info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Donald Trump Jr.'s emails undermine what the White House has been saying
24 views
Skip to first unread message
Lawrence Akutagawa
Jul 12, 2017, 4:54:47 AM7/12/17
to
I just tell you - The Whining Donald presidency is as different as different
can be! The Village Idiot and his ilk certainly did right when they placed
The Whining Donald in the circus that is today's White House, saying that
they wanted someone different as US president!
The first six months of The Whining Donald's presidency has been one long
series of fun and laughs galore as just about each and every week saw a new
fun and most entertaining act on the part of The Whining Donald and his
Whining Donald minions!
And to celebrate The Whining Donald's six month "anniversary," here we
have - after literally months and months of denials concerning contacts
between The Whining Donald minions and the Russians during the 2016
presidential campaign going back to last summer
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jul/11/donald-trump-russia-timeline-campaign-denials
- Trump Jr. himself...a highly placed member in The Whining Donald campaign
staff...releasing a series of emails that contradicts hands down, beyond any
and all doubt whatsoever, all those many, many denials over all those months
and months!
Now all this is just hilariously and most deliciously funny and as
entertaining as never has the US presidency ever...yes, ever...entertained
the American people! Golly gee - Laurel and Hardy could not at all set up
something like this better!
Quelle difference!
Vive la difference!
ha ha ha
http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/11/politics/trump-jr-russia-politics/index.html
(CNN)Donald Trump's defenders have always argued that the entire notion his
campaign colluded with Russia was all smoke and no fire.
That may not cut it anymore.
The President's son and namesake, in a sensational revelation that
significantly escalated the drama over alleged Russian election meddling
incessantly battering the White House, may have provided the flames by
releasing an email chain that detailed his expectations of getting Kremlin
dirt on Hillary Clinton in a meeting he had with a Russian lawyer last year.
/snip - read the cited linked article/
can be! The Village Idiot and his ilk certainly did right when they placed
The Whining Donald in the circus that is today's White House, saying that
they wanted someone different as US president!
The first six months of The Whining Donald's presidency has been one long
series of fun and laughs galore as just about each and every week saw a new
fun and most entertaining act on the part of The Whining Donald and his
Whining Donald minions!
And to celebrate The Whining Donald's six month "anniversary," here we
have - after literally months and months of denials concerning contacts
between The Whining Donald minions and the Russians during the 2016
presidential campaign going back to last summer
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jul/11/donald-trump-russia-timeline-campaign-denials
- Trump Jr. himself...a highly placed member in The Whining Donald campaign
staff...releasing a series of emails that contradicts hands down, beyond any
and all doubt whatsoever, all those many, many denials over all those months
and months!
Now all this is just hilariously and most deliciously funny and as
entertaining as never has the US presidency ever...yes, ever...entertained
the American people! Golly gee - Laurel and Hardy could not at all set up
something like this better!
Quelle difference!
Vive la difference!
ha ha ha
http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/11/politics/trump-jr-russia-politics/index.html
(CNN)Donald Trump's defenders have always argued that the entire notion his
campaign colluded with Russia was all smoke and no fire.
That may not cut it anymore.
The President's son and namesake, in a sensational revelation that
significantly escalated the drama over alleged Russian election meddling
incessantly battering the White House, may have provided the flames by
releasing an email chain that detailed his expectations of getting Kremlin
dirt on Hillary Clinton in a meeting he had with a Russian lawyer last year.
/snip - read the cited linked article/
me
Jul 12, 2017, 9:26:24 AM7/12/17
to
Don't political campaigns normally seek damaging material about the opposition? Perhaps things are different for Democrats. They wouldn't think of such a dastardly means to winning.
Josh Rosenbluth
Jul 12, 2017, 11:26:07 AM7/12/17
to
they believe are agents of foreign governments.
Lawrence Akutagawa
Jul 12, 2017, 4:03:10 PM7/12/17
to
"Josh Rosenbluth" wrote in message news:ok5er3$du9$3...@dont-email.me...
***** This line separates my response from the foregoing ******
<ahem>
Well, I do believe that the issue here is not so much what is "not normal"
as it is what is "illegal":
from US Code 11 CFR 110.20
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/11/110.20
(b)Contributions and donations by foreign nationals in connection with
elections. A foreign national shall not, directly or indirectly, make a
contribution or a donation of money or other thing of value, or expressly or
impliedly promise to make a contribution or a donation, in connection with
any Federal, State, or local election.
and
(g)Solicitation, acceptance, or receipt of contributions and donations from
foreign nationals. No person shall knowingly solicit, accept, or receive
from a foreign national any contribution or donation prohibited by
paragraphs (b) through (d) of this section.
<ahem>
Well, I do believe that the issue here is not so much what is "not normal"
as it is what is "illegal":
from US Code 11 CFR 110.20
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/11/110.20
(b)Contributions and donations by foreign nationals in connection with
elections. A foreign national shall not, directly or indirectly, make a
contribution or a donation of money or other thing of value, or expressly or
impliedly promise to make a contribution or a donation, in connection with
any Federal, State, or local election.
and
(g)Solicitation, acceptance, or receipt of contributions and donations from
foreign nationals. No person shall knowingly solicit, accept, or receive
from a foreign national any contribution or donation prohibited by
paragraphs (b) through (d) of this section.
GLOBALIST
Jul 12, 2017, 4:37:52 PM7/12/17
to
On Wednesday, July 12, 2017 at 8:26:24 AM UTC-5, me wrote:
> Don't political campaigns normally seek damaging material about the opposition? Perhaps things are different for Democrats. They wouldn't think of such a dastardly means to winning.
Nothing was illegal no matter how you twist it
> Don't political campaigns normally seek damaging material about the opposition? Perhaps things are different for Democrats. They wouldn't think of such a dastardly means to winning.
and rant.
Josh Rosenbluth
Jul 12, 2017, 5:42:28 PM7/12/17
to
considered a "thing of value" It is also debatable whether the law was
not broken because he didn't get what he hoped for.
My point is what he did is deplorable even if it is legal.
GLOBALIST
Jul 12, 2017, 5:46:02 PM7/12/17
to
lost her thousands of votes.
Josh Rosenbluth
Jul 12, 2017, 5:53:23 PM7/12/17
to
an offer of dirt on their opponent from a foreign government official,
particularly from an adversarial dictator.
> Thank you Hillary Clinton....that term
> lost her thousands of votes.
Chelsea Clinton said, "I love it" to an offer from a Russian government
agent to receive damaging information about Trump?
Tzatz Ziki
Jul 12, 2017, 6:13:45 PM7/12/17
to
On 7/12/2017 1:37 PM, GLOBALDUMBFUCK wrote:
> Nothing was illegal
You'll be bleathing this stupidity long after Toddler-in-chief
either resigns or is frog-marched off in handcuffs, because you're
a dumbfuck.
DISMISSED!
> Nothing was illegal
You'll be bleathing this stupidity long after Toddler-in-chief
either resigns or is frog-marched off in handcuffs, because you're
a dumbfuck.
DISMISSED!
me
Jul 12, 2017, 8:14:16 PM7/12/17
to
Politics is deplorable. It's like a war. The object is not 'social justice' it's winning vs. losing. Lawyers understand this particularly well.
me
Jul 12, 2017, 8:30:08 PM7/12/17
to
How do you know that? Why shouldn't "damaging" information be used if the damaging information is valid?
Also:
Are there any major examples of foreign contributions to US elections?
One of the largest and more interesting scandals involving foreign contributions to a presidential election involves the Democratic Party, Bill Clinton, the China’s People Liberation Party, Al Gore, and a Californian Buddhist monastery. The FEC documents describe fundraising attempts by members of the DNC that set prices so foreign nationals could meet with President Clinton and Vice President Gore. In response to these findings, the FEC imposed a civil penalty on the DNC, the International Buddhist Progress Society, and various other actors for a cumulative total of $719,500.
http://www.uky.edu/electionlaw/analysis/foreign-contributions-us-elections
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/18/foreign-money-campaign-finance-lobbying_n_897189.html
Also:
Are there any major examples of foreign contributions to US elections?
One of the largest and more interesting scandals involving foreign contributions to a presidential election involves the Democratic Party, Bill Clinton, the China’s People Liberation Party, Al Gore, and a Californian Buddhist monastery. The FEC documents describe fundraising attempts by members of the DNC that set prices so foreign nationals could meet with President Clinton and Vice President Gore. In response to these findings, the FEC imposed a civil penalty on the DNC, the International Buddhist Progress Society, and various other actors for a cumulative total of $719,500.
http://www.uky.edu/electionlaw/analysis/foreign-contributions-us-elections
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/18/foreign-money-campaign-finance-lobbying_n_897189.html
Josh Rosenbluth
Jul 12, 2017, 10:44:39 PM7/12/17
to
On 7/12/2017 5:14 PM, me wrote:
> Politics is deplorable. It's like a war. The object is not 'social justice' it's winning vs. losing. Lawyers understand this particularly well.
No, politics is not inherently deplorable. What is deplorable is
> Politics is deplorable. It's like a war. The object is not 'social justice' it's winning vs. losing. Lawyers understand this particularly well.
putting national security at risk in order to win.
El Castor
Jul 13, 2017, 1:13:19 AM7/13/17
to
"New documents reveal Democrats urged Obama to respond to Russian
hacking — but chose to do nothing for months"
http://www.theblaze.com/news/2017/06/25/new-documents-reveal-democrats-urged-obama-to-respond-to-russian-hacking-but-chose-to-do-nothing/
''Trump accuses Obama of inaction over Russia meddling claim"
"Mr Trump said Mr Obama had learned well before the 8 November poll
about the accusations and "did nothing"."
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40395433
"Ukrainian efforts to sabotage Trump backfire"
"Ukrainian government officials tried to help Hillary Clinton and
undermine Trump by publicly questioning his fitness for office. They
also disseminated documents implicating a top Trump aide in corruption
and suggested they were investigating the matter, only to back away
after the election. And they helped Clinton’s allies research damaging
information on Trump and his advisers, a Politico investigation
found."
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/ukraine-sabotage-trump-backfire-233446
"DNC coordinated with Ukraine, White House says amid Trump-Russia
collusion claims"
"Sanders clarified that her statement was "not an accusation," instead
stressing that it is an "on-the-record action they took."
"So if you’re looking for an example of a campaign coordinating with a
foreign country or a foreign source, look no further than the DNC who
actually coordinated opposition research with the Ukrainian embassy.
And no one in this room to my knowledge really had a big problem with
that.""
https://www.rt.com/usa/395984-dnc-ukraine-white-house/
Josh Rosenbluth
Jul 13, 2017, 11:09:06 AM7/13/17
to
On 7/12/2017 10:13 PM, El Castor wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Jul 2017 19:44:36 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
> <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>> On 7/12/2017 5:14 PM, me wrote:
>>> Politics is deplorable. It's like a war. The object is not 'social justice' it's winning vs. losing. Lawyers understand this particularly well.
>>
>> No, politics is not inherently deplorable. What is deplorable is
>> putting national security at risk in order to win.
>
> Ooh! You mean like this?
Of course! The "they are just as bad as us" defense. As conservative
> On Wed, 12 Jul 2017 19:44:36 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
> <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>> On 7/12/2017 5:14 PM, me wrote:
>>> Politics is deplorable. It's like a war. The object is not 'social justice' it's winning vs. losing. Lawyers understand this particularly well.
>>
>> No, politics is not inherently deplorable. What is deplorable is
>> putting national security at risk in order to win.
>
> Ooh! You mean like this?
commentator Dan McLaughlin notes, that is no defense:
"But that [the Ukrainian charge against the Clinton campaign] was bad
too, and this was worse because of the overall context: while the
Ukranian government has been populated by plenty of shady characters in
the past decade, Russia is a much bigger and more hostile international
actor than Ukraine, and Putin has a known, ongoing strategy of
disrupting the democratic process in other countries (none more than in
Ukraine). The Trump camp already knew that Russia was widely believed to
be the source of the earlier hacks."
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/449408/donald-trump-jr-didnt-commit-treason
> "New documents reveal Democrats urged Obama to respond to Russian
> hacking — but chose to do nothing for months"
> http://www.theblaze.com/news/2017/06/25/new-documents-reveal-democrats-urged-obama-to-respond-to-russian-hacking-but-chose-to-do-nothing/
>
> ''Trump accuses Obama of inaction over Russia meddling claim"
> "Mr Trump said Mr Obama had learned well before the 8 November poll
> about the accusations and "did nothing"."
> http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-40395433
Obama doesn't come anywhere as close to what Junior did or what the
Clinton camp is accused of doing. So, it shouldn't be part of the
discussion at all.
Obama did not *temporarily* act on the knowledge of Russian meddling so
as to not appear to be taking Clinton's side. That doesn't compromise
national security in any way close to the other cases. And to whatever
extent waiting to act compromised national security, it was to
*preserve* the integrity of our campaign (not taking sides).
El Castor
Jul 13, 2017, 2:16:36 PM7/13/17
to
On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 08:08:14 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
defense, but it does call into question the reliability of
hypocritical accusers. (-8
BTW -- See below for info on the Hillary uranium deal.
Oh, and did I mention the sale of 20% of US uranium production to
Russia?
"Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal"
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-as-russians-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html
"THE CLINTON FAMILY BUSINESS There may be no Clinton Foundation office
in Moscow or St. Petersburg, but it is not for lack of trying. Bill
Clinton received half a million dollars in 2010 for a speech he gave
in Moscow, paid by a Russian firm, Renaissance Capital, that has ties
to Russian intelligence. The Clinton Foundation took money from
Russian officials and oligarchs, including Victor Kekselberg, a Putin
confidant. The Foundation also received millions of dollars from
Uranium One, which was sold to the Russian government in 2010, giving
Russia control of 20% of the uranium deposits in the U.S. — the sale
required approval from Hillary Clinton's State Department. What's
more, at least some of these donations weren't disclosed. "Ian Telfer,
the head of the Russian government's uranium company, Uranium One,
made four foreign donations totaling $2.35 million to the Clinton
Foundation. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the
Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama
White House to publicly identify all such donors," the Times has
reported."
http://www.investors.com/politics/commentary/check-it-out-the-new-york-times-just-exposed-the-hillary-clinton-russia-nexus/
<no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>On 7/12/2017 10:13 PM, El Castor wrote:
>> On Wed, 12 Jul 2017 19:44:36 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
>> <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 7/12/2017 5:14 PM, me wrote:
>>>> Politics is deplorable. It's like a war. The object is not 'social justice' it's winning vs. losing. Lawyers understand this particularly well.
>>>
>>> No, politics is not inherently deplorable. What is deplorable is
>>> putting national security at risk in order to win.
>>
>> Ooh! You mean like this?
>
>Of course! The "they are just as bad as us" defense. As conservative
>commentator Dan McLaughlin notes, that is no defense:
And facts you conveniently ignore. Pointing out hypocrisy may not be a
>On 7/12/2017 10:13 PM, El Castor wrote:
>> On Wed, 12 Jul 2017 19:44:36 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
>> <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 7/12/2017 5:14 PM, me wrote:
>>>> Politics is deplorable. It's like a war. The object is not 'social justice' it's winning vs. losing. Lawyers understand this particularly well.
>>>
>>> No, politics is not inherently deplorable. What is deplorable is
>>> putting national security at risk in order to win.
>>
>> Ooh! You mean like this?
>
>Of course! The "they are just as bad as us" defense. As conservative
>commentator Dan McLaughlin notes, that is no defense:
defense, but it does call into question the reliability of
hypocritical accusers. (-8
BTW -- See below for info on the Hillary uranium deal.
Russia?
"Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal"
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-as-russians-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html
"THE CLINTON FAMILY BUSINESS There may be no Clinton Foundation office
in Moscow or St. Petersburg, but it is not for lack of trying. Bill
Clinton received half a million dollars in 2010 for a speech he gave
in Moscow, paid by a Russian firm, Renaissance Capital, that has ties
to Russian intelligence. The Clinton Foundation took money from
Russian officials and oligarchs, including Victor Kekselberg, a Putin
confidant. The Foundation also received millions of dollars from
Uranium One, which was sold to the Russian government in 2010, giving
Russia control of 20% of the uranium deposits in the U.S. — the sale
required approval from Hillary Clinton's State Department. What's
more, at least some of these donations weren't disclosed. "Ian Telfer,
the head of the Russian government's uranium company, Uranium One,
made four foreign donations totaling $2.35 million to the Clinton
Foundation. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the
Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama
White House to publicly identify all such donors," the Times has
reported."
http://www.investors.com/politics/commentary/check-it-out-the-new-york-times-just-exposed-the-hillary-clinton-russia-nexus/
Josh Rosenbluth
Jul 13, 2017, 9:17:55 PM7/13/17
to
On 7/13/2017 11:16 AM, El Castor wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 08:08:14 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
> <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>> On 7/12/2017 10:13 PM, El Castor wrote:
>>> On Wed, 12 Jul 2017 19:44:36 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
>>> <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 7/12/2017 5:14 PM, me wrote:
>>>>> Politics is deplorable. It's like a war. The object is not 'social justice' it's winning vs. losing. Lawyers understand this particularly well.
>>>>
>>>> No, politics is not inherently deplorable. What is deplorable is
>>>> putting national security at risk in order to win.
>>>
>>> Ooh! You mean like this?
>>
>> Of course! The "they are just as bad as us" defense. As conservative
>> commentator Dan McLaughlin notes, that is no defense:
>
> And facts you conveniently ignore. Pointing out hypocrisy may not be a
> defense, but it does call into question the reliability of
> hypocritical accusers. (-8
That would not include me or a bunch of others who have called out Trump
> On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 08:08:14 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
> <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>> On 7/12/2017 10:13 PM, El Castor wrote:
>>> On Wed, 12 Jul 2017 19:44:36 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
>>> <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 7/12/2017 5:14 PM, me wrote:
>>>>> Politics is deplorable. It's like a war. The object is not 'social justice' it's winning vs. losing. Lawyers understand this particularly well.
>>>>
>>>> No, politics is not inherently deplorable. What is deplorable is
>>>> putting national security at risk in order to win.
>>>
>>> Ooh! You mean like this?
>>
>> Of course! The "they are just as bad as us" defense. As conservative
>> commentator Dan McLaughlin notes, that is no defense:
>
> And facts you conveniently ignore. Pointing out hypocrisy may not be a
> defense, but it does call into question the reliability of
> hypocritical accusers. (-8
(such as McLaughlin).
El Castor
Jul 14, 2017, 2:55:57 AM7/14/17
to
On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 18:17:53 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
<no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>On 7/13/2017 11:16 AM, El Castor wrote:
>> On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 08:08:14 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
>> <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 7/12/2017 10:13 PM, El Castor wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 12 Jul 2017 19:44:36 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
>>>> <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 7/12/2017 5:14 PM, me wrote:
>>>>>> Politics is deplorable. It's like a war. The object is not 'social justice' it's winning vs. losing. Lawyers understand this particularly well.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, politics is not inherently deplorable. What is deplorable is
>>>>> putting national security at risk in order to win.
>>>>
>>>> Ooh! You mean like this?
>>>
>>> Of course! The "they are just as bad as us" defense. As conservative
>>> commentator Dan McLaughlin notes, that is no defense:
>>
>> And facts you conveniently ignore. Pointing out hypocrisy may not be a
>> defense, but it does call into question the reliability of
>> hypocritical accusers. (-8
>
>That would not include me or a bunch of others who have called out Trump
>(such as McLaughlin).
If racism depends on perspective, perhaps hypocrisy does too. (-8
>On 7/13/2017 11:16 AM, El Castor wrote:
>> On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 08:08:14 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
>> <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 7/12/2017 10:13 PM, El Castor wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 12 Jul 2017 19:44:36 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
>>>> <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 7/12/2017 5:14 PM, me wrote:
>>>>>> Politics is deplorable. It's like a war. The object is not 'social justice' it's winning vs. losing. Lawyers understand this particularly well.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, politics is not inherently deplorable. What is deplorable is
>>>>> putting national security at risk in order to win.
>>>>
>>>> Ooh! You mean like this?
>>>
>>> Of course! The "they are just as bad as us" defense. As conservative
>>> commentator Dan McLaughlin notes, that is no defense:
>>
>> And facts you conveniently ignore. Pointing out hypocrisy may not be a
>> defense, but it does call into question the reliability of
>> hypocritical accusers. (-8
>
>That would not include me or a bunch of others who have called out Trump
>(such as McLaughlin).
mg
Jul 16, 2017, 10:05:11 PM7/16/17
to
On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 23:55:52 -0700, El Castor
<DrE...@justuschickens.com> wrote:
>On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 18:17:53 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
><no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>>On 7/13/2017 11:16 AM, El Castor wrote:
>>> On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 08:08:14 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
>>> <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 7/12/2017 10:13 PM, El Castor wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 12 Jul 2017 19:44:36 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
>>>>> <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 7/12/2017 5:14 PM, me wrote:
>>>>>>> Politics is deplorable. It's like a war. The object is not 'social justice' it's winning vs. losing. Lawyers understand this particularly well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, politics is not inherently deplorable. What is deplorable is
>>>>>> putting national security at risk in order to win.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ooh! You mean like this?
>>>>
>>>> Of course! The "they are just as bad as us" defense. As conservative
>>>> commentator Dan McLaughlin notes, that is no defense:
>>>
>>> And facts you conveniently ignore. Pointing out hypocrisy may not be a
>>> defense, but it does call into question the reliability of
>>> hypocritical accusers. (-8
>>
>>That would not include me or a bunch of others who have called out Trump
>>(such as McLaughlin).
>
>If racism depends on perspective, perhaps hypocrisy does too. (-8
>
>
The definition of a witch-hunt is an attempt to find and
<DrE...@justuschickens.com> wrote:
>On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 18:17:53 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
><no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
>>On 7/13/2017 11:16 AM, El Castor wrote:
>>> On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 08:08:14 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
>>> <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 7/12/2017 10:13 PM, El Castor wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 12 Jul 2017 19:44:36 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
>>>>> <no...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 7/12/2017 5:14 PM, me wrote:
>>>>>>> Politics is deplorable. It's like a war. The object is not 'social justice' it's winning vs. losing. Lawyers understand this particularly well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, politics is not inherently deplorable. What is deplorable is
>>>>>> putting national security at risk in order to win.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ooh! You mean like this?
>>>>
>>>> Of course! The "they are just as bad as us" defense. As conservative
>>>> commentator Dan McLaughlin notes, that is no defense:
>>>
>>> And facts you conveniently ignore. Pointing out hypocrisy may not be a
>>> defense, but it does call into question the reliability of
>>> hypocritical accusers. (-8
>>
>>That would not include me or a bunch of others who have called out Trump
>>(such as McLaughlin).
>
>If racism depends on perspective, perhaps hypocrisy does too. (-8
>
>
punish someone who hasn't done anything wrong.
Jonathan Turley says that the idea that the meeting might be
in violation of the laws "truly otherworldly" and added that
there has been "no case in history" that has considered
information "a thing of value," and if it were, "any
journalist would be in violation of federal law."
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/did-donald-trump-jr-break-the-law/
The bottom line, I think, is that after being called racists
and bigots, the Establishment is now returning to calling us
"deplorables" and is conducting a witch hunt. In other
words, there's no there there. Name calling is all they got
-- and something frighteningly similar to McCarthyism.
El Castor
Jul 17, 2017, 2:18:45 AM7/17/17
to
power.
Josh Rosenbluth
Jul 17, 2017, 11:19:34 AM7/17/17
to
are accused of meddling in the election and those Americans who may have
colluded with them. I'm pretty sure that you aren't being targeted.
Josh Rosenbluth
Jul 17, 2017, 11:22:00 AM7/17/17
to
in the election is a witch hunt similar to McCarthyism? Robert Mueller
would be so disappointed in you.
rumpelstiltskin
Jul 17, 2017, 1:43:36 PM7/17/17
to
On Mon, 17 Jul 2017 08:19:29 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
>> The definition of a witch-hunt is an attempt to find and
>> punish someone who hasn't done anything wrong.
>>
>> Jonathan Turley says that the idea that the meeting might be
>> in violation of the laws "truly otherworldly" and added that
>> there has been "no case in history" that has considered
>> information "a thing of value," and if it were, "any
>> journalist would be in violation of federal law."
>> http://www.cbsnews.com/news/did-donald-trump-jr-break-the-law/
>>
>> The bottom line, I think, is that after being called racists
>> and bigots, the Establishment is now returning to calling us
>> "deplorables" and is conducting a witch hunt. In other
>> words, there's no there there. Name calling is all they got
>> -- and something frighteningly similar to McCarthyism.
>
>Us? Who is the "us"? The investigation is against Russian agents who
>are accused of meddling in the election and those Americans who may have
>colluded with them. I'm pretty sure that you aren't being targeted.
I've objected to the lack of any proof visible to the American
people of any Russian meddling. That could put me in danger
of a visit from the CIA, if they were having a slow day.
>On 7/16/2017 7:05 PM, mg wrote:
<snip>
>> The definition of a witch-hunt is an attempt to find and
>> punish someone who hasn't done anything wrong.
>>
>> Jonathan Turley says that the idea that the meeting might be
>> in violation of the laws "truly otherworldly" and added that
>> there has been "no case in history" that has considered
>> information "a thing of value," and if it were, "any
>> journalist would be in violation of federal law."
>> http://www.cbsnews.com/news/did-donald-trump-jr-break-the-law/
>>
>> The bottom line, I think, is that after being called racists
>> and bigots, the Establishment is now returning to calling us
>> "deplorables" and is conducting a witch hunt. In other
>> words, there's no there there. Name calling is all they got
>> -- and something frighteningly similar to McCarthyism.
>
>Us? Who is the "us"? The investigation is against Russian agents who
>are accused of meddling in the election and those Americans who may have
>colluded with them. I'm pretty sure that you aren't being targeted.
people of any Russian meddling. That could put me in danger
of a visit from the CIA, if they were having a slow day.
Josh Rosenbluth
Jul 17, 2017, 1:52:27 PM7/17/17
to
And you are way to susceptible to conspiracy theories, apparently
including that the CIA, FBI, NSA and DNI are making shit up and are out
to get you for claiming they are making shit up.
rumpelstiltskin
Jul 17, 2017, 3:41:43 PM7/17/17
to
>, Mueller will be sharing his information publicly.
>And you are way to susceptible to conspiracy theories
>, apparently
>including that the CIA, FBI, NSA and DNI are making shit up and are out
>to get you for claiming they are making shit up.
stuff ever since Trump was elected, with not a thing to
back it up to so far. I don't have "patience" for such
tomfoolery. It would be crazy to trust the CIA or FBI.
Secrecy breeds mistrust, and it should. If you and
others choose to ignore Iraq, Salvadorian death squads,
the murder of Allende by military dictators, and current
shenanigans, that's your complacency, not mine.
Josh Rosenbluth
Jul 17, 2017, 7:40:28 PM7/17/17
to
malfeasance as a common practice. Obama put this best after his birth
certificate destroyed Trump's claim there was a government coverup of
Obama not being born in the USA:
"I know that he's taken some flak lately, but no one is happier, no one
is prouder to put this birth certificate issue to rest, and that's
because he can finally get back to focusing on the issues that matter,
like did we fake the moon landing? What really happened in Roswell? And
where are Biggie and Tupac?"
El Castor
Jul 18, 2017, 2:12:21 AM7/18/17
to
On Mon, 17 Jul 2017 08:21:56 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
I would agree that the 7X24 fascination in this subject exhibited by
liberal politicians and the liberal press certainly smells like a
witch hunt. Why were the same politicians and news media nowhere to be
found when Hillary approved the sale of 20% of US uranium production
to Russia -- a sale that was accompanied by large contributions to the
Clinton foundation? Should that sale, and the approval process, be
investigated by a special counsel?
liberal politicians and the liberal press certainly smells like a
witch hunt. Why were the same politicians and news media nowhere to be
found when Hillary approved the sale of 20% of US uranium production
to Russia -- a sale that was accompanied by large contributions to the
Clinton foundation? Should that sale, and the approval process, be
investigated by a special counsel?
Josh Rosenbluth
Jul 18, 2017, 10:41:45 AM7/18/17
to
Mueller. Witch hunt or not?
rumpelstiltskin
Jul 18, 2017, 1:44:12 PM7/18/17
to
On Mon, 17 Jul 2017 16:40:22 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
It's a lot more than just a few instances, in both number
and weight, e.g. the "Cold War" and the lying that got us
involved with many wars that IMO we should never have
gotten into, starting with Vietnam and proceeding through
setting up or contributing toward empowering murderous
right-wing factions in Chile and El Salvador for example.
The whole middle-East thing has been one disaster after
another, still continuing, with the most catastrophic lie
being about WMD's in Iraq, during which the only
credible person involved, Hans Blix, repeatedly said that
he had found no evidence even by sifting the ground for
radioactive residue that would be impossible to get rid
of completely. Blix also noted that every time the
United States gave him information about a location
of WMD sites in Iraq, it was wrong.
>
>"I know that he's taken some flak lately, but no one is happier, no one
>is prouder to put this birth certificate issue to rest, and that's
>because he can finally get back to focusing on the issues that matter,
>like did we fake the moon landing? What really happened in Roswell? And
>where are Biggie and Tupac?"
Obviously it couldn't be Obama himself that said or
wrote that. Setting that aside, I never bought into the
birth certificate or moon landing or Roswell sillinesses,
though at least nobody was killed, or very few people
were killed, by those. I don't know who "Biggie" is,
and "Tupac" is just a name to me: I know he's a
vocalist, probably rap music, but I've never heard him
vocalize that I can recall.
**
and weight, e.g. the "Cold War" and the lying that got us
involved with many wars that IMO we should never have
gotten into, starting with Vietnam and proceeding through
setting up or contributing toward empowering murderous
right-wing factions in Chile and El Salvador for example.
The whole middle-East thing has been one disaster after
another, still continuing, with the most catastrophic lie
being about WMD's in Iraq, during which the only
credible person involved, Hans Blix, repeatedly said that
he had found no evidence even by sifting the ground for
radioactive residue that would be impossible to get rid
of completely. Blix also noted that every time the
United States gave him information about a location
of WMD sites in Iraq, it was wrong.
>
>"I know that he's taken some flak lately, but no one is happier, no one
>is prouder to put this birth certificate issue to rest, and that's
>because he can finally get back to focusing on the issues that matter,
>like did we fake the moon landing? What really happened in Roswell? And
>where are Biggie and Tupac?"
wrote that. Setting that aside, I never bought into the
birth certificate or moon landing or Roswell sillinesses,
though at least nobody was killed, or very few people
were killed, by those. I don't know who "Biggie" is,
and "Tupac" is just a name to me: I know he's a
vocalist, probably rap music, but I've never heard him
vocalize that I can recall.
**
Josh Rosenbluth
Jul 18, 2017, 2:07:23 PM7/18/17
to
House Correspondent dinner.
> Setting that aside, I never bought into the
> birth certificate or moon landing or Roswell sillinesses,
> though at least nobody was killed, or very few people
> were killed, by those. I don't know who "Biggie" is,
> and "Tupac" is just a name to me: I know he's a
> vocalist, probably rap music, but I've never heard him
> vocalize that I can recall.
reject others as nonsense. Why is the conclusion that Russia meddled in
the election in the former camp?
El Castor
Jul 18, 2017, 2:25:34 PM7/18/17
to
On Mon, 17 Jul 2017 16:40:22 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
To rest? Really? (-8
"WND EXCLUSIVE
Sheriff's probe finds Obama birth certificate 'fake'
Years of forensics investigation confirmed 'birther' suspicions right
all along
Published: 12/15/2016 at 6:09 PM"
http://mobile.wnd.com/2016/12/investigators-find-source-for-obamas-online-birth-certification-image/
"Obama birth certificate investigation: Sheriff Arpaio's office says
'9 points of forgery' found"
http://www.abc15.com/news/region-phoenix-metro/central-phoenix/sheriff-joe-arpaio-to-talk-obama-birth-certificate-investigation
"WND EXCLUSIVE
Sheriff's probe finds Obama birth certificate 'fake'
Years of forensics investigation confirmed 'birther' suspicions right
all along
Published: 12/15/2016 at 6:09 PM"
http://mobile.wnd.com/2016/12/investigators-find-source-for-obamas-online-birth-certification-image/
"Obama birth certificate investigation: Sheriff Arpaio's office says
'9 points of forgery' found"
http://www.abc15.com/news/region-phoenix-metro/central-phoenix/sheriff-joe-arpaio-to-talk-obama-birth-certificate-investigation
rumpelstiltskin
Jul 18, 2017, 3:44:15 PM7/18/17
to
On Tue, 18 Jul 2017 11:07:16 -0700, Josh Rosenbluth
"He's taken some flak ...", where "He" is Obama,
couldn't have been said by Obama.
>
>> Setting that aside, I never bought into the
>> birth certificate or moon landing or Roswell sillinesses,
>> though at least nobody was killed, or very few people
>> were killed, by those. I don't know who "Biggie" is,
>> and "Tupac" is just a name to me: I know he's a
>> vocalist, probably rap music, but I've never heard him
>> vocalize that I can recall.
>
>It seems to you choose to accept some government coverups as real and
>reject others as nonsense. Why is the conclusion that Russia meddled in
>the election in the former camp?
I believe things that are reasonable and don't believe
things that are nonsense or, if I don't have encyclopedic
knowledge of them, show earmarks of nonsense. The
lack of any plain evidence so far of "meddling" after all
this time, and after all these allegations, is an "earmark".
If talking to Russia means that Russia is "meddling",
then Russia is meddling. We "should" be talking to
Russia though, so I'm not going to seize on any talking
with Russia as "meddling". The US actions in regard
to Crimea might well be "meddling" - or at least a
thousand times closer to "meddling" than anything
that's been confirmed about Russia supposedly
"meddling" in US elections.
couldn't have been said by Obama.
>
>> Setting that aside, I never bought into the
>> birth certificate or moon landing or Roswell sillinesses,
>> though at least nobody was killed, or very few people
>> were killed, by those. I don't know who "Biggie" is,
>> and "Tupac" is just a name to me: I know he's a
>> vocalist, probably rap music, but I've never heard him
>> vocalize that I can recall.
>
>It seems to you choose to accept some government coverups as real and
>reject others as nonsense. Why is the conclusion that Russia meddled in
>the election in the former camp?
things that are nonsense or, if I don't have encyclopedic
knowledge of them, show earmarks of nonsense. The
lack of any plain evidence so far of "meddling" after all
this time, and after all these allegations, is an "earmark".
If talking to Russia means that Russia is "meddling",
then Russia is meddling. We "should" be talking to
Russia though, so I'm not going to seize on any talking
with Russia as "meddling". The US actions in regard
to Crimea might well be "meddling" - or at least a
thousand times closer to "meddling" than anything
that's been confirmed about Russia supposedly
"meddling" in US elections.
Josh Rosenbluth
Jul 18, 2017, 8:32:15 PM7/18/17
to
0 new messages