't help one's own credibility anywhere. 

The people ****ing love that **** man. Or, at the least, they don't care.

 

LetterR.jpg

 

That's it right there. You put one of those after your name, nothing else matters. What are we going to do in 2018 when the rabble turns out in record numbers and the GOP grabs 10 more seats in the senate? All hope will be lost.

Edited by Sacks 'n' Stuff
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Burgold

Burgold

Posted
Posted

I look at a budget that weakens our counter terrorism abilities, damns our clean air, water, education, scientific research efforts, Coast Guard, TSA, diplomatic reach, etc and part of me wonders is he softening us up for invasion?

I don't think I really think that, but by weakening all of our safety nets and many of our front line defenses what can they be thinking?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RedskinsFan44

RedskinsFan44

Posted
Posted (edited)

Haley: "He'll answer for that". I doubt it. 

This crap is getting embarrassing:
http://www.businessinsider.com/white-house-apologizes-to-britain-gchq-2017-3

 

Add:  While they are apologizing it would seem that one to Obama is warranted.  All of this over our infantile president's angry response to a Breitbart article.

 

Edited by RedskinsFan44
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry

Larry

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Burgold said:

I look at a budget that weakens our counter terrorism abilities, damns our clean air, water, education, scientific research efforts, Coast Guard, TSA, diplomatic reach, etc and part of me wonders is he softening us up for invasion?

I don't think I really think that, but by weakening all of our safety nets and many of our front line defenses what can they be thinking?

 

No one is remotely close to invading us. 

 

Now, we could lose many of the things that make us a world leader, though. Our (admittedly far from perfect) moral stance. Our network of free trade relationships. Our position as the world's most secure economy and currency. Our position in science and technology. 

 

Granted, it wasn't guaranteed that those things were going to continue forever, anyway. There were forces at work, threatening all of them, before Trump. But his response to those threats is to simply yell "**** them things!  Get rid of them!"  

 

Things like Trump's Muslim Ban, or the resurrection of racism, or another round of trickle down economics, might be reversible, down the road. But some of those more intangible things I listed, might be impossible to regain, once we've rejected them. It's possible that we're seeing the end of a golden age that lasted most of a century. 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, RedskinsFan44 said:

 

Add:  While they are apologizing it would seem that one to Obama is warranted.  All of this over our infantile president's angry response to a Breitbart article.

 

 

. . . And his belief that the technique to recover from that stupidity is a generous application of bullying, and more lying. 

Edited by Larry
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jumbo

Jumbo

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Good morning, Vietnam.

 

Well, as usually the case these days, just the new stupid overnight is impressive. :rofl89:

 

Poor McMasters (he and sean apologizing to James Bond). I am not one of those who respect Spicer (or Conway) for being "professionals just doing their job" because they are still accountable for whom they choose to play that highly paid role for, and how far they are willing to dive into deep dishonesty and abandon personal integrity in the process. Their willingness to do what they've done to date (Conway x 10) for  this candidate/admin earns them all the ill will they receive---not for his policies afaic (for the most part, anyway) but for his extremely low character and extremely high level of scumminess.

 

Then I get to watch him lie about converting "no votes to yes votes" in his morning media set and blather his fake news and crooked media stuff over and over during it. This guy who scoffs at, insults, and distrusts, our own IC (note to dead brains: yes, our IC has flaws and scandals too--noting one does not override or invalidate the other) in arbitrary and simply stupid fashion routinely so far while swallowing Hannity/Fox/infowars/breitbart like a sinkhole. That's where he prefers to get his intel. Dwell on that.

 

What a freaking **** show this admin is. I get why so many who aren't his core but voted for him for whatever <self-censor> reason keep going "Obama" in some sort of "rebuttal" to a trump criticism as ridiculously lame as it is 9 out of 10 times  (the tenth time is for legit instances).

 

I get that "lefty hate" is THE all-powerful drive for many. I get that a lot of the actual policies he's pushing seem great to the hard right and a few others and that's fair. IMO every other aspect of this **** show from any principled or well-reasoned standard is historically cringeworthy. If these were all policies I really liked I'd still want him out of there asap, would not defend him on 90% of this stuff, and would even be constantly joining in on the vast bulk of the criticism, though I'd still argue for my favored policy.

 

This guy is a train wreck and at only two months in I'm starting to think the damage may end up very severe. Too many of his posse are of like ilk, and per the majority of his core base/actual "enthusiasts"----well...I want to show proper regard for the well-documented sensitivity of rightside snowflakes by avoiding unflattering but accurate adjectives. Don't want to be politically incorrect by citing reality.

 

 

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...