Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
She didn't do that.
This simple chart debunks the conspiracy theory that Hillary Clinton sold uranium to Russia
When you fix those Uranium One charts, it looks a lot less like a conspiracy.
By Alvin Chang@alv9nalvin@vox.com Nov 17, 2017, 9:20am EST
Republicans are pushing a verifiably fake conspiracy theory that goes something like this: Hillary Clinton approved the sale of American uranium to Russia in exchange for a large donation to the Clinton Foundation. It’s gotten to the point that Attorney General Jeff Sessions is thinking about appointing a special counsel to look into this fake theory.
Journalists ranging from MSNBC’s Joy Reid to Fox News’s Shep Smith have methodically debunked the theory. But one reason it lives on is because it’s so convoluted. It cherry-picks details that make it seem plausible that Clinton gave Russia a huge portion of America’s uranium.
In fact, Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) showed us just how complicated the life of a conspiracy theorist can be when he presented this flowchart during a congressional hearing:
https://www.vox.com/2017/11/17/16658080/uranium-one-clinton-russia-chart
There are two very important things to notice here.
The first is that Clinton played little to no part in this approval process because as secretary of state, she headed an agency that was just one of many involved in the approval process — and even then, it was likely a lower-level staffer who handled the approval.
The second is that the person who donated the largest amount of money to the Clinton Foundation, Frank Giustra, didn’t even benefit from the sale. That’s because he said he sold his stake in Uranium One three years before this deal — and more than a year before Clinton began serving as secretary of state.
That’s why PolitiFact debunked this conspiracy theory long ago, but that hasn’t stopped President Trump from tweeting out insinuations like this:
Donald J. Trump
? @realDonaldTrump
...New Donna B book says she paid for and stole the Dem Primary. What about the deleted E-mails, Uranium, Podesta, the Server, plus, plus
These types of messages push twisted, convoluted narratives that are hard to understand but imply that Clinton made a shady uranium deal with Russia. It ultimately sows uncertainty in our minds; it makes us wonder whether this could have happened. That’s why we won’t see a concise chart like this used to peddle this conspiracy theory.
I recommend reading the gray part first and then moving on to the red lines:
That lame explanation could apply to every criminal target who ever believed that they were wrongly targeted. That does NOT excuse obstructing an investigation.
Never on any Law and Order episode did any defense attorney say "your honor my client obstructed the investigation because he was frustrated. Accordingly I seek dismissal of all charges."
Laughable, huh?
Would you allow such license for Obama or Clinton if they felt aggrieved by an investigation sufficiently to become 'frustrated' enough to obstruct said investigation?
Of course you wouldn't.
Try the above exercise before posting anymore nonsense.
You're the one who needs to give your poor reasoning and reading comprehension skills a rest.
THE determinative factor was socio-economic.
Better outdoor conditions certainly are in play, winter sportswise for CO, MN and WA.
Everybody else? Gyms and home exercise equipment except, apparently, the Stroke Belt.
How else to explain higher exercise rates in high pollution areas, dumb-ass?
And I chose to qualify the article's 'determines' with 'may determine' for the reason I stated.
I hardly know what to say to you anymore. I realize that a substandard education is responsible for your misconstruing 'association is not causation' but c'mon, at least TRY.
Several causative factors are laid out in this article. So my snark about 'bad news for righties' has underlying data to support it that, yes, I was aware of.
The States That Exercise Least
A new CDC report highlights geographical trends in leisure-time physical activity.
https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2018/06/states-and-exercise/563882/
Olga Khazan
Jun 28, 2018
The federal government recommends that every week we all do “muscle-strengthening” activities at least twice, along with 150 minutes of “moderate intensity” aerobic physical activity. However, only about 23 percent of U.S. adults actually manage to work out this much during their leisure hours, according to a new CDC report released Thursday.
And, the CDC found, the percentage of people who get enough exercise varies greatly by state, from a low of 13.5 percent of adults in Mississippi to a high of 32.5 percent in Colorado.
Percent of adults who met both the federal guidelines on physical activity, by state
Men are more likely than women to get enough exercise, and less than 10 percent of women in Mississippi work out sufficiently (compared to 31.5 percent in Colorado).
People who had jobs were also more likely to get enough exercise than those who didn’t, potentially because of the high cost of gyms. (The study only measured physical activity performed outside of work, not commuting or physical activity done on the job.)
In 13 states—Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Mississippi, New York, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, and West Virginia—a significantly lower percentage of adults got enough exercise than the national average.
Most of these states are in the southeast, which is sometimes referred to as the “Stroke Belt.”
As Claire Suddath once wrote for Time, some areas of the southeast U.S. lack public transportation options and even sidewalks. It’s also too hot to exercise outside much of the year, unlike in healthier states such as Colorado or Minnesota.
Also, people who are already in poor health—as people in places like Kentucky disproportionately are—tend to exercise less, the CDC notes.
Meanwhile, in 14 states—Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Illinois, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Vermont, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming—and the District of Columbia, a significantly higher percentage of adults exercised enough, compared to the national average.
Several of these states are in the mountainous, activity-filled west, but others are simply wealthier than average. According to the CDC, “people in professional and managerial occupations” are more likely to get enough exercise.
Although exercise is not the best way to lose weight, people who exercise tend to have a lower risk of chronic disease, disability, and premature mortality. The differences in physical activity among the states is yet another example of how where you live determines how healthy you are.
I would change the phrase to 'may determine how...' simply because I don't believe that residence or easier or more difficult are destiny, for good or ill.
Association is not causation, otherwise you Red State bumpkins will have to assign GOP governors responsibility for abysmal State educational performance, tragically sad healthcare and mortality stats and lagging GDP's that have you dependent upon the 'kindness of strangers'....redistribution of tax revenues largely generated by Blue States.
Murder RATES are the more accurate indicator of the prevalence of violence in a community.
Tell me there are not some GOP mayors sprinkled among these cities, not that it's their fault mind you.
https://www.neighborhoodscout.com/blog/highest-murder-rate-cities
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/01/03/5-facts-about-crime-in-the-u-s/
There are large geographic variations in crime rates. The BJS data don’t allow for specific geographic comparisons, but the FBI data show big differences from state to state and city to city. In 2017, there were more than 600 violent crimes per 100,000 residents in Alaska, New Mexico and Tennessee. By contrast, Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont had rates below 200 violent crimes per 100,000 residents.
And while Chicago has drawn widespread attention for its soaring murder total in recent years, its murder rate in 2017 – 24.1 murders and non-negligent manslaughters per 100,000 residents – was less than half of the rates in St. Louis (66.1 per 100,000) and Baltimore (55.8 per 100,000). The FBI notes that various factors might influence a particular area’s crime rate, including its population density and economic conditions.
Pic Of The Moment: Funny How That Works
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1017542438
2. Happy Memorial Day? He does realize that's an American remembrance holiday, right?
4. He might as well have followed up with thank you all for killing our people
Remember he saluted a North Korea military officer
Thought bubble above NK officer's head....
Jeezus, I tried to help you out with my outstretched hand. But no, you don't get it. Foreign dignitaries do not salute foreign military, particularly when a state of war still exists between the two countries.
Even the other guy in the room with a funny haircut is all 'holy shit, we got picture of this. What a dotard!'
3. A disgrace to all Americans
Forget about partisanship. How can anyone in this country still support this fool?
Many of us here have fathers or grandfathers who survived or perished in WW2.
His inane remarks are an affront to all.
He has to go - and soon.
Asked about Pelosi's comment that he needs an intervention, Trump went off the rails, if his train was ever on them in the first place.
He went around the room, demanding that staff and advisers who were at the meeting tell the cameras that he was perfectly calm when he told Pelosi and Chuck Schumer he wouldn't work on an infrastructure bill (or anything) while Democrats investigated him.
http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/
He asked Kellyanne Conway, Mercedes Schlapp, Larry Kudlow, Sarah Sanders, and Deputy Press Secretary Hogan Gidley to testify that he was calm. Here's how Trump put it to Sanders: "The narrative was I was screaming and ranting and raving, and it was terrible. And I watched Nancy and she was all crazy yesterday...Just out curiosity — you were there — what was my tone yesterday at the meeting?" Sanders attested to this frantic fuck's calm demeanor.
Here's the thing, though. I think it was absolutely planned. I think Trump told everyone he was going to ask them if he was totally chill at the canceled infrastructure meeting. All the answers he got seemed absolutely practiced. So Pelosi's thrusting so far into his dullard's brain pan that he can't get her out of there.
Throughout this whole frankly fucking odd display, Trump kept making all kinds of asides, like to Kudlow, "Larry has done more live television. Maybe Regis has you by a little bit, right? Not by much." Yeah, that's a Regis Philbin reference.
And this: "I don’t want to say 'Crazy Nancy,' because if I say that, you’re going to say it’s a copy of 'Crazy Bernie,' and that’s no good, because he — Bernie is definitely crazy." But he couldn't help but attack Pelosi more because, you know, chicks, man: "It was sad when I watched Nancy, all moving — the movement and the hands and the craziness — and I watched — that’s, by the way, a person that’s got some problems." He's gonna be mocking her movements soon because that's what this lump of shit thinks is funny.
The rest of the appearance, which, to remind you, was about giving money to farmers who he himself has harmed financially, was just as alarming. Trump criticized Rep. Jerrold Nadler by saying, "Jerry Nadler. I know him well. I’ve had great success against Jerry and I will again." That's an allusion to a 1980s zoning battle. Seriously, Trump's fucking brain stopped functioning around 1990.
"I'm a very capable person," Trump said at one point and wasn't joking. (He was joking when he called himself "an extremely stable genius," so let's let that one go.)
He insisted repeatedly that he knew things, understood things, was well-versed in a subject. I teach students who lie to me all the time about studying something or reading something. I know that Trump was fuckin' lying when he said of the release of John Walker Lindh, "Believe it or not, about two weeks ago, I went to the best lawyers in our country that work for government. I said, 'What could we do about this?'" Bullshit. He probably saw Tucker Carlson jacking off about Lindh and wondered why they weren't talking about him for five minutes.
And asked about who he was accusing of treason, after being reminded that one can be sentenced to death for that, Trump responded, "If you look at Comey; if you look at McCabe; if you look at probably people — people higher than that; if you look at Strzok; if you look at his lover, Lisa Page, his wonderful lover — the two lovers, they talked openly." Trump's weird fascination with the Strzok/Page affair is just pure dickishness, his default posture. But, yeah, sure, let's just move on from him implying that leaders of the FBI deserved to be executed.
By the way, several farmers and Farm Bureau officials were forced to stand there the entire time and had to be wondering what the fuck they had gotten themselves into.
And Trump proclaimed once again that everything is really about him and him alone. Talking about farm states, he said, "China has openly stated they’re going to use the farmer. The reason is because I got the farmer’s votes. You look at a map; it’s all red, meaning Republican, meaning Trump. It’s all red in the middle states, as you know. It’s got a little blue here and a little blue there." I guess it's useless at this point to try to say that California is the largest farm economy in the nation and is being hurt badly by this trade war.
Look, I've got a problem with how Pelosi is handling the lugubriously slow walk towards impeachment. But I'm all in on her penetrating Trump's tiny mind and buying a condo there.
One thing he hates more than anything is being bested by a woman, and right now, he's frantically trying to figure out how to degrade her and get her out of there. No, it's not impeachment. It is, though, making Trump look weaker and weaker and more easily defeated. It's not a great plan, but it's sure as shit an entertaining one.
Side note: Here's an exchange that didn't get much notice between Trump and Conway.
MS. CONWAY: Very calm. No temper tantrum...I’m sure somebody has it on tape too. But you were very calm. Stood at the edge of the Cabinet table.
THE PRESIDENT: They have it on tape someplace?
MS. CONWAY: Sure.
THE PRESIDENT: Good. That’d be good.
Um, are they taping the Cabinet Room?
(Correction: I originally said the meeting took place in the Oval Office. That was wrong.)
How Chicago Ranks For Physical Fitness
Find out if the Windy City made it on a list of the fittest cities in the nation.
By Shannon Antinori, Patch National Staff | May 24, 2019 11:18 am ET
The American College of Sports Medicine has released its annual fitness scores and rankings.
CHICAGO — A new report has ranked the fittest cities in America, and there's some good news: Chicago fared pretty well. The American College of Sports Medicine on Tuesday released its annual fittest cities rankings. The researchers assessed the 100 largest cities based on 33 indicators related to health behaviors, chronic disease and community infrastructure.
Chicago ranked 15th fittest in the country, just ahead of Pittsburgh and behind San Diego. That includes a rank of 32 for personal health and 3 for community and environment.
Meanwhile Arlington, Virginia, earned the title of fittest city in America. The authors highlighted Arlington's balance of both healthy behaviors and community infrastructure. The Northern Virginia city ranked in the top 10 for 22 of the 33 indicators in the index, with six claiming a No. 1 spot.
Nearby Washington, D.C. also claimed a spot in the top 10, along with both of Minnesota's Twin Cities and two California cities.
Here are the 10 fittest cities in America, according to the report:
1.Arlington, VA
2.Seattle, WA
3.Minneapolis, MN
4.San Francisco, CA
5.Madison, WI
6.Washington, D.C.
7.St. Paul, MN
8.Irvine, CA
9.Denver, CO
10.Portland, OR
Bad news for righties, mostly libs hitting the gym and the trails; even though some of the trails lead to Italian Beef joints.
The fitness rankings show a community's personal health habits and how well officials encourage people to stay fit, Stephen Friedhoff, chief clinical officer for the Anthem Foundation, which funded the report, said in a news release. ?
"For example, we added new social determinant of health indicators to this year's report and learned that some cities have work to do in the areas of pedestrian safety and air quality, which are both critical to overall wellness," said Friedhoff.
"Four of the 10 worst cities for pedestrian fatalities are in Florida, and we know air pollution rivals car accidents and tobacco when it comes to causing deaths."
Regular exercise can lower an adult's risk of an early death, the researchers said, as well as for heart disease, stroke, high blood pressure, type 2 diabetes, breast cancer, colon cancer and even risk of falls. It can be just as beneficial for peoples' mental well-being, the report said, and housing values can increase the more run-, walk- and bike-friendly a community is.
Among the report's other key findings: California, Arizona and Nevada were home to the 21 cities with the worst air quality; on average, 75 percent of adults in all cities were physically active in the previous month; and 97 percent of residents in the top 10 fittest cities were located within a 10-minute walk to a park.
Patch national staffer Dan Hampton contributed to this report.
https://patch.com/illinois/evanston/s/gq5wt/how-chicago-ranks-for-physical-fitness?utm_source=alert-breakingnews&utm_medium=email&utm_term=weather&utm_campaign=alert
I was in a casino in Iowa last night.
imanamerican63 (6,566 posts)
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100212136420
I was at a Blackjack table with 5 other players. The talk was about the servicemen and women. The dealer said that her son was a Marine and he has been in since Obama was President. Some guy at the other end of the table said that Obama was terrible man and that he never served his country in the military. She said that her son thought that Obama was a great man was an honorable president. The guy said that it wasn't right for Obama be president without being in the military anyway.
Then dealer asked the guy if he was a Trumper? He said yes he was. She said to him "you know that both Trump or VP Pence never served in the military"? The guy said that he did not care, Trump knew what he was doing?
At that point, another man setting at the table said that he was republican, served in the Iraq War and under Obama's command. He said Obama was a good man and a good president.
He went on to say, Trump was selling out the country and told the guy, "if you can't see that, you are a fool"! The guy got mad, cashed out and left the table. We all laughed and keep playing.
Wounded Bear (28,200 posts)
9. It's the religious influence, Repubs thrive on paradox...
they are perfectly capable of holding both sides of a hypocrisy as truth.
13. It's almost like there was some other difference between Obama & Trump.
What could it be?
Color me perplexed.
You're assuming a position of his not in evidence, that he refuses to debate.
The debate lends itself to confusion as between legitimate historical revisionism and denialism/negationism. The latter taints the former with a negative connotation, IMO.
Historical revisionism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_revisionism
Historical revisionism is the means by which the historical record — the history of a society, as understood in its collective memory — continually integrates new facts and interpretations of the events commonly understood as history, about which the historian and American Historical Association member James M. McPherson, said:
The fourteen-thousand members of this association, however, know that revision is the lifeblood of historical scholarship. History is a continuing dialogue, between the present and the past. Interpretations of the past are subject to change in response to new evidence, new questions asked of the evidence, new perspectives gained by the passage of time. There is no single, eternal, and immutable “truth” about past events and their meaning.
The unending quest of historians for understanding the past — that is, revisionism — is what makes history vital and meaningful. Without revisionism, we might be stuck with the images of Reconstruction [1865–77] after the American Civil War [1861–65] that were conveyed by D. W. Griffith’s The Birth of a Nation [1915] and Claude Bowers’s The Tragic Era [1929]. Were the Gilded Age [1870s–1900] entrepreneurs “Captains of Industry” or “Robber Barons”?
Without revisionist historians, who have done research in new sources and asked new and nuanced questions, we would remain mired in one or another of these stereotypes. Supreme Court decisions often reflect a “revisionist” interpretation of history, as well as of the Constitution.[2]
The historian Deborah Lipstadt (Denying the Holocaust: The Growing Assault on Truth and Memory, 1993), and the historians Michael Shermer and Alex Grobman (Denying History: Who Says the Holocaust Never Happened and Why Do They Say It?, 2002), distinguish between historical revisionism and historical negationism, the latter of which is a form of denialism.
Lipstadt said that Holocaust deniers, such as Harry Elmer Barnes, disingenuously self-identify as "historical revisionists" in order to obscure their denialism as academic revision of the historical record.
As such, Lipstadt, Shermer, and Grobman said that legitimate historical revisionism entails the refinement of existing knowledge about a historical event, not a denial of the event, itself; that such refinement of history emerges from the examination of new, empirical evidence, and a re-examination, and consequent re-interpretation of the existing documentary evidence.
That legitimate historical revisionism acknowledges the existence of a "certain body of irrefutable evidence" and the existence of a "convergence of evidence", which suggest that an event — such as the Black Death, American slavery, and the Holocaust — did occur; whereas the denialism of history rejects the entire foundation of historical evidence, which is a form of historical negationism.[
The irony of it? Among the biggest bugaboos' of those on the right are so called 'safe spaces', for snowflakes, on college campuses, student pressure to deny speaking engagements to those whose views they oppose and opposition to trigger words.
It's doubtful that most liberals, most people over 50, believe in those illiberal practices. But most liberals do not extrapolate from instances to widespread trends, without evidence.
Nor do they believe that where those instances occur they define the entire college experience for most of the student body.
Not so the conclusion jumping right.
So what do you call a board that defines itself, names itself, for what it excludes?
A safe space for snowflakes where posters whose views they oppose are banned so that they will read no trigger words.
Trigger words loosely defined as those that convey facts, evidence, logical thinking, sciencey shit, accurate history and sound economics.
Well to be fair, have you seen ANY shot of Hicks that is NOT a glamour shot?
I suppose a camera phone shot of her roused from a sound sleep at 5:00 a.m., maybe. But unless I get real lucky we're unlikely to see such.
Nah, not a kamikaze mission but rather what is referred to as 'reconnaissance by fire'; open fire where you believe the enemy is lurking.
Note the location of the retuning fire and then unload on it.
I lobbed a grenade, the NFFL Hottentots came rushing from the bush, spear tips glinting in the sun, leaving me no time to open fire.
I made it safely back to home base where me and the TA troops repelled a very weak probing counter-attack.
The End.
Pearl Harbor advance-knowledge conspiracy theory
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl_Harbor_advance-knowledge_conspiracy_theory
The Pearl Harbor advance-knowledge conspiracy theory is the argument that U.S. Government officials had advance knowledge of Japan's December 7, 1941, attack on Pearl Harbor. Ever since the Japanese attack, there has been debate as to how and why the United States had been caught off guard, and how much and when American officials knew of Japanese plans for an attack.[1][2] In September 1944, John T. Flynn,[citation needed] a co-founder of the non-interventionist America First Committee,[3] launched a Pearl Harbor counter-narrative when he published a forty-six page booklet entitled The Truth about Pearl Harbor.[citation needed]
Several writers, including journalist Robert Stinnett,[4] retired U.S. Navy Rear Admiral Robert Alfred Theobald,[5] and Harry Elmer Barnes[6] have argued various parties high in the U.S. and British governments knew of the attack in advance and may even have let it happen or encouraged it in order to force America into the European theatre of World War II via a Japanese–American war started at "the back door".[7][8]
Evidence supporting this view is taken from quotations and source documents from the time[9][page needed] and the release of newer materials. However, the Pearl Harbor advance-knowledge conspiracy is considered a fringe theory and is rejected by historians. [10
Trump is truly a sociopath's sociopath.
Sacrifice, honor, service, values and reflection?
A fish will sooner learn to ride a bicycle than Trump will manifest a single one of those qualities.
Trump is as bereft of those as Commodus was of the virtues his father Marcus Aurelius listed....
Commodus: You wrote to me once, listing the four chief virtues: wisdom, justice, fortitude and temperance. As I read the list, I knew I had none of them.
Yeah, my search didn't respond to specificity either. Had to stumble upon it...
Not sure why this one is more open ended than the first one I found. And 'advance' tells us nothing about sales revenue.
Cotton received more than $500,000 in advance for the book, according to a source close to him.
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/02/04/tom-cotton-arlington-book-1144756
And mine was about Cotton's clumsy, tone deaf, totally inappropriate equating of farmers' suffering from tariffs as not so bad because.....Americans dying in combat.
Last refuge of a scoundrel comes to mind.
He's getting $500K for the book, and presumably paperback proceeds down the road.
Personally, I can't divorce his hard right politics from his book.
A reasonable course for you might be to drop into a B&N bookstore and just start reading. Some of the reviews suggest that some skipping around/over might be called for.
Paul B. Eaglin
5.0 out of 5 stars
5 stars well deserved May 20, 2019
Format: Kindle EditionVerified Purchase
I rated this book five-stars as it is an important history of a renowned military unit that is constantly in the public eye. Mr. Cotton’s writing is highly accessible, although I do understand that some might find the detail to be challenging.
I noticed that in one of the three-star ratings. For me, the detail adds to the authenticity of the history. Whether one is impressed or not with the level of detail it does serve to make the point that the soldiers of the Old Guard put in extraordinary effort as part of their dedication to the sacred duty of honoring our military dead.
It may work for some while not for others, but it does say something about the strong attention to the minutest aspect of their assignments, and the persistence in maintaining their performance level for what is otherwise a repetitive task.
Mr. Cotton avoids the tendency to engage in the twin banes of military writing, overuse of acronyms and reliance on military jargon.
He avoids those successfully, with only an understandable nod to “ANC” for Arlington National Cemetery. The ease and accessibility of his writing style permits the reader to go through this book in little time, for it is captivating and engrossing. The highlights of the military history of the regiment were just enough without dwelling too long at various aspects. Anyone who wants more detail on the regiment’s combat history can rely on his Authorities at the end of the book.
It’s important to realize that this is not a political book, despite his status and despite the criticism in the one-star review that blasts his politics. For all that the reader can tell from the reading of this, it could have been written by an academic whose politics is unknown.
Mr. Cotton leaves that out of the book completely, in my opinion. There is a singular focus on the soldiers of the regiment and dedication to their sacred duty. It is well worth the reading, and it should last for a considerable time as one of the very strong writings about this remarkable regiment and its dedicated soldiers.
RLTW
Paul B. Eaglin
He just embarrasses the hell out of me.. what a loser
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100212134102
Peacetrain (17,073 posts)
There is no other way to put it.. Trump is over in Japan on Memorial Day no less.. swaying his fat backside as he walks with that stupid smirk on his face.. embracing the Korean dictator who is pissing on Trumps shoes.. he is so blasted weak too.. it is so embarrassing .. to have such a marshmallow of a man who embraces dictators overseas representing us..
15. And they love him for it.
16. Donald smiles for the right people
As his master Vlad approaches
I very specifically compared the survival, on this board, of your copy and paste post of the overheated article from zerohedge….decidedly NOT a politically neutral site...with the quick disappearance of my post, and me, from your board.
In case you missed it. You may not like the tone but the substance is un-refutable:
Hey Trumpanzees, some food for thought. Not that there seems to be much appetite for that on this board.
Can't handle this? Change the name of the board to the NFFL...No Functioning Frontal Lobe board.
Enjoy, I know I did!
Nevermind
Nance Greggs
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100212125005
As we gear-up for the 2020 general election, you Republicans have so much going for you when it comes to re-electing Trump.
You can point to his incredible honesty, and how he’s never told a lie to the American people, or … oh, right. Nevermind.
You can focus on how he’s kept his promises, like releasing his tax returns, having Mexico pay for the Wall, replacing Obamacare with cheaper and more efficient healthcare coverage and … oh, right. Nevermind.
You can tout the fact that he’s “not into cover-ups”, and how his financial dealings are an open book for all to see … oh, right. Nevermind.
You can brag about how he’s championed the working-class by giving them tax breaks that went to the wealthy and … oh, right. Nevermind.
You can highlight his grasp of scientific fact, like how the noise from wind turbines causes cancer and … oh, right. Nevermind.
You can point to his respect for women by saying he’s free to grab them by … oh, right. Nevermind.
You can drive home how he’s protecting the country by standing up to Putin and warning him not to interfere in our … oh, right. Nevermind.
You can demonstrate his lack of bigotry and racism by never having said things like ‘shithole countries’ and ‘good people on both sides’, and – oh, right. Nevermind.
You can tout his high IQ and how he’s such a stable genius, he never has a meltdown when someone criticizes … oh, right. Nevermind.
You can point to his vast knowledge of world affairs, like knowing there are countries named Nipple and Button … oh, right. Nevermind.
You can repeat his eloquent speeches, full of inspiring phrases like “lock her up” and … oh, right. Nevermind.
You can point out how beloved and respected he is everywhere, as evidenced by the way protestors never show up when he … oh, right. Nevermind.
You can talk about how much he cares about children – especially the ones he’s taken from their parents at the border and locked in … oh, right. Nevermind.
You can brag about what a successful, self-made businessman he is, and how he never had to rely on Daddy’s money in order to … oh, right. Nevermind.
You can point to his brilliant negotiating skills, and how he gave Kim Jung-Un what he wanted and walked away with nothing … oh, right. Nevermind.
You can remind everyone how the Mueller report ‘exonerated’ Trump one hundred percent, and … oh, right. Nevermind.
You can point to Trump’s “best people”, and how they’ve all proven to be competent and honest … oh, right. Nevermind.
You can focus on his adherence to the rule of law, and his devotion to working 24/7 for the American people without vacation time or … oh, right. Nevermind.
Yeah, okay. What I said about you having so much going for you in trying to re-elect Trump, I was kidding.
So nevermind – because in all honesty, you’re f*cked.
Tom Cotton Is a Complete Product of the Wingnut Candidate Manufacturing Plant
Let's play compare and contrast:
Notwithstanding the unwelcome presence of a visitor from the NFFL board, your post remains up.
(I'll refresh your memory of the term from my breathlessly short half-lived post that your snowflake moderator took down: No Functional Frontal Lobe board.)
See how I helped you out there? I do show some consideration for those from the Land of the Slow.
Now, the source of your ass-on-fire post?
Overall, we rate Zero Hedge an extreme right biased conspiracy website.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/zero-hedge/
Zero Hedge’s content has been classified as “alt-right” and has been criticized for presenting conspiracy theories.
In review, Zero Hedge publishes pro-right wing/Trump articles such as Pat Buchanan: “Trump Calls Off Cold War II.” As well as fake news stories regarding liberals: Anti-Trump Protesters Bused Into Austin, Chicago.
Editorial content is written under the pseudonym Tyler Durden and usually focuses on conspiracies related to economic collapse. Zero Hedge sources to factually mixed think tanks such as the The Mises Institute, which promotes Austrian (Anarcho-Capitalism) economics.
A factual search reveals a terrible track record with IFCN fact checkers. There are too many failed checks to list here.
Overall, we rate Zero Hedge an extreme right biased conspiracy website. (8/18/2016) Updated (M. Huitsing 7/17/2018)
Source: https://www.zerohedge.com/
P E A K S T U P I D I T Y d Stupid / d t = 0 & d Stupid2 / d t2 < 0
Zerohedge.com - website review:
https://www.peakstupidity.com/blogrollreviews/site-reviews.php?site=zerohedge
Let's play compare and contrast:
Notwithstanding the unwelcome presence of a visitor from the NFFL board, your post remains up
(I'll refresh your memory of the term from my breathlessly short half-lived post that your snowflake moderator took down: No Functional Frontal Lobe board.)
See how I helped you out there? I do show some consideration for those from the Land of the Slow.
Now, the source of your ass-on-fire post?
Overall, we rate Zero Hedge an extreme right biased conspiracy website.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/zero-hedge/
Zero Hedge’s content has been classified as “alt-right” and has been criticized for presenting conspiracy theories.
In review, Zero Hedge publishes pro-right wing/Trump articles such as Pat Buchanan: “Trump Calls Off Cold War II.” As well as fake news stories regarding liberals: Anti-Trump Protesters Bused Into Austin, Chicago.
Editorial content is written under the pseudonym Tyler Durden and usually focuses on conspiracies related to economic collapse. Zero Hedge sources to factually mixed think tanks such as the The Mises Institute, which promotes Austrian (Anarcho-Capitalism) economics.
A factual search reveals a terrible track record with IFCN fact checkers. There are too many failed checks to list here.
Overall, we rate Zero Hedge an extreme right biased conspiracy website. (8/18/2016) Updated (M. Huitsing 7/17/2018)
Source: https://www.zerohedge.com/
P E A K S T U P I D I T Y d Stupid / d t = 0 & d Stupid2 / d t2 < 0
Zerohedge.com - website review:
https://www.peakstupidity.com/blogrollreviews/site-reviews.php?site=zerohedge
From your post on the JP board:
Sumo wrestlers, golf, steak, some new jet planes, smoke up his ass and insure he makes it to the airport safely; that's the whole Japanese agenda.
They discussed taking him to Hiroshima to remind him of the cost of nuclear war, but they were afraid he'd say "WTF, Detroit looks worse than this. A fresh start isn't the WORST thing."
Melania's complaint is that the firing off of a small weapon is what disturbed her ass into a separate bedroom.
She had to be thinking, while forced to watch the Sumo wrestlers...."Oh man, I traveled 10K miles to see the
kinds of folds of flab I successfully avoid stumbling upon in the WH?
TF, I'm down in the WH kitchen eating ice cream while he's in the shower. My avoidance routine is the foundation of my 'Be Best' shit."
Evidence Russia Tipped Election for Trump ‘Staggering,’ Says Former U.S. Intel Chief James Clapper
By Tom Porter On 5/23/18 at 7:47 AM EDT
GettyImages-163558286
Robert Mueller, then FBI director, and James Clapper, then director of national intelligence (from left), testify during a hearing before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, on Capitol Hill on March 12, 2013. In his new memoir, Clapper contends the evidence the Russians tipped the 2016 election to be “staggering.”
Updated| James Clapper, the former director of national intelligence, has spoken out about Russia’s bid to subvert the 2016 presidential election.
In his new memoir, Facts and Fears: Hard Truths From a Life in Intelligence, Clapper describes evidence that Russian President Vladimir Putin swayed the election in a bid to secure Trump’s election as “staggering.”
“Of course, the Russian efforts affected the outcome," writes Clapper, as cited in a Washington Post review.
"Surprising even themselves, they swung the election to a Trump win. To conclude otherwise stretches logic, common sense and credulity to the breaking point. Less than eighty thousand votes in three key states swung the election. I have no doubt that more votes than that were influenced by this massive effort by the Russians.
Describing a report on Russian interference presented by the intelligence community to president-elect Trump in January 2017, Clapper writes, “I remember just how staggering the assessment felt the first time I read it through from start to finish, and just how specific our conclusions and evidence were.”
In the intelligence chief's view, “We showed unambiguously that Putin had ordered the campaign to influence the election…and how the entire operation had begun with attempts to undermine U.S. democracy and demean Secretary Clinton, then shifted to promoting Mr. Trump when Russia assessed he was a viable candidate who would serve their strategic goals.”
Clapper warns of the threat posed by Trump’s dismissal of inconvenient facts as “fake news.”
“I don’t believe our democracy can function for long on lies, particularly when inconvenient and difficult facts spoken by the practitioners of truth are dismissed as ‘fake news,’?” Clapper writes. "I know that the Intelligence Community cannot serve our nation if facts are negotiable.”
Clapper does not go so far as to state that Trump colluded with Russia, but he describes the president’s attitude in face of evidence of Russian interference as one of “aggressive indifference."
Trump has strenuously denied allegations of colluding with Russia, describing investigations into the claims as a "witch hunt."
Clapper is also critical of Republican congressional leaders for refusing to sign a bipartisan statement condemning Russian meddling in 2016.
"House Speaker Paul Ryan and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said they would not support a bipartisan statement that might hurt their nominee for president," Clapper writes in an excerpt of the book published by NPR.
"I was disappointed but not surprised. It seemed they had decided by then that they didn't care who their nominee was, how he got elected or what effects having a foreign power influence our election would have on the nation, as long as they won."
A spokeswoman for Ryan and McConnell denied Clapper's claims, and in a stament to Newsweek said “Mr. Clapper has his facts wrong. What was discussed with the White House staff in September was a letter to the states warning against attacks during the election, which was quickly drafted and sent on September 28th."
Clapper has emerged as one of the fiercest critics of Trump among former leaders of the intelligence community since resigning in November, 2016.
On Tuesday, he criticized the president for demanding the Justice Department investigate allegations that the FBI placed a mole in the Trump campaign.
"When the president—this president or any president—tries to use the Department of Justice as kind of a private investigatory body, that's not good for the country," Clapper told
Incubated....'have an infectious disease developing inside one before symptoms appear.'
Perfect, now if only it could burst forth from the chest of the credulous dumb-ass hosts like the ALIEN did.
Game, set and match on that meme. Unless I wake up tomorrow and read some Tweet that enables me to flog it further.
On the other hand his Naval physician, on his last day as such, could tell him "relax old man, your cells....you have sooo many of them..... divide way too slowly to kill you before those Big Macs do."
Trump also couldn't find his own sizeable ass with a GPS device and a three day head start.
I've made my peace, this Memorial Day weekend, with Cadet Bone Spur, as follows.
IF he'd found his way into the military and then into command of a rifle platoon in Vietnam, he would have made Lt. Calley seem like Gen. Eisenhower.
Is there anything in the description of Lt. Calley's lack of qualifications, and especially in his verifiably amoral and criminal actions, that doesn't suggest Trump's entire life?
I suppose that the civilian version of fragging could be construed as tell all books and the quotes of those therein.
Too bad that the shrapnel is just words and that Trump is flack jacketed against those by a sociopathic psyche.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Calley
Yep, and you continue to misrepresent, cheap shot, the significance of referring to it as a 100 hour war.
Who TF on here do you really believe doesn't know about the Persian Gulf War, the aftermath, bin Laden and on and on?
We COULD go right up to the PDB titled "bin Laden Determined to strike in U.S.", that Condi tried to claim was historical info rather than actionable intelligence.
And then Dubya's inability to finish bin Laden off at Tora Bora, loses the scent, and then tells us he didn't much worry about bin Laden anymore. Told the truth about that.
The sanctions and diplomacy gained us no interruption of their nuke program, nor electronic monitoring nor inspections. Five other countries believed it was in their best interests to craft the agreement.
Spare me the Obama bashing, he's 10 times the man and president than the embarrassingly ignorant sociopath you support is.
And don't make me laugh about 'legacy' while the fat-assed jerk is fashioning a disgraceful one of his own.
You'd prefer no deal and continued unmonitored, uninspected, Iranian progress toward nuke capability. I prefer otherwise.
Maybe none of the others in the P5+1 wanted it to be a treaty either.
Look, having electronic monitoring and inspectors on the ground is better than being blind. Our own Intel agencies confirmed that Iran is in compliance.
And it's a lot more than we have with N. Korea.
Trumps ignorance and insecurity is in play here, again.
Pete Buttigieg Tells Democrats How To Cancel The Trump Horror Show
https://www.politicususa.com/2019/05/26/pete-buttigieg-trump-horror-show.html
Posted on Sun, May 26th, 2019 by Jason Easley
Pete Buttigieg said that it is time for America to ignore Trump’s distractions and talk about what they want instead of Trump.
Transcript via ABC’s This Week:
PETE BUTTIGIEG: It’s a continuing horror show right now in Washington. And you have a president who has turned the entire thing into a reality show. We’ve got to completely change the channel, and make sure that we respond to all of the — the distractions and the nonsense coming out of the White House, not just by calling him to account, but by returning consistently to the question of how American lives are shaped by those decisions.
RADDATZ: You talk about changing the channel, how do you do — do that with President Trump? It — it works for him.
BUTTIGIEG: It does, but part of how it works for him is he provokes us in ways that make it very hard for us to do anything but respond in kind, the nicknames, the tweets, the insults. And what we’ve got to remember is that the more we’re talking about him, the less we’re talking about voters.
When the conversation is about voters, we’re going to win. Voters want a raise. They want health care. On almost all of the issues, the American people are with us. It is precisely for that reason that the only way the Republican Party can retain power in the White House is if the conversation is about something completely different, like the shenanigans of the current president.
You referenced the wrong post. I was referring to the article I posted and to your clear ignorance of the meaning of the word 'sociopath'.
It wasn't a treaty, so your reference to constitutionality was flat out wrong.
And as you read the agreement received nearly unanimous votes of both Houses.
The money Iran received came from unfreezing Iranian assets, their money.
No way to accurately infer what I think of myself.....I'm OK though.....from a post that makes persuasive arguments that Trump IS a sociopath and that you don't know the meaning of the word.