Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:


Same people who say cops are crooked and support the Innocent Project. The disconnect is astounding.

 

It’s easier for people to be ignorant. Takes absolutely no energy and doesn’t disrupt their perceived normal.

 

They also have a hard time listening. So, let’s say you give specific examples of members of an organization being corrupt; they will refute your examples by claiming you are referring to the entire organization as being corrupt and not just the elements of it you listed. Because, in their mind, that makes you biased against the organization and you can then fit in their perceived reality of “they’re right and you’re wrong”.

Edited by The Guy In Pants
  • Like (+1) 2
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, MILFHUNTER#518 said:

I don't understand what he was getting at when he said he learned from Richard Nixon when he said "...don't fire people..." and then went on to talking about the people he fired like Sessions, Comey, etc.


Nixon fired Cox for demanding the tapes. That was what got the ball rolling on the special prosecutor.

Edit: I am not really old enough to have watched and understood what was happening. People on my family were riveted to the TV during the investigation, so I did see the hearing. But seeing, actively sitting down to watch, and understanding what was going on at the time? Nope.

 

Edited by Buffalo_Gal
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, MILFHUNTER#518 said:

But then went on to talk about firing Comey, Sessions, et al


I think he wanted to fire more people. (That is just my take, however.)

And recall, Trump knew that Comey was part of an illegal set-up, a soft-coup. Comey was the dirty one, not Trump. Comey was trying to set it up like Trump was dirty.

Cox (as I understand it, and I may be corrected) was trying to get to the bottom of Nixon possibly doing something illegal in demanding the tapes. The Supreme Court later said Nixon needed to hand them over.

 

Edited by Buffalo_Gal
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, ALF said:

 

Just curious ,  what is the one thing Obama did that you disliked the most ?


The interference with the peaceful transition of power is damnable. But you really need more? He was an enemy of many of the things you’ve stood loudly in support of over the years. 
 

* Obama ran on ending perma wars, instead he inflamed them in several new theaters, while arming and funding AQ who literally killed 3k Americans and tripled the drone assassination program in size (while targeting American citizens and depriving them of due process). 
 

* Obama ran on curbing the mass surveillance program, instead he DOUBLED its size and used its tools to illegally spy on not only his political opponents, but also Congress, the media, and the incoming president. 
 

* Obama allowed child trafficking and narcotics rings run by Hezbollah to continue unabated in their operations INSIDE THE US because he didn’t want to disrupt his negotiation/bribery of the Mullahs. How many children did he sacrifice in order to give the largest state sponsor of terror billions in cash? 
 

Obama was deeply corrupt. He was a terrible authoritarian. He just had / has REALLY good press. But that should mean less today now that it’s clear how wrong the media got this story (intentionally so). 
 

***** 44 and everyone who stands with him. 

(Said as a man who voted for him twice)

Edited by Deranged Rhino
  • Like (+1) 1
  • Awesome! (+1) 5
  • Thank you (+1) 5
Posted

 

 

 

1 minute ago, 32ABBA said:

 

 

***** off, Alf. You're gonna lose.

 

It keeps the thread off of the new revelations.

 

 

 

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
Just now, B-Man said:

It keeps the thread off of the new revelations.

 

I'm only through four of the transcripts so far (Sussmann, Podesta, Clapper, Henry) and damn you aren't kidding. There is absolute fire in these pages, doubly so when you compare the public statements made by people vs what they said in these hearings. If anyone wants to continue to argue that the media was not an active participant in this coup, all they have to do is read Clapper's statements. 

 

If a rag-tag group of citizen researchers could figure this out (in 2017!), without the same type of access afforded to journalists in DC or NYC, then there's NO reason the major media outlets couldn't have done the same unless they wanted to distort and deceive

 

The history written about this event will not be kind to the media, or the previous administration.

 

White House press conference on this topic due to begin soon fyi.  

1 minute ago, Magox said:

And it got worse after this.   Yikes

 

 

 

 

 

Marie Harf's continued presence on Fox to discuss all things SpyGate is a continual reminder that Fox is every bit the establishment outlet that CNN/MSNBC is. Harf worked for the former administration, she KNOWS better than most how much of what she says is untrue -- but her job when coming to Fox wasn't to push truth, it was to carry the water for the coup itself. 

 

This is Paul Ryan's Fox news. And it should be treated the same as all the other left leaning media complexes: you can find good journalists, stories if you look -- but the "hard news" sources are all about protecting the establishment, not jouranlism.

  • Like (+1) 7
  • Thank you (+1) 4
Posted
17 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

I'm only through four of the transcripts so far (Sussmann, Podesta, Clapper, Henry) and damn you aren't kidding. There is absolute fire in these pages, doubly so when you compare the public statements made by people vs what they said in these hearings. If anyone wants to continue to argue that the media was not an active participant in this coup, all they have to do is read Clapper's statements. 

 

If a rag-tag group of citizen researchers could figure this out (in 2017!), without the same type of access afforded to journalists in DC or NYC, then there's NO reason the major media outlets couldn't have done the same unless they wanted to distort and deceive

 

The history written about this event will not be kind to the media, or the previous administration.

 

White House press conference on this topic due to begin soon fyi.  

 

Marie Harf's continued presence on Fox to discuss all things SpyGate is a continual reminder that Fox is every bit the establishment outlet that CNN/MSNBC is. Harf worked for the former administration, she KNOWS better than most how much of what she says is untrue -- but her job when coming to Fox wasn't to push truth, it was to carry the water for the coup itself. 

 

This is Paul Ryan's Fox news. And it should be treated the same as all the other left leaning media complexes: you can find good journalists, stories if you look -- but the "hard news" sources are all about protecting the establishment, not jouranlism.

 

 

She was an Obama administration official, she really has no choice but to defend it to the end.    You can see the renewed vigor with the righties right now, they feel empowered.

 

The energy is definitely with the right.

  • Like (+1) 4
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

After three years of HYPING "RUSSIA!" Jim Acosta gets the first question -- and instead of addressing Flynn, he asks about the economy. 

 

 


And it was stupidly phrased. The follow-up of "what's the plan" was more succinct, and reasonable.

I am curious at what point, if any, there is a question about Flynn, Russia, Comey, etc.

 

Edited by Buffalo_Gal
  • Like (+1) 1
×
×
  • Create New...