Former President Donald J. Trump

[Thang-y]

Meanwhile, I found this enlightening about the problem of wiretapping

[PresMuffley]

Davey's favorite opinion journalist on the Democrats' abrupt policy shift regarding Russia:

https://theintercept.com/2017/03/06/democrats-now-demonize-the-same-russia-policies-that-obama-long-championed/

I'm going to have a look at the Politico piece he links to now. This made me laugh:

Say what you will about Politico, but one thing they are very adept at doing is giving voice to cowardly Washington insiders by accommodating their cowardice and thus routinely granting them anonymity to express themselves.

[Jimbo]

Meanwhile, I found this enlightening about the problem of wiretapping

Got it. Trump is a clown making assertions rather than charges that he was wiretapped by Obama. But apart from the topic of the video what struck me was the former intelligence guy's statement about my bugbear, the anti-Russia mania sweeping the nation. Note his non-specific wording. "We have Russian intervention in elections that my friends think is of serious concern, not for what happened in 2016 but for what happens in 2020." So, nothing happened in 2016 or if something did happen you are over it now? What about GUCIFER!!

[PresMuffley]

I'm not sure what was supposed to be enlightening about the CNN clip. Borger even admits they are at the bottom of the food chain.

[Thang-y]

I'm not sure what was supposed to be enlightening about the CNN clip. Borger even admits they are at the bottom of the food chain.

Well, the processes (checks) a president would have to go through to get a wire tap like that - and therefore the implications of Trump's wire tapping accusation and the reason for the strong resentment from quarters I'd not have realised for a start.

[PresMuffley]

Fair enough. I was mostly just taking a dig at CNN. It's hard to resist.

[Jimbo]

Wait, did not Snowden warn that the NSA records every phone call? So when Trump says "it's a fact" that his phone was tapped he's right. It is!

[harvey k-tel]

#MAGA: Millionaire Asshole Golfs Again

[Davey the Fat Boy]

Davey's favorite opinion journalist on the Democrats' abrupt policy shift regarding Russia:

https://theintercept.com/2017/03/06/democrats-now-demonize-the-same-russia-policies-that-obama-long-championed/

I'm going to have a look at the Politico piece he links to now. This made me laugh:

Say what you will about Politico, but one thing they are very adept at doing is giving voice to cowardly Washington insiders by accommodating their cowardice and thus routinely granting them anonymity to express themselves.

This article illustrates why I can't abide by the notion of Greenwald as some kind of super-joournalist worthy of more faith than other reporters.

He states that "Russian mania" has led Democrats to go beyond calling for investigations into issues surrounding the election. In his words, "It’s done far more than that: it’s turned them into increasingly maniacal and militaristic hawks – dangerous ones"

Then...he utter fails to offer up any examples, links or explanation for the above characterization, other than the presence of a few Democratic co-sponsors to a Lindsey Graham bill attempting to disallow Trump from dropping sanctions.

Indeed - this article starts from the false premise that Democrats were upset with the substance of the changes Trump made to the GOP's platform. He offers no proof of that claim - he just asserts it. Most Democrats I know simply view the presence of pro-Russia platform changes as suspicious given the appearance of some kind of Russian/Trump alliance. I've not heard one person attack the platform change itself - but Greenwald says we do, so I'm sure that settles it.

He then moves into a long mid-section in which he imagines a recent shift in mainstream Democratic sentiments towards arming Ukraine - which he contrasts to the Obama policy on Ukraine. But again...he leaves out any evidence of this supposedly widespread opinion that I've never heard voiced. Eventually he gets to his only supporting link...a poll showing that Dems now see Russia as a bigger threat than they used to. Imagine that!!

It's an incredibly lazy and manipulative piece.

[Jimbo]

One reason Hillary lost to the MORON is that she said Putin was the new Hitler and Trump said he wanted to be friends. A little positivity paid off.

[Davey the Fat Boy]

One reason Hillary lost to the MORON is that she said Putin was the new Hitler and Trump said he wanted to be friends. A little positivity paid off.

Right. Trump was soooo positive .

There aren't enough eye-rolling emotions.

[sloopjohnc]

One reason Hillary lost to the MORON is that she said Putin was the new Hitler and Trump said he wanted to be friends. A little positivity paid off.

Did you eat some bad puffer fish or something?

I don't know any American, much less Republicans or conservatives, who would want to be friends with Russians.

[Jimbo]

Davey, Can't locate your quote where you said you'd rather believe the 16 security agencies re Russia over other opinions. I clipped this bit from a recent Robert Parry article about "phone tapp gate."

In the case of the Russia investigation, the opening salvos came from President Obama’s intelligence agencies, which alleged that Russia had “hacked” Democratic emails and slipped the contents to WikiLeaks, but the agencies offered nothing in the way of U.S. government evidence to support that supposition...The Jan. 6 report, issued by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, admitted as much, saying, “Judgments are not intended to imply that we have proof that shows something to be a fact. Assessments are based on collected information, which is often incomplete or fragmentary, as well as logic, argumentation, and precedents.”

I recommend the Parry article. https://consortiumnews.com/2017/03/06/o ... ent-248254

[Davey the Fat Boy]

Parry's argument is a non-starter.

The fact that our intelligence agencies have offered no concrete evidence is not a signal that they have none. They often can't reveal the basis It’s done far more than that: it’s turned them into increasingly maniacal and militaristic hawks – dangerous ones their findings without compromising the systems (and people) who provided them.

So to assert that there shouldn't be an investigation without first having the presentation of evidence is completely irresponsible. There needs to be an investigation so that congress can see the information that the intelligence community has based its statements on and then come to a conclusion (if a non-partisan conclusion is even possible).

Regardless - Parry is full of shit and ought to be ignored.

[Jimbo]

Regardless - Parry is full of shit and ought to be ignored.

Speaking of ignore. Bu-bye Davey.

[PresMuffley]

This article illustrates why I can't abide by the notion of Greenwald as some kind of super-joournalist worthy of more faith than other reporters.

He states that "Russian mania" has led Democrats to go beyond calling for investigations into issues surrounding the election. In his words, "It’s done far more than that: it’s turned them into increasingly maniacal and militaristic hawks – dangerous ones"

Then...he utter fails to offer up any examples, links or explanation for the above characterization, other than the presence of a few Democratic co-sponsors to a Lindsey Graham bill attempting to disallow Trump from dropping sanctions.

Indeed - this article starts from the false premise that Democrats were upset with the substance of the changes Trump made to the GOP's platform. He offers no proof of that claim - he just asserts it. Most Democrats I know simply view the presence of pro-Russia platform changes as suspicious given the appearance of some kind of Russian/Trump alliance. I've not heard one person attack the platform change itself - but Greenwald says we do, so I'm sure that settles it.

He then moves into a long mid-section in which he imagines a recent shift in mainstream Democratic sentiments towards arming Ukraine - which he contrasts to the Obama policy on Ukraine. But again...he leaves out any evidence of this supposedly widespread opinion that I've never heard voiced. Eventually he gets to his only supporting link...a poll showing that Dems now see Russia as a bigger threat than they used to. Imagine that!!

It's an incredibly lazy and manipulative piece.

You say the article starts with a false premise but he links to Ben Cardin's July letter published in the Times expressing concern with the platform change. Glasser's piece in Politico is key here, and much of what Glenn is doing is simply riffing on it. The point seems to be that this anti-Russia sentiment was there all-along beneath the surface in Obama's administration but he was able to keep it in check. So it's not so much a change in philosophy by the Democrats, but a bubbling up to the surface of long-held views.

[Davey the Fat Boy]

Greenwald's argument is that Democrats are castigating Trump for continuing Obama's policies. But Cardin was correct in his statement, as Obama had sanctioned Russia over its Ukraine aggression. The election-related sanctions were actually an extension of the deadline on the Ukraine sanctions.

So again...Greenwald's argument starts from a false premise.

[Davey the Fat Boy]

Regardless - Parry is full of shit and ought to be ignored.

Speaking of ignore. Bu-bye Davey.

I'm crushed.

[naughty boy]

How many have you got on ignore now, Jimbs?

[PresMuffley]

Greenwald's argument is that Democrats are castigating Trump for continuing Obama's policies. But Cardin was correct in his statement, as Obama had sanctioned Russia over its Ukraine aggression. The election-related sanctions were actually an extension of the deadline on the Ukraine sanctions.

So again...Greenwald's argument starts from a false premise.

Cardin's letter doesn't even mention sanctions - it's more of a straight slander job, really, - but from what I gathered the so-called 'Foreign Policy Elite' were in favor of a more interventionist approach, which is to say, sanctions were never enough for them. Like I said, the piece ties together better if you read the Politico article.