^

Quote :

"Sanders said that the two leaders discussed whether the administration would allow former White House counsel Don McGahn to testify before Congress as Democrats ramp up their oversight investigations into the administration. McGahn was a key witness in one of the 10 episodes of potential obstruction of justice by Trump Mueller outlined in the report."

Not much shocks me about Trump anymore, but my mouth fell open on this paragraph.

Completely fucking insane where we’re at in this country right now.

5/3/2019 1:40:09 PM

they just don't even give a fuck about it anymore because they've already won, there is no oversight or consequences


also lol at the russia thing being both a hoax and also obama's fault for letting it happen

[Edited on May 3, 2019 at 1:49 PM. Reason : .]

5/3/2019 1:47:48 PM

^^ as I suspected it was a mistake by nbc. That didn’t happen.

But he didn’t bring up interference again which the Mueller report detailed extensively. Is the president a Seth Rich truther?

5/3/2019 2:44:49 PM

Week 4 of criminal President getting his corrupt attorney general to lie to the Americans people about a special counsel investigation with zero actual consequences

5/3/2019 9:55:17 PM

Quote :

"it's because they have been so radicalized by conservative media, conservative talk radio, their insular conservative social media, and other forms of propaganda that they think anything is okay as long as it keeps democrats out of office. Receiving and using information from Russia - okay, Russia interfering in our election - okay, disenfranchising voters - okay, obstruction justice - okay, perjury - okay... they have been radicalized to believe that the threat that democrats pose is so great that it is better to destroy everything than let democrats control the government. "

dtownral says loads of stupendously silly shit, but nobody could be more spot on than with this comment.

5/3/2019 11:56:25 PM

wait aren't you the guy who said you'd prefer Trump over any of the leftist candidates? are you counting yourself in that radicalized group?

5/4/2019 12:03:56 AM

I don't know if I'd prefer him in the sense that I think he's any less horrible. I think they all pretty much max the scale. I think Trump is easily, by a wide margin, the worst President in modern American history, and on the short list of worst ever.

I would still probably rather see Trump re-elected than any of the leftist candidates for a few reasons, regardless of any preference (or lack thereof) between them:

-At least he's incompetent. It's a sad state of affairs when this is a selling point for President of the United States, but for all of his mind-bendingly dumb ideas, at least he's incapable and in many cases disinterested in doing what is needed to actually accomplish those things.

-i expect that to the extent he can accomplish his idiotic ideas, he has already done much of the damage that he can do. Electing one of the leftist candidates would open us up to a whole new slate of fresh dumbassery.

-It would discourage the Dems from continuing this shift to the left and tolerating their analog to the right's Tea Partiers.

[Edited on May 4, 2019 at 5:00 PM. Reason : ]

5/4/2019 4:59:17 PM

Jesus, that's fucking sad.

5/4/2019 7:19:27 PM

Who are these leftist candidates running??!?

If I wasn’t an idiot I’d assume the entire race was filled with abunch of Stalinists.

5/5/2019 8:06:43 AM

^^^ What about the Trump admin’s handling of security clearances and classified information?

Weren’t you saying in another thread that you thought Hilary’s emails should possibly be revisited and she should probably be punished based off what we currently know about the whole debacle?

But you don’t seem to mind what many have indicated is the loosest info security environment a Whitehouse has ever had? This is at least one place where their incompetence must be disqualifying for you?

5/5/2019 10:06:45 AM

I would absolutely 100% consider TheDuke among the radicalized, he's a great example of people who think they are moderate because they aren't as extreme as the bat shit crazy element, but who are actually okay with everything and dont really want substantive changes they just want the people in power to pretend to be grown ups

5/5/2019 11:25:09 AM

^^ I don’t think anything with HRC should be revisited at this point. Her gross mishandling of classified material of classified material should have been disqualifying, but Trump had many reasons he should have been much more disqualified. Hell, he’s probably more worthy of disqualification at this point just based on security protocol alone.

I’m not gonna vote for the fucking guy; I think he is a grave threat to our standing as a nation. Left to his own devices, probably an existential threat. I’m just saying that I’d probably rather him be re-elected than the hard-left crowd on the other side, for the aforementioned reasons. It is possible that I could find him even more loathsome than some of them (I haven’t really given that hard though, as it’s not consequential)—I could hate him even more, yet still prefer him to win.

In the end, whatever. Either we’ll unfuck ourselves or not, and if we go down the drain, I’ll just expatriate.

[Edited on May 6, 2019 at 12:02 AM. Reason : ^ that is absurd]

[Edited on May 6, 2019 at 12:02 AM. Reason : I’m like...Jon Huntsman, that ol’ firebrand radical.]

5/6/2019 12:01:38 AM

Tulsi Gabbard is the closest thing the Democrats have to a tea party

Bernie’s craziest idea is Medicare for all, his trade ideas are basically gop at this point

Yang has basic income paid for with a VAT, probably the most extreme economic policy

Warren wants a 2% property tax on net worth over $50 million

I don’t see how any of this is less preferable to trade wars on top of trade wars with nebulous victory conditions, a foreign policy that seems to entirely be based on heaping praise personally on world leaders assuming they’re all as narcissistic and shallow as trump, and a domestic policy that’s basically white nationalism.

5/6/2019 2:24:58 AM

You’re missing the point. He could be worse, and I think it might still be better for him to win.

5/6/2019 8:05:55 AM

that's because you've been radicalized to believe that sensible, non-radical, only slightly left of center ideas are some kind of huge socialist threat

5/6/2019 8:35:15 AM

Quote :

"Her gross mishandling of classified material of classified material should have been disqualifying"

Are you referencing anything other than private server use? If not, then I'd have to challenge you here. Private server use is actually pretty common- hell Trump's own administration has done it and the Bush administration had a hell of a time with it. I know two wrongs don't make a right, but that isn't the point. My point is a de facto standard exists and should be the point of reference.

Quote :

"I’ll just expatriate"

To where, exactly? Most countries you'd probably consider are decidingly more leftist than we are.

Quote :

"I would absolutely 100% consider TheDuke among the radicalized, he's a great example of people who think they are moderate because they aren't as extreme as the bat shit crazy element,"

I'd have to agree here. I had been starting to think otherwise, but the posts above are a strong indicator that dtownral is correct. He reminds me of my buddy in SC, who thinks he is a moderate or independent and that I'm a liberal. Meanwhile, he's never voted for anyone other than a republican, assumes the worst republican is better than the best of democrats, and switches his 'convictions' based on whatever the republican talking point is at the time. Yet, he is adamant that he's independent and that I'm a liberal, even though I have voted for reps, dems, and libertarians across all 3 branches of government and across state and federal.

These people just fail to understand that being the least rabid of your conservative cohort is not enough to make you an independent.

[Edited on May 6, 2019 at 8:58 AM. Reason : /]

5/6/2019 8:58:22 AM

so I know that typically a contempt of congress charge would be referred to the US attorney, but they do still have the power to have the Sergeant at Arms deputize some people and go arrest someone, right?

i posted a link related but can't find it

5/6/2019 1:21:39 PM

They do

5/6/2019 2:16:42 PM

https://twitter.com/jeremyherb/status/1125514607328677889?s=21

Start with contempt for this asshole. Democrats are way too fucking weak-spined to do a god damn thing despite this admin shitting down their throats every day.

Maybe Chuck can send another tweet supporting his trade war tonight.

[Edited on May 6, 2019 at 5:40 PM. Reason : X]

5/6/2019 5:40:09 PM

Quote :

"Are you referencing anything other than private server use? If not, then I'd have to challenge you here. Private server use is actually pretty common- hell Trump's own administration has done it and the Bush administration had a hell of a time with it. I know two wrongs don't make a right, but that isn't the point. My point is a de facto standard exists and should be the point of reference. "

Concur, that's not good, but she is in the company of many, many others there. I don't know that the de facto standard should be the point of reference, but nobody should look to crucify HRC over that while overlooking the many who have done the same.

No, I'm talking about the transmission of classified material, to include TS, across unclassified mediums.

Quote :

"To where, exactly? Most countries you'd probably consider are decidingly more leftist than we are. "

Maybe Switzerland, or some island somewhere...or maybe I'd keep my citizenship, buy a big sailing yacht, and spend 183 days per year in Puerto Rico, paying zero federal income tax.

Quote :

"These people just fail to understand that being the least rabid of your conservative cohort is not enough to make you an independent. "

I, too, have voted for a mix at every level. In fact, I voted for substantially more Democrats than Republicans last time. I think something like 3x as many Ds as I did Rs.


Either you guys massively misunderstand my political stances, or you are complete fucking wingnuts.

5/8/2019 12:35:04 AM

Quote :

"Either you guys massively misunderstand my political stances, or you are complete fucking wingnuts"

Or you have said you on multiple occasions that you would prefer four more years of Trump instead of Sanders or Warren.

You say it's because you don't think Trump can implement his stupid and self-serving policies, which is categorically false, but I figure it's because you don't mind his stupid policies because you're a fan of his economic policies (yay money in your pocket) and judicial appointments, like any reasonable Republican. But to value that over the damage he's doing to our country on the world stage in favor of his isolationist world view while championing enemy/all dictators is pretty terrible. The man is a lunatic, and is not fit for any office. It was a scary social media/Russian Goverment-fueled abnormality that propelled him into office, and now you wish that geopolitical trainwreck to continue.

5/8/2019 1:26:20 AM

I thought Gorsuch was a pretty decent pick, even if I disagreed with the Senate tactics that opened that door to begin with. Kavanaugh, I opposed, for multiple reasons.

Extra money in my pocket is good, and I like tax cuts and some deregulation, although he has implemented some really dumb deregulation, and I thought the tax cuts were at a minimum, badly timed from an economic perspective, and poorly conceived in some ways.

He is indeed a lunatic, unfit for any office, an embarrassment to America, a horrifically destructive force, and maybe even an existential threat to our standing in the world if he were actually left to his own devices. I don't think he is incapable of ever implementing anything, but he's certainly self-sabotaging, ignorant of process, and lazy. He would doubtlessly do more damage in 4 more years, but at least he'd be term limited--one of the hard left candidates could have 8 years to introduce myriad destruction--and I expect that after one term, Trump would have already done, I don't know, maybe 80% of the damage he could do over two full terms. I guess I'd prefer the devil I know, who will have run his course to some extent.

Rarely does one party keep power for 3-4 successive terms. If, faced with anathema on the left, we endure a few more years of anathema from the right, at least then we'd be well primed for a President from a well-chastened Democratic Party.

It is a shit-sandwich for the history books. I'm crossing my fingers for Biden to succeed and to not adopt any deal-breaking policy positions. While I disagree with him on many things and under normal circumstances would not choose him as my candidate, as of right now I'd eagerly vote for him. He would represent a punt, a sort of tactical pause for the country, to buy us 4-8 years to regroup and try not to fuck everything up so hard next time.

Quote :

"I would absolutely 100% consider TheDuke among the radicalized, he's a great example of people who think they are moderate because they aren't as extreme as the bat shit crazy element, but who are actually okay with everything and dont really want substantive changes "

OK with everything and don't want substantive changes? Yes, those are hallmarks of radicals.

5/8/2019 12:18:28 PM

Quote :

"or maybe I'd keep my citizenship, buy a big sailing yacht, and spend 183 days per year in Puerto Rico, paying zero federal income tax."

I don't know the laws well enough or how tongue in cheek this is but I hope you try to absentee vote and get prosecuted for voter or tax fraud.

Quote :

"Either you guys massively misunderstand my political stances, or you are complete fucking wingnuts."

Maybe I've missed something but I feel like I'm on this board and have repeatedly seen people (including me) ask what is dangerous about these "far left" candidates and you rarely give any substantial answers. So if people misunderstood your stances, explain them. What would Sanders or Warren do that would destroy the country?

5/8/2019 12:38:48 PM

Quote :

"one of the hard left candidates could have 8 years to introduce myriad destruction"

Like what? What's going to make it through congress and the courts that concerns you to the point where you would prefer Trump get reelected? We keep asking these questions and you never have answers.

Quote :

"maybe even an existential threat to our standing in the world"

There ain't no maybe about it. Our standing in the world has already suffered. When you start pulling out of multi-national efforts and the China steps in to fill the void the damage is done. When you lay down in front of/celebrate enemy dictators like Putin and Kim Jong-un while turning your back on traditional allies the damage is done.

Quote :

"an embarrassment to America"

That's the least of my concerns.

Quote :

"Trump would have already done, I don't know, maybe 80% of the damage he could do over two full terms"

lol ok buddy. keep telling yourself that.

5/8/2019 1:07:29 PM

He keeps clarifying that he has absolutely been radicalized

5/8/2019 1:44:12 PM

Quote :

"There ain't no maybe about it."

I meant long-term and chronic, not immediate and acute.

Quote :

"I don't know the laws well enough or how tongue in cheek this is but I hope you try to absentee vote and get prosecuted for voter or tax fraud."

Not tongue-in-cheek at all. If you meet certain provisions, you can retain US citizenship and pay no federal income taxes in Puerto Rico. There are lots of traders and science/engineering types down there doing just that.

5/8/2019 4:59:36 PM

The Senate Intelligence Committee has subpoenaed Trump Jr.

Question for everyone - If you were Trump Jr. What would you do? I think I would just not show up, totally ignore it.

5/8/2019 5:31:28 PM

^^ so still nothing to address this?

Quote :

"Like what? What's going to make it through congress and the courts that concerns you to the point where you would prefer Trump get reelected? "

5/8/2019 6:32:23 PM

House Judiciary voted to hold AG Barr in contempt, they need to stop fucking around and just arrest him

5/8/2019 7:37:27 PM

Can they?

I mean if Trump tells them they can't (which he will), then what?

This whole thing is so fucking absurd. We live in a banana republic and nobody gives a fuck and if they do, they're too chicken shit to actually stand up and do anything about it.

5/8/2019 7:43:26 PM

They can

[Edited on May 9, 2019 at 5:29 AM. Reason : They wont but they have that power and can]

5/9/2019 5:29:32 AM

this barr stuff reminds of when the ATF got caught giving 2k guns to drug cartels in mexico and obama admin tried to cover it up. eric holder was also held in contempt. good times

[Edited on May 9, 2019 at 7:13 AM. Reason : s]

5/9/2019 7:04:29 AM

Which is great justification for why they need to stop fucking around and actually arrest AG Barr and not just refer to the justice department -- the case against holder basically died in court and was only finally settled now. It's a pointless excercise if you're not going to send the house sergeant at arms.

5/9/2019 7:56:02 AM

Quote :

"one of the hard left candidates could have 8 years to introduce myriad destruction-"

Quote :

"I expect that after one term, Trump would have already done, I don't know, maybe 80% of the damage he could do over two full terms."

This doesn't jive for me. So a left candidate could do a lot of damage in two terms but Trump is only capable of doing damage in one term? I'm not sure how you'd arrive at that conclusion, if that is your position. I could conclude he'd even be worse in term 2 if he doesn't need to try to be reelected, less fear of impeachment, and would have made it through the gauntlet that made his first term hell and tempered. Even more so now that he has weeded out most of the adults in the room.

Quote :

"While I disagree with him on many things and under normal circumstances would not choose him as my candidate, as of right now I'd eagerly vote for him."

Duke deserves some acknowledgement for this comment. He is coming out and saying there are dems he would vote for over Trump. While I'd vote for any dem over Trump, and, shit, most republicans, unless we're discussing Cruz or Pence, I do not think it is fair to expect everyone to hold that position.

5/9/2019 10:15:11 AM

If I were Jr. I certainly wouldn't show up. This admin has gotten away with everything thus far, why cooperate now?

If Trump wins 2020, things will definitely get worse. He will feel even more vindicated and invincible. If he loses, I honestly don't think he will peacefully transfer power. we are headed for a constitutional crisis no matter what(if we arent there already).

5/9/2019 10:31:47 AM

Quote :

"If I were Jr. I certainly wouldn't show up. This admin has gotten away with everything thus far, why cooperate now? "

+1

5/9/2019 11:34:30 AM

Quote :

"this barr stuff reminds of when the ATF got caught giving 2k guns to drug cartels in mexico and obama admin tried to cover it up. eric holder was also held in contempt. good times"

There’s more than a few similarities except the crimes Barr is trying to bury are drastically more severe

5/9/2019 12:40:09 PM

i mean what's even the point of bringing up holder? we held an AG in contempt so how dare you for holding an AG in contempt? Are they pointing out that there are basically no consequences for being held in contempt outside of a protracted civil lawsuit that will be settled out of court some years later? And is that supposed to be an argument in favor of or against holding Barr in contempt? I mean outside of the obvious whataboutism, do they even think they are making a point or did their thinking end at whataboutism?

5/9/2019 1:00:38 PM

Any bets on who the person "connected to Congress" is?

I'd put money on Graham. I'd love for it to be McConnell but he's probably too smart to get involved.

5/16/2019 10:06:21 PM

graham was notoriously anti-trump for the first part of the presidency, how did he let himself get caught up in this? I'd think Graham in general would know better

Nunes to me seems dumb enough and corrupt enough too.

5/17/2019 12:16:28 AM

Forgot about Nunes.

Graham is following the base to win re-election in South Carolina.

5/17/2019 1:00:22 AM

^ this.

Lindsey Graham is best explained as being a soulless, power hungry hack. It’s not extortion and it’s not some sexual deviance. It’s literally base politics and fighting off a primary.

He’s not go moral compass and no ethics aside from “win.” Nothing more sinister.

(Trump throwing around treason and long jail sentences this AM again)

*** also, why didn’t the Flynn stuff make it into the Mueller report and what is he still helping on?

[Edited on May 17, 2019 at 7:30 AM. Reason : D]

5/17/2019 7:17:46 AM

There are still 12 ongoing investigations that have not been made public, that's the reason for some of the redactions

5/17/2019 7:41:09 AM

^^^^^ fucking gaetz. Arguably this biggest dipshit on Capitol Hill.

Sounds like Flynn was just as involved, not just a reformed traitor who was suffering from pressure by those dastardly Congressmen.

5/18/2019 9:17:19 AM

Quote :

"Lindsey Graham is best explained as being a soulless, power hungry hack. It’s not extortion and it’s not some sexual deviance. It’s literally base politics and fighting off a primary."

Yup. I've spent lots of time in DC in various capacities and the cheat sheet is that every member of congress wants to remain being a member of congress, and that desire to remain in power motivates nearly all their decisions.

[Edited on May 19, 2019 at 3:14 AM. Reason : I'm not sure if term limits is a complete solution to that problem but it's probably a damn good start.]

5/19/2019 3:12:20 AM

Mueller to make a statement at 11am?

He’s speaking via the DOJ, so who the fuck knows what he’s gonna say.

5/29/2019 9:44:46 AM

It’s gonna be to knock down the absurd Michael Wolff nonsense that no one took serious anyway I bet. Possibly to explain why he isn’t testifying publicly too.

5/29/2019 9:57:26 AM

because he's a product of another era, if we had a remotely functional congress private testimony could be good to avoid any appearances of partisanship

5/29/2019 10:18:37 AM

mueller: to clarify, we aren't allowed to accuse the president of committing a crime because of justice department policy, but we definitely didn't say he didn't commit a crime. read the fucking report. also it's not the justice department's job to accuse the president of a crime, the constitution outlines how that happens (hint hint congress)\

or the tl;dr version: fucking impeach him, i spelled it out for you

[Edited on May 29, 2019 at 11:11 AM. Reason : .]

5/29/2019 11:10:13 AM

lol https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1133752532201889792

I found it noteworthy that out of a 448-page report, Robert Mueller chose to emphasize the facts that there was insufficient evidence to charge the Trump campaign with overall conspiracy, that the report would have stated that Donald Trump had not obstructed justice had the report been able to confidently have done so and that the DOJ was incapable of charging the president with obstruction due to internal DOJ policy.

[Edited on May 29, 2019 at 11:24 AM. Reason : ]

5/29/2019 11:14:06 AM