LaxPower Back-Up Stick

old salt wrote: ↑Sun Oct 06, 2019 1:37 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Sun Oct 06, 2019 1:06 pm

youthathletics wrote: ↑Sun Oct 06, 2019 12:53 pm

seacoaster wrote: ↑Sun Oct 06, 2019 12:42 pm

youthathletics wrote: ↑Sun Oct 06, 2019 12:34 pm

seacoaster wrote: ↑Sun Oct 06, 2019 12:26 pm

youthathletics wrote: ↑Sun Oct 06, 2019 10:13 am Much like schiffs (non)facts and TWP giving him 4 Pinocchio's. https://www.instagram.com/p/B3N1KnkHnay ... dF7b3gwo0/

I posted the article a few days ago. Schiff appears to have dissembled a bit about his committee's interactions with the whistleblower. He didn't use the slow-walking or withholding of appropriated dollars as a carrot to euchre cheap political favors out of a vulnerable foreign leader for his reelection campaign. But sure, bad boy Adam.

Bottom line, Schiff lied and significantly bamboozled the world with his theatrical antics. And he is in charge of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. He apparently likes playing #whackamole

Baloney; you relentlessly miss the "bottom line," YA, which is that the right is simply sanguine about a President who is abusing the powers and dignity of the office, after excoriating the prior President and administration for putting a binder clip on legislation. How about the rule of law and the country first for a while?

I agree about the dignity part and have openly admitted that. You are expanding the conversation at hand, we were solely speaking on Schiff and his lying and that MATTERS, as it relates to this impeachment inquiry.

I get you do not like Trump, neither do I. But I am not of the mindset to poo on everything....just because.

youth, you just poohed on Schiff pretty hard.
And you continue to ignore that Schiff was clear those were not Trump's actual words, he was paraphrasing for effect. Only a nit wit would actually not understand...or someone who didn't bother to watch the whole thing. Sure, if you only were to watch excerpts that Fox shows you, it's easy to misunderstand. But it's not what actually happened.

So, your "poo" is misplaced...indeed, saying that Schiff was "lying" appears to be a conscious repeat of something that is quite untrue. I think you know better. So, why do it?

We can agree that Schiff made a tactical mistake in resorting to paraphrase and parody to make his desired points, but to call it "lying" is just beyond the pale.

The WP awarded Schiff 4 Pinocchios for his claims regarding his contacts with the WB,
not for his dramatic reading of his adaptation of the transcript

youth was referring to his "theatrical antics" Salty.

I'd agree that Schiff 'dissembled' on prior contacts of his staff with the WB, thus the Pinocchios, but not to the degree that the nut jobs, including Trump, want to think.

BREAKING: As President Trump urged Ukraine’s leaders to investigate his political rival Joe Biden, associates of his personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani were looking to profit from the country’s state-run natural gas company, AP sources say.

A sad bit of on-air toadying by a United States Senator:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... -analyzed/

"More than anything, this section of the interview shows just how much Republicans in Congress think they need to ingratiate themselves to Trump.

Johnson is a member of the Senate Ukraine Caucus and chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. He also sits on the Senate’s Foreign Relations Committee. In addition, he’s a member of a separate but coequal branch of government. He had a vested interest in getting security aid to Ukraine approved by members of Congress in both parties. We know based on his own words that he was concerned that Trump was holding it up.

Yet, rather than acknowledge that on camera, Johnson tries to deflect by throwing out false summaries of the Mueller report ⁠ — that the allegations were “proven false” ⁠ — conspiracy theories that someone “planted” the allegations of Russian collusion at the center of the special counsel investigation and by naming a former FBI official who was no fan of Trump but was ancillary to the investigations into his campaign. At one point, Johnson refuses to answer whether he trusts the CIA and the FBI, two agencies he oversees and works with in his role in the Senate.

More importantly, none of this has anything to do with Ukraine. Johnson was talking fast, tossing out these distractions like roadblocks to a journalist determined to get a legitimate answer."

a fan wrote: ↑Fri Oct 04, 2019 11:51 am
Have you ever met a Trumpfan? Do they "gratuitously slap" libs? Or call the media "fake news". Or make fun of "drive by voters"? They make fun of "libs" 24/7. Pot, meet kettle.

I have met many Trumpfans...we employ a ton of them (and btw, they are nice guys and ladies!). To the extent they 'make fun' of liberals (they'd rather fish, hunt, or play catch with their kids), they mostly make fun of a lack of common sense. Machinists and technicians need to understand basic math like speeds and feeds, imperial to metric, and fractions to decimals, and of course geometric dimensioning and tolerancing. That takes common sense. And common sense isn't as common as we'd like to think. Hence it has real value.

Ad hominem attacks from the politics-obsessed are simply another way of saying "I'm an important guy and it's OK for me to call someone names". It's not okay.

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 10:24 am

a fan wrote: ↑Fri Oct 04, 2019 11:51 am
Have you ever met a Trumpfan? Do they "gratuitously slap" libs? Or call the media "fake news". Or make fun of "drive by voters"? They make fun of "libs" 24/7. Pot, meet kettle.

I have met many Trumpfans...we employ a ton of them (and btw, they are nice guys and ladies!). To the extent they 'make fun' of liberals (they'd rather fish, hunt, or play catch with their kids), they mostly make fun of a lack of common sense. Machinists and technicians need to understand basic math like speeds and feeds, imperial to metric, and fractions to decimals, and of course geometric dimensioning and tolerancing. That takes common sense. And common sense isn't as common as we'd like to think. Hence it has real value.

Ad hominem attacks from the politics-obsessed are simply another way of saying "I'm an important guy and it's OK for me to call someone names". It's not okay.

ergo, Trumpnista making fun of liberals is OK. Gottcha.

seacoaster wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 6:13 am A sad bit of on-air toadying by a United States Senator:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... -analyzed/

"More than anything, this section of the interview shows just how much Republicans in Congress think they need to ingratiate themselves to Trump.

Johnson is a member of the Senate Ukraine Caucus and chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. He also sits on the Senate’s Foreign Relations Committee. In addition, he’s a member of a separate but coequal branch of government. He had a vested interest in getting security aid to Ukraine approved by members of Congress in both parties. We know based on his own words that he was concerned that Trump was holding it up.

Yet, rather than acknowledge that on camera, Johnson tries to deflect by throwing out false summaries of the Mueller report ⁠ — that the allegations were “proven false” ⁠ — conspiracy theories that someone “planted” the allegations of Russian collusion at the center of the special counsel investigation and by naming a former FBI official who was no fan of Trump but was ancillary to the investigations into his campaign. At one point, Johnson refuses to answer whether he trusts the CIA and the FBI, two agencies he oversees and works with in his role in the Senate.

More importantly, none of this has anything to do with Ukraine. Johnson was talking fast, tossing out these distractions like roadblocks to a journalist determined to get a legitimate answer."

Yup, Johnson reverted to form. It really was an amusing segment.

jhu72 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 10:55 am

seacoaster wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 6:13 am A sad bit of on-air toadying by a United States Senator:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... -analyzed/

"More than anything, this section of the interview shows just how much Republicans in Congress think they need to ingratiate themselves to Trump.

Johnson is a member of the Senate Ukraine Caucus and chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. He also sits on the Senate’s Foreign Relations Committee. In addition, he’s a member of a separate but coequal branch of government. He had a vested interest in getting security aid to Ukraine approved by members of Congress in both parties. We know based on his own words that he was concerned that Trump was holding it up.

Yet, rather than acknowledge that on camera, Johnson tries to deflect by throwing out false summaries of the Mueller report ⁠ — that the allegations were “proven false” ⁠ — conspiracy theories that someone “planted” the allegations of Russian collusion at the center of the special counsel investigation and by naming a former FBI official who was no fan of Trump but was ancillary to the investigations into his campaign. At one point, Johnson refuses to answer whether he trusts the CIA and the FBI, two agencies he oversees and works with in his role in the Senate.

More importantly, none of this has anything to do with Ukraine. Johnson was talking fast, tossing out these distractions like roadblocks to a journalist determined to get a legitimate answer."

Yup, Johnson reverted to form. It really was an amusing segment.

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 10:24 am

a fan wrote: ↑Fri Oct 04, 2019 11:51 am
Have you ever met a Trumpfan? Do they "gratuitously slap" libs? Or call the media "fake news". Or make fun of "drive by voters"? They make fun of "libs" 24/7. Pot, meet kettle.

I have met many Trumpfans...we employ a ton of them (and btw, they are nice guys and ladies!). To the extent they 'make fun' of liberals (they'd rather fish, hunt, or play catch with their kids), they mostly make fun of a lack of common sense. Machinists and technicians need to understand basic math like speeds and feeds, imperial to metric, and fractions to decimals, and of course geometric dimensioning and tolerancing. That takes common sense. And common sense isn't as common as we'd like to think. Hence it has real value.

Ad hominem attacks from the politics-obsessed are simply another way of saying "I'm an important guy and it's OK for me to call someone names". It's not okay.

So in other words, yes, you've heard them make fun of libs, use the phrase "fake news", and generally act condescending towards "stupid liberals."

Pot meet kettle.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... spartanntp

Apparently Rick Perry has discovered that he can't run away from Orange Duce. Another gutless Trump lover.

Speaking of a Trump lover or perhaps more to the point a Trump lover speaking.

jhu72 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 11:30 am Speaking of a Trump lover or perhaps more to the point a Trump lover speaking.

One of the tacks they are using...same as the Ds did with Clinton. Claim it's bad, but not bad enough to impeach. Gotta say, they are consistent in their hypocrisy.

foreverlax wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 11:36 am

jhu72 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 11:30 am Speaking of a Trump lover or perhaps more to the point a Trump lover speaking.

One of the tacks they are using...same as the Ds did with Clinton. Claim it's bad, but not bad enough to impeach. Gotta say, they are consistent in their hypocrisy.

Times have changed and the nature of the offenses are different. Its pretty stupid to rely on arguments made by democrats in a different time and significantly different circumstances. Same for comparisons of what will happen to the president's popularity as a result of impeachment.

jhu72 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 11:42 am

foreverlax wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 11:36 am

jhu72 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 11:30 am Speaking of a Trump lover or perhaps more to the point a Trump lover speaking.

One of the tacks they are using...same as the Ds did with Clinton. Claim it's bad, but not bad enough to impeach. Gotta say, they are consistent in their hypocrisy.

Times have changed and the nature of the offenses are different. Its pretty stupid to rely on arguments made by democrats in a different time and significantly different circumstances. Same for comparisons of what will happen to the president's popularity as a result of impeachment.

Agreed. Which leads to tack #2 - Trump was just kidding, trying to get the press' panties in a wad.

Tack #3 is Ron J's approach....

Colin Powell is spot on -

“They need to get a grip, and when they see things that aren’t right they need to say something about it. Because our foreign policy is a shambles right now, in my humble judgement. And I see things happening that are hard to understand,” Powell said.

“In my time, in her time, one of us would have gone to the President and said, ‘you screwed up.’ So we’ve got to fix it, and we’ll put out a correction. You know what happened this time? They ordered the Commerce Department to go out and back up whatever the President has said,” Powell said. “This is not the way the country is supposed to run, and Congress is one of the institutions that should be doing something about this. All parts of Congress. The media has a role to play. We all have a role to play. We’ve got to remember that all these pieces are part of our government: Executive Branch, Congress, Supreme Court and the fourth estate. And we have to remember the Constitution started with ‘we the people,’ not ‘me the President.’”

“I’m a moderate Republican who believes we should have a strong foreign policy, a strong defense policy, but we have to look out for our people. And ought to work hard to make sure we’re one country, one team. And so on that basis, I called myself a Republican,” Powell said.

foreverlax wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 11:54 am

jhu72 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 11:42 am

foreverlax wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 11:36 am

jhu72 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 11:30 am Speaking of a Trump lover or perhaps more to the point a Trump lover speaking.

One of the tacks they are using...same as the Ds did with Clinton. Claim it's bad, but not bad enough to impeach. Gotta say, they are consistent in their hypocrisy.

Times have changed and the nature of the offenses are different. Its pretty stupid to rely on arguments made by democrats in a different time and significantly different circumstances. Same for comparisons of what will happen to the president's popularity as a result of impeachment.

Agreed. Which leads to tack #2 - Trump was just kidding, trying to get the press' panties in a wad.

Tack #3 is Ron J's approach....

Colin Powell is spot on -

“They need to get a grip, and when they see things that aren’t right they need to say something about it. Because our foreign policy is a shambles right now, in my humble judgement. And I see things happening that are hard to understand,” Powell said.

“In my time, in her time, one of us would have gone to the President and said, ‘you screwed up.’ So we’ve got to fix it, and we’ll put out a correction. You know what happened this time? They ordered the Commerce Department to go out and back up whatever the President has said,” Powell said. “This is not the way the country is supposed to run, and Congress is one of the institutions that should be doing something about this. All parts of Congress. The media has a role to play. We all have a role to play. We’ve got to remember that all these pieces are part of our government: Executive Branch, Congress, Supreme Court and the fourth estate. And we have to remember the Constitution started with ‘we the people,’ not ‘me the President.’”

“I’m a moderate Republican who believes we should have a strong foreign policy, a strong defense policy, but we have to look out for our people. And ought to work hard to make sure we’re one country, one team. And so on that basis, I called myself a Republican,” Powell said.

Just another lib talking......

Yup, Johnson reverted to form. It really was an amusing segment.

In the Banana Republican party, Johnson had no choice but to undo the damage of his "Kinsley gaffe" -- telling the WSJ that he was told the Uke aide was tied to the Biden stuff (i.e., quid pro quo).

A "Kinsley gaffe" is when a politician accidentally tells the truth.

Nice summary of the GOP's complicity through Trumpian blather, by Rubin in the Post:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... e-excuses/

"Attorney General William P. Barr is gallivanting around the globe trying to disprove the conclusions of the U.S. intelligence community that Russia interfered with our elections. No, really, he seems to think it was a plot between … oh, never mind. It’s preposterous, as the current secretary of state and former CIA director Mike Pompeo would tell you (or is he part of the deep state, too?). The president thinks his call soliciting foreign help from Ukraine was “perfect,” and Pompeo thinks this is just what allies do. The entire administration, which spent a good deal of the past few years claiming Trump could never be impeached because there was no “collusion” between his 2016 campaign and Russia, now publicly invites foreign countries to meddle in our elections. (This should underscore the need to impeach both Barr and Pompeo, who seems to be fully supportive of plots to subvert our elections.)

Given how nutty the president and his top aides sound, there is little wonder most Republican defenders sound desperate to change the subject, to throw accusations at former vice president Joe Biden and otherwise distract from the debacle that threatens to take down Trump and his party.

It would save a lot of time if interviewers could use a shorthand to bat down the ludicrous excuses. Numbering the weak excuses and their obvious flaws would at least save time. (No, Senator, that’s a No. 3! Let’s move on.) Here goes:

1. He was kidding. That’s what Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) and other hapless spinners are saying about his remarks on the White House grounds inviting China to dig for dirt on the former vice president. The problems with this one include: (a) His demeanor was not jocular and he spoke about Ukraine, which he absolutely did invite to intervene, in the same conversation, even the same sentences as China; (b) He reportedly did call President Xi Jinping. When the record of that call is released, I suppose Republicans will have to claim he was pulling a prank on Xi; and (c) How does this exonerate the president with regard to Ukraine?

2. The whistleblower is a no-good … The whistleblower’s claims have been confirmed by documents including the rough transcript of the July 25 call. His or her credibility is irrelevant now. We’ve got the goods

3. Hearsay. See No. 2.

4. It’s not worth impeaching him, especially so close to the election. (No, really, Rich Lowry of National Review offered this as an argument he could get behind: "The level and the magnitude of this offense does not justify impeaching and possibly removing a president 12 months before an election.”) This comes from the crowd who thought it essential to impeach President Bill Clinton in late 1998 for lying about an affair in a deposition. (Is this like the Merrick Garland rule — no impeachments in the last year?) It’s a bit mind-blowing to say that it’s just not that big a deal when the president repeatedly went to foreign powers to put their fingers on the scale of our elections, used taxpayer-funded aid as leverage, obstructed an investigation into this conduct and threatened a whistleblower — that he should be allowed to remain in office until the very election in which he is trying to drag foreigners. (Let him delegitimize the election first and then go? Does this come with a promise Trump won’t be on the ballot in 2020?) If all we are talking about is a year (not a year plus four), why doesn’t he just resign or say he won’t run? We would save the trouble of an impeachment in that case.

5. But Hunter Biden … First, the claim that former vice president Biden did anything untoward has been repeatedly, unequivocally debunked. It is not enough just to say that there is “no evidence.” Biden did not do what he is accused of doing (removing a prosecutor to protect his son); he executed the policy of the U.S. government and our allies to push out a prosecutor who was not rooting out corruption. Second, if Biden’s actions were a problem, why did Trump not care until Biden became the front-runner in the race for the 2020 Democratic nomination and built a double-digit lead in polls against Trump? Third, if Biden were to drop out tomorrow, Trump would still have committed impeachable acts (e.g., withholding taxpayer-funded aid to get help eliminating a rival).

6. The deep state … Listen, sane adults should not spew crackpot conspiracy theories. Even the ones still defending Trump (e.g., Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, Sen. Lindsey O. Graham of South Carolina, Pompeo) at one time all asserted Russia interference with our election. Period. Attempts to rewrite history by strong-arming our allies might be the best reason to impeach Trump.

So remember, the next time Ron Johnson goes off on the deep state, the interviewer can shout out: “No. 6!” When Jim Jordan says, “Just kidding,” the response is: “Forget it! That’s No. 1!” In truth, there is no valid excuse for doing what we now know Trump did. If we want a Constitution that means something, he’s got to go. If someone wants to talk immediate resignation, I’m all ears. Otherwise forget Nos. 1 to 6. Using these rotten excuses simply reveals the dishonesty and lack of patriotism of the people advancing them."

a fan wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 11:09 am

Peter Brown wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 10:24 am

a fan wrote: ↑Fri Oct 04, 2019 11:51 am
Have you ever met a Trumpfan? Do they "gratuitously slap" libs? Or call the media "fake news". Or make fun of "drive by voters"? They make fun of "libs" 24/7. Pot, meet kettle.

I have met many Trumpfans...we employ a ton of them (and btw, they are nice guys and ladies!). To the extent they 'make fun' of liberals (they'd rather fish, hunt, or play catch with their kids), they mostly make fun of a lack of common sense. Machinists and technicians need to understand basic math like speeds and feeds, imperial to metric, and fractions to decimals, and of course geometric dimensioning and tolerancing. That takes common sense. And common sense isn't as common as we'd like to think. Hence it has real value.

Ad hominem attacks from the politics-obsessed are simply another way of saying "I'm an important guy and it's OK for me to call someone names". It's not okay.

So in other words, yes, you've heard them make fun of libs, use the phrase "fake news", and generally act condescending towards "stupid liberals."

Pot meet kettle.

Not what I said. I have heard them make fun of a 'lack of common sense'.

Generally these people have no bile; they tend to laugh off stuff mostly. The corollary to that is when we read Internet comments full of bile and outright hatred for the other side, which I'm seeing a dangerous trend of by the left (and by "left" I do not mean all Democrats, which I am no longer a member of; but a significant % of the Dems and growing fast).

The people I know who voted for Trump (admittedly only my colleagues...this is not some massive Pew poll) would be the first to jump-start your car on a cold day or winch your vehicle out of a ditch if you got in trouble. They wouldn't even ask your party identification! (the same is true for most people in America...for some reason, the Internet strokes hysteria).

Me personally, I think people in person can be much less insane than their Internet commentary. To the extent I blame any one news outlet, MSNBC seems like a cauldron of hypocrisy and hatred, a horrible combo. And before you say Fox, Fox at least invites the Left onto its programs and has rational debates (not to mention some anchors who are frankly Democrats...'both sides' doesn't even happen any more at MSNBC). CNN tries to keep some opposing voices, which I appreciate (not to mention I think Jake Tapper is an eminently fair journalist).

Rolling Stone of all places.... https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/p ... ssion=true

It’s an insult to all of these people, and the suffering they’ve weathered, to frame the ballcarrier in the Beltway’s latest partisan power contest as a whistleblower.

With that in mind, let’s look at what we know about the first “whistleblower” in Ukrainegate:

He or she is a “CIA officer detailed to the White House”;
The account is at best partially based upon the CIA officer’s own experience, made up substantially by information from “more than a half dozen U.S. officials” and the “private accounts” of “my colleagues”;
“He or she” was instantly celebrated as a whistleblower by news networks and major newspapers.

That last detail caught the eye of Kiriakou, a former CIA Counterterrorism official who blew the whistle on the agency’s torture program.

In 2016 we saw a pair of electoral revolts, one on the right and one on the left, against the cratering popularity of our political elite. The rightist populist revolt succeeded, the Sanders movement did not. Ukrainegate to me looks like a continuation of Russiagate, which was a reaction of that defeated political elite to the rightists. I don’t feel solidarity with either group.

The argument that’s supposed to be galvanizing everyone right now is the idea that we need to “stand up and be counted,” because failing to rally to the cause is effectively advocacy for Trump. This line of thinking is based on the presumption that Trump is clearly worse than the people opposing him.

HooDat wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 2:01 pm Rolling Stone of all places.... https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/p ... ssion=true

It’s an insult to all of these people, and the suffering they’ve weathered, to frame the ballcarrier in the Beltway’s latest partisan power contest as a whistleblower.

With that in mind, let’s look at what we know about the first “whistleblower” in Ukrainegate:

He or she is a “CIA officer detailed to the White House”;
The account is at best partially based upon the CIA officer’s own experience, made up substantially by information from “more than a half dozen U.S. officials” and the “private accounts” of “my colleagues”;
“He or she” was instantly celebrated as a whistleblower by news networks and major newspapers.

That last detail caught the eye of Kiriakou, a former CIA Counterterrorism official who blew the whistle on the agency’s torture program.

In 2016 we saw a pair of electoral revolts, one on the right and one on the left, against the cratering popularity of our political elite. The rightist populist revolt succeeded, the Sanders movement did not. Ukrainegate to me looks like a continuation of Russiagate, which was a reaction of that defeated political elite to the rightists. I don’t feel solidarity with either group.

The argument that’s supposed to be galvanizing everyone right now is the idea that we need to “stand up and be counted,” because failing to rally to the cause is effectively advocacy for Trump. This line of thinking is based on the presumption that Trump is clearly worse than the people opposing him.

So the author doesn’t believe money was withheld for a political favor? The transcript was faked?

It mostly sounds like the author thinks it is a set up.