I laugh at all the wankers trying to dispel all these little things amounting to fascism as 'minor': everybody relax... stop comparing these events to the similar events that occurred in Nazi Germany... etc.
Either they actually believe these incidents truly are 'minor' (and spend the majority of their days with their heads lodged up their asses)... or they are complicit (essentially telling people to chill out and enjoy the ride).
MAGA morons seems to be a redundant. Morons is the superset. Not all moron are part of the #MAGA movement, but all members of the #MAGA movement are morons.
"I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
How come Mother Jones is the only news source that picked this up?!?
I google it and I only get the MJ article.
There’s a couple others that referenced his posts on the Alabama page. But it’s interesting to see who doesn’t. Likely it didn’t meet their threshold since there’s the chance it could’ve been someone else posing as him.
I ran right out and gave that tweet a big like. That's even better than a regular like. j/k .
So the right wants to boycott Walmart over a t-shirt? That t-shirt is free speech too. I think corporations may be becoming less fond of putin's boy.
Interested in the walmart story!!!
I find the Walmart boycott hilarious. I can’t stand the place and for some reason it’s been held up as some retail outlet for conservatives.
They already boycotted Target because of bathrooms. Wonder where they will go next?
I’ve seen a lot of conservatives take pride in themselves about business boycotts being their form of creating social change instead of public protests. I say boycott walmart all day long. I want to see their dilemma. They might even have to shop local!!
The idea of a “deep state” is nothing new. Just like “fake news” is nothing new.
We had prime examples of both with, say, the Iraq war. The reasons were all made up bullshit, and were parroted by the mainstream media who just played along.
I think its interesting that the anti-war crew from the bush years basically disappeared around 2009, and now cite the mainstream media regularly to back their criticisms of the current admin.
The Iraq war wasn't perpetuated by career service people, it was done by the neo conservative political appointees that controlled the White House. They pressured the career people in the CIA to find validating evidence. Iraq is the precise inverse of what you're referring to. Regarding the press. You won't find me defending them for not asking too many questions. But if you don't really remember the jingoism that gripped the US post 9-11, just Google the Dixie Chicks.
It should have been Afghanistan that was invaded. The media loves to play along as long as it's going to get them higher ratings Good old George Bush worst president ever needed to keep his buddy Osama and family safe. the attention was shifted to Iraq which allowed extremists like ISIS to grow once we left the mess under the Obama administration. We need to be over there now to make sure the extremists don't expand again. Extremist is way to nice of a word used to describe the demons that terrorized the middle east and more.
Speaking of terrorists,
So i'm wondering how Maxine Waters is liking the tables being turned on her??
When you insite harrassment and violence, it comes back to bite you. And yeah what she was saying was inciting violence even if you don't want to admit it because she's a liberal, but all you need is one nut job to take it to the extreme.
Either everyone is allowed or the owner gets to choose. What's it gonna be? Personally, I think everyone should be able to go about their day without getting harrassed or denied service as long as there is no criminal intent or harm to the person or others.
"speaking of terrorists"....and you segue to Maxine Waters???
get serious.
You mean because she's a liberal she's exempt from that status even though she clearly was inciting violence to further her cause. If those words she spoke came from a republicans mouth or any other non liberal view person, you all would have had a thread a mile long bashing them and you know it. You need to get serious.
What is your news source?? I'm curious to know how you reached this outrageous conclusion about Maxine Waters. It is a complete lie that she incited violence. If you really know what she said and still think that's what she did, then you don't understand what inciting violence means, and you very clearly do not know what a terrorist is if you've also stuck that label on her. I have to assume you're gobbling up alt-right media sources like candy if you really believe what you're saying.
Did you really think I didn't already know exactly what she said. There is literally not a single word she said that suggested violence, and certainly not anything that could lead you to call her a terrorist. I understand that some are playing dumb when it comes to the meaning of "pushing back", but I think just about everyone with an IQ over 65 at least secretly understands that was not a comment about violence. I suggest that you stop reading Trump's tweets about things to form any opinions.
Lol, I'm not reading tweets. People can be well informed by reading lots of different information from many diffrent sources. Even sources other than CNN. Maybe you could try it. Like I said before if the tables were turned and it was another party, any other party, you'd all be picking apart every single word they said, disecting it to prove how wrong they were for saying it. Please at least admit that. lol
I don't get CNN, and haven't for at least a few years, so yeah, that is not an issue for me. Again, if you think she was inciting violence, then you either don't understand the English language very well, or are listening to bullshit sources, be they Trump's own tweets, or whatever news sources that use his tweets as a sounding board. And no, I don't think the rational people here would be misinterpreting English words no matter what party it was connected to. I am not sure how you continue to justify your stance here when the truth is in black and white in the article you posted. It's totally irrational.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I ran right out and gave that tweet a big like. That's even better than a regular like. j/k .
So the right wants to boycott Walmart over a t-shirt? That t-shirt is free speech too. I think corporations may be becoming less fond of putin's boy.
Interested in the walmart story!!!
I find the Walmart boycott hilarious. I can’t stand the place and for some reason it’s been held up as some retail outlet for conservatives.
They already boycotted Target because of bathrooms. Wonder where they will go next?
I’ve seen a lot of conservatives take pride in themselves about business boycotts being their form of creating social change instead of public protests. I say boycott walmart all day long. I want to see their dilemma. They might even have to shop local!!
I remember O'Reily starting a movement to get Pepsi to drop rapper Ludacris in ads so this happens to big companies sometimes.
I ran right out and gave that tweet a big like. That's even better than a regular like. j/k .
So the right wants to boycott Walmart over a t-shirt? That t-shirt is free speech too. I think corporations may be becoming less fond of putin's boy.
Interested in the walmart story!!!
I find the Walmart boycott hilarious. I can’t stand the place and for some reason it’s been held up as some retail outlet for conservatives.
That's because Walmart is a big union buster and is known for huge profits but still has low wages and poor service, so it probably does deserve that reputation, given that conservative America does now seem to represent the tactic of "keep all the profits and screw everything else." They support it in a disguised form - Reaganomics/trickle down theory/corporate tax cuts.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I’d like to put a human face — my own — to the risk posed by GOP gamesmanship on the Mueller investigation.
Sometime last year, I went to the FBI and provided information on a person whom I had come to believe had played a significant role in the Russian election attack on the US. Since that time, a number of public events have made it clear I was correct.
I never in my life imagined I would share information with the FBI, especially not on someone I had a journalistic relationship with. I did so for many reasons. Some, but not all, of the reasons are:
I believed he was doing serious harm to innocent people
I believed (others agreed) that reporting the story at that time would risk doing far more harm than good
I had concrete evidence he was lying to me and others, including but not limited to other journalists
I had reason to believe he was testing ways to tamper with my website
I believed that if the FBI otherwise came to understand what kind of information I had, their likely investigative steps would pose a risk to the privacy of my readers
To protect the investigation, I will not disclose this person’s true identity or the identity and/or role I believe he played in the attack. Nor will I disclose when I went to the FBI. I did so on my own, without subpoena; I did that in an effort to protect people who have spoken to me in confidence and other journalists. Largely because this effort involved a number of last minute trips to other cities, I spent around $6K of my own money traveling to meet with lawyers and for the meeting with the FBI.
I always planned to disclose this when this person’s role was publicly revealed. But I’m doing so now for two reasons. First, I think the public deserves to see the text he sent me at 3:15 PM on November 9, 2016.
The substance of the text — that the Trump team started focusing on Syria right after the election — has been corroborated and tied to their discussions with Russia at least twice since then. Most importantly, in his statement to Congress, Jared Kushner explained his request for a back channel with the Russians by describing an effort to cooperate on Syria.
The Ambassador [Sergei Kislyak] expressed similar sentiments about relations, and then said he especially wanted to address U.S. policy in Syria, and that he wanted to convey information from what he called his “generals.” He said he wanted to provide information that would help inform the new administration. He said the generals could not easily come to the U.S. to convey this information and he asked if there was a secure line in the transition office to conduct a conversation. General Flynn or I explained that there were no such lines. I believed developing a thoughtful approach on Syria was a very high priority given the ongoing humanitarian crisis, and I asked if they had an existing communications channel at his embassy we could use where they would be comfortable transmitting the information they wanted to relay to General Flynn.
Less credibly, in the days after Mike Flynn pled guilty, an inflammatory Brian Ross report was corrected to reveal that “shortly after the election” Trump asked Flynn personally to work with Russia on Syria (Ross left ABC yesterday but as far as I understand the corrected story stands).
Retired Lt. Gen Michael Flynn has promised “full cooperation” in the special counsel’s Russia investigation and, according to a confidant, is prepared to testify that Donald Trump directed him to make contact with the Russians, initially as a way to work together to fight ISIS in Syria.
[snip]
The source said Trump phoned Flynn shortly after the election to explicitly ask him to “serve as point person on Russia,” and to reach out personally to Russian officials to develop strategies to jointly combat ISIS.
The text sent to me matches both those reports — indeed, it makes it clear that “shortly after the election” means just over 14 hours after polls closed. But the text doesn’t come from anyone, like Kushner or Flynn, inside the Trump team. It comes from someone who, I believe, had already done real damage to the United States as part of the Russian attack. That person understood the cooperation with Syria in terms of the US backing Bashar al-Assad, not in terms of fighting ISIS.
I’m making this public now because a David Ignatius report Thursday maps out an imminent deal with Russia and Israel that sounds like what was described to me within hours of the election. This deal appears to be the culmination of an effort that those involved in the Russian attack worked to implement within hours after the election.
The other reason I’m disclosing this now is to put a human face to the danger in which the House Republicans are putting other people who, like me, provided information about the Russian attack on the US to the government.
Several times since I first considered sharing information with the FBI, I’ve asked my attorney to contact the FBI to tell them of what I perceived to be a real threat that arose from sharing that information. One of those times, I let law enforcement officers enter my house without a warrant, without me being present.
My risk isn’t going to go away — indeed, going public like this will surely exacerbate it. That’s to be expected, given the players involved.
But I’m a public figure. If something happens to me — if someone releases stolen information about me or knocks me off tomorrow — everyone will now know why and who likely did it. That affords me a small bit of protection. There are undoubtedly numerous other witnesses who have taken similar risks to share information with the government who aren’t public figures. The Republicans’ ceaseless effort to find out more details about people who’ve shared information with the government puts those people in serious jeopardy.
I’m speaking out because they can’t — and shouldn’t have to.
It infuriates me to observe (and cover) a months-long charade by the House GOP to demand more and more details about those who have shared information with the government, at least some of whom were only trying to prevent real damage to innocent people, all in an attempt to discredit the Mueller investigation. As someone who has worked to rein in dragnets for over a decade, I’m all the more disgusted to see so many lifelong cheerleaders of surveillance pretend to care now.
I only came to be convinced slowly about Russia’s role in the attack and I have been skeptical of the Steele dossier from the day it was published. That said, I obviously do not like Donald Trump — though I’m no Hillary fan, either. But my decision to share information with the FBI had nothing to do with my dislike for Donald Trump. It had to do with the serious damage that someone else I believed to be involved in the Russian attack — someone I had been friendly with — was doing to innocent people, almost all of those people totally uninvolved in American politics.
This investigation is not, primarily, an investigation into Donald Trump. It’s an investigation into people who attacked the United States. It’s time Republicans started acting like that matters.
On Thursday night, I reached out to the Special Counsel’s Office to inquire whether I could post this without damaging the investigation. After sharing the specific language from the passages I felt might pose the biggest concern, last night at 10:15, I was informed they, “take no position” on my posting it.
It’s so much fucking bigger than Watergate. Nunes no balls are sweating as are the NRA and Ryan and McConnell and all those fucking repubes. Too bad 61 million Americans can’t take the time to read, never mind comprehend.
Comments
They don't have the intelligent mature use of words, sentences, thoughts, or ideas.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Another racist/white supremacist/white nationalist. ....
I laugh at all the wankers trying to dispel all these little things amounting to fascism as 'minor': everybody relax... stop comparing these events to the similar events that occurred in Nazi Germany... etc.
Either they actually believe these incidents truly are 'minor' (and spend the majority of their days with their heads lodged up their asses)... or they are complicit (essentially telling people to chill out and enjoy the ride).
I google it and I only get the MJ article.
So the right wants to boycott Walmart over a t-shirt? That t-shirt is free speech too. I think corporations may be becoming less fond of putin's boy.
Again, if you think she was inciting violence, then you either don't understand the English language very well, or are listening to bullshit sources, be they Trump's own tweets, or whatever news sources that use his tweets as a sounding board. And no, I don't think the rational people here would be misinterpreting English words no matter what party it was connected to. I am not sure how you continue to justify your stance here when the truth is in black and white in the article you posted. It's totally irrational.
https://www.axios.com/trump-trade-war-leaked-bill-world-trade-organization-united-states-d51278d2-0516-4def-a4d3-ed676f4e0f83.html
https://www.emptywheel.net/2018/07/03/putting-a-face-mine-to-the-risks-posed-by-gop-games-on-mueller-investigation/
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/395471-dictionary-mocks-trump-over-misspelled-tweet