Friday, February 02, 2018

Haley Slams Russia at GOP Retreat

US Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley slammed Russia at the GOP retreat in West Virginia on Thursday, definitively telling Republican lawmakers that Moscow "is not, will not, be our friend." "As long as their government has the values that it has, and as long as it conducts itself the way it does internationally," Haley said. Haley made it very clear that Russia meddled in the 2016 US election ... While President Donald Trump has expressed consistent skepticism over Russian election meddling efforts, Haley has raised the issue on several occasions, calling Russian cyber-interference in American elections "warfare" in October.

Comments

Yet she does the bidding of their Orange puppet.

#1 | Posted by jpw at 2018-02-02 01:10 PM

They keep repeating that Russian interference made no difference in outcome but they offer zero proof of that. Putin and the Russians are experts at meddling in elections, they aren't amateurs and would not have wasted the money and time in their efforts without an expectation of results. To pretend otherwise is just partisan hackery.

#2 | Posted by danni at 2018-02-02 01:30 PM

She's going to piss off her boss's boss.

#3 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2018-02-02 01:47 PM

Having recently been a victim herself, Haley should know better than to slut shame Moscow. Very troubling.

#4 | Posted by moder8 at 2018-02-02 01:48 PM

They keep repeating that Russian interference made no difference in outcome but they offer zero proof of that. - #2 | Posted by Danni at 2018-02-02 01:30 PM
The people making the claim that the interference did make a difference have also offered zero proof of that, though, right? To pretend otherwise is just partisan hackery.

#5 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-02-02 02:24 PM

We have been so tough on Russia, except when we decided not to enforce the sanctions approved by Congress.

#6 | Posted by Bubba10 at 2018-02-02 02:41 PM

#5 | POSTED BY AVIGDORE

That's objectively false. We have proof from Facebook and Twitter.

We have evidence in the form of actual articles and fake accounts.

Your willful ignorance alone proves Russian success.

#7 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2018-02-02 02:53 PM

Someone with honor would resign.

#8 | Posted by truthhurts at 2018-02-02 03:30 PM

"See, my girlfriend even said nasty things about Russia, so that proves it, no collusion. Ooops, what did I just say? That was just a joke. But still, no collusion."

Trump

#9 | Posted by danni at 2018-02-02 04:25 PM

Haley is part of the deep state. She is not a real Republican. She is fake news. She is going to hell. She came here on a comet. We need a wall to keep out the illegal aliens.

Russia is good. Putin is our friend. He looks good without a shirt.

#10 | Posted by cbob at 2018-02-02 04:31 PM

The people making the claim that the interference did make a difference have also offered zero proof of that, though, right? To pretend otherwise is just partisan hackery.

#5 | Posted by Avigdore

You do realize that is why the FBI investigations began in the first place?

The FBI is always monitoring the Russians Spy rings even the Presidents are not.

It is their FN job.

And it came to the FBI's attention that the Russians were up to something big. And the Trumps and their minions got snared well before the elections because they were talking to Russian spies.

And you are now learning the rest of the story. Well, maybe YOU are not learning anything but most reasonable people sure are.

#11 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-02-02 05:38 PM

And yet....Trump refuses to issue the Congressional mandated sanctions on Russia....

#12 | Posted by Sycophant at 2018-02-02 07:53 PM

#10 was an amazing impression of Matt Drudge. Either that, or it was Matt Drudge.

#13 | Posted by sentinel at 2018-02-03 08:29 AM

There's no doubt that the Russian government tried to influence our elections. Whether they succeeded in flipping the outcome is a totally different question.

#14 | Posted by sentinel at 2018-02-03 08:32 AM

The people making the claim that the interference did make a difference have also offered zero proof of that, though, right? To pretend otherwise is just partisan hackery.

#5 | POSTED BY AVIGDORE

The people who have dedicated every ounce of their posting energy to defending the Russian interference since the very first day they arrived at Drudge Retort are highly suspect of their loyalty to the USA.

#15 | Posted by oldwhiskeysour at 2018-02-03 09:28 AM

They keep repeating that Russian interference made no difference in outcome but they offer zero proof of that. - Danni

You can't prove something didn't happen.

defending the Russian interference. -ows

What's to defend?

There are only accusations.

#6 | POSTED BY BUBBA10

You mean like dismantling defense missile systems...

Selling our uranium to the Russians...

After the election I will have more "flexibility".,.

You mean that sort of toughness?

#16 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2018-02-03 10:17 AM

#16

You're defending Trump, a small time monster, actively punked by bigger mobsters.

#17 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 10:35 AM

Monster, mobster. Both work. What do you do for a living really?

#18 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 10:36 AM

That's objectively false. We have proof from Facebook and Twitter.
We have evidence in the form of actual articles and fake accounts.
#7 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2018-02-02 02:53 PM

No one has claimed that Russia didn't purchase ads and make social media posts. The statement was that "those who claim that the interference did make a difference have also offered zero proof of that". Has anyone, anywhere came forward and stated that their vote changed because of the fake social media posts? That would be some evidence. Would you like to actually respond to the point I made instead of the one you made up?

#19 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-02-03 10:45 AM

Haley's looking toward her potential political life after Trump. She should if she wants to have one.

#20 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-02-03 10:47 AM

#19

AVIGDORE is not from here. No one misses the obvious points as easily as he does with out having a profit motive.

#21 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 10:52 AM

The obvious point here is that only an agent of a foreign power would defend what other foreign agents do.

#22 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 10:53 AM

#11 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-02-02 05:38 PM
Is that your long-winded way of agreeing that you also have not seen anyone show any proof that the propaganda that Russia engaged in made any difference in the election?

You're defending Trump, a small time monster, actively punked by bigger mobsters. - #17 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 10:35 AM
Are you aware that it is possible to defend truth while not defending Trump? If someone says that Trump( a terrible leader and liar) claimed to have walked 10 miles a day for 100 years, it is perfectly reasonable to tell that person that they are wrong. Or at least ask them to cite where he's made that statement. There is enough bad about Trump that we don't need to lie to make it worse.

When someone makes a statement, like Danni's, where they make an inflammatory statement about 1 side of an issue, it is perfectly normal to remind them that both sides have done the same thing about the same issue. There's no defending Trump in showing someone that they're being myopic.

#23 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-02-03 10:56 AM

#23

AVIGDORE, Comrade. Although the moment is not quite yet, wait a few weeks, the time for your faux reasonableness will have passed.

#24 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 11:02 AM

Where do you think this is all going? The. Possible outcomes are narrowing quickly. I'm sick if bad actors attempting to use positive values against those who genuinely hold them.

#25 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 11:04 AM

The obvious point here is that only an agent of a foreign power would defend what other foreign agents do. -#22 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 10:53 AM
I have never defended Russia's use of propaganda. Stop pretending that I have, or show me where I have. Have some integrity.

#26 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-02-03 11:06 AM

The way I read you is that if Trump moves on a coup you'll spend endless hours mincing the definition of coup.

#27 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 11:07 AM

You defend Russian propaganda every time you say it didn't really matter.

#28 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 11:09 AM

The chance that Trump will subvert this government for his own needs is far less than zero. Tell me you agree, or take your definition of integrity and shove it

#29 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 11:11 AM

Where do you think this is all going? - #25 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 11:04 AM
Allow me to quote myself to answer you:
Like everyone who isn't wildly partisan, I continue to believe that any wrongdoing will be turned up by the investigation, and I am quite content to allow the investigation to continue to do its job. #401 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-02-03 07:28 AM

You defend Russian propaganda every time you say it didn't really matter. - #28 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 11:09 AM
Perhaps you would be so kind as to quote where I have ever claimed that Russian propaganda didn't really matter?
Look, I can't fight stuff that you make up on a whim. You are making claims about me. Everything you know about me is on this website. Show your evidence of your claims or admit that you're fighting something you've made up in your head.

#30 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-02-03 11:11 AM

Far more than zero, but you take my point.

#31 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 11:13 AM

The chance that Trump will subvert this government for his own needs is far less than zero. Tell me you agree, or take your definition of integrity and shove it
#29 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 11:11 AM

I think you might want to re-read what you wrote.
I'll answer to what I think you were trying to write:
Sure, the likelihood of Trump trying to subvert the government for his own ends is certainly greater than zero.
The likelihood of Trump succeeding in subverting the government for his own ends is certainly less than the likelihood he tries.
You know what neither of those 2 statements require? Lying about anything.

#32 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-02-03 11:14 AM

Stop playing the sophist and read your own posts. Russian propaganda has an obvious effect as witness you are arguing it doesn't.

Your argument, your defense, is the proof. Surely that point is not too subtle for you?

#33 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 11:17 AM

Russian propaganda has palpably changed American political behavior, as witness people finding questions concerning your alleged profession you can't answer.

#34 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 11:21 AM

I never argued that Russian propaganda had no effect.
I argued that NEITHER side has provided any proof of that effect.
Maybe you need to read what I actually write instead of what you think I'm trying to say.
Here, check it out again:

They keep repeating that Russian interference made no difference in outcome but they offer zero proof of that...To pretend otherwise is just partisan hackery. - #2 | Posted by Danni at 2018-02-02 01:30 PM
The people making the claim that the interference did make a difference have also offered zero proof of that, though, right? To pretend otherwise is just partisan hackery.#5 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-02-02 02:24 PM

I did not defend the propaganda. I informed Danni that NEITHER side had provided proof. Read what I actually wrote, not how you feel I wrote.

#35 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-02-03 11:22 AM

Your argument, your defense, is the proof. Surely that point is not too subtle for you? - #33 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 11:17 AM
You keep claiming that I have defended the propaganda without actually citing me defending propaganda. How many times are you going to accuse me of doing something that I haven't done without providing some actual evidence that doesn't come out of your head? Is backing up your words too hard?

#36 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-02-03 11:25 AM

"The people making the claim that the interference did make a difference have also offered zero proof of that, though, right? To pretend otherwise is just partisan hackery."

The opposite is also true. No one has offered proof that Russian meddling didn't make a difference, but plenty of people claim it had no effect.

"Has anyone, anywhere came forward and stated that their vote changed because of the fake social media posts? That would be some evidence. Would you like to actually respond to the point I made instead of the one you made up?"

Has anyone, anywhere come forward and stated that their vote wasn't changed because of the fake social media posts? That would still be hard to do at this point since people don't know all the fake social media posts they were exposed to.

#37 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-02-03 11:25 AM

as witness people finding questions concerning your alleged profession you can't answer. - #34 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 11:21 AM
I'm not sure what you mean by this.

#38 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-02-03 11:27 AM

#37 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-02-03 11:25 AM
Both of those are true. Your first point was Danni's original statement and I responded to her that there was no proof either way (see that word 'also' in my response?). The 2nd point is you again agreeing with me that no one has provided proof that the election was or was not affected by Russia's use of propaganda.

#39 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-02-03 11:30 AM

#38

Then I can understand why you don't understand why I don't trust you.

#40 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 11:31 AM

You still think I am not on the Ike right now? Ok. How about this, if I can track down the outside number to csoow on the Ike, would you call it?

#41 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-02-03 11:37 AM

one has provided proof that the election was or was not affected by Russia's use of propaganda.

#39 | POSTED BY AVIGDORE

First of all it is still under investigation. So all the facts are not in and we learn more almost everyday.

Second, even if they did not affect the election either way does not mean it did not happen or is still happening.

If a thief tries to rob a bank but fails and gets nothing does not mean that nothing happened. A crime was still committed.

#42 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-02-03 11:40 AM

#41

I'm not an expert, so I expect experts to know more than I do.

#43 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 11:43 AM

#42 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-02-03 11:40 AM
1. I agree about the investigation, which is why I said so earlier. Read number 30 in this thread.
2. I never claimed that it didn't happen. I have stated that the propaganda actions by Russia did happen in this very thread 19, 26, & 35.
3. It's a good thing that I've never claimed that nothing happened then, right?

#44 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-02-03 11:45 AM

You want to go another round, expert?

#45 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 11:45 AM

Has anyone, anywhere came forward and stated that their vote changed because of the fake social media posts?

Most people do not publicly admit that they are gullible retards.

#46 | Posted by REDIAL at 2018-02-03 11:45 AM

Because no one has any idea what 'the spot' is? Seriously, if I call CSOOW right now (their J-dial is 5615) and try to get you the outside number to call and talk with living, breathing, Navy Victor, would you do so? Would that at least prove that I am who I claim to be?

#47 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-02-03 11:47 AM

I want you to tell me something I can't Google, like I did you.

#48 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 11:49 AM

3. It's a good thing that I've never claimed that nothing happened then, right?

#44 | POSTED BY AVIGDORE

So basically you have no point.

👌

#49 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-02-03 11:51 AM

I once met a man who said he was a former MiG 29 pilot. He didn't know what color light illunminated his control panel at night.

#50 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 11:51 AM

You've asked me a grand total of 1 question. What is 'the spot'.
I have never heard of it, neither has the EMCS or MCS sitting next to me, not the ABEC snoring in the chair behind me. You're going to have to ask another.

#51 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-02-03 11:51 AM

"Most people do not publicly admit that they are gullible retards."

because they don't realize they ARE a gullible retard.

which makes it hard to track the number of people who were actually impacted by fake social media posts.

I personally don't think it makes that big of a difference. Fake social media posts are read by people who want to believe that crap in the first place.

#52 | Posted by eberly at 2018-02-03 11:52 AM

EMCS or EMC

#53 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-02-03 11:52 AM

#51

What I get from you is that you know no one in the Navy serving on carriers who is interested in the Battle of Midway.

#54 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 11:55 AM

You must admit that's odd.

#55 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 11:56 AM

Here's another for you: What famous carrier in WW II introduced the angled deck?

#56 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 11:58 AM

I once met a man who said he was a former MiG 29 pilot. He didn't know what color light illunminated his control panel at night.

#50 | POSTED BY ZED AT 2018-02-03 11:51 AM

And how exactly did you know the answer to that, COMRADE?

(see how easy that was?)

#57 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-02-03 12:01 PM

You might find this on Google. Want some key words?

#58 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 12:02 PM

Zed
I guess part of that was my fault. You asked me where 'the spot' was, and I didn't know. So I asked others where on a carrier 'the spot' is. To which they also couldn't answer. Miscommunication all around. And maybe some officers would know more about various carrier's actions in Midway, but I guarantee that it isn't really the topic of conversation this century.

We can talk about the reason I was here so late last night (as you can tell by my late posts here) was because we brought AFT IC switchboard down for some maintenance, but it HAD to be back up before Rx took down the 3S groups or the hydra (Wifcom) would have neither primary nor secondary power.
We can discuss how after I left, Rx DID take down the 3S group, but since ABT 02-189-1 was left in manual, it never switched to it's alternate so hangar bay 3 lights were off until I got here (with Dunkin Donuts) at 630.

#59 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-02-03 12:02 PM

#57

I talked to SITZKRIEG.

#60 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 12:03 PM

Zed, man I am not a US Navy historian. I am not going to be able to prove to you that I'm on the Ike by coming up with battle-group data from WW2. I don't think you know what the government teaches to the people in the Navy these days.

#61 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-02-03 12:05 PM

You could always ask RCade. He and I have communicated on my @navy.mil account.

#62 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-02-03 12:15 PM

Zed, I can tell that Avigdore is still a Squid (and not back on the block) by the way he talks and how he uses the term "pants" instead of "trousers." :)

#63 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-02-03 12:21 PM

"The statement was that "those who claim that the interference did make a difference have also offered zero proof of that". Has anyone, anywhere came forward and stated that their vote changed because of the fake social media posts?"

Then, logically, we can conclude that Vladimer Putin is stupid and was willing to waste millions of dollars to try to affect our elections with no results. Were that true we would have heard some mention of the the executions of the failures but we didn't so that leads me to believe he feels that his espionage was successfu.

#64 | Posted by danni at 2018-02-03 12:52 PM

"Has anyone, anywhere came forward and stated that their vote changed because of the fake social media posts?"

Is that how advertising works?
Can you always point to one specific advertising event you witnessed which led you to make a specific consumer choice?
No.

#65 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-02-03 01:39 PM

csoow on the Ike, would you call it? #41 | POSTED BY AVIGDORE

Duty day today?

#66 | Posted by GOnoles92 at 2018-02-03 01:41 PM

that leads me to believe he feels that his espionage was successfu. - #64 | Posted by Danni at 2018-02-03 12:52 PM
I care almost as much about how Vladimir Putin feels as I do about how you feel.
If you are truly, really, and honestly concerned about Putin not feeling like his propaganda was successful, then the simplest course of action is to advertise your complete support of the government and make changes to it come election-day, but something tells me that it really isn't Putin's feelings about the success of the propaganda that you really care about.

Russian activities during the election were designed not to elect Donald Trump, but to destabilize the democratic process and foment division in our country. You passing along biased and misleading information in an attempt to express your anger at the 'other side' certainly are not working to bring our country together. You are doing an excellent job in aiding that propaganda.

The really funny part is that many here claim that I am some Russian agent because again and again I point out bias and untruth being passed here. Somehow my attempt to help you see that your views are biased means that I'm working for the other side. You really have been overcome with the propaganda that you claim to hate so very much. The evidence of the success of Russian propaganda is the wild belief by people who claim so vigorously that they are right, when the facts say otherwise. People who have been caught up in the righteous indignation of things that they THINK are true, that really aren't. I'm the bad guy for pointing out those falsehoods, not because I really am an agent of Russia, but because I rob you of that feeling of righteousness. It's a lot harder to recognize that evil isn't simply those who think differently than you.

Read entire post threads here. See how many times people disparage their own countrymen because of where they were born or that they think differently. That is the evidence that Putin accomplished something with his propaganda, and it has nothing to do with the results of the election.

#67 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-02-03 01:45 PM

"See how many times people disparage their own countrymen because of where they were born or that they think differently."

You're disparaging people who act that way, right?

#68 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-02-03 01:49 PM

""Has anyone, anywhere came forward and stated that their vote changed because of the fake social media posts?""

I don't remember anyone ever telling me they changed their vote because of an ad but campaigns still spend MILLIONS of dollars on them, do you think they are wasting their money?

I honestly do know people who quote right wing talking points to justify their support for Trump, (Reagan, Bush 1, Bush 2 as well) but honestly I have little respect for them except that I do know that they vote. That is the one essential component that the right holds over the left, they vote. Many of us on the left are too lazy to exercise our right. If we ever manage to change that we will change America and probably the world. I won't hold my breath.

#69 | Posted by danni at 2018-02-03 01:49 PM

I love me some Netflix though! It's like a drug.

#70 | Posted by danni at 2018-02-03 01:50 PM

#67

Pithy you are not, AVIGDORE.

#71 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 01:52 PM

"Russian activities during the election were designed not to elect Donald Trump, but to destabilize the democratic process and foment division in our country."

Destabilizing the democratic process, you say.
Well, that certainly seems to warrant a bipartisan investigation both deep and wide.
Any thoughts on why the GOP doesn't think this ought to be investigated?

#72 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-02-03 01:54 PM

Duty day today? - #66 | Posted by GOnoles92 at 2018-02-03 01:41 PM
Can't I be here for love of country? Ike's in the shipyard. I'm here most Saturdays.

#73 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-02-03 01:54 PM

Any thoughts on why the GOP doesn't think this ought to be investigated? - #72 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-02-03 01:54 PM
Any thoughts why the sky is red? Or do you have some evidence of the GOP stating that there should be no investigation into it?

#74 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-02-03 01:56 PM

Some points of view aren't worthy of respect. Any train of thought abetting the imminent Constitutional crisis make their holder's sympathies suspect.

#75 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 01:56 PM

#73

Care to state that a faction of the GOP doesn't want it investigated!

#76 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 01:58 PM

"Or do you have some evidence of the GOP stating that there should be no investigation into it?"

Nunez Memo?

#77 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-02-03 01:59 PM

"Russian activities during the election were designed not to elect Donald Trump, but to destabilize the democratic process and foment division in our country."

I don't care how ridiculously long your post is it is still just a pile of crap. It's just a bigger pile of crap. The Russians colluded with the Trumps since 2013, that's a fact, he got elected with their help whether you are adult enough to accept that or not. Without their help he would not be in the WH. Don't ever try to convince me that Putin just throws away millions of dollars without any hope of achieving his goals. Money speaks, that's actually more true than "money is free speech" as our corrupted SC decided.
The members of that court who made that decision should be impeached and prosecuted for accepting bribes. Don't even pretend it isn't so because so many of them were seen taking free trips all over the place that Congressmen would have been prosecuted for. Cheney and Scalia on hunting trip together? Who do you think picked up the tab for food, housing and air fare? They are sold out crooks and our nation is suffering greatly because the right refuses to see what is right in front of their stupid faces.

#78 | Posted by danni at 2018-02-03 01:59 PM

This is what gets you into trouble.

#79 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 01:59 PM

"Russian activities during the election were designed not to elect Donald Trump, but to destabilize the democratic process and foment division in our country."

Was the election of Donald Trump an indicator of their success?
Let's say the election had gone to Hillary Clinton, would that be the same amount of success?
Or do you merely know the goal, and have no idea what achieving the goal would look like?

#80 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-02-03 02:00 PM

Nunez Memo? - #77 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-02-03 01:59 PM

To me, Nunez' memo hints at unethical behavior on the part of people seeking FISA warrant. That is not the same as claiming that the GOP doesn't want an investigation. Would you care to quote from it where it makes any claim about there not being a need for an investigation?

#81 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-02-03 02:04 PM

This is what I suspect. The Russia scandal implicates many more Republicans than we know. Hard to know why these formerly hard headed conservative types would be defending this dangerous nonsense at this level of fantacism.

#82 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 02:05 PM

So I think Nunez knows that when Trump falls he falls, and I think Speaker Ryan is afraid of the same fate

#83 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 02:07 PM

Without their help he would not be in the WH. #78 | Posted by Danni at 2018-02-03 01:59 PM.
Citation-says-what?

Don't ever try to convince me that Putin just throws away millions of dollars without any hope of achieving his goals.
We disagree as to what Putin's goals were. I think that you are helping him to achieve them. I apologize that my 4 paragraph response was too long for you.

#84 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-02-03 02:07 PM

I think it's time to REALLY examine the finances of these people, starting with Trump.

#85 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 02:08 PM

This is what gets you into trouble. - #79 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 01:59 PM

Disagreeing with people like Danni? That's trouble I'll accept.
Telling Snoofy to cite his claims? Why would that be trouble?
Donnerboy can't understand what I'm writing? We're all in trouble, then.

#86 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-02-03 02:09 PM

#84

I know that Putin wants a money laundering compromised stooge in the White House. Why you don't know it is the reason we worry about you.

#87 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 02:10 PM

I think it's time to REALLY examine the finances of these people, starting with Trump. - #85 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 02:08 PM
Do you think that Mueller isn't investigating Trump's finances? Are you not aware that every state in the union and the fed have agencies who investigate financial misdeeds? You just want them to investigate HARDER, maybe?

#88 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-02-03 02:11 PM

#86

You get in trouble for failing to touch base with reality at key points. You have an agenda.

#89 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 02:12 PM

I want know who is paying off Nunez, and Ryan, and a few others.

#90 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 02:14 PM

#80 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-02-03 02:00 PM
I'll not be playing the game where I answer questions and ask my own only to have you ignore them and ask more. If you wish to engage in a conversation, then do so.

#91 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-02-03 02:14 PM

Of course Mueller is looking into Trump's money. The least likely outcome here is that Trump will continue to let him do it.

#92 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 02:16 PM

"Nunez' memo hints at unethical behavior on the part of people seeking FISA warrant. That is not the same as claiming that the GOP doesn't want an investigation. Would you care to quote from it where it makes any claim about there not being a need for an investigation?"

The memo is garbage. So you might as well quit referring to it as though it is authoritative of anything. There is unethical behavior throughout our government and it starts at the top.

The memo is a biased opinion piece only vaguely related to the evidence. There is only one reason why the White House and Nunes colluded to release this memo.

To undermine the FBI and the Russian investigation. You know that we know that and Trump has already admitted that.

#93 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-02-03 02:17 PM

The members of that court who made that decision should be impeached and prosecuted for accepting bribes.

You'll have to dig them up first.

#94 | Posted by et_al at 2018-02-03 02:18 PM

To me, Nunez' memo hints at unethical behavior on the part of people seeking FISA warrant.

Well, you ducked last time.

On what basis do you contend there is unethical actively on the part of DOJ lawyers? - #249 | Posted by et_al at 2018-02-02 04:04 PM |

Considering that I never contended that there was unethical activity, only that the memo hinted at it, I don't think that I'll be defending that strawman.
#263 | Posted by Avigdore

So, let's try again. On what basis do you contend there is unethical actively on the part of DOJ lawyers? I'll give you a head start. Here's the ethical rule regarding candor to a tribunal. www.dcbar.org

#95 | Posted by et_al at 2018-02-03 02:33 PM

#10 was an amazing impression of Matt Drudge. Either that, or it was Matt Drudge.

#13 | Posted by sentinel at 2018-02-03 08:29 AM | Reply | Flag:

Thanks. All I had to do was turn off my brain.

#96 | Posted by cbob at 2018-02-03 02:35 PM


You have an agenda.

#89 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 02:12 PM

Of COURSE I have an agenda. I've stated it clearly numerous times. I am trying to engage in discussions with people who think differently than me. Doing so, I hope to open their eyes to things they haven't thought of and expose myself to thoughts and opinions that I wouldn't otherwise. While engaged in those actions, I also choose to push back against hypocrisy and lies, because that's just the kind of ahole that I am.

Take this single thread as an example. This all began with a comment from Danni claiming that one side of a subject hadn't provided proof of a negative, and anyone claiming otherwise was a partisan hack. I called her attention to the fact that neither side had provided that proof. I didn't even dispute her claim, just tried to show her the hypocrisy of holding only 1 side to that standard.
That I had the AUDACITY to expect BOTH sides to be held to the same standard was the clarion call of the Russian Agent to some people here.

That's all for me today folks. Enjoy your weekend.

#97 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-02-03 02:35 PM

So you might as well quit referring to it as though it is authoritative of anything. - #93 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-02-03 02:17 PM
You should target this statement to the only person here who has done so:
Nunez Memo? - #77 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-02-03 01:59 PM

#95 | Posted by et_al at 2018-02-03 02:33 PM
Once again, even though you already quoted me saying it once, I have never contended that there was any unethical activity by the DOJ. I claim that Nunez' memo is trying to paint that picture by hinting at unethical behavior.

#98 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-02-03 02:40 PM

So you might as well quit referring to it as though it is authoritative of anything. - #93 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-02-03 02:17 PM
You should target this statement to the only person here who has done so:
Nunez Memo? - #77 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-02-03 01:59 PM

"Nunez' memo hints at unethical behavior on the part of people seeking FISA warrant"

I am targeting the person who said this.

Was that you or your handlers?

#99 | Posted by donnerboy at 2018-02-03 02:53 PM

They keep repeating that Russian interference made no difference in outcome but they offer zero proof of that.

#2 | POSTED BY DANNI

I have no doubt that Russian meddling actually occurred. But the burden of proof that the meddling actually changed the outcome is upon those that make that claim.

Until someone provides substantial proof that Russian meddling actually changed the outcome and that someone in America was actually at least complicit in such meddling, there is no crime.

America certainly holds no moral high ground when it comes to meddling in elections. Although, for the sake of security, we should be doing everything we can to minimize such meddling. Since it mostly seems to benefit Republicans, most Republicans don't seem to have any interest in doing anything about it.

#100 | Posted by Whatsleft at 2018-02-03 02:57 PM

#98 | Posted by Avigdore

So, unsubstantiated innuendo it is.

#101 | Posted by et_al at 2018-02-03 03:12 PM

"Of COURSE I have an agenda. I've stated it clearly numerous times. I am trying to engage in discussions with people who think differently than me."

Like this?

"I'll not be playing the game where I answer questions and ask my own only to have you ignore them and ask more. If you wish to engage in a conversation, then do so."

#102 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-02-03 03:30 PM

"Considering that I never contended that there was unethical activity"

But the GOP contends that, right?
Why do you think they are doing that?
I'll make it really simple: Is it to derail the investigation, or not?

#103 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-02-03 03:33 PM

Then, logically, we can conclude that Vladimer Putin is stupid and was willing to waste millions of dollars to try to affect our elections with no results. Were that true we would have heard some mention of the the executions of the failures but we didn't so that leads me to believe he feels that his espionage was successfu.
#64 | POSTED BY DANNI

It had no effect, but ironically, Putin got what he wanted anyways; Trump refused Russian sanctions.

#104 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2018-02-03 04:44 PM

Is it to derail the investigation, or not? - #103 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-02-03 03:33 PM
You realize you still have done nothing but ask questions, not actually engage in discussion, right?
Yawn.
It (The memo) does notify the public of potentially unethical behavior in the request of the FISA warrant, but clearly the reason for that is to muddy the waters in regards to Mueller's investigation. - #192 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-02-02 03:18 PM

#105 | Posted by Avigdore at 2018-02-03 04:49 PM

The Republicans are damaging critical institutions that are currently being run by Republicans.

What gives?

#106 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2018-02-03 04:50 PM

How about this:

Putin funded the meddling in U.S. elections without any hope of directly influencing voters via propaganda (i.e., Facebook, Instagram, the Retort, etc.). The effort was MEANT to be found out; the implication against Russia was Putin's intended outcome.

Putin forced many American voters to consider the innate gender based roles in the face of an attacking force. And not just any attacking force, an old foe that we once thought was overcome. Putin forced a significant group of Americans to make their choice between a man (protector) and a woman (nurturer), not based on any political factors.

#107 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2018-02-03 04:57 PM

"Nunez' memo hints at unethical behavior on the part of people seeking FISA warrant"

Hints at unethical behavior? Come for the FBI and DOJ best not miss.

#108 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2018-02-03 04:58 PM

Then, logically, we can conclude that Vladimir Putin is stupid...

Vladimir Putin is a lot of things, but stupid is not one of them.

#109 | Posted by REDIAL at 2018-02-03 04:59 PM

Then, logically, we can conclude that Vladimir Putin is stupid...

For some reason I have doubts that you plugged this into a truth table.

#110 | Posted by GOnoles92 at 2018-02-03 05:03 PM

:Is it to derail the investigation, or not? - #103 | Posted by snoofy"

I guess that question was too hard.
GoNoles, want to see if you can pin the tail on the donkey?

#111 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-02-03 06:03 PM

"clearly the reason for that is to muddy the waters in regards to Mueller's investigation. - #192 | Posted by Avigdore"

But you still can't see how the GOP thinks there should be no investigation?
Oh. Do you have an "angle," like, the GOP would be okay with some other investigation, but not this tainted one?
How many investigations cam fit on the head of a pin, that kind of thing?

#112 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-02-03 06:06 PM

Lol, ---- if I know the intentions of some public figure we only "know" of through their media portrayal.

#113 | Posted by GOnoles92 at 2018-02-03 06:08 PM

Then, logically, we can conclude that Vladimer Putin is stupid and {...} willing to waste millions of dollars to try to affect our elections {..}.

If "logical," then it deserves truth table analysis...
Brb, running it on that sentence:

p -> (q ^ r)

#114 | Posted by GOnoles92 at 2018-02-03 06:13 PM

#113

That's why you get rolled.

#115 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-03 06:36 PM

"To me, Nunez' memo hints at unethical behavior on the part of people seeking FISA warrant. That is not the same as claiming that the GOP doesn't want an investigation. Would you care to quote from it where it makes any claim about there not being a need for an investigation?"

That is the most educated but pretending to be stupid comment I've probably ever read. Goatman you are smart, we all know that, but we aren't dumb just because you are smart.

#116 | Posted by danni at 2018-02-03 07:49 PM

"If "logical," then it deserves truth table analysis...
Brb, running it on that sentence:"

Enough crazy codes, what do you really want to say Noles?

#117 | Posted by danni at 2018-02-03 07:51 PM

Enough crazy codes, what do you really want to say Noles?

Usually "derp derp derp Trump Good derp derp derp"

#118 | Posted by REDIAL at 2018-02-03 08:00 PM

Gonoles excels in putting forth unreadable posts.
It's better that way, you need not waste any time trying to "understand" them.

#119 | Posted by woe_is_W at 2018-02-03 08:08 PM

But Trump is with Russia, touching each other

Hillary got more votes.

Biases on the part of investigators do not matter.

We must resist any progress so that we can say nothing got done and that's why we need more Democrats in Congress.

The economy was fixin' to get going because of the diection of President Obama. Slashes to regulations and taxes are incidental and perhaps allegorical.

$1000 is a crumb.

Far left / socialists will hijack some primaries and run as Democrats. Nationally popular, we'll see how it plays locally.

#120 | Posted by Nuke_Gently at 2018-02-04 05:43 AM

"$1000 is a crumb"

Not to that $1 50 a week teacher Ryan bragged about who isn't getting it.

#121 | Posted by Zed at 2018-02-04 08:33 AM

If you make $10 an hour, $1000 is two and a half weeks' work

#122 | Posted by Nuke_Gently at 2018-02-04 11:00 AM

It's still a crumb, it's just that you are also accustomed to living on crumbs, if you make $10/hr.

#123 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-02-04 11:18 AM

Drudge Retort Headlines

Why Always the AR-15, Homicidal Nutjobs? (106 comments)

Billy Graham Dies (94 comments)

Trump Wants to Arm Teachers (89 comments)

Trump Needed 'Cheat Sheet' When He Met Survivors (70 comments)

How Low Are You Willing to See America Go? (63 comments)

Far-Right Kooks Smear Parkland Survivors (60 comments)

32 More Indictments for Manafort, Gates (52 comments)

NRA Opposes Age Limits on Gun Purchases (45 comments)

Parkland Survivors Confront Legislators in Tallahassee (44 comments)