Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

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


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Burgold said:

Interesting. With me he was always quite balanced and fair. On the conservative side for sure, but logical and reasonable.

 

 

He's not stupid.  He knows his audience.  Nevertheless, read what a responsble conservative writer said about Phares before Trump got the nomination.

 

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/trump-and-walid-phares/

Edited by Predicto
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, tshile said:

on NPR this morning they went over the history of the failure to register as an agent for a foreign government law. i believe they said there's only been 5 charges and 1 conviction. they said it's basically something they know goes on but nothing is ever done about it

 

that surprised me. i would have thought that was a more serious issue.

 

Doesn't really surprise me. 

 

I wouldn't be at all surprised if it's like the "mishandling of classified information" law. Where doing something like, say, taking notes about a classified document, and taking the notes home to study, is a violation of the law. But to really get punished for it, you have to take briefcases full of marked documents, and intentionally hand them to a person who you know to be an agent of a foreign government. 

 

"Agent of a foreign government" is a pretty broad term. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, AsburySkinsFan said:

I had someone say something similar to me about a local Congressman lately; that he was thoughtful, well balanced and fair. My comment to him was simply, “I wish he had campaigned on that rather than appealing to extremism.” My friend doesn’t watch politics at all so he was kind of shocked.

For me it’s about who you are 1v1 and how you allow yourself to be represented through your campaign. At a certain point the difference becomes moot.

 

"It's not who I am underneath, but what I do, that defines me"

 

- Batman

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RedskinsFan44 said:

Add:Carter Page and Papadopolous as two of you five "foreign policy experts"? "Hey guys, this Russian mole wants to set up a meeting with Putin and Trump! Whaddyathink?"

 

We're talking about a campaign where their "national security expert" held phone conversations with the Russian ambassador.  And then he (and the candidate) are shocked to find out that the NSA recorded the call.  

Edited by Larry
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

We're talking about a campaign where their "national security expert" held phone conversations with the Russian ambassador.  And then he (and the candidate) are shocked to find out that the NSA recorded the call.  

You mean that I as a citizen cannot contact the Russian ambassador without a reasonable expectation of privacy?!

 

Stunner!!

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Busch1724 said:

So on the previous two pages about who is playing who in the movie...Mueller will be played by George Clooney. I'd bet my neighbor's dog's life on that. it's a sweet dog. It pisses and poops on only the best million dollar carpet money can buy. 

That's a good one.  I think Luke Wilson looks just like him

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, AsburySkinsFan said:

That percentage will only get bigger the more they smell controversy on the Dem side. If anyone thinks that something like that will suddenly cause people in the GOP to be open to opposing Trump then I think that’s naive, and wholly contrary to historical evidence of the past 25 years since Newt Gingrich. Newt brought zero sum politics into vogue in DC, it’s been hell to pay since.

That's exactly what I was trying to say.

 

There's a % that won't believe anything no matter what. There's also a % that are willing to believe, but as soon as you throw in someone (clinton) as an "also accused" they'll happily ignore the issues with their guy to focus on the other guy. 

 

That happens on both sides, though how and how bad varies depending on the situation. 

 

I'd prefer this investigation stay focused on the Trump campaign. If there's evidence/need to expand once it's done, do it. Otherwise everyone just stays in their trenches and points fingers.

3 minutes ago, AsburySkinsFan said:

You mean that I as a citizen cannot contact the Russian ambassador without a reasonable expectation of privacy?!

 

Stunner!!

To be fair you can't really contact anyone anymore with any level of expectation of privacy.

 

It's really only a question of whether it gets you put on a list for followup investigation or not.

 

Edited by tshile
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing with the media really giving Tony Podesta airtime is that I seriously question the media's ability to appropriately put it in context.

 

More and more the media doesn't fact check, they just grab the two sides and let them present their opposing narratives and just sorta let it happen.

 

The Joy AR fact check bonanza that happened the other day is the exception, not the rule, though it ought to be the rule.

 

Tony Podesta is already being paraded as the REAL story in conservative circles, between Uranium 1 and Steele Dossier funding stories.  He's being tied into his brother John though no evidence of John knowing anything has been presented.  And of course that goes back to the DNC and Hilary bc of course it does.

 

I want all the bad actors to be identified and punished appropriately, but the narrative game must be acknowledged.  There is zero chance the media can handle talking about Tony Podesta and Trump-Russia at the same time without devolving in falsehoods, inapprorpiate implications, and false equivalencies.

 

So while I hope people are brought to justice, I think Tony being out of the cycle somewhat is a positive thing for discourse in the US.  It limits the excesses of the narrative he would be tied into, somewhat.

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, tshile said:

To be fair you can't really contact anyone anymore with any level of expectation of privacy.

 

It's really only a question of whether it gets you put on a list for followup investigation or not.

 

 

So same as burner phones ? 

We lost privacy, and unfortunately don't want it back.

 

Had a friend tell me that he couldn't take pictures with folks for Halloween a few years back...he was in uniform. 

He wasn't drinking, he was just hanging out with the neighbors before his shift. 

Sad. 

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember liking Phares a while back before Iraq.  Then he spent the next few years obsessively talking about how close we were to finding WMDs in Iraq every time I saw him on tv   Judging by his comments about Trump and foreign policy the past year or so, he seems to have become much more of a hardliner and perhaps a bit crazy too.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by visionary
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DogofWar1 said:

The thing with the media really giving Tony Podesta airtime is that I seriously question the media's ability to appropriately put it in context.

 

More and more the media doesn't fact check, they just grab the two sides and let them present their opposing narratives and just sorta let it happen.

 

The Joy AR fact check bonanza that happened the other day is the exception, not the rule, though it ought to be the rule.

 

Tony Podesta is already being paraded as the REAL story in conservative circles, between Uranium 1 and Steele Dossier funding stories.  He's being tied into his brother John though no evidence of John knowing anything has been presented.  And of course that goes back to the DNC and Hilary bc of course it does.

 

I want all the bad actors to be identified and punished appropriately, but the narrative game must be acknowledged.  There is zero chance the media can handle talking about Tony Podesta and Trump-Russia at the same time without devolving in falsehoods, inapprorpiate implications, and false equivalencies.

 

So while I hope people are brought to justice, I think Tony being out of the cycle somewhat is a positive thing for discourse in the US.  It limits the excesses of the narrative he would be tied into, somewhat.

They jumped on the name Podesta but there is no evidence of anything. Its what the current media and political climate does.

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, BenningRoadSkin said:

They jumped on the name Podesta but there is no evidence of anything. Its what the current media and political climate does.

It sounds like a FARA violation, if anything.

 

I don't mean to diminish the importance of FARA violations, I think we're on the weak side of the curve with regards to those, but it seems as though he's once removed from Manafort's main efforts, which even then max out for Manafort at FARA violations and money laundering.  From a Times article on it, it appears he was done by 2014 with Manafort's clients, which really limits the scope of what they're being dragged into.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, AsburySkinsFan said:

Bet his confirmation hearing gets rescheduled.

Yeah, they'll move it up to the top of the list and have a midnight hearing/vote tomorrow night.

 

3 hours ago, AsburySkinsFan said:

You mean that I as a citizen cannot contact the Russian ambassador without a reasonable expectation of privacy?!

 

Stunner!!

IKR!! I was equally shocked to discover that you can't just walk into a Russian embassy without the FBI somehow getting wind of it. 

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DogofWar1 said:

...FARA violations, I think we're on the weak side of the curve with regards to those, but it seems as though he's once removed from Manafort's main efforts, 

 

At least once removed, right?  Ukraine -> Manafort -> Brussels based European Centre for a Modern Ukraine -> Podesta Group.

 

The Podestra Group retroactively submitted FARA paperwork, claiming they were unaware that the Brussels think tank was purportedly only a front group controlled by now-former Ukranian president Viktor Yanukovych.  I guess Mueller will see whether that claim holds up.  In any case, before Hannity and friends get too frothed up about Tony Podestra's involvement, I hope they keep in mind that they were essentially doing subcontract work for Paul Manafort.

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

I like the Honey Boo Boo reference.  I remember the first time I heard of that show and my wife explained to me what it was and how popular it was, I knew our nation was ****ed.

It was a few seasons in before someone told me about the show being here in GA. 

Needless to say, I was far from surprised.:ols:

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.

×
×
  • Create New...