Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating

     

Left Nav S-B Home Register FAQ Members List S-B on Facebook Arcade WEAX Tides Buoys Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Right Nav

Left Container Right Container
 

Go Back   Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating » Striper Chat - Discuss stuff other than fishing ~ The Scuppers and Political talk » Political Threads

Political Threads This section is for Political Threads - Enter at your own risk. If you say you don't want to see what someone posts - don't read it :hihi:

 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 02-15-2022, 11:17 AM   #121
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottw View Post
have to pivot to trump. We’re not allowed to talk about things that are unflattering to the left.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 02-15-2022, 12:11 PM   #122
Pete F.
Canceled
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,067
What you shouldn’t do is blindly repeat blatant lies
Re: this Durham "scandal." It's sad to see people freak out who dont know difference between lawful, standard DNS mining like here) versus illegal (and here nonexistent) server hacking, nor do they know DNS mining has been reported repeatedly for 5 years.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Pete F. is offline  
Old 02-15-2022, 12:16 PM   #123
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F. View Post
What you shouldn’t do is blindly repeat blatant lies
Re: this Durham "scandal." It's sad to see people freak out who dont know difference between lawful, standard DNS mining like here) versus illegal (and here nonexistent) server hacking, nor do they know DNS mining has been reported repeatedly for 5 years.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
is it legal for a private person ( say, someone on hilarys campaign staff) to hire technical
experts to hack into trump’s campaign servers, without his permission?

Then spreading BS. about russian collision to the media, all of whom acted as it were verifiably true? is that ethical?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 02-15-2022, 12:31 PM   #124
Slipknot
Super Moderator
iTrader: (0)
 
Slipknot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Middleboro MA
Posts: 17,119
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso View Post
Makes me wonder who will end up dead by suicide soon

Can’t you find anything new

Isn’t Trump on your pedestal

I don’t recall seeing your views of Jan6th or Trump and his people’s involvement in overturning our election
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
I don't put anyone on a pedestal so correct, Trump isn't on my pedestal. I prefered him over the alternative and my life was easier those 4 years as was many Americans especially economically and having a strong president as opposed to weak. I give regard to someone like Rand Paul and Trump isn't in my list.

You don't recall seeing my view on the Fedsurrection on Jan 4th last year because I didn't give it. This thread is about Durham report. There wasn't any election overturned on Jan. 4th as you stated so I shouldn't even respond to your comment.

The United States Constitution does not exist to grant you rights; those rights are inherent within you. Rather it exists to frame a limited government so that those natural rights can be exercised freely.

1984 was a warning, not a guidebook!

It's time more people spoke up with the truth. Every time we let a leftist lie go uncorrected, the commies get stronger.
Slipknot is offline  
Old 02-15-2022, 12:55 PM   #125
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
and pete, nothing from
the Durham investigation has been leaked.

yet somehow you know what’s in there, and shockingly, you know that nothing in there makes democrats look bad.

let’s just wait and see what happens. i didn’t even know he was still
investigating, it’s ben so long since we heard anything.

Durham is the guy who they sent in to clean up the Boston Justice department when Whitey Bulger was bribing so many of them. Robert Mueller was the US attorney in boston at the time, and he couldn’t get it done. They sent Durham
in there to clean it up.

He’s earned some trust.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 02-15-2022, 04:50 PM   #126
wdmso
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Somerset MA
Posts: 9,097
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slipknot View Post
I don't put anyone on a pedestal so correct, Trump isn't on my pedestal. I prefered him over the alternative and my life was easier those 4 years as was many Americans especially economically and having a strong president as opposed to weak. I give regard to someone like Rand Paul and Trump isn't in my list.

You don't recall seeing my view on the Fedsurrection on Jan 4th last year because I didn't give it. This thread is about Durham report. There wasn't any election overturned on Jan. 4th as you stated so I shouldn't even respond to your comment.
So You prefer a Strong man who attempted to over throw an election

Your right there’s nothing left to say .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
wdmso is offline  
Old 02-15-2022, 04:59 PM   #127
wdmso
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Somerset MA
Posts: 9,097
A Washington attorney charged as part of the Justice Department's investigation into the origins of the Trump-Russia probe is accusing prosecutors of trying to politicize the case and gin up negative press coverage.

The allegations came in a court filing late Monday from Michael Sussmann, a former prosecutor who worked at a law firm with longstanding ties to the Democratic Party.

The latest public flare-up in the investigation stems from a court filing Durham submitted Friday about potential conflicts of interest in Sussmann's case.

Funny the guy who mined the data, Durham does not accuse Joffe of wrongdoing, and Joffe has not been charged with a crime.

Still, Trump and his allies seized on the Friday filing and created a storm in conservative media.

But but Hillary
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
wdmso is offline  
Old 02-15-2022, 05:32 PM   #128
detbuch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,688
detbuch is offline  
Old 02-15-2022, 06:00 PM   #129
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso View Post
A Washington attorney charged as part of the Justice Department's investigation into the origins of the Trump-Russia probe is accusing prosecutors of trying to politicize the case and gin up negative press coverage.

The allegations came in a court filing late Monday from Michael Sussmann, a former prosecutor who worked at a law firm with longstanding ties to the Democratic Party.

The latest public flare-up in the investigation stems from a court filing Durham submitted Friday about potential conflicts of interest in Sussmann's case.

Funny the guy who mined the data, Durham does not accuse Joffe of wrongdoing, and Joffe has not been charged with a crime.

Still, Trump and his allies seized on the Friday filing and created a storm in conservative media.

But but Hillary
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
"But but Hillary"

So it's OK, when people are criticizing Biden, when you pivot to Trump, which you do constantly.

But it's foolish when anyone else does the same thing.

Are you saying there's no value in letting Durham finish his investigation? Seems like you're afraid of what he might find? SO far it's been a huge nothingburger.

Do you even understand Sussmans attempt is here, or did you post the first thing you could find that was critical of Durham? Sussman has been indicted for lying. But you take it for granted that everything he say has merit, because he worked for Hilary.
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 02-15-2022, 06:27 PM   #130
Pete F.
Canceled
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,067
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
is it legal for a private person ( say, someone on hilarys campaign staff) to hire technical
experts to hack into trump’s campaign servers, without his permission?

Then spreading BS. about russian collision to the media, all of whom acted as it were verifiably true? is that ethical?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Where’s it alleged by Durham that someone hacked into the Trump campaign servers?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Frasier: Niles, I’ve just had the most marvelous idea for a website! People will post their opinions, cheeky bon mots, and insights, and others will reply in kind!

Niles: You have met “people”, haven’t you?

Lets Go Darwin
Pete F. is offline  
Old 02-15-2022, 06:31 PM   #131
Pete F.
Canceled
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,067
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
"But but Hillary"

So it's OK, when people are criticizing Biden, when you pivot to Trump, which you do constantly.

But it's foolish when anyone else does the same thing.

Are you saying there's no value in letting Durham finish his investigation? Seems like you're afraid of what he might find? SO far it's been a huge nothingburger.

Do you even understand Sussmans attempt is here, or did you post the first thing you could find that was critical of Durham? Sussman has been indicted for lying. But you take it for granted that everything he say has merit, because he worked for Hilary.
Durham is claiming that Sussman is lying based on a person who’s story has changed numerous times

Thursday, Durham will officially have been investigating the Russian investigation 50% longer than the entire Mueller investigation.

Apparently it’s harder to hunt bitches than witches
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Frasier: Niles, I’ve just had the most marvelous idea for a website! People will post their opinions, cheeky bon mots, and insights, and others will reply in kind!

Niles: You have met “people”, haven’t you?

Lets Go Darwin
Pete F. is offline  
Old 02-15-2022, 06:42 PM   #132
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F. View Post
Where’s it alleged by Durham that someone hacked into the Trump campaign servers?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
durhams probe “revealed over the weekend” ( whatever that means) that Hilary staffers hired techs to hack into servers at Trump before he was elected, then at the white house after he was elected.

If it’s true, that’s not a nothingburger.

It means Trump
was 100% correct when he said hilary was spying on him. And everyone, including me, said he was a paranoid lunatic to say that. looks like he was 100% correct.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/rep...house-majority
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 02-15-2022, 06:43 PM   #133
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F. View Post
Durham is claiming that Sussman is lying based on a person who’s story has changed numerous times

Thursday, Durham will officially have been investigating the Russian investigation 50% longer than the entire Mueller investigation.

Apparently it’s harder to hunt bitches than witches
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Muellers probe turned up zilch. Let’s see what Durhams turns up.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 02-15-2022, 08:09 PM   #134
Pete F.
Canceled
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,067
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
Muellers probe turned up zilch. Let’s see what Durhams turns up.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Zilch?
The investigation produced 37 indictments; seven guilty pleas or convictions; and compelling evidence that the president obstructed justice on multiple occasions. Mueller also uncovered and referred 14 criminal matters to other components of the Department of Justice.
Trump associates repeatedly lied to investigators about their contacts with Russians, and President Trump refused to answer questions about his efforts to impede federal proceedings and influence the testimony of witnesses.
A statement signed by over 1,000 former federal prosecutors concluded that if any other American engaged in the same efforts to impede federal proceedings the way Trump did, they would likely be indicted for multiple charges of obstruction of justice.


Russia engaged in extensive attacks on the U.S. election system in 2016

Russian interference in the 2016 election was “sweeping and systemic.”[1]
Major attack avenues included a social media “information warfare” campaign that “favored” candidate Trump[2] and the hacking of Clinton campaign-related databases and release of stolen materials through Russian-created entities and Wikileaks.[3]
Russia also targeted databases in many states related to administering elections gaining access to information for millions of registered voters.[4]


The investigation “identified numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump Campaign” and established that the Trump Campaign “showed interest in WikiLeaks's releases of documents and welcomed their potential to damage candidate Clinton”

In 2015 and 2016, Michael Cohen pursued a hotel/residence project in Moscow on behalf of Trump while he was campaigning for President.[5] Then-candidate Trump personally signed a letter of intent.
Senior members of the Trump campaign, including Paul Manafort, Donald Trump, Jr., and Jared Kushner took a June 9, 2016, meeting with Russian nationals at Trump Tower, New York, after outreach from an intermediary informed Trump, Jr., that the Russians had derogatory information on Clinton that was “part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump.”[6]
Beginning in June 2016, a Trump associate “forecast to senior [Trump] Campaign officials that WikiLeaks would release information damaging to candidate Clinton.”[7] A section of the Report that remains heavily redacted suggests that Roger Stone was this associate and that he had significant contacts with the campaign about Wikileaks.[8]
The Report described multiple occasions where Trump associates lied to investigators about Trump associate contacts with Russia. Trump associates George Papadopoulos, Rick Gates, Michael Flynn, and Michael Cohen all admitted that they made false statements to federal investigators or to Congress about their contacts. In addition, Roger Stone faces trial this fall for obstruction of justice, five counts of making false statements, and one count of witness tampering.
The Report contains no evidence that any Trump campaign official reported their contacts with Russia or WikiLeaks to U.S. law enforcement authorities during the campaign or presidential transition, despite public reports on Russian hacking starting in June 2016 and candidate Trump’s August 2016 intelligence briefing warning him that Russia was seeking to interfere in the election.
The Report raised questions about why Trump associates and then-candidate Trump repeatedly asserted Trump had no connections to Russia.[9]


Special Counsel Mueller declined to exonerate President Trump and instead detailed multiple episodes in which he engaged in obstructive conduct

The Mueller Report states that if the Special Counsel’s Office felt they could clear the president of wrongdoing, they would have said so. Instead, the Report explicitly states that it “does not exonerate” the President[10] and explains that the Office of Special Counsel “accepted” the Department of Justice policy that a sitting President cannot be indicted.[11]
The Mueller report details multiple episodes in which there is evidence that the President obstructed justice. The pattern of conduct and the manner in which the President sought to impede investigations—including through one-on-one meetings with senior officials—is damning to the President.
Five episodes of obstructive conduct stand out as being particularly serious:
In June 2017 President Trump directed White House Counsel Don McGahn to order the firing of the Special Counsel after press reports that Mueller was investigating the President for obstruction of justice;[12] months later Trump asked McGahn to falsely refute press accounts reporting this directive and create a false paper record on this issue – all of which McGahn refused to do.[13]
After National Security Advisor Michael Flynn was fired in February 2017 for lying to FBI investigators about his contacts with Russian Ambassador Kislyak, Trump cleared his office for a one-on-one meeting with then-FBI Director James Comey and asked Comey to “let [Flynn] go;” he also asked then-Deputy National Security Advisor K.T. McFarland to draft an internal memo saying Trump did not direct Flynn to call Kislyak, which McFarland did not do because she did not know whether that was true.[14]
In July 2017, the President directed former campaign manager Corey Lewandowski to instruct the Attorney General to limit Mueller’s investigation, a step the Report asserted “was intended to prevent further investigative scrutiny of the President’s and his campaign’s conduct.”[15]
In 2017 and 2018, the President asked the Attorney General to “un-recuse” himself from the Mueller inquiry, actions from which a “reasonable inference” could be made that “the President believed that an unrecused Attorney General would play a protective role and could shield the President from the ongoing Russia Investigation.”[16]
The Report raises questions about whether the President, by and through his private attorneys, floated the possibility of pardons for the purpose of influencing the cooperation of Flynn, Manafort, and an unnamed person with law enforcement.[17]
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Frasier: Niles, I’ve just had the most marvelous idea for a website! People will post their opinions, cheeky bon mots, and insights, and others will reply in kind!

Niles: You have met “people”, haven’t you?

Lets Go Darwin
Pete F. is offline  
Old 02-15-2022, 10:11 PM   #135
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Hilary was asked today point blank if she spied on the trump campaign, and in classical liberal fashion, she dodged the question.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 02-15-2022, 10:52 PM   #136
Pete F.
Canceled
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,067
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
Hilary was asked today point blank if she spied on the trump campaign, and in classical liberal fashion, she dodged the question.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Straight from zilch to But Hillary

It should be no surprise that MAGA cultists are soft on Russia. Trump spent much of his presidency conducting a propaganda campaign on behalf of Putin.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Frasier: Niles, I’ve just had the most marvelous idea for a website! People will post their opinions, cheeky bon mots, and insights, and others will reply in kind!

Niles: You have met “people”, haven’t you?

Lets Go Darwin
Pete F. is offline  
Old 02-16-2022, 06:18 AM   #137
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F. View Post
Straight from zilch to But Hillary

It should be no surprise that MAGA cultists are soft on Russia. Trump spent much of his presidency conducting a propaganda campaign on behalf of Putin.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
this post is about the Durham report. Not about the topic of zilch. I didn’t pivot to Hilary. It’s about what her campaign did at the origins of the Russia hoax,

Why didn’t she just say “read my lips, we had nothing to do with it”?

Man oh man are you scared. IHilarys almost certainly not running again, she’s yesterday’s news, like Trump hopefully is. So why are you so desperate to ensure that the probe shows nothing?

I don’t know anything about Durham
except he was the one they specifically sent in to clean up Boston when Whitey Bulger was running things. I do know that a brutal and painstaking prosecutor, would do exactly what he’s doing.

I also know that unlike the Mueller probe, Durham isn’t leaking findings daily to friendly media. I honestly had no idea he was still investigating.

We also all know the difference in how the media covered the two investigations. The whole
media said Trumpmwas guilty, and now the same folks are ignoring everything about the Durham
probe, except to say it’s. politically motivated witch hunt.

I’ll just wait and see. I can happily accept any outcome.

Can you? Nope.

Durhams released findings apparently show that Hilarys lawyers hired tech people
to spy on Trump when he was a candidate, and even when he was POTUS.

Hilary refused to answer when asked about it.

That ain’t nothing. It’s sort of the current technological equivalent of Watergate. Isn’t it? Hacking into Trumps servers?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Last edited by Jim in CT; 02-16-2022 at 06:54 AM..
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 02-16-2022, 09:04 AM   #138
Pete F.
Canceled
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,067
Except that’s not what happened
As I said before and Ratcliffe admitted
Fox News anchor Bill Hemmer wonders if the Durham filing's mention of "infiltrate" means there was "hacking" of computers, only for John Ratcliffe to admit that this was actually "lawful access into government servers" by the tech company involved.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Pete F. is offline  
Old 02-16-2022, 09:41 AM   #139
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F. View Post
Except that’s not what happened
As I said before and Ratcliffe admitted
Fox News anchor Bill Hemmer wonders if the Durham filing's mention of "infiltrate" means there was "hacking" of computers, only for John Ratcliffe to admit that this was actually "lawful access into government servers" by the tech company involved.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
It's lawful for lawyers representing a rival political campaign, to access the servers of your political rival without his knowledge or permission?

The Durham report supposedly says that Trumps private servers (before he was president) were hacked by experts, who were hired by the Clinton campaign. This is before he was elected.
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 02-16-2022, 12:54 PM   #140
Pete F.
Canceled
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,067
There’s no Durham report
Nothing that Durham has produced says anyone hacked
DNS info is not hacking
Kash Patel -- the same guy who spent the weekend lying his ass off and a guy who played a key role in attempting to overthrow our govt --has now become a fact witness.
Quite a clown show the formerly reputable John Durham has going
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Pete F. is offline  
Old 02-16-2022, 03:01 PM   #141
Got Stripers
Ledge Runner Baits
iTrader: (0)
 
Got Stripers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: I live in a house, but my soul is at sea.
Posts: 8,383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
this post is about the Durham report. Not about the topic of zilch. I didn’t pivot to Hilary. It’s about what her campaign did at the origins of the Russia hoax,

Why didn’t she just say “read my lips, we had nothing to do with it”?

Man oh man are you scared. IHilarys almost certainly not running again, she’s yesterday’s news, like Trump hopefully is. So why are you so desperate to ensure that the probe shows nothing?

I don’t know anything about Durham
except he was the one they specifically sent in to clean up Boston when Whitey Bulger was running things. I do know that a brutal and painstaking prosecutor, would do exactly what he’s doing.

I also know that unlike the Mueller probe, Durham isn’t leaking findings daily to friendly media. I honestly had no idea he was still investigating.

We also all know the difference in how the media covered the two investigations. The whole
media said Trumpmwas guilty, and now the same folks are ignoring everything about the Durham
probe, except to say it’s. politically motivated witch hunt.

I’ll just wait and see. I can happily accept any outcome.

Can you? Nope.

Durhams released findings apparently show that Hilarys lawyers hired tech people
to spy on Trump when he was a candidate, and even when he was POTUS.

Hilary refused to answer when asked about it.

That ain’t nothing. It’s sort of the current technological equivalent of Watergate. Isn’t it? Hacking into Trumps servers?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Boy are you guys (you in particular) predictable, heat on Trump escalates as new revelations come out on multiple fronts and Fox and the other right wing media outlets, decide it's time to change the narrative to Hilary and the Durham report. When they flip the narrative, its only a matter of hours before this board sees the same narrative. Crazy Rudy now claims to have tons of evidence against Hilary in his bedroom and has had if for years, oh I can't wait to see what that conspiracy theory turns into?

You of course are always complaining we who respond to your posts always seem to turn it around to Trump, gee wiz mr. wizard wonder why that is, could it be it's a political forum and the GOP is the party or should I say cult of Trump now. It's amazing that the GOP can run in 2016 without any platform and when asked what that might be in 2020 or the upcoming midterms, the response is we will tell you when we regain the power.

Hilary isn't running again and if she or her employees broke the law and it can be PROVEN, then have at her. Trump on the other hand should he run out the clock on getting charged may run again and that is why we keep bringing him up. Maybe you are ok with the results justifying the means, personally I think he is the worst example of a human being or governor, his policies are geared towards helping the upper crust, he is one dangerous MF on foreign policy and he would love to be nothing but king for as long as he can hold the throne. He would be the worst possible result for the entire globe and I can't imagine how bad the result would be.

The economy and jobs are doing well, no thanks to a single boot licking republican as they voted for nothing they weren't forced into knowing if they didn't it would really hurt them politically. It will be interesting as spring comes and covid dies down to see what happens, the fly in the ointment of course now is Trumps man crush Putin. If Trump were asked today if he thought Russia would invade, his response would be just like his answer on Russia interfering in our elections; no Putin said he won't invade and I believe him.
Got Stripers is offline  
Old 02-16-2022, 03:13 PM   #142
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by Got Stripers View Post
Boy are you guys (you in particular) predictable, heat on Trump escalates as new revelations come out on multiple fronts and Fox and the other right wing media outlets, decide it's time to change the narrative to Hilary and the Durham report. When they flip the narrative, its only a matter of hours before this board sees the same narrative. Crazy Rudy now claims to have tons of evidence against Hilary in his bedroom and has had if for years, oh I can't wait to see what that conspiracy theory turns into?

You of course are always complaining we who respond to your posts always seem to turn it around to Trump, gee wiz mr. wizard wonder why that is, could it be it's a political forum and the GOP is the party or should I say cult of Trump now. It's amazing that the GOP can run in 2016 without any platform and when asked what that might be in 2020 or the upcoming midterms, the response is we will tell you when we regain the power.

Hilary isn't running again and if she or her employees broke the law and it can be PROVEN, then have at her. Trump on the other hand should he run out the clock on getting charged may run again and that is why we keep bringing him up. Maybe you are ok with the results justifying the means, personally I think he is the worst example of a human being or governor, his policies are geared towards helping the upper crust, he is one dangerous MF on foreign policy and he would love to be nothing but king for as long as he can hold the throne. He would be the worst possible result for the entire globe and I can't imagine how bad the result would be.

The economy and jobs are doing well, no thanks to a single boot licking republican as they voted for nothing they weren't forced into knowing if they didn't it would really hurt them politically. It will be interesting as spring comes and covid dies down to see what happens, the fly in the ointment of course now is Trumps man crush Putin. If Trump were asked today if he thought Russia would invade, his response would be just like his answer on Russia interfering in our elections; no Putin said he won't invade and I believe him.
Yawn, and wrong.

"Fox" isn't changing the narrative. Durham is sharing some of his findings.

As for me, I hope they throw the book at Trump so that he never, ever runs again. You and I probably agree on that.

At the same time, I'd like to know the truth about the origins of the Russia hoax, and it was a complete hoax. You probably have no interest in learning that truth, hope it goes away.

I can think for myself and i can agree and disagree with either side. You? Not so much.

Every single post made my every single one of you guys, can be boiled down to this:

liberal=good, conservative=bad.

If only the world were that simple.

"the GOP can run in 2016 without any platform and when asked what that might be in 2020 or the upcoming midterms, the response is we will tell you when we regain the power. "

Not sure what planet you live on, but here on Earth, in 2016, Trump and Republicans ran on tax cuts, creating job growth, eliminating unnecessary regulations, killing jihadists, not getting us involved in questionable wars. They did all those things. Of course, they also ran on some things that they failed to do (border wall, overhaul Obamacare).

What in Gods name gave you the idea that they ran on nothing?
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 02-16-2022, 08:14 PM   #143
Pete F.
Canceled
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,067
The only reason we're suddenly hearing about Hillary Clinton & new conspiracy theories in right wing media is because there is deep concern about what's coming out of the January 6 Committee's investigation.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Pete F. is offline  
Old 02-17-2022, 05:33 AM   #144
scottw
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
scottw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F. View Post
The only reason we're suddenly hearing about Hillary Clinton & new conspiracy theories in right wing media is because there is deep concern about what's coming out of the January 6 Committee's investigation.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
when someone says "conspiracy theory(ies)" now...I automatically assume they are an idiot
scottw is offline  
Old 02-17-2022, 07:26 AM   #145
Pete F.
Canceled
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,067
Today makes day 1,011 for Durham. The Mueller investigation lasted 674 days, total. So as of today, John Durham has been investigation for 50% longer than the entire Mueller investigation he was hired to undermine.

In 22 months, Mueller got convictions of Trump’s Coffee Boy, his National Security Advisor, his Campaign Manager and the Campaign Manager’s Deputy, Trump’s personal lawyer, as well as another American and the son-in-law of Alfa Bank Oligarch German Khan. On a referral, a second Konstantin Kilimnik partner, Sam Patten pled guilty. Mueller charged 25 Russian involved in attacks on the country, as well as Kilimnik himself in a conspiracy with Manafort (though not the conspiracy for trading campaign strategy for debt relief). With another eight months, DC’s US Attorney would win Roger Stone’s conviction. None of those things — not the George Papadopoulos guilty plea, not the guilty plea of Khan’s son-in-law Alex Van der Zwaan, and not Michael Cohen’s plea to covering up the communications he had (on Trump’s behalf) with the Kremlin — derives from either the Steele dossier or the Alfa-Bank anomalies.

In half again that time span, John Durham has won the guilty plea of Kevin Clinesmith (whose misconduct DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz found), charged Michael Sussmann for lying about coordinating with Hillary staffers he didn’t coordinate with, and charged Igor Danchenko for lies that Durham’s prosecutors created, at least in part, with cut-and-paste failures. All because he’s sure — and he’s going to keep going until he finds proof — that the abundant prosecutions Mueller obtained were the fruit of stuff that Durham is working hard to criminalize and not the criminal conduct that all those Trump flunkies but Stone admitted to.

With the addition of a new financial crimes prosecutor yesterday to the Michael Sussmann prosecution team, I feel like Durham is barely getting started.
Why not double the length of time Mueller took to investigate rather than avoid admitting you can’t substantiate any of your conspiracy theories?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Pete F. is offline  
Old 02-17-2022, 07:28 AM   #146
scottw
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
scottw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F. View Post

Today makes day 1,011 for Durham. The Mueller investigation lasted 674 days, total.

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Durham is investigating actual crimes...takes longer I guess
scottw is offline  
Old 02-17-2022, 07:53 AM   #147
Pete F.
Canceled
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: vt
Posts: 13,067
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottw View Post
Durham is investigating actual crimes...takes longer I guess
Cause we all know Trump had no deals in Russia
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Frasier: Niles, I’ve just had the most marvelous idea for a website! People will post their opinions, cheeky bon mots, and insights, and others will reply in kind!

Niles: You have met “people”, haven’t you?

Lets Go Darwin
Pete F. is offline  
Old 02-17-2022, 08:14 AM   #148
scottw
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
scottw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F. View Post
Cause we all know Trump had no deals in Russia
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
time to move on pete.......when he is elected again in 2024 you can resume your pursuit of him
scottw is offline  
Old 02-17-2022, 08:16 AM   #149
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F. View Post
Cause we all know Trump had no deals in Russia
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
But Biden's deals with Ukraine that made his family wealthy, aren't worth mentioning...

It was a hoax Pete. An attempt to overturn the results of an election, because your side didn't like the outcome. It's OK when your side does it.

They were screaming for impeachment before his inauguration.
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 02-17-2022, 08:18 AM   #150
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by scottw View Post
time to move on pete.......when he is elected again in 2024 you can resume your pursuit of him
I say Trump can't win, and I am never, ever wrong about predicting his results in elections.
Jim in CT is offline  
 

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:09 AM.


Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Please use all necessary and proper safety precautions. STAY SAFE Striper Talk Forums
Copyright 1998-20012 Striped-Bass.com