Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

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


Jumbo

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Jumbo said:

that's has been widely considered as one reasonable argument (among others) as to why it's unlikely there is any serious conspiracy with russia

Indeed. But then again, if it all turns out to be a big nothing, one of the most puzzling questions will still be why did Donald feel the need to take those stances, shooting his mouth off so loudly & often about it.

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

1 minute ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said:

Indeed. But then again, if it all turns out to be a big nothing, one of the most puzzling questions will still be why did Donald feel the need to take those stances, shooting his mouth off so loudly & often about it.

Arrogance.  These guys feel like they can operate with impunity.  Trump has never had a humbling day in his life.  

 

I've referenced it before, but Trump displays many traits commonly found in your garden variety sociopath.  Like many sociopaths, he wants maximum pleasure from his deceits.  He takes those stances because he gets off on it.  He likes knowing that he can get away with saying anything, so he pushes the boundaries as far as he possibly can.  It's a power play.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And add John Walters to the gopers who don't care about the truth as much as their agenda. Living in an alternate reality indeed. "This is a completely made-up issue by the media from beginning to end." Once verification of material has met the appropriate standards, these will be heady days for tape to use in teaching non-verbal communication (specifically, forms of honest/dishonest and perception/delusion).

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said:

Indeed. But then again, if it all turns out to be a big nothing, one of the most puzzling questions will still be why did Donald feel the need to take those stances, shooting his mouth off so loudly & often about it.

I think the chance of it being nothing is close to zero. The chance of it not being as bad as some of us think is probably 30-70. Mind you, so far since being elected he's done even worse than I feared in terms of his cabinet choices, environmental and budget proposals, as well as his ability to deal with the simple stuff like condemning hate crimes.

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

1 hour ago, Jumbo said:

i'll repeat, jeff has the wiggle room for now it seems, even with the written question (because the sentence includes the phrase "about the campaign" in it) on a perjury deal...but it will be obvious to honest working brains everywhere he was trying to cover up and that will be propellent for ongoing

 

The snake even smiled as he said it. 

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

well, i thought ole jeff pulled that off as well as he could...smooth, genuine, real enough...came off very innocent...answered questions without spinning into crazy, really a master but did use a lot of "don't remember" forms...and i'm not deciding at this point that he's lying about it all...but i think we'll see his words are open to serious dissection that won't help him in the long run..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • I wonder what the chances are that that Sept. 13th phone call had been wire tapped and there is a transcript floating around somewhere in the hands of our IC.

 

It could end up like Flynn all over again.

Edited by Fresh8686
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

just was around some people having a grand time playing the "what of this were hillary" game lol

 

the NSA goes down for lying about talks with russian ambassador in the middle of a russian operation to interfere with our election and then coinky-dinky the bosom-buddy AG gets caught lying about meeting with the same damn guy weeks later lol...can't make this **** up...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Jumbo said:

just was around some people having a grand time playing the "what of this were hillary" game lol

 

the NSA goes down for lying about talks with russian ambassador in the middle of a russian operation to interfere with our election and then coinky-dinky the bosom-buddy AG gets caught lying about meeting with the same damn guy weeks later lol...can't make this **** up...

 

I think it is fair to say, however, if nothing is found in these investigations that the same defense used for Hillary would be applicable here. "They looked and looked and looked with partisan bias and high levels of motivation, but ultimately found nothing. So you can't say there is something there"

Both sides need to accept this

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@zoony well, we can say that once the two become equivalent in time effort value expense etc etc...which we are light years away from...also--and not saying you think otherwise, just pertinent to the comparison--i was one of many who called hillary out on the lying (and forms thereof) even tho she wasn't found criminally guilty.

 

and i had a lot of company in that, so were this to become equivalent, we'd want an equivalent widespread acknowledgment even among trumpets that these guys were all liars who just didn't get convicted, and i doubt that would happen....i am that guy who keeps harping on how pervasive hypocrisy is with we humans especially "preachers and politicos" :evil:

i find it a useful practice to vent when needed on appearances and other stuff,  but remain even-handed on drawing actual conclusions about this stuff...i keep advising caution on the rooskie assumptions and other stuff, even considering all the seemingly glaring obviousness to some of it..

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said:

False equivalency!!!!

Yeah, it's not like lying about consorting with enemies on how to rig an American election is anywhere near as bad as lying about an affair! That little blue dress is thousands of times worse than trading in secrets and working with the Russians to rig the Presidential election for whatever kickback they are offering.

19 minutes ago, zoony said:

 

I think it is fair to say, however, if nothing is found in these investigations that the same defense used for Hillary would be applicable here. "They looked and looked and looked with partisan bias and high levels of motivation, but ultimately found nothing. So you can't say there is something there"

Both sides need to accept this

 

 

Except that we have already been told that the Intelligence agencies have found something there. They have found and reported conclusively that the Russians were involved in the DNC hacking and took a very active role in trying to manipulate the US elections. Now, how in bed Trump and his cohorts were we don't know, but we do know that Flynn and Manafort were already forced to step down because of improprieties and lies.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Burgold said:

Yeah, it's not like lying about consorting with enemies on how to rig an American election is anywhere near as bad as lying about an affair! That little blue dress is thousands of times worse than trading in secrets and working with the Russians to rig the Presidential election for whatever kickback they are offering.

One was proven and true. 

 

If if this turns out to be true and proven, then we will all agree it is far worse. 

 

So far though?  A bunch of noise. 

  • Like 1
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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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