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

LD0506

LD0506

Posted
Posted
Quote

WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—In a fiercely defiant statement on Tuesday, the White House press secretary, Sean Spicer, denied that any member of the White House staff has ever worked "in any way, shape, or form" for the benefit of the United States.

Angrily addressing the press corps, Spicer said that any allegations that members of the Trump Administration have ever acted in concert or collusion with the United States are "unequivocally false."

 

http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/white-house-denies-any-ties-to-united-states

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DogofWar1

DogofWar1

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, Dan T. said:

Mr. Benghazi himself, Rep. Trey Gowdy, weighed in today:

You're right Mr. Gowdy.

 

If only we had a form that asked all those questions on pain of perjury.  If only ...

 

Also I like how the REAL problem is that it's undermining credibility not that these meetings happened.

 

18 minutes ago, LD0506 said:

 

Take a few minutes, look at the staff Mueller has assembled and do that Google thang if you don't know who they are. These are assassins, total legal barracudas, the kinda lawyers that keep lawyers awake at night. This is not a "going through the motions" kinda thing, you don't build a machine like this if there isn't a job worthy of it. Pay attention, talk less, read more, pay even more attention, years from now you will want to be able to tell the tale.

I love this paragraph.  You should honestly send it to some journalists who have been doing reporting, they might use it.  I especially like the "lawyers who keep lawyers awake at night" line.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry

Larry

Posted
Posted
Just now, Forehead said:

It's a few "if's", but if Trump is still president when the 2018 midterms come around, and if the Democrats take the majority...how quickly does the House Oversight committee go freaking nuts once the Dems are in charge of it?

 

Actually, if we're spinning really extreme "if"s, the one that occurs to me is:  

 

Nov '18:  Dems take control of the House.  

Next day:  The still-R-majority-but-now-lame-duck House, and the still-R-majority-but-now-lame-duck Senate, rush through a one-day impeachment of Trump and Pence, thus allowing Paul Ryan to become President, before the Dems can be sworn in.  

 

Next day:  twa explains to all of the members of ES that this was merely complying with a rule that didn't exist before now.  

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
twa

twa

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

Next day:  twa explains to all of the members of ES that this was merely complying with a rule that didn't exist before now.  

 

 

 

How's the Anti-Lame Duck rule sound?

 

Not much zing, but I've got time to work on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hersh

Hersh

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, twa said:

 

How's the Anti-Lame Duck rule sound?

 

Not much zing, but I've got time to work on it.

 

Do you think Donald Trump, our current POTUS, knew about the meeting in question around when it took place?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
twa

twa

Posted
Posted
Just now, Hersh said:

 

Do you think Donald Trump, our current POTUS, knew about the meeting in question around when it took place?

 

Probably not specifics, but probably knew about a supposed source.....probably a few sources.

He is not very detail oriented fwih.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tshile

tshile

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, DogofWar1 said:

 

I love this paragraph.  You should honestly send it to some journalists who have been doing reporting, they might use it.  I especially like the "lawyers who keep lawyers awake at night" line.

 

Doesn't seem like a coincidence that when the team started being appointed Hannity and Gingrich started going after the credibility or mueller (the guy everyone had nice things to say about when he was appointed)

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BornaSkinsFan83

BornaSkinsFan83

Posted
Posted

Just to rant a little...

 

What does it say that the party that sought impeachment over not getting a straight answer to "Did you have sexual relations with that woman?" has no qualms with not getting a straight answer to "Did you commit treason?"

 

To me that's the Republican Party in a nutshell. And I just can't bring myself to respect anyone who's down with such a blatant, obvious and un-American absurdity. And really why should I? They obviously have no respect (or love) for the rest of us. No problem selling us out. Hell they have no respect for themselves. The rank and file anyway. I really think they need some kind of counseling. 

 

And all this is before we even get to the anti-science, anti-education, anti-diversity, anti-women, anti-poor people, so and so forth,  elements. I'll accept those as political issues. But this **** here, with Russia, this is beyond politics. This is a matter of patriotism. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tshile

tshile

Posted
Posted

WSJ reporting us intelligence community detected chatter of Russian government agents discussing trump associates before the campaign began in 2015.

 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/russian-officials-overheard-discussing-trump-associates-before-campaign-began-1499890354

 

They are paywalled but the segment shown on foxnews just now reads:

"US intelligence starting in the spring of 2015 detected conversations in which Russian government officials discussed meetings with Trump associates"

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry

Larry

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, BornaSkinsFan83 said:

What does it say that the party that sought impeachment over not getting a straight answer to "Did you have sexual relations with that woman?" . . . 

 

Actually, I believe the question was "Have you ever cheated on your wife?"  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
skinny21

skinny21

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, tshile said:

WSJ reporting us intelligence community detected chatter of Russian government agents discussing trump associates before the campaign began in 2015.

 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/russian-officials-overheard-discussing-trump-associates-before-campaign-began-1499890354

 

They are paywalled but the segment shown on foxnews just now reads:

"US intelligence starting in the spring of 2015 detected conversations in which Russian government officials discussed meetings with Trump associates"

 

You know what else jumped out at me from the article?  The fact that foreign Intelligence officials warned the US that Russia might be funneling money into the election.  Can't recall seeing that bit of info before and maybe it doesn't mean all that much, but "follow the money" came to mind... 

  • Like 4
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...