Jump to content


Senior Member
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    United States

Previous Fields

  • Political Party:

Profile Fields

  • Website URL
    who knows?

Recent Profile Visitors

13,793 profile views
  1. {crickets} See, folks? I told you that the response to this article would be nothing but that.
  2. At least he's not a LIAR, like you.
  3. Musings of a Free Man

    That's right. In fact, most of the dead in the Norway mass shooting back in 2011 (remember that one?) were killed by a single banned hand gun that was repeatedly reloaded. +1 Although I could add a few to your list. Like authorities doing something when citizens over and over and over call them about someone who is *problematic*.
  4. Wonder if it was a Fast And Furious gun, come back to the states?
  5. Yeah ... now, at best, it's Russian *Meddling*.
  6. https://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschlichter/2018/02/19/liberals-fail-volume-xxxvii-n2451057
  7. Senator Casey knows … knows that Mueller’s so-called investigation has turned up NOTHING. He just wants to keep the pretense of Russian Collusion alive past ANOTHER election, hoping against hope that the election will get enough seats to shut down the many investigations into the REAL collusion that occurred. Talk about interfering with the election process. But Casey shouldn't concern himself with Mueller. He should fear the Big Ugly, which will happen regardless of what Mueller does, and undoubtedly before the election. After that, Mueller will likely be scurrying for cover, hoping to not get indicted himself. Speaking of which ... https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/02/18/too-funny-special-prosecutor-mueller-patched-together-much-of-his-muh-russia-indictment-from-old-news-articles/ So what exactly is going on here? Is this entire narrative really just creating the illusion of something, anything, simply because something began… continued… and was really nothing. Well, essentially, YES. The reality of the weak-sauce structure of the indictment reflects the abject absurdity of the two-year-long enterprise known as the vast Muh-Russia’ investigation. Essentially, a joint collaborative effort between the political intelligence community and their codependent media narrative engineers to manufacture a false premise. Everyone should have noticed the actual missing substance from the 2016 Joint Analysis Report as it was enhanced an presented in 2017. It was a goofy assembly of odd data labeling Russian hackers and such as planetary arch-villains. Hillary Clinton herself started pushing it on August 26th, 2016, with Pickle’s Vast Russian Planetary Conspiracy Theorem. REMINDER: We all laughed at the time, but where we are today is nothing more than what happens when the media, then government officials, follows the Clinton campaign’s pied piper. Madness. Abject absurdity.
  8. Now tommie, you know full well that grand juries only get to see what the prosecutor shows them and the other side doesn't get to even witness it. Which is why almost all grand juries indict. And when I say almost all, I mean almost all. For example ...
  9. https://off-guardian.org/2018/02/18/mueller-indictments-truth-v-liespin-the-observer-view/ FALSE: They’re not. At all. They are barely crimes, if they are crimes at all. Moon of Alabama has done an excellent breakdown of this. The primary charges of “fraud” are, essentially, that these 13 Russians did internet PR through sock-puppet accounts. This is a marketing tool as old as the internet itself, and not illegal. The British army has an entire section devoted to it. As does Israel. In fact, the Guardian reported on a massive American operation to do the same thing back in 2011. … snip … The secondary charges of “failing to register as a foreign agent” are more serious…but only as a precedent. The idea that foreign nationals have to register as agents before expressing opinions about domestic politics is absurd. George Soros wrote a column for the Guardian last week. Barack Obama begged Scotland to vote “No”, and campaigned against Brexit. Neither of them are British citizens, or (I’m guessing) registered with Her Majesty’s government as foreign agents. American politics are often the subject of global discussion. We’re not all foreign agents. Should we have to? Isn’t that an incredibly autocratic and dangerous idea? Does that include Israeli and Saudi DNC donors? The author feels the need to skirt around how ridiculous it is that only 13(!) Russians are meant to have swung the election, combating the highest paid and most advanced state security agencies in the world, so so will we. TRUE: This is the first true thing in the article. It could, however, be truer. For example, they could point out that Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein went out of his way, during his press conference, to underline that there was no evidence that “any American was a knowing participant in this illegal activity.” It was quite clearly a message – they have nothing on Trump. FALSE: No, they haven’t. Thirteen Russians doing viral marketing is not “rigging”, or “collusion” or “hacking”. For months now we’ve heard that the FSB colluded with Trump to steal that election – something there is still precisely ZERO evidence to support – the FBI indicting some low-paid marketing shills means nothing. Actually, the very fact that – after all this time, money and effort – the only charges are about some internet PR firm means that they could find nothing else. This is the biggest fish available, and it’s not worth the bait. FALSE: There is nothing linking the “Internet Research Agency” to the Kremlin. None of the people indicted are employees of the Russian government. That’s very basic journalism. Leaving that information out is a deliberate lie. MISLEADING: Trump hasn’t “defended Russia”, he has defended himself, claiming there was no collusion. He said if Russia did anything, he didn’t know about it and it didn’t swing the election. The indictments echo this sentiment, which the author concedes… TRUE: The Justice Dept. has admitted there is no evidence of collusion. In a sane world, that brings the matter to a close. FALSE: Yes it does. That is literally exactly what it means. FALSE: This is untrue, Trump Jr. never SOUGHT dirt, he was (allegedly) OFFERED it, but never received it or paid for it. This is in contrast to, say, Hillary Clinton’s campaign – who we know paid a foreign national (Christopher Steele) to dig up (aka, fabricate) dirt on Donald Trump. In fact Hillary Clinton paying a British spy to make up stuff is the only reason this investigation ever happened. MISLEADING: This is highly dishonest. Flynn’s “Russian connections” consisted of two meetings with the Russian ambassador, both of which happened AFTER the election. Neither of which were to do with collusion. The first was about protecting Israel from UNSC condemnations, the second about retaliatory sanctions. Once again, this was all after the election, none of it was illegal or even improper. Totally and completely irrelevant. TRUE: Yes, he was. And THIS MONTH the Justice Dept. “stressed that any collaboration between individuals associated with the Trump campaign and the 13 named Russians was “unwitting” and that these activities did not change the election’s outcome.” Ergo, Bannon told them nothing. MISLEADING: WikiLeaks, who published the DNC e-mails, said the e-mails were leaked, not hacked. They were very specific about that. There is no evidence of hacking at all. Also, to talk about the DNC e-mails, without referencing the blatant internal corruption they uncovered, or the DNC staffer who was killed in mysterious circumstances shortly afterwards, is blatant lying by omission. It’s important to remember, the only PROVEN cheating in the 2016 Presidential election was carried out by the DNC. The person responsible for this cheating resigned in disgrace, only to be immediately hired by Clinton’s campaign. MISLEADING: That was a joke. It is intellectually dishonest to the point of absurdity to pretend other wise. Watch it. He’s joking. This comparison is actually unintentionally apt. High Noon was released in 1952, the height of Hollywood’s “red scare” and is clearly an allegory for McCarthyism in Hollywood. The screenwriter/producer, Carl Foreman, was a former member of the Communist Party USA. He was called before HUAC and asked to name other communists, he refused, was labelled an “uncooperative witness”, blacklisted and fled to Britain. He didn’t return to the country of his birth for 30 years. His producer credit was taken off High Noon, and when his later work – Bridge on the River Kwai – won an oscar, it was not in his name. This was McCarthyism in action. People having their livelihoods destroyed by rumor and gossip, being “tainted” by communism in the “land of the free”. Just 4 or 5 years ago the Western world looked back on this era as absurd paranoia, today suddenly it doesn’t seem so ridiculous. Today we have McCarthyism 2.0. Anonymous editorials blaming the Russians for everything and anything they can think of. What happened to Gary Cooper, you ask? The film star to whom our anonymous Observer editor so aptly compares Robert Mueller? Well, he happily testified in front of HUAC to protect his career. Unlike Mueller, he at least had conscience enough to look ashamed of himself. FALSE: There is not plenty of reason to believe this, as evidenced by the total lack of sources cited to support this assertion. FALSE: This is nothing but scare-mongering. There has been no evidence collected that Russia took any part in any “cyber warfare” anywhere in Europe. Quite the opposite. The head of French cyber security said there was “no trace of Russian hacking” on the French Presidential election – which Macron won. Youtube, Facebook and twitter all said they saw “no evidence” Russia had influenced the Brexit vote. The New York Times even had an article wondering why Russia hadn’t “hacked” the German election. FALSE: Again, there is no evidence of this. Certainly none linked in this article, which apparently doesn’t believe in sources or citations. MISLEADING: Russia’s proven involvement in Ukraine is one bloodless referendum. I would suggest the nameless author(s) of this editorial google “Iraq 2003”, “Libya 2011”, “Gaza”, “Gitmo”…you know, the usual. If Russians are “mocking” international law, the Israelis have tarred and feathered it, and the American’s took it out behind the barn and shot it in the head. This level of hypocrisy is nauseating. This would more accurately be phrased as “It is winning a war against ISIS and other coalition armed proxies, whom we fund and train to execute regime change.” Syrians are returning to Syria, ISIS are all but beaten. “Effectively steal” meaning, in this instance, “win”. Russians support Putin, even Shaun Walker admits that in his absurd “goodbye Russia” article. In summary, this editorial completely misses the point of these indictments. They are not the first domino to fall, this isn’t the sign of a coming impeachment. Far from it, it’s an admission hidden in an accusation. After all this time, and all this hysteria, they have shown they have nothing. The apparent budget of the Internet Research Agency was 1.2 million dollars. The Pentagon spends that much on stationary. Is this the extent of Russian “hacking” we heard so much about? Because foreign interference doesn’t look like 13 people with fake facebook names. Real “Foreign interference” looks like rigged elections for underdog candidates. “Foreign interference” costs five billion dollars and has leaked phone calls to prove it. It looks like £700,000 from a billionaire foreign national to push their own private agenda. It results in military coups of democratic presidents. It looks like armed contras selling cocaine to the American public. It looks Yemen and Honduras and Iran and Venezuela. El Salvador, Cuba and Vietnam. This is what “foreign interference” looks like: … snip image of bombed out destroyed middle easter city … And this… This is what dangerous, dishonest war-mongering looks like. The following points are mentioned in the indictments, but never brought up by The Observer. We consider them important. ▪ The Russian “interference operation” was started in 2014, well before Donald Trump announced he was running for President. ▪ The Russian indictees and their “co-conspirators” are accused of campaigning for Jill Stein and Bernie Sanders as well as Donald Trump. ▪ The accusations state that the Internet Research Agency held both pro- and anti-Trump protests in the same city, on the same day, after the election. ▪ …they also apparently promoted black lives matter and others. Now, I predict all I'll hear in response to this is article is {crickets}, ad-hominems or derails. Just watch ...
  10. McCabe altered his 302 of Flynn interview! If true, they need to vacate Flynn’s plea and indict McCabe. And then they need to rebuild the FBI from the ground up.
  11. Seriously. What's wrong with you?
  12. What in the world is wrong with you?