SwampDonkey posted:

yeah

https://www.kyivpost.com/ukraine-politics/authorities-identify-assassin-ex-russian-mp-killed-ukraine.html

Two Finger posted:

well i mean what he's saying makes sense


IF obamacare explodes

if it doesn't, which it doesn't look like it will, welp

facialimpediment posted:

Full video is here, but I have it set to when he gets the "what didn't you like in the bill" question, after he said there's stuff he didn't like in the bill.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7F2pGAhaiSI&t=515s

Then, realizing he's ducking the question and rambling, another reporter asked specifically what he wanted to change.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7F2pGAhaiSI&t=571s

It's like there's no brainpower behind the words.


Meanwhile.... the National Enquirer, one of Donnie's favorite "newspapers", is calling Flynn a Russian spy. https://twitter.com/dceiver/status/845322782867148802

facialimpediment posted:

Full video is here, but I have it set to when he gets the "what didn't you like in the bill" question, after he said there's stuff he didn't like in the bill.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7F2pGAhaiSI&t=515s

Hillary Clintons Thong posted:

"It's the same thing, it really is" says the man who went bankrupt like seven times doing exactly that?

Hillary Clintons Thong posted:

I wonder if that books at it's high mark for sales after 30 years finally, and if so it's probably just people reading it to laugh at everything

Proud Christian Mom posted:

Art of the Deal

Nostalgia4Butts posted:

The Circus started up on showtime again this past week

Ran Paul handed everyone at his meeting a copy of it to plan their fight

Bolow posted:

https://twitter.com/Lowenaffchen/status/845345620848205824

facialimpediment posted:

Meanwhile.... the National Enquirer, one of Donnie's favorite "newspapers", is calling Flynn a Russian spy. https://twitter.com/dceiver/status/845322782867148802

quote:

Before we begin, don’t tell me the National Enquirer isn’t reputable — that is not the point of this story. The National Enquirer has an umbilical cord tethered to Team Trump, and only writes what Trump wants them to write. So the big question this morning is why Team Trump wants to smear Michael Flynn.

Now, the big news: The National Enquirer is accusing former Trump National Security Adviser Michael Flynn of being a “Russian spy.”

This story is huge, and here’s why.

No one should believe anything the National Enquirer writes. The fact that the National Enquirer says Flynn is a Russian spy likely means Flynn isn’t a Russian spy. But this story matters because the man who runs the National Enquirer, David Pecker, is a huge longtime friend of Trump. The Enquirer only runs stories that help Trump. And there is no way the Enquirer would run this story unless Team Trump thought this story helped Trump.

So the real question is why the White House thinks it’s to Trump’s advantage to suddenly throw Flynn under the bus. More on that after the images below.

Here are the some images of the Enquirer online. The first doesn’t hint at Flynn. The second show him, the third names him.

Even better, it’s “top White House officials” telling the Enquirer that Flynn is a Russian agent. Again, the Enquirer is close to Trump, why would they lie about the White House claiming this story is real unless the White House approved it?

Now there is one odd caveat: Note how the Enquirer says Flynn was “in essence” a Russian spy. They’re hedging a bit. Which might mean this is an inflammatory tease made to look like they’re accusing Flynn of being a Russian agent, only to have the story less salacious. The story isn’t online, so we can’t tell. What we can tell is that the Enquirer clearly wanted to damage Flynn’s reputation.

UPDATE: I’ve got a copy of the Enquirer. There are no caveats. They accuse Flynn of being a spy, and quote a White House official, no less!

Now, why would Team Trump do this to Flynn? Because they fear Flynn has become a liability, perhaps by turning state’s evidence against them or because they’ve gotten wind of such damaging information about Flynn that they feel the need to distance themselves, as they did with Manafort last week. This is a real turn of events, as up until a few days ago the White House was defending Flynn big time. They threw Manafort under the bus last week, but not Flynn. So something changed to make them turn on Flynn.

Now, if you really want to go all 007, another reason to sacrifice Flynn might be to save someone else. If there’s a bigger fish who’s been compromised by the Russians, throw the world the smaller fish who may not have even been involved, and hope that their appetite is satiated.

One more possibility: It wasn’t Trump, it was someone in the White House who turned on Flynn and asked the Enquirer to do this. We know Trump considers the Enquirer a reputable news source. If you wanted to convince Trump that Flynn is bad news, you’d go throw a disreputable news source that Trump respects, like the Enquirer, Breitbart or Fox. But this story is even too incendiary for Fox. So you go to the Enquirer. What if Bannon or some other senior official decided that Trump’s defense of Flynn was damaging Trump? You hand the Enquirer a story they can’t refuse, and hope that it sways Trump.

Of course, then you tick off Flynn, so that now Flynn is guaranteed to do whatever he can to save his own behind, including turning on Trump.

Also, keep in mind that all of this is happening as Adam Schiff, the lead Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said he’s seen evidence meriting going to a grand jury. Schiff has seen something new, something troubling. What was it? And was it related to Flynn and today’s news?

UPDATE: Then we find out that Trump’s top intelligence ally in the House, Intelligence Committee chair Nunes, just canceled a public hearing about Russia. What is Nunes hiding? Why is he afraid of having a larger public discussion about this issue? And why now? It’s interesting timing that the spam hits the fan this week just as Nunes feels the need to pull all the information in more tightly.

And finally, the “best” spin the White House could come up with is that a Russian mole got inside the White House. What’s the worse spin? What possible story could the White House be trying to hide, protect if they’re using the claim “Trump hired a Russian spy in the White House” as cover?

This is a very strange and very important story. The fact that it’s the Enquirer doesn’t make this story meaningless, it makes this story huge.

quote:

Emboldened by the election of President Donald Trump, Smith appears increasingly comfortable dismissing those who disagree with his stance on any number of issues under the purview of his science committee, from climate research to the use of peer review in assessing research results and grant proposals. And one key element in his strategy appears to be relabeling common terms in hopes of shaping public dialogue.

“I applaud you for saying you’ll be using the term climate studies, not climate science,” said one audience member. His reference was to Smith’s embrace of a distinction made by a previous speaker, climatologist Patrick Michaels of the libertarian Cato Institute in Washington, D.C., who argues that most climate scientists don’t deserve to be called “scientists” because they have manipulated their data and ignored contrary results. “But I also urge you to use the term politically correct science.”

“Good point,” Smith replied. “And I’ll start using those words if you’ll start using two words for me. The first is never, ever use the word progressive. Instead, use the word liberal. The second is never use the word 'mainstream' media, because they aren’t. Use 'liberal' media. Is that a deal?”

Greeted with a rousing ovation, Smith kept going. “I’ll give you a bonus. When we talk about changing the Senate rules on ending filibusters, don’t use the word ‘nuclear’ option. That has a negative connotation. Use ‘democratic’ option.”

Smith also signaled that he plans to turn up the volume on his criticism of federally funded research that doesn’t fit his definition of “sound science.” In particular, he expressed support for writing legislation that would punish scientific journals that publish research that doesn’t fit standards of peer review crafted by Smith and the committee (although he didn’t say how that would be accomplished).

“I think that is a good idea worth our consideration,” he told the questioner, who was building off Smith’s long-running criticism of a study that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has used in regulating air quality. “In fact, it’s one of several good ideas I’ve heard today. Let us see how we can accomplish that.”

In fact, as Smith told one audience member who worried that Trump might renege on some to his campaign promises, the sky’s the limit when it comes to dismantling the past 8 years of environmental regulations.

“I think the president has ushered in a permanent change in the political climate,” Smith asserted. “And by that I mean I think he’ll keep his promises and that he’ll do exactly what he said. You’re seeing that in his appointments, like Scott Pruitt at EPA, for example. So … I don’t think you’ll have any disappointment on any of those issues.”

DoktorLoken posted:

https://twitter.com/senatormenendez/status/845363015222542336

Reverand maynard posted:

thread title really should be "Do you ever think about death, Donald?"

Casimir Radon posted:

I think I'll throw a party when Oliver North dies. Too many idiots in temhr military idolize that piece of poo poo.

Two Finger posted:

LtCol J. Krusinski posted:

I dunno, if I'm being honest? I got no beef with Ollie North.

Kung Fu Fist gently caress posted:

you guys realize that its nixon asking that question to cia director richard helms right?

psydude posted:

General? Pfft, Ollie barely cracked O5.

Hillary Clintons Thong posted:

whoops, sorry IDK why I always think he's a general. YOu'd think someone with that many fingers in that much bullshit would be a flag officer.