Republicans Backs Intel Assessment Of Russia’s 2016 Meddling

TRUMPINISTA'S AREN'T REPUBLICANS

THEY JUST MADE A "QUID PRO QUO" JUDGES & CONTROL OF THE WHITE HOUSE FOR TRUMP'S WALL

Hillary Clinton and the DNC paid for Russian disinformation in order to use it against Trump. 

That's the part you left out.

Shitty timing.

Oooh. More oppressor victimization. Lovely.

No mention of the current, ongoing, and daily disinformation campaign by der kommissar though.

eat more acid thom

Thom should have let bryen handle this one.

bryen's got a much stronger denial of reality game going.

Thom plays hit and run. Bryen doesn't seem to know better.

It was impeachable it just wasn't winnable they didn't have the numbers in the Senate and they knew that. the move to go forward with impeachment was basically a bluff (and a gamble)because they really had no move. The repubs knew they would win because they could count. ..so they called the bluff and pelosi has been floundering ever since he got off looking like he was exonerated

Pelosi was challenged by AOC & Co. And the media added to the pressure on her to impeach but it backfired and now just water under the bridge..imo

< Shitty timing.

For us, not them. It's perfect timing for them and their reelections. Now they can say they stood up against putin, (4 years after the fucking fact) and will milk this in ads from now till Nov, and saps will buy it. So even if clump loses,  the senate stays pub. More evil brilliance from the boys in red. Fuck senate republikans, fuck all republikans.

Lock her up!!....LOL.

(Meanwhile....Manafort, Stone, Flynn, Gates, Cohen....for now)

     "It was impeachable"

     Define "It"

     By the way...has anyone informed John Durham of this consequential event?

     Nothing to see here, move along...the tyranny you thought you witnessed was just a figment of your imagination.

>>>>>Meanwhile....Manafort, Stone, Flynn, Gates, Cohen....for now

Bryen, do you have a longer list of convicted perps yet? Any day now?

So Byren, when did your hippy ideals morph? In your 30s? 40s? 50s? 60s? Was it a gradual shift or did you have an epiphany of some sort?

I'm curious to know how, when and why you developed your current political beliefs? I'm (not addressing them, just trying to understand how some guy who spent time in Spinner fatty circles "evolved" into a Trump loving Republican? It seems unusual.

(if you ignore a respectful question, I'll just assume you are just pranking a dbmb or you are incapable of having a civil conversation.) 

     While some of you seem to associate "hippie ideals" with blind obedience of all things tyrannical, my "hippie ideals" tend to gravitate towards freedom & liberty.  

Byren is "Anti-War".....like everyone else.

Can't believe this pos breitbart  brybot gets so much air time.

C'mon people, what have you done when you have bested a fool ?

When Durham comes up empty on indictments and convictions, he will issue a scathing review of inappropriate actions taken. Byren & Co will gobble this up and claim vindication, only to dismiss the lack of indictments as the work of the Derp State.

nothing says freedom like kowtowing to oligarchy.

     ...or unseating a duly elected president 

^ I can wait until November, Byren.

Ok so you didn't really answer the question.. you just reframed my question......wanna give it another go?

Again, I am not disparaging your political beliefs, just wondering how, why, and when you might have changed? 

I don't really understand your answer. You mentioned freedom and liberty... is that it? Is that your defining issue? Do you have something more to add?

if you want me to take you seriously, you need to expound a bit. 

^ shitbird b talks a good game but I'll bet yer ass he's never been to a dead or jerry show, he would have been laughed out of the parking lot the second he opened his mouth. And sure as fuck never done acid. No enlightened mind is so closed. This mutherfucker b is phony as fuck, period. So phoney he could be used in a clinical case study.

     "Again, I am not disparaging your political beliefs, just wondering how, why, and when you might have changed?"

     I suppose it was when the Democratic Party quietly morphed into the neoconservative choice on the ballot.  If you're truly an anti war voter, how could you possibly have supported Hillary Clinton?  How about answering that question Alan?  I didn't change, the Democratic Party changed...drastically.

And I don't really care about the rest of the country or one election... we are addressing all the time since you were sitting in a parking lot at Shoreline or someplace til now..... don't just spit back current talking points -- how were your personal beliefs impacted by al the politics since then? This is your personal story I'm wondering about. 

Byren I will answer any question you throw at me. If you do the same.

But I did ask first -- it's polite if you answer if you are truly interested in having a discussion with me.

Don't sound so challenging. I am not attacking you.

     I've registered more Democrats to vote than any 10 people on this message board...at the time it was the most effective thing I could do to stop the Iraq War, then the party quietly shifted to a continuation of Bush's foreign policy, it then morphed into Hillary Clinton's insatiable bloodthirst for war in perpetuity and proudly wearing her neoconservative ideology as a badge of honor, again...how could anyone claiming to be anti war have possibly supported her in 2016?  I'll wait for your response, thank you.

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-angers-military-veterans-2018-12#1...

President Donald Trump has often praised himself for how much he loves "his military." 

From increasing the US defense budget to calling for a showy military parade to rival any other, Trump presents himself as a champion of the armed forces and veterans.

But his showmanship has sometimes irked the very group he aims to praise. 

From his continued threats to use troops to build a border wall to his public spats with widely respected military heroes, here are 12 ways the president provoked controversy with the military and veterans in 2018.

Sounds like you're more Anti-Clinton than Anti-War.

< If you're truly an anti war voter, how could you possibly have supported Hillary Clinton? >

First of all, why would I be an anti-war voter? Unfortunately, there are times that humans have to do battle with each other to preserve their civilizations, just like there are unnecessary wars that only benefit a few -- the rest of us are canon fodder. Not all wars are alike. This is when I wish you were more of a student of history... I mean 5,000 years worth of history -- not 5 years worth.

Second of all. Who said I liked Hillary Clinton? Why do you assume that? I never said I was enamored with her politics. Why am I automatically on her side of every issue?

Third -- I'm not convinced you know what the neoconservative movement was about and who the players are and what their motivations are. Again, a couple good history books might broaden your understanding of geopolitics. That particular movement has evolved and that label has become rather fuzzy. What do you mean when you say neoconservative?

bry rocked the vote ya'll

...and nobody rocked it as hard as him either..lol

     "Sounds like you're more Anti-Clinton than Anti-War."

     They are one and the same.

     "Who said I liked Hillary Clinton?"

     Did you vote for her?  

But you still never answered the original question. I find that typical about you. What's stopping you from sharing how and when your belief changed. So far, all I got is "Hillary, Hillary, Hillary" made you what you are today and you always liked freedom. Is that it? Is that what you want me to take away from this conversation?

     Alan, I didn't change, my "hippie ideals" as you put it, were largely based in opposition to foreign entanglements, there was a time many moons ago when the "hippie movement/Grateful Dead Family" espoused such a philosophy [anti war/nonviolence], it's the Democratic Party that lost its way, not me, I'm still opposed to war & bloodshed.  

>> it then morphed into Hillary Clinton's insatiable bloodthirst for war in perpetuity and proudly wearing her neoconservative ideology as a badge of honor <<

Can you cite an example of this being displayed?

     Ned, are you kidding?

 "Who said I liked Hillary Clinton?"

     Did you vote for her?  

Answering a question with a different, unrelated question. Classic avoidance.

I don't equate liking someone with voting for them.  I have not always voted Democratic if you need some weird ammunition to win some argument only you are having.

Again, for me, this isn't about any one politician...don't try to change the subject -- my question is longterm.... how and why did YOUR personal beliefs change over time. I'm tying to understand what makes you tick, not debate any single politician. 

I'm still opposed to war & bloodshed. 

https://mobile.twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1252932181447630848

     Excellent avoidance Alan, nicely done!

OK - thank you. Excuse the time lag.

I'm going to paraphrase and say "Byren's main political issue is foreign policy, specifically geo-political aggression by one nation-state against another." Did I get that right? (Shit I feel kike I'm in a marriage therapy session.)

Now assuming that's correct -- what do you consider war -- does it have to be sending troops or are there other kinds of war?

Yes, Byren, an example of "Hillary Clinton's insatiable bloodthirst for war" being any different than Trump's.

"North Korea best not make any more threats to the United States. They will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen," Trump said at an event on the topic of opioid use in the US on August 8, 2017.

"The United States has great strength and patience, but if it is forced to defend itself or its allies, we will have no choice but to totally destroy North Korea," he said.

"Rocket Man is on a suicide mission for himself and for his regime," Trump added. "The United States is ready, willing and able."

"The entire United States is within range of our nuclear weapons, and a nuclear button is always on my desk. This is reality, not a threat," he said.

Tweet: North Korean Leader Kim Jong Un just stated that the “Nuclear Button is on his desk at all times.” Will someone from his depleted and food starved regime please inform him that I too have a Nuclear Button, but it is a much bigger & more powerful one than his, and my Button works!

     "Byren I will answer any question you throw at me"

     Alan, you haven't answered my question yet...it is your turn.  I'll wait, thank you.

Byren - you still are having some Trump versus Clinton argument and if you reread this thread, that's not anything I'm interested in. I want to figure out why you feel that way you do about certain things. 

If you want to have a Who voted tor Hillary thread?, please start one.

If you want to know more about me and my personal beliefs, ask more in-depth questions. I don't do the simpleton thing. Sorry.

     So, is that checkmate?  I do have some things to attend to.

You never did tell me your definition of a neo-conservative. Neo-conservatism is not all about war, right?  Can you please be a little specific about why you will not support neo-conservatives.

How do you see neo-conservatism compared to "old" conservatism? How has it changes in the past 20 / 30 years? What economic policies are involved?

Do yu ever research things or just spout off buzz words? 

     ...still waiting

     although your defense of Hillary Clinton's neoconservatism is priceless 

Byren ignores people that press him with actual facts.

     Here you go Alan...some light reading for the day, I'll check in later to see how you're progressing

     https://web.archive.org/web/20130609011554/http://newamericancentury.org/

HahHahaaa you just noticing ned ? He's a fucking human disgrace not worth anyone's time

Yeah, Bryen, you won a fight I'm not even having. 

So in a martial arts sorta way... I guess you really didn't.

So the only thing I've learned is you think of everything as pro-Hillary or anti-Hillary. That's the sum of your political discourse.

I mean, that's all you can come up with? "Who did you vote for in the last election?"  In a serious discussion about war, foreign policy. neo-conservatism, etc?

Thanks for your time.

Ok I'm familar with tha publication. Do you think I'm not well rounded? What about it? How does that relate to what we are talking about?

Remember, the question was... how, why, and when dd you views evolve (If they did).

Are you saying you found this website and it changed your life or something? 

the democrat party turned neo-liberal starting with clinton?

lol. the foreign policy of BOTH parties has largely been in complete lock-step post Eisenhower administration.

if you think otherwise, you are delusional.

..

As long as we are recommending reading to each other... these are on the nightstand now.

I highly recommend the middle one -- it covers ancient civilizations to the present time. I guarantee it will provide you with a different take on neoconservatism (which you haven't demonstrated you understand) and politics and life in general. It's a 1000 pages though; it's taken me close to a year to get thru it. So I'll check back with you in 2021.

Excellent posting Alan

thank you very much

Just tell the poor man that you voted for Hillary and he still won't answer a fucking thing  nor have a rational answer / deflection 

Someone send the boy a big dose of LSD (to save his soul?). He is so lost and actually disingenuous and incapable of speaking the truth

I love war. Doesn't everybody?

boy golly, sure is great that the republican party is the party of non-intervention....

Not only is ths book educational, it is the perfect antidote to insomnia.  It's a relatively easy read, as it is written for a normal person to understand. I've learned a lot. I like the fact that it is not Euro-centric.

I'm personally more interested in the ancient civilizations -- makes you realize tht we are just a blip in history. The Middle Ages stuff tires me, but it is an important time in the evolution of modern thought.

Bryen you might find the evolution of democracy revealing, but I'm guessing you get all your knowledge from the Internet. Sorry, no pictures.

Looks like you're almost done, Alan.

Please send it this way once you're finished.

You know, I'd be delighted to. Though I may need it to stand on if I ever decide to clean out the top of the closet. 

Unlike the Rock Skullly book, you can't just pick it up anywhere... after the Vikings > 1200s it got to be a little bit of a slog, but it's worth it. For instance, I just opened a page at random, and wouldn't ya know it -- it talks about how in France in 1795 they were having debates (and shedding blood) about the conservatives and liberals and the power of the monarchy. 

i was trying to explain  (I should say I want to explain) to Bryen that our politics today just didn't pop up out of nowhere during the lifetime he remembers -- it is part of a continuum of discourse about how people want to be governed and how they were governed. The French Revolution (booooring) definitely shaped our present world. Sure you can be oblivious to facts like that, but knowledge of our past is one of the things that makes us human. 

But some people prefer to walk around looking tru the wrong side of the binoculars... it's all their brains can handle -- small, childlike simplistic black and white  views of reality. (You're either just like me or you're the enemy.)  Playground mentality. And more importantly in times like these...poor Zoning. Very poor Zoning.

Rock's book is probably the most sleazy of all the GD tell alls.

     ...you still haven't admitted to, or rationalized voting for Hillary Clinton, so there's that

     "Byren I will answer any question you throw at me"...is your word your bond?

Oh shit -- I forgot pictures.. My favorite Zoner of the Day ...Mr all-I-got-is-Hillary

Byren  -- let me make this simple for you..... I usually vote for my pocketbook. Me and my family usually do better under Democrats. I'm more of  pragmatist than an idealist when it comes to voting.

Happy now?  Feel superior than me? You can gloat all you want. 

     So the bloodthirst for war in perpetuity wasn't a deal-killer?

     Figure it out or fail to do so, it is my sincere hope that I've shed a bit of light on which you may reflect.

     https://youtu.be/Gg-jvHynP9Y

as stated, bernie was the only non-war candidate.

I'm still waiting for the example of Hillary's "bloodthirst for war in perpetuity" and it's comparison to Trump's statements regarding NKorea.

So now it's your turn to answer a personal question...or two.

What, if any career did you have between the Shoreline parking lot and now? Did you ever have to work and earn a living or were you fortunate enough to be given most of what you own? Were your political beliefs shaped by these experiences?

Did you ever raise children?

Do you like mashed potatoes?

In my quest to understand you, I think this info is relevant.

     Namaste Alan...the road is long and the turns are many, it is after all...the first day of the rest of our lives, be well old friend.

     Gyuto Monks Tantric Choir - The Perfect Jewel- Sacred Chants of Tibet

     https://youtu.be/INIMACWzMsI

OK - see ya.. anytime you want to have a real discussion with sentences and paragraphs and stuff, you know where I live on the Zone -- mostly East Coast mornings or rainy days when I can't work outside.

But come prepared with more retorts than I can find on right wing radio. Otherwise, you're wasting my time.

Quick monk story -- when my co-worker, who was also Jerry's personal aide during the late 80s early 90s, lost his job (Deborah) he hooked up with the monks to show them around Marin... oh, never mind..... you don't deserve it today...

     ...sounds good, see you then!  :)

<Rock's book is probably the most sleazy of all the GD tell alls.>

Billy dishes a little dirt, too. (I'm also rereading his book.)  You never really hear that Mickey left the band for anything else but the Lenny episode, but apparently he (Mickey) was doing a lot of heroin around that time and was really dragging the music down.

>>weren’t all the different from Obama<<

which weren't really much different than bush2, clinton,bush1....on down the line...

Bush started the war, Obama opposed it.

Do facts even mean anything to anybody anymore?

https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=99591469

The following is a transcript of the remarks then-Sen. Barack Obama delivered in Chicago on Oct. 2, 2002. In his speech, Obama said that what he was opposed to was "a dumb war ... a rash war." He said the war was a "cynical attempt" to shove "ideological agendas down our throats" and would distract from domestic problems such as poverty and health care.

...

https://www.factcheck.org/2016/09/obamas-war-stance-revisited/

...everybody didn’t just take Obama “at his word.” He spoke at an anti-war rally in Chicago on Oct. 2, 2002, the same day the resolution authorizing the use of military force in Iraq was introduced in Congress. The Senate voted on and passed that resolution on Oct. 11, 2002, by a 77-23 vote. It was signed into law by President George W. Bush five days later.

At the time of the anti-war rally, Obama was an Illinois state senator. In his book “Obama: From Promise to Power,” published in 2007, journalist David Mendell wrote of the event: “A rally in the city’s Federal Plaza … in October 2002, was assembled by an aide to former U.S. senator Paul Simon and a mainstream liberal public relations expert. The rally featured a pointed anti-war speech from Obama, then a fairly anonymous state lawmaker, who deemed the impending Iraq engagement ‘a dumb war.'”

The weekly Chicago Defender reported on Oct. 3, 2002, that nearly 3,000 people had attended the rally the day before.

Chicago Defender, Oct. 3, 2002: Nearly 3,000 people attended an anti-Iraq war rally Wednesday where the Rev. Jesse L. Jackson Sr. and Illinois Senator Barack Obama (D-13th) warned the Bush administration that a war against Iraq undermines U.N. protocol.

The text of Obama’s remarks was posted to his 2008 campaign website. He called the war “dumb,” “rash” and “based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics.” Among his remarks:

Obama, Oct. 2, 2002: Now let me be clear – I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity. He’s a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him.

But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history. I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of Al Qaeda. I am not opposed to all wars. I’m opposed to dumb wars.

During the 2008 presidential campaign, and before, the media were well aware of this 2002 speech.

NPR reported in March 2008: “On the campaign trail, Obama promotes his 2002 speech in steady and relentless fashion.” That story said that a recording of the speech “is all but impossible to find,” but NPR interviewed people who said they had witnessed the anti-war speech. A New Republic article from Feb. 27, 2008, described the October 2002 anti-war rally, and detailed Obama’s many statements on the war since then.

...

gets noble prize. bombs people with drones in yemen.

give it a rest, he continued the same shit.

Wait a minute, B-ry is a Trumpafarian because he thinks the guy is anti-war?

That is the most asinine thing I've ever heard.  

It's estimated that Trump dropped more bombs in his first 6 months than Obama dropped in the prior 2 years. We don't know the exact number dropped, or the casualties caused, because Trump signed an executive order saying that he didn't have to divulge that info anymore.

Here you go, B-ry:

2019: https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jan/28/us-...

2018: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2018/11/...

2017: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newsweek.com/trump-era-record-number-bo...

 Bry loves war

he just often gets confused 

Former CIA officer accuses highly ‘politicized’ John Brennan of cooking the books to favor Hillary Clinton

“With the 14 other intelligence agencies left out, the three participating agencies (CIA, NSA, and FBI) included only two dozen ‘handpicked’ analysts…In addition, House Intelligence Committee staff revealed the actual drafting of the intelligence community assessment was done by three close associates of former CIA Director Brennan, who has proven to be the most politicized intelligence chief in American history.”

“House Intelligence Committee staff told me that after an exhaustive investigation reviewing intelligence and interviewing intelligence officers, they found that Brennan suppressed high-quality intelligence suggesting that Putin actually wanted the more predictable and malleable Clinton to win the 2016 election.”

https://www.bizpacreview.com/2020/04/23/former-cia-officer-accuses-highl...

Fred Fleitz: Here's what's behind the Senate-House disputes on Russian meddling in 2016 election

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/house-senate-russian-meddoing-dueling-re...

Lol Fred Fleitz and Fox News.

Bolton's pitbull and Trump's state news cheerleader   

Have anything more biased maybe, Thom?

Any day now.....LOL!!