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
7 minutes ago, Popeman38 said:

Only 3 hours though. His work ethic and hours are legendary. 

 

I could live with that. I kinda think a very smart, driven professional known for integrity ought to be the type of person we look for as a leader, but what do I know?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Popeman38

Popeman38

Posted
Posted (edited)
18 minutes ago, LD0506 said:

 

I could live with that. I kinda think a very smart, driven professional known for integrity ought to be the type of person we look for as a leader, but what do I know?

You are just a silly man trying to find truth in Washington. 

 

(Read in sarcasm font)

Edited by Popeman38
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skinny21

skinny21

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Popeman38 said:

Only 3 hours though. His work ethic and hours are legendary. 

I'd be comfortable sleeping through a generous chunk of his 21 hr days. 

 

Also, there's plenty of truth coming out of Washington in the way of facts.  Of course you usually have to winnow out the spin they're often wrapped in.  

 

I'll add that there's credibility in much of the press... a crap ton more than anyone in this administration (outside the rare few like Mattis).  I put a fair amount of stock in some of the papers (not many of the cable shows) in terms well researched articles.  

 

I think the war on the press is a serious net negative, even if this... situation...is causing some to evaluate/better their practices. 

Edited by skinny21
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jumbo

Jumbo

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Both sides on the house intel committee have strong partisan agendas driving what they want to focus on, obviously. That alone, as has been demonstrated, is not inherently crippling. It just has to be navigated properly via "equal time", even if it's contentious at times. That's pretty much business as usual on many such matters., But I see Nunes as seriously compromised. I wonder if he told his fellow committee members he was doing that presser this a.m. 

 

I know the obvious call on Manafort volunteering to appear before the committee is that it's a strategic move with his lawyers knowing now a subpoena is inevitable, but I also note how quickly this dramatic move follows Nunes' trip to spill the beans to one of the principles being investigated--and regarding material he still can't/hasn't been able so show his fellow committee members which is just a tad sketchy.

 

Nunes' ties to the campaign as a happy trumpy booster also go way back. I'm not claiming he has some conspiracy connection with manafort et al, just think it's relevant that nunes has been a trump booster for that long and definitely does not want to see a gop hold on the government slip away or be too weakened. Nunes has very low cred in my book right now, even considering how low that bar is set for most congresspeople.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry

Larry

Posted
Posted

Yeah, some of what I'm reading about what's going on, is insane enough to make me wonder if I'm reading a conspiracy theory web site.  

 

I mean, what it sounds like is that the guy who's nominally in charge of investigating something, has been handed evidence in the case, and hiw reaction is "OK, first thing I'm going to do, is to run over to the people I'm investigating, and tell them exectly what evidence there is, about them.  Then I'm going to call a press conference, so I can announce that the evidence says the exact opposite of what it actually says.  Oh, and make sure not to tell the Democrats on my committee what the evidence is (even though they are specifically given blanket access to everything), because letting them see it will make it harder for me to **** with it."  

 

And a good chunk of the audience cheers this performance.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
visionary

visionary

Posted
Posted (edited)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wtf, I can't even....

 

I seem to recall Nunes going on about how badly Flynn was slandered and beat up by the media.

 

 

Is Trump world expecting him to say something damaging to the FBI?

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

twa

Posted
Posted

From what I've read there is no evidence, or just circumstantial evidence, of the Trump campaign colluding with the Russians despite surveillance and investigation.

On the other hand there seems real evidence of unmasking of people under NSA surveillance (a felony) and the use of that surveillance for political purpose.

 

Where's my popcorn?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Llevron

Llevron

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, twa said:

From what I've read there is no evidence, or just circumstantial evidence, of the Trump campaign colluding with the Russians despite surveillance and investigation.

On the other hand there seems real evidence of unmasking of people under NSA surveillance (a felony) and the use of that surveillance for political purpose.

 

Where's my popcorn?

 

 

 

Crazy how you did that 

  • Like 2
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...