US Politics Thread 2021-24

[MaDef]

Arlo, if you don't like the laws in Texas, DON'T live there.

[Arlo]

Originally Posted by MaDef

Arlo, if you don't like the laws in Texas, DON'T live there.

'Hey, Colonels Travis and Bowie, if you don't like the way Santa Anna runs Texas, DON'T live there.'

[u crank]

Originally Posted by Arlo

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Post

https://nrinstitute.org/fellows/andrew-c-mccarthy/

[Arlo]

Originally Posted by u crank

https://nrinstitute.org/fellows/andrew-c-mccarthy/

Goodness, gracious Great Ball of Collusion*!

*Paperback price $14.37 on Amazon.

[u crank]

Originally Posted by Arlo

Goodness, gracious Great Ball of Collusion*!

*Paperback price $14.37 on Amazon.

Yuk yuk. I haven't read it.

So what part of the article in The New York Post by Andrew C. McCarthy do you disagree with? Or are you just barking at the moon?

[Arlo]

Originally Posted by u crank

Yuk yuk. I haven't read it.

So what part of the article in The New York Post by Andrew C. McCarthy do you disagree with? Or are you just barking at the moon?

It's a Murdoch tabloid, sir. And McCarthy is just trying to sell his book. You really shouldn't take it too seriously. I don't.

[Arlo]

[u crank]

Originally Posted by Arlo

It's a Murdoch tabloid, sir. And McCarthy is just trying to sell his book. You really shouldn't take it too seriously. I don't.

Of course the article is not about McCarthy’s book it is about a felony indictment of one of Hillary Clintons lawyers concerning the Russia collusion conspiracy theory. You know that thing that has been thoughly debunked. You don’t still believe that do you?

[Arlo]

Originally Posted by u crank

Of course the article is not about McCarthy’s book it is about a felony indictment of one of Hillary Clintons lawyers concerning the Russia collusion conspiracy theory. You know that thing that has been thoughly debunked. You don’t still believe that do you?

You don't realize the premise of Mac's book, apparently.

[u crank]

Originally Posted by Arlo

You don't realize the premise of Mac's book, apparently.

You are avoiding the question aren’t you?

[Arlo]

Originally Posted by u crank

You are avoiding the question aren’t you?

I was under the impression that I more than adequately addressed it.

[u crank]

Originally Posted by u crank

You know that thing that has been thoughly debunked. You don’t still believe that do you?

Originally Posted by Arlo

You don't realize the premise of Mac's book, apparently.

Originally Posted by Arlo

I was under the impression that I more than adequately addressed it.

If that is your answer then no you haven’t.

[Arlo]

Originally Posted by u crank

If that is your answer then no you haven’t.

I'm sorry, Crank, but, like I said, I think your taking an article from a politically biased tabloid, written by Trump's defense attorney who is trying to sell a book on the exact same premise, way too seriously. I told you I don't and the aforementioned is why. Besides, the Federal Bureau of Investigation didn't debunk the effort made on the part of Russia during the campaign. I would call that wishful thinking on the part of Trump apologists. Charges were even made against Russian operatives, as a result. Is there something you think I missed in any of that now that I've repeated myself?

[u crank]

Originally Posted by Arlo

I'm sorry, Crank, but, like I said, I think your taking an article from a politically biased tabloid, written by Trump's defense attorney who is trying to sell a book on the exact same premise, way too seriously.

Ok. In the article there are some indisputable facts, mainly that special counsel John Durham has brought a felony indictment against Democratic Party lawyer Michael Sussmann on a false statements count. A false statement was allegedly made by Sussmann to the FBI’s then general counsel, James Baker, on Sept. 19, 2016.

Another indisputable fact is that Sussmann was a lawyer for Perkins Coie, a lawfirm that is the counsel of record for the Democratic National Committee and in 2015 as counsel for the presidential campaign of Hillary Clinton. Perkins Coie lawyer Marc Elias hired Fusion GPS for opposition research services. A notable product of that “opposition research” was the Steele dossier describing alleged attempts by Russia to promote the presidential campaign of Donald Trump.

That the article was written by Andrew C. McCarthy, that it appeared in the New York Post or that the Post is owned by Murdoch's News Corp certainly has no bearing on those facts.

Besides, the Federal Bureau of Investigation didn't debunk the effort made on the part of Russia during the campaign.

In this case the FBI did debunk the ridiculous claim by Sussmann that there was a 'secret server' between the Trump organization and the Russian Alfa Bank. And Sussmann lied about it to the FBI, hence the felony indictment.

I would call that wishful thinking on the part of Trump apologists.

If pointing out wrong doing makes someone an 'apologist' does that apply to both sides of the political divide or just to the true believers?

Is there something you think I missed in any of that now that I've repeated myself?

Oh no. Quite the opposite. I understand completely.

[Arlo]

Originally Posted by u crank

I understand completely.

Forgive me if I doubt that.