That’s not what he said, he said smelly Walmart shoppers are Fox viewers.
Don’t use twatter and can’t find “(2/2)”. Anyone? Wonder if he mentioned conspiracy theory numnuts.
Class, with a capital K. Are you secretly in Portland or Seattle, setting fires, throwing Molotov cocktails, and emulating other peaceful protesters?
Maybe you want to dump that bowl of Cheerios and get one without urine all over them. 
1 Like
@Bend3r: I’ve got no sense of humor and can’t understand a joke, no matter how many times I read it.
That’s kind of like Trump saying that maybe Russia can find all of those emails that mysteriously disappeared from the teetotaler’s right-wing conspiracy server in her basement.
1 Like
I was only bringing balance to the force after shinobi’s post just above mine, where he wrongly and foolishly claimed that “Trump, by far the best President or Presidential candidate so far this century”.
And as Patty would say to me I say to you: Give me a break!!!
(I know it doesn’t make sense, not to me anyway, but maybe it makes sense to others so I’m using it).
1 Like
By mentioning it, I was giving you a break because I know you’re better than that. 
Trust me, I know that sometimes it is frustrating not to be able to impart your scores of wisdom by osmosis … uh, make that TCP/IP osmosis. 
2 Likes
Straight up, Jonathan Turley is NOT A FAN of President Donald J. Trump. Nevertheless:
Senate Intelligence Report Is Long On Pages And Short On Intelligence
Where Shakespeare is credited in writing “Much To Do About Nothing,” the Senate may have achieved credit for writing “nothing about much.” It is remarkable about how comparably little can be said in 1000 pages. The Senate Intelligence Committee released report yesterday on its own Russian investigation. I have been plowing through the report but what was most striking thus far is how little really new material the Senate was able to uncover. Indeed, it notes that it did not even look into the basis for the claims of the Steele dossier, which was used and widely cited for the early allegations of collusion. One of the few notable points is that the Report states that Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign chairman Paul Manafort worked closely with a known Russian intelligence officer and that he “represented a grave counterintelligence threat” due to that relationship with Konstantin Kilimnik. Yet, the Report is largely descriptive of known allegations with few concrete conclusions or original disclosures.
Even on the Manafort issue, the Senate never appears to have secured access to encrypted communications between the two men despite the fact that Special Counsel Robert Mueller presumably did have such access before declaring that he found no evidence of knowing collusion between campaign officials and the Russian operation to influence the election. The Senate does not contest that finding and further states that the Steele dossier, which was funded by the Clinton campaign, was a highly dubious product that did not meet the most basic standards for intelligence collection and analysis.
For some of us, the allegation against Manafort is hardly surprising but we were hoping for new evidence on his conduct. I have been a long critic of Manafort and criticized his selection by the campaign. I both supported his federal prosecution and opposed any presidential pardon or clemency. I also viewed his sentence as far too light. As I previously wrote, Manafort has been long known to be a reckless and corrupting influence in Washington. It does not surprise me at all if Russian intelligence saw him as an easy mark or worse. The role of Kilimnik as a possible Russian asset has been discussed for years, though the House Intelligence Committee seemed to largely ignore his role.
What was interesting to me was the statement that, because the pair used encrypted communications, the Committee could not really determine if there was criminal or collusive conduct. Mueller presumably did get past these encryption walls since Manafort cooperated and did not find any other crime to charge or evidence of knowing collusion. Manafort and Kilimnik were engaged in a variety of business ventures. Yet, the Senate never appeared to get access to this information. That is troubling to me as someone who has long advocated a robust legislative role in oversight.
Our United States Senate has labored long and brought forth a bipartisan gooseegg!!
Trump is mounting a steady attack on the American system on his march to authoritarianism.
-
Branding the media the “enemy” when it is enshrined in the First Amendment in the Bill of Rights of the US Constitution. His real job is to protect the media.
-
Making the Post Office an enemy and trying to destroy it – it’s also in the Constitution
-
Trying to stop the Census so correct data can’t be used for Congressional districts;
-
Making “voting” the enemy- Trying to stop the vote anyway possible through cries of fraud months before an election takes place.
The next step is to cancel elections because voting, the Post Office, and the media are the enemy.
Jill Biden remains today an attractive woman, pretty face, nice smile, good figure.
But forty-five years ago she was totally HOT!! And Joe Biden found her downright irresistible. But there was just one problem: she was another man’s wife.
An honorable man would have respected those marital vows, waiting until Jill was divorced or at least legally separated. Is such respect for marriage not called for in Biden’s religion? And we all know how serious he is about that.
But honorable Joe Biden did not wait. Instead he cuckolded Jill’s husband. What an exemplar!!
But wait, you cry, is Trump not equally a skunk?
Trump was unfaithful to his first wife. But Marla Maples was not married when he pursued her. And Trump did even meet Melania, a single woman at the time, until after he had been separated from Marla for a year.
Trump is widely believed to have cheated on Melania when she was preggers with Barron. But he did not do so with a married woman.
In short Trump is correctly seen as being “no choir boy”. He has a long record of womanizing. But is Trump guilty of stealing away other men’s wives? No. Only Biden has fallen that low.
Bottom line, while Trump is no choir boy, NEITHER is Biden!!
2 Likes
Ignoring whether there’s any actual factual basis to all your accusations…
Here you seem to be clearly saying you feel married women are the property of their husbands, therefore it’s worse to hypothetically “steal” someone else’s property (who presumably isn’t capable of making her own choices) than to betray one’s own wife?
The same situation is occurring in both of your hypotheticals. The difference is you seem to be directly claiming it’s worse to harm a man (by stealing his property) than to harm a woman in the same manner.
3 Likes
All we hear at the DMC about Biden is how honorable, nice, trust worthy, loves babies, dogs. You name it & Joe will help. Not a bad bone in his body.
So this next week we will all hear the truth about Joe.
1 Like
Nothing to see here. Move along.
Since there is, and because they do not fit your template, you blissfully ignore the facts.
Property!!! I am saying no such thing. That is purely your highly distorted, twisted, and wildly self serving interpretation of what I wrote.
You clearly would not recognize honorable behavior if you tripped over it. And by the same token, you are manifestly averse to recognizing your boy Biden’s dishonorable activity as the loathsome behavior it is. And I didn’t even bring up Biden’s several other instances of misconduct where women are concerned.
You could be forgiven, except that those on your side never cease in your criticism of Trump for being guilty of far less repugnant activity involving women.
To your kind:
Trump’s transgressions are simply unforgivable. Biden’s even worse transgressions must not even be mentioned.
The truth is what it is. Deal with it.
1 Like
Quite clearly, he was embracing the derogatory terms you and yours use to describe them. If I’m such a terrible horrible no-good person, I’m glad to have so many similarly terrible horrible no-good people with me.
1 Like
So how do you “steal” something (someone) that is not property, a person with their own free will and responsibility to make decisions? The term clearly conveys the idea of property, whether that’s the intent or not.
"steal
/stēl/
verb
take (another person’s property) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it."
Yes, the “side” constituted of patriotic Americans with a respect for decency, the rule of law, and American leadership and exceptionalism will not cease in criticism of those guilty of damaging the country we love.
1 Like
You’re stealing, or otherwise sabotaging, the relationship itself. When in a relationship you and your partner have equal ownership of that relationship, and the third party steals away your stake and inserts his/herself into it instead.
Since you asked. I would’ve never guessed that someone would take issue with such a common colloquialism.
1 Like
OK, we all need to be careful this thread does not veer off into X-RATED territory!!
I write that while admitting insertion is precisely the transgression Biden committed.
Story is Jill’s husband, a very hard working guy, bought a new Corvette. Ownership of that car was fulfillment of a lifelong dream for him and it took him a while and a LOT of serious effort finally to be able to afford that car.
So you can imagine how the poor guy felt when he learned Biden and his wife had been seen driving around together in his dream car, with Biden behind the wheel!!
Biden did not stop at stealing this guy’s wife. He also took his dream car along with her!
Sure Trump was a Lothario in his younger days. But we all knew that when he was elected in 2016. It had been known for many years.
But the left today is doing everything it can to portray Biden as being pure as wind-driven snow. Reality is that Biden is even WORSE than Trump. Biden is the lowest sort of skunk out there!
1 Like
We all saw Joe driving that car.
Never did realize that car actually belonged to Jill’s previous husband. Poor left out guy. 
1 Like
Following what you believe the law should be rather than what it actually is, is not respecting the law.
3 Likes
Felons have been tried and convicted. The pardon doesn’t undo the guilt. When the person being pardoned has relations to and/or the crimes were directly related to the president, the act of pardoning is corrupt. This is directly counter to the rule of law. Following what you, or what any corrupt person holding the office of president, believes the law should be rather than what it actually is, is not respecting the law.
Yes, it’s up to Congress to follow their oaths or not and impeach and remove from office for crimes committed by POTUS while in office. That’s a separate discussion. Congress having a voluntary option to decide whether the current congressional officeholders believe removal from office is warranted does not change the law (nor does it insulate from prosecution later after POTUS has vacated the office).