Jumbo

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

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, BenningRoadSkin said:

she don't live on this planet. 

 

People need to stop engaging her.

 

I keep harping on the ignore feature here. If more people used it instead of being sucked into this back and forth where there is no end.

 

Begging folks to try it.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, StillUnknown said:

I will never understand the unashamed willingness to bend over and spread cheeks for Donald ****ing Trump. not some bastion of conservative ideology

 

He is absolutely a bastion of conservative ideology in 2019. Without question. They have never circled the wagons like this outside of the “**** you Obama” phase. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Llevron said:

 

He is absolutely a bastion of conservative ideology in 2019. Without question. They have never circled the wagons like this outside of the “**** you Obama” phase. 

Yeah, Trump recognized and exploited the core driving forces of the 2016 Republican electorate. Not sure if "conservative" is an appropriate label for what that is though.

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, RedskinsFan44 said:

Yeah, Trump recognized and exploited the core driving forces of the 2016 Republican electorate. Not sure if "conservative" is an appropriate label for what that is though.

 

Definitions of words change all the time. I think conservative has. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RedskinsFan44 said:

Yeah, Trump recognized and exploited the core driving forces of the 2016 Republican electorate. Not sure if "conservative" is an appropriate label for what that is though.

You give Trump too much credit, he has no plan...never did. He's just being his douchehawk self (autocorrect put douchehawk, decided to keep it) and the GOP just hopped on board for the ride.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Llevron said:

 

Definitions of words change all the time. I think conservative has. 

 

Oh, there's certainly been some changes. Although I'd say that many of the things Trump represents were things that have been fundamental parts of the Republican Party for most of my life. 

 

They've been the party of exploding the deficit to hand out tax cuts to billionaires since at least Reagan.

 

Racism has been a big part of their tent since Lee A****er (I love the fact that our board censors his name) asserted that dog whistles will get them power (and the Party decided that hey, they'd take that deal). 

 

However, for as long as I could remember, one thing you could count on from a Republican was the religious belief that Russia was Satan, and that they were going to conquer and enslave the world if we didn't have a military that was capable of fighting the entire world at once. Our entire foreign policy was operated for the goal of fighting Russia. (Or even fighting things that some dictator said were tied to Russia). 

 

And all it took to get the Republican Party to change their position from Russia being the biggest threat in the history of humanity, to them being our greatest ally, and NATO is an enemy, was for the KGB (OK, their replacement) to endorse a guy who wasn't even a Republican until he became a Birther. 

 

That's a change that I think has happened just in this last election.  

  • Like 2
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I totally agree with you Larry. Ever since Nixon and Watergate, when Republicans put party over country until Nixon's crimes against country couldn't be ignored, I have been against their policies of divide and conquer at the expense of We the People. 

 

Unfortunately, the Republicans continue to put party above country. Hopefully, they electorate will send them packing as it did since 2016.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LadySkinsFan said:

I totally agree with you Larry. Ever since Nixon and Watergate, when Republicans put party over country until Nixon's crimes against country couldn't be ignored, I have been against their policies of divide and conquer at the expense of We the People. 

 

Unfortunately, the Republicans continue to put party above country. Hopefully, they electorate will send them packing as it did since 2016.

 

Yep and the GOP more than any party has had many opportunities to join the fight to attack racism head on and help squelch it but because many of their voters hold these kinds of beliefs the GOP has instead chosen to exploit and fan the flames in order to maintain that voting block.  Fanning racism via portraying anyone not white as "those scary people over there are coming to get ya" has become a regular part of the GOP playbook. 

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

 

 

Why not?  Aren’t foreign players stakeholders?  Hacking and posting fake news articles is sleazy, but ultimately it’s up to the electorate to decide what to listen to.

 

 

Perhaps making campaigns report foreign “assistance” similar to how campaign donations are reported.

More ridiculousness. Who needs sovereignty anyway? Why call ourselves a nation at all? America the puppet.

 

GOP Morons: We gots ta git voter ID cards to make sure no illegals **** up our elections!

 

GOP Morons: But foreign governments can play in them all they want so long as they back our guy, and they will back our guy because we are treasonous ****ing snakes willing and ready to sell our country out.

You people are ****ing traitors.

 

Hope one day this country treats you as such.

 

Up against the wall and

 

~Bang

 

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 3
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Bang said:

More ridiculousness. Who needs sovereignty anyway? Why call ourselves a nation at all? America the puppet.

 

Tough on Russia, soft on Iran.  If America was sovereign, Syria and Venezuela would look a lot different.   

 

I wonder what you classify as “foreign” interference. Do you think the steele  dossier was foreign interference? 

 

Its not about whataboutism. I already agree what trump did was way more blatant. I already agree he obstructed justice and should be impeached for that. My point is if you think there should be no foreign interference what to you do about it when it does happen? 

 

Impeachment?  OK, but what about the people who didn’t win who also used foreign interference? Where is the line? Why is that the line.

 

Interference is going to happen, it’s already happened. What you you actually suggest we do to guarantee it doesn’t happen? Or, as I suggested, wouldn’t it be better to have a system to report it?

 

How strongly do you believe in no foreign interference? Is it something to go to war over?

 

Putting sanctions on Russia is not a reasonable solution, so what do you think? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

 

 

 

Aren’t foreign players stakeholders?  Hacking and posting fake news articles is sleazy, but ultimately it’s up to the electorate to decide what to listen to.

 

this precludes all of your questions, and shows where any of your 'logic" in this leads.

 

More.

Ridiculousness.

From.

The.

Traitorous.

Right.

 

I am not sure how you read my post and decided there was a discussion to be had.

 

~Bang

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

Putting sanctions on Russia is not a reasonable solution

 

Since when?  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
24 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

Since when?  

 

 

 

Not Reasonable solution in the sense that it will not be effective.  And they can veto any admonishment/sanctions that the west brought before the UN.

Edited by CousinsCowgirl84

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

 

Not Reasonable solution in the sense that it will not be effective.  And they can veto any admonishment/sanctions that the west brought before the UN.

 

Who said anything about the UN?  

 

And you you do realize that Russia has spent years trying to get the sanctions lifted against them?  In fact, it's one of the things that they wanted to talk to the Trump campaign about, in exchange for them helping Trump with stolen DNC emails?

 

Now no, those sanctions weren't enough to get them to give the Ukrane back. But it seems that they hurt enough so that they were willing to help out Trump, in exchange for him partially lifting them. So they don't seem completely useless. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I brought up the UN because for sanctions to really work most of the world powers would have to agree on them, i think.

 

Did the sanctions cause Russia to respond in a way that moved them closer toward the norms of international law, or no?  Were they an effective solution to russia’s meddling, or no? 

Edited by CousinsCowgirl84

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"One side is a private investigator under contract and the other involves alleged collaboration with a hostile government seeking to meddle in the U.S. election," said Andrew Wright, an associate professor at Savannah Law School in Georgia and former staff director of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

 

The Trump campaign's actions could put it at odds with federal election law, Wright said.

 

"Campaign finance laws prohibit soliciting or receiving a 'thing of value' from a foreign entity because that would constitute an illegal campaign contribution," he said. "Information could amount to an illegal in-kind contribution from a foreign government. Russia repeatedly dangled information in order to get its hooks into the Trump campaign."

 

In contrast, Wright said, "Fusion GPS was paid for opposition research services at arms-length. As such, it was not a campaign contribution but rather contracted services." 

 

The fact that Steele ended up talking to a couple of Russian sources to compile his dossier doesn't change that, experts said.

Charles Tiefer, a professor at the University of Baltimore School of Law and the special deputy chief counsel for the House Iran-Contra Committee's investigation of the Reagan administration, said the actions by the two campaigns "could not be more different."

 

"Steele was British, but there is no reason to believe Britain ... was meddling in the election," Tiefer said. "In contrast, the Russian effort to interfere in the U.S. election connected in a number of ways with (Russian President Vladimir) Putin and his network. The Russian effort was very active on many election fronts, such as hacking, publicizing hacked materials, placing ads in social media with undisclosed identities, and seeking to work directly with the Trump campaign."

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/11/03/russia-investigation-trump-tower-meeting-and-trump-dossier-comparable/825346001/

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

I brought up the UN because for sanctions to really work most of the world powers would have to agree on them, i think.

 

Previous Presidents have successfully convinced enough of the world to cooperate on sanctions for them to hurt.  Against Russia and against other bad actors like Iran.  Without the UN.  

 

10 hours ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

Were they an effective solution to russia’s meddling, or no? 

 

Hard to tell.  Trump unilaterally lifted many of them before even the midterms came around.  Because Russia asked him to.  

 

This is a problem with Trump, not a problem with sanctions.  

 

- - - 

 

Now, do I believe that sanctions, in and of themselves, will prevent Russia from engaging in social media discussions with an aim on harming The West?  No.  It's too hard to catch them at it.  Too subtle a kind of "attack".  And they know that we're not going to, say, send troops to go kick them out of some territory, or anything like that, over something this subtle.  

 

No, that does not in any way mean that "Putting sanctions on Russia is not a reasonable solution".  (And it's certainly not an argument why we have no choice but to endorse it, and pass a law mandating it be reported.)  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's important before every election to check your voter status. Most states now have online systems. Make sure your record exists and hasn't been purged.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Hey, who cares if they change votes. 
The foreign governments trying to subvert our elections are players too. Russians oligarchs and criminal overlords are Americans all except for the "being Russians" part, so they should be allowed a complete subversion of the process..  er.. i mean a 'say"  in who they want to assist them in helping our country tear itself apart.

the Senate majority leader and president are correct in derailing any and all efforts to secure the voting machines.

It's up to the electorate to know who they voted for even if the machines say they cast their vote for the candidate the foreign entity wants to win regardless of who they actually chose.

 

However, i do agree.. **** sanctions. i am down with the inevitable shooting war. Not like there will be much choice. May as well get it going.

We can start with the traitors here at home enabling the aggression of our enemies and the destruction of our country.

 

~Bang

Edited by Bang
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She won't answer questions?

 

Cool.  Shove her in the clink below the Capitol building, Mr. Sgt at Arms.

 

She'll last 48 to 72 hours, tops, and then she'll sing like a bird.

 

And so will the rest.  None of these wankers are built to withstand jailtime.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, DogofWar1 said:

She won't answer questions?

 

Cool.  Shove her in the clink below the Capitol building, Mr. Sgt at Arms.

 

She'll last 48 to 72 hours, tops, and then she'll sing like a bird.

 

And so will the rest.  None of these wankers are built to withstand jailtime.

 

 

Apparently none of these other wankers are built to dish out any.  😐

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.