Welcome to Thunderdome

Holy shit the NY Times is a joke.

Turns out the story has suddenly, quietly been given a new headline. No longer is it “Wiretapped Data Used in Inquiry of Trump Aides.” Instead, readers are now told, “Intercepted Russian Communications Part of Inquiry into Trump Associates.”

Is he a financial retard? I'm thinking no.

It's easy to make a lot of profit if you do so by refusing to pay your vendors and contractors. The real magic is how he can still get anyone to agree to do anything for him, since the odds are very high they will never be paid for it.

I don't think it's that clear. As Vince says, Trump needs a foil. I legit do think he's simply aiming the gun at the top dog rather than the organization as a whole.

You do realize this is inherently contradictory? You are saying you don't think he meant Obama personally, which is why he aimed it at Obama personally?

I think I understand what you are trying to say and you almost certainly aren't wrong about what he was trying to do. What you are wrong about is the supposed weight of the accusation. Again, there's a huge difference between "the President ordered this thing it would be highly illegal for him to have ordered" and "the feds did this thing they would normally do during an investigation". All because he chooses for other reasons to direct the accusation to the top dog doesn't mean it does not also completely change the nature of the accusation.

We are really just the peasants complaining in the streets about which king we like better.

Currently I would have nothing but positive feelings if someone were to completely slag the capitol while the main members of both parties were in town. It would be a huge net positive for our country. Unfortunately it would probably also lead to other huge negative consequences from whomever was able to take power afterwords, so on the whole I do not wish for it.

TPRJones wrote:

Is he a financial retard? I'm thinking no.

It's easy to make a lot of profit if you do so by refusing to pay your vendors and contractors. The real magic is how he can still get anyone to agree to do anything for him, since the odds are very high they will never be paid for it.

While working for a computer reseller in Memphis, it was pretty widely known that if you were able to land the FedEx contract you were not going to make any money off of it. When you have that much weight, you can pressure the margins to the point that the guy isn't going to make money off of you. I realize that this is not at all what Trump did, but the principle of why anyone would agree to do work for him is the same. "My work is in Trump Tower. That's why I can charge 5% more than the other guy you're looking at. My work represents quality and style."

Leisher wrote:
Obama says there are 57 states. The MSM: "Oh, he didn't mean it! No big deal!"
Johnson isn't sure where Aleppo is...The MSM: "See? This man is unfit to be president!"

I had this EXACT exchange with someone last week when we discussed Johnson.

Vince wrote: Holy shit the NY Times is a joke.

Turns out the story has suddenly, quietly been given a new headline. No longer is it “Wiretapped Data Used in Inquiry of Trump Aides.” Instead, readers are now told, “Intercepted Russian Communications Part of Inquiry into Trump Associates.”

Ooooooooops.

The following piece is based on an error. The Times did not in fact change the headline of a January 19 article after its publication as was alleged. Andrew C. McCarthy acknowledges and explains the error in this post. The text of his column as originally published remains below for reference. We regret the error and apologize to our readers.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/4 ... tap-russia

TheCatt wrote:

Vince wrote: Holy shit the NY Times is a joke.

Turns out the story has suddenly, quietly been given a new headline. No longer is it “Wiretapped Data Used in Inquiry of Trump Aides.” Instead, readers are now told, “Intercepted Russian Communications Part of Inquiry into Trump Associates.”

Ooooooooops.

The following piece is based on an error. The Times did not in fact change the headline of a January 19 article after its publication as was alleged. Andrew C. McCarthy acknowledges and explains the error in this post. The text of his column as originally published remains below for reference. We regret the error and apologize to our readers.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/4 ... tap-russia

LOL! The tribalism in all this is silly.

I guess the British as spying as well because ... fuck, I got no idea.

Standing next to German Chancellor Angela Merkel at a White House news conference Friday afternoon, Drumpf declined to express regret for the accusation he tweeted nearly two weeks ago, despite some of the highest-ranking members of his own party saying they have seen no evidence that any such wiretapping occurred. Drumpf also passed on the opportunity to reject an unfounded report from a Fox News commentator asserting that British intelligence agents were involved in the alleged spying — even though White House officials had just assured livid British leaders that they would no longer promote the claim.

“As far as wiretapping, I guess by this past administration, at least we have something in common, perhaps,” Drumpf said to Merkel, referring to reports that the National Security Agency had tapped the chancellor’s phone in 2010 under President Barack Obama.

Merkel did not respond to Drumpf’s attempt at a joke.

Comey saying what we already knew today.

Wiretapping no,
Russian interference/collusion maybe,
Investigation yes.

That was the first half of hearing. Second half is GOP grilling on leaks of collusion/interference/investigation.

I forget, why weren't there hearings on Chinese interference/collusion when Clinton won his elections considering how much money they illegally contributed to his campaign?

Not defending Trump, but I wish folks would stop pretending like a foreign power possibly influencing an election is a new thing.

BECAUSE EMAILS, BENGHAZI, SOROS!

Am I doing this right?

e: Oh that Clinton. Well, he ended up being impeached for lying. Seems fair, let's try that.

Leisher wrote: I forget, why weren't there hearings on Chinese interference/collusion when Clinton won his elections considering how much money they illegally contributed to his campaign?

Not defending Trump, but I wish folks would stop pretending like a foreign power possibly influencing an election is a new thing.

I keep wondering why they aren't talking about the state department under Obama sending $350k against Netanyahu.

We were told the emails and Benghazi didn't matter. Both by Hillary and the MSM. However, that same MSM is all about this Russian connection.

Ditto for all of Obama's cash handouts.

That's my point.

Both parties are overflowing with corruption, foreign investors, stupidity, ethics violations, illegal bullshit, etc. and it's frustrating to constantly hear about one side doing it, while the other's sins are ignored.

And I'm for impeachment. Hell, I'm down with impeaching the entire government. The system is sound, but the parties and people involved need a good enema.

Leisher wrote: We were told the emails and Benghazi didn't matter. Both by Hillary and the MSM. However, that same MSM is all about this Russian connection.

Ditto for all of Obama's cash handouts.

That's my point.

Both parties are overflowing with corruption, foreign investors, stupidity, ethics violations, illegal bullshit, etc. and it's frustrating to constantly hear about one side doing it, while the other's sins are ignored.

And I'm for impeachment. Hell, I'm down with impeaching the entire government. The system is sound, but the parties and people involved need a good enema.

None of this is new. The press is inoculating Trump. There is plenty about him I worry about. They keep going ape shit over every little thing and when there is a big something to go after, no one will be listening to them any more.

Leisher wrote: We were told the emails and Benghazi didn't matter. Both by Hillary and the MSM.

Actually, the secretary of state went on TV and said Benghazi happened because of a youtube video.

Leisher wrote: The system is sound, but the parties and people involved need a good enema.

I disagree strongly. The system is what creates these extremist parties. If you get rid of them all then you'll just have a different set of extremists pretty soon. The only way to break the cycle is to overhaul how voting is handled so that it doesn't inevitably drive the results to two extremist parties.

TPRJones wrote:

Leisher wrote: The system is sound, but the parties and people involved need a good enema.

I disagree strongly. The system is what creates these extremist parties. If you get rid of them all then you'll just have a different set of extremists pretty soon. The only way to break the cycle is to overhaul how voting is handled so that it doesn't inevitably drive the results to two extremist parties.

Or get rid of the parties. What we have is what Washington feared.

I don't think you can. Well, you can, but they'll just reform again. The country didn't really start with parties as formalized as they are now; those in power formalized them into law over time. That will just happen over again unless you remove the incentive by changing the system at it's most fundamental levels.

If you examine the voting system using game design theory it's all just a complete mess. We can do much better now if we try again.

TPRJones wrote: I don't think you can. Well, you can, but they'll just reform again. The country didn't really start with parties as formalized as they are now; those in power formalized them into law over time. That will just happen over again unless you remove the incentive by changing the system at it's most fundamental levels.

If you examine the voting system using game design theory it's all just a complete mess. We can do much better now if we try again.

I'd disagree with that notion simply because out of roughly 195 nations in the world, we still seem to be the best going on. At least for now. Not that our system is perfect, but it seems to be the best.

It's possible to pick up the best pile of poop out of a dog park, but that doesn't mean there aren't theoretically better things out there in the world that aren't poop that you could be picking up.