We get a lot of rumors we have to go through and figure out if true......except to the press
that rumor came from somewhere and I'd bet $10 it was someone who glowed in the dark
It isn't as easy to tell the diffrencr as people think
We get a lot of rumors we have to go through and figure out if true......except to the press
that rumor came from somewhere and I'd bet $10 it was someone who glowed in the dark
THEY LITERALLY RELEASED A FUCKING RUMOR AND YOU'RE DEFENDING IT!I definitely did not want Trump to lose.
But the point is, the president didn't even know about the rumor because the military IC doesn't release rumors
...THEY LITERALLY RELEASED A FUCKING RUMOR AND YOU'RE DEFENDING IT!
So now you're saying it's a rumor, but in your last post you JUST SAIDI am in the military to defend the constitution. The mikitary has yet to betrsy it.
...
I literally said they released a statement saying unverified rumor of it happening.
Before they even let the president know.
I am saying it was literally just a rumor and they even said it was.
I am only defending the wording they fucking used
president didn't even know about the rumor because the military IC doesn't release rumors
Through your motardation you wouldn't be able to recognize betrayal of constitution unless the revelation came through your chain of command. Military took part in concentrated effort to remove the President of the USA, which is clear violation of Constitution, but you refuse to accept that due to your blind belief in your higher ups.I am in the military to defend the constitution. The mikitary has yet to betrsy it.
Good. It can’t happen soon enough for me. Though I wish there was a way to avoid the bloodshed and destruction. But sadly, the world doesn’t work that way.Modernity is ending, this is actually par for the course when a modern period ends everything ends up being taken to parody levels of extreme, then you get a series of civil wars and from the ashes of those civil wars some one rises and says no. The time for experimentation is over every one is sick of this shit we are going back to the old ways fuck this.
This has all happened before and it will happen again.
The question is if he really believes his own BS or is trying to suck up to his new Democratic friends now that the right kicked him out for snake oil and spinelessness. I can have respect for a person that tries honestly, gets it wrong, and then takes the loss when he loses, but so many of these neocons don't bother even taking a break before they slither over to the Democrats for headpats and money."Loving" these cover-your-ass articles from former Republican congressman booted out by Trumper types in primaries. There was another one by John Boehner over in politico that was basically an ad for his book about being house speaker.The GOP is stuck in a losing battle against immigration
While playing hardball may put points on the board in the short term, the GOP’s broadly anti-immigration platform is a losing strategy in the long termthehill.com
Denver Riggleman was defeated by a guy who wanted to cut legal immigration, no wonder he's still pissed.
The Federalist said:after the anonymously sourced claims he helped peddle to launch the Iraq War were found to be false, he said, “Personally I don’t much care if the U.S. reports about weapons of mass destruction prove to be imaginary.”
The Federalist said:In the last year alone, he pushed the fake news about Russia paying bounties for American soldiers in Afghanistan.
The Federalist said:He pushed the anonymously sourced Atlantic claim — disputed by more than a dozen on-the-record and first-hand sources, contemporary weather reports, government documents, and other sourced information — that Trump avoided paying respects at Aisne-Marne cemetery in France because he hated soldiers.
The Federalist said:Most notably, when intelligence operatives couldn’t get even otherwise credulous Washington Post reporters to run with their absurd suggestion that Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn may have violated an obscure and never-used 1799 law called the Logan Act by doing the expected and prudent thing of talking to a Russian ambassador as President Trump’s incoming National Security Advisor, they had no trouble getting the columnist Ignatius to regurgitate their spin on the criminal leak of classified information about those phone calls. Ignatius’ complicity was a key component driving the continued investigation of Flynn by his political opponents and launching the hysterical belief among many on the left that Donald Trump had won in 2016 by being a traitor who had colluded with Russia to steal the election. It and follow-up regurgitations from the intelligence community also helped secure the expensive and cumbersome Special Counsel probe that caused the Trump administration so much pain. It turned out that not a single American was found to have colluded with Russia to steal the election. Nevertheless, Ignatius clings bitterly to the conspiracy theory.
The Federalist said:The Daily Beast had a source, anonymous of course, calling him Devin Nunes’ “Torquemada,” in the early days of his work. The New York Times also singled him out for abuse for his work exposing the Russia collusion hoax that they had pushed. The attacks always use anonymous sources. (Incidentally, the best thing about the Times attack was when it strongly suggested Patel’s hockey team “The Dons” — named for legendary Canadian hockey announcer Don Cherry — was actually named in honor of Donald Trump.)
Now, Ignatius’ anonymous sources claim that it is Patel who is “facing” an investigation by Department of Justice officials for “possible improper disclosure of classified information.” It’s impossible to know if such a potential investigation is real or just another one of the made-up claims that Ignatius is always eager to peddle.
He doesn’t say that Patel is “under” investigation, but “facing” one. He claims this potential investigation would be something that arose out of a complaint from an “intelligence agency,” but it’s impossible to know if that’s true or just something being said for the purpose of another Russia collusion hoax-style operation. One intelligence official said that while anyone can start an investigation, if Patel’s enemies had a legitimate claim against him, some evidence would have been provided. Ignatius provides no substantiation for the claim. But at least he didn’t accuse him of violating the Logan Act!
To take just one example, Ignatius claims that Patel was “a senior adviser to acting director of national intelligence Richard Grenell and his successor, John Ratcliffe, helping lead their efforts to remove senior career intelligence officers.” In fact, Patel was never an adviser, senior or otherwise, to Ratcliffe. And Ratcliffe never removed any senior career intelligence officials when he was Director of National Intelligence.
David Ignatius said:The third takeaway is the most perplexing and, in an odd way, reassuring. The truth is that for all the roadblocks these aides put in Trump’s way, he had the authority as commander in chief to do what he wanted in national security: declassify and release documents, hire and fire people, direct agencies to take actions he wanted. Facing resistance from courageous officials who sought to protect the government, Trump in many cases simply backed down.
As bad as this story was, in other words, it could have been much worse.
CNN Sports commentator who decided his history of talking about fouls made him qualified to discuss politics. Notable for being so extreme (among other things he's made death threats against people for disagreeing with him) NBC fired him for being too far-left for their left-leaning commentary show.Who is Keith Olbermann? I ask this non-ironically.
Who is Keith Olbermann? I ask this non-ironically.
Doesn't get more blatant than this.
On another note:
Questions about why one would ever venture into the breitbart comments pages aside, I have to say that if this is the worst possible snapshot of the comments this guy could find, it paints the community in a better light than he thinks.