Trump's Secret Documents. The World awaits.

[UNI88]

Opinion: Republicans, take a good hard look at where Trump is leading you

Yeah, I'm going to take my cue from a CNN opinion piece..

So let's disregard the message because of the source and not ask trump to be an adult and be responsible for his own actions? That's convenient and a deflection.

Alice Stewart "worked as Communications Director for the presidential campaigns of Senator Ted Cruz, Governor Mike Huckabee, Senator Rick Santorum and Congressman Michele Bachmann. She also served as a surrogate for the Republican National Committee." She'll be labeled a RINO now.

[kalm]

Yeah, I'm going to take my cue from a CNN opinion piece..

So let's disregard the message because of the source and not ask trump to be an adult and be responsible for his own actions? That's convenient and a deflection.

Alice Stewart "worked as Communications Director for the presidential campaigns of Senator Ted Cruz, Governor Mike Huckabee, Senator Rick Santorum and Congressman Michele Bachmann. She also served as a surrogate for the Republican National Committee." She'll be labeled a RINO now.

RINO’s…the lot of them.

BDK is so far behind he hasn’t realized CNN’s move to the right with the new ownership.

[UNI88]

Another RINO. Pretty soon there will be more RINOs than Republicans.

[houndawg]

They were all investigated by Republicans, so you should be able to google something like "conserative asswipe" to find out - let us know when you do, I'm curious too.

As for your pitifully feeble attempt to deflect from Trump's violations of the Espionage Act: it really doesn't even warrant a "gentleman's C", but we'll let it slide because we know you're going to be providing us with an assload of laughs for at least the next year.

So now all of a sudden liberals like the Espionage Act because Get Trumpism. The Espionage Act includes stuff that isn’t espionage. Espionage as an act would be taking secrets and giving them to an adversary. That’s not even alleged here.

From an almost 50 yr Harvard law professor democrat who voted for Obama, Clinton, amd Biden:
(min+ of a 12+ min interview last Fri)
]

Just like the jack-booted thugs you people used to Back the Blue about...

[SeattleGriz]

They BETTER NOT indoctrinate Trump tomorrow!

Oh man. Where do they find them? Years ago, people were protesting the joint army,air force base south of Seattle in Tacoma. So anyway, they get this pro-troops lady on interview and she proceeds to embarrass herself and make her reasoning look bad. Who do they interview on the anti military side? A college professor who proceeded to mop the floor with her.

[kalm]

They BETTER NOT indoctrinate Trump tomorrow!

Oh man. Where do they find them? Years ago, people were protesting the joint army,air force base south of Seattle in Tacoma. So anyway, they get this pro-troops lady on interview and she proceeds to embarrass herself and make her reasoning look bad. Who do they interview on the anti military side? A college professor who proceeded to mop the floor with her.

The signs and red hats might be giveaway.

[UNI88]

Oh man. Where do they find them? Years ago, people were protesting the joint army,air force base south of Seattle in Tacoma. So anyway, they get this pro-troops lady on interview and she proceeds to embarrass herself and make her reasoning look bad. Who do they interview on the anti military side? A college professor who proceeded to mop the floor with her.

The signs and red hats might be giveaway.

I'm with SG on this one. The media will definitely be selective in who they choose to interview in order to support the narrative they support.

I can remember one of the big 3 networks sending a team to my hometown prior to the 1980 Iowa Caucuses to get the perspective of real Iowans. They blew into town and interviewed a bunch of drunken bums. It would be like a network going to Mayberry and interviewing Otis but not Andy or even Floyd.

[GannonFan]

The signs and red hats might be giveaway.

I'm with SG on this one. The media will definitely be selective in who they choose to interview in order to support the narrative they support.

I can remember one of the big 3 networks sending a team to my hometown prior to the 1980 Iowa Caucuses to get the perspective of real Iowans. They blew into town and interviewed a bunch of drunken bums. It would be like a network going to Mayberry and interviewing Otis but not Andy or even Floyd.

There is a lot to that. I think it can be abused. I always think that with the militant white supremacists that the media swears are increasing their ranks left and right, especially since Trump was elected. I honestly don't think they're much more populous than the Klan has been these past decades. Are there still folks like this? Sure. Are they a big deal in terms of numbers? I strongly doubt it. But if you point a camera where you want to and tell people they can be on TV I think you can show pretty much whatever it is that you're trying to show. Just another facet of yellow journalism these days.

[UNI88]

[UNI88]

[UNI88]

[BDKJMU]

-The director of the FBI didn’t ‘issue’ the warrant.
-The magistrate wasn’t appointed by Trump. Even the lib USAToday acknowledges that.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/fac ... 290114002/
-It wasn’t ‘executed’ by a Trump appointed DOJ attorney.

FakeNews88

[kalm]

I'm with SG on this one. The media will definitely be selective in who they choose to interview in order to support the narrative they support.

I can remember one of the big 3 networks sending a team to my hometown prior to the 1980 Iowa Caucuses to get the perspective of real Iowans. They blew into town and interviewed a bunch of drunken bums. It would be like a network going to Mayberry and interviewing Otis but not Andy or even Floyd.

There is a lot to that. I think it can be abused. I always think that with the militant white supremacists that the media swears are increasing their ranks left and right, especially since Trump was elected. I honestly don't think they're much more populous than the Klan has been these past decades. Are there still folks like this? Sure. Are they a big deal in terms of numbers? I strongly doubt it. But if you point a camera where you want to and tell people they can be on TV I think you can show pretty much whatever it is that you're trying to show. Just another facet of yellow journalism these days.

It can be abused and I agree that these idiots are a small minority. However, J6, threats by sitting congressman, etc. make them worth keeping an eye on.

What’s the right number of these types and how do we calculate that in order for them to be newsworthy?

[UNI88]

-The director of the FBI didn’t ‘issue’ the warrant.
-The magistrate wasn’t appointed by Trump. Even the lib USAToday acknowledges that.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/fac ... 290114002/
-The USA was a Biden appointee.

FakeNews88

It's a meme ...


Still not a witch hunt.

Don't do the crime if you can't do the time!

[BDKJMU]

-The director of the FBI didn’t ‘issue’ the warrant.
-The magistrate wasn’t appointed by Trump. Even the lib USAToday acknowledges that.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/fac ... 290114002/
-The USA was a Biden appointee.

FakeNews88

Still not a witch hunt.

Don't do the crime if you can't do the time!

Its a 100% political lib donk TDS Witchunt.

And whatever you say there FAKENEWSMeme88..

[BDKJMU]

-The director of the FBI didn’t ‘issue’ the warrant.
-The magistrate wasn’t appointed by Trump. Even the lib USAToday acknowledges that.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/fac ... 290114002/
-The USA was a Biden appointee.

FakeNews88

It's a meme ...


Still not a witch hunt.

Don't do the crime if you can't do the time!

Amd 100% Witch Hunt.

[UNI88]

It's a meme ...


Still not a witch hunt.

Don't do the crime if you can't do the time!

Amd 100% Witch Hunt.

Oh the irony of a trump supporter complaining about lies and misinformation.

[BDKJMU]

Amd 100% Witch Hunt.

Oh the irony of a trump supporter complaining about lies and misinformation.

After being called on posting Fake News, ‘But Trump!’

[kalm]

Still not a witch hunt.

Don't do the crime if you can't do the time!

Its a 100% political lib donk TDS Witchunt.

And whatever you say there FAKENEWSMeme88..

So he didn’t/doesn’t possess national security docs he clearly wasn’t entitled to?

[GannonFan]

There is a lot to that. I think it can be abused. I always think that with the militant white supremacists that the media swears are increasing their ranks left and right, especially since Trump was elected. I honestly don't think they're much more populous than the Klan has been these past decades. Are there still folks like this? Sure. Are they a big deal in terms of numbers? I strongly doubt it. But if you point a camera where you want to and tell people they can be on TV I think you can show pretty much whatever it is that you're trying to show. Just another facet of yellow journalism these days.

It can be abused and I agree that these idiots are a small minority. However, J6, threats by sitting congressman, etc. make them worth keeping an eye on.

What’s the right number of these types and how do we calculate that in order for them to be newsworthy?

Of course, it's also a chicken and egg thing. Congressmen who make threats get media coverage. J6 crowd was a couple hundred people largely armed with fire extinguishers and cudgels. Democracy was not at the tipping point that day, not even close. But we treat it like it was and pump up these people to be more than they are/were - an angry mob. The next mob sees the media coverage and attention. People make some of the same arguments for school shootings and how they're covered. I thought it was interesting today, the guy who shot up that synagogue in Pittsburgh was sentenced today - almost all the news sites made it a point to not reference his name in headlines or early in articles. It's there if you look close enough, but they stayed away from blasting his name to the rafters. That looked deliberate to me. Maybe the media is understanding the part they play in if not creating news, but prodding it on. The moment Trump was elected we couldn't get out of our way to find a white nationalist to interview, no matter how hard it was to find them. Now they pop up in front of the cameras before the red light even comes on.

[UNI88]

Oh the irony of a trump supporter complaining about lies and misinformation.

After being called on posting Fake News, ‘But Trump!’

Oh the irony of a MAGAt complaining about "but trump" when the MAGAt defense of trump is "but Biden" and "but Hillary" got away with it. This is a witch hunt.

Case in point ...

[UNI88]

If it's a witch hunt then trump's a ...

[kalm]

It can be abused and I agree that these idiots are a small minority. However, J6, threats by sitting congressman, etc. make them worth keeping an eye on.

What’s the right number of these types and how do we calculate that in order for them to be newsworthy?

Of course, it's also a chicken and egg thing. Congressmen who make threats get media coverage. J6 crowd was a couple hundred people largely armed with fire extinguishers and cudgels. Democracy was not at the tipping point that day, not even close. But we treat it like it was and pump up these people to be more than they are/were - an angry mob. The next mob sees the media coverage and attention. People make some of the same arguments for school shootings and how they're covered. I thought it was interesting today, the guy who shot up that synagogue in Pittsburgh was sentenced today - almost all the news sites made it a point to not reference his name in headlines or early in articles. It's there if you look close enough, but they stayed away from blasting his name to the rafters. That looked deliberate to me. Maybe the media is understanding the part they play in if not creating news, but prodding it on. The moment Trump was elected we couldn't get out of our way to find a white nationalist to interview, no matter how hard it was to find them. Now they pop up in front of the cameras before the red light even comes on.

You didn’t answer my questions. What’s a tolerable amount subversion?

[GannonFan]

Of course, it's also a chicken and egg thing. Congressmen who make threats get media coverage. J6 crowd was a couple hundred people largely armed with fire extinguishers and cudgels. Democracy was not at the tipping point that day, not even close. But we treat it like it was and pump up these people to be more than they are/were - an angry mob. The next mob sees the media coverage and attention. People make some of the same arguments for school shootings and how they're covered. I thought it was interesting today, the guy who shot up that synagogue in Pittsburgh was sentenced today - almost all the news sites made it a point to not reference his name in headlines or early in articles. It's there if you look close enough, but they stayed away from blasting his name to the rafters. That looked deliberate to me. Maybe the media is understanding the part they play in if not creating news, but prodding it on. The moment Trump was elected we couldn't get out of our way to find a white nationalist to interview, no matter how hard it was to find them. Now they pop up in front of the cameras before the red light even comes on.

You didn’t answer my questions. What’s a tolerable amount subversion?

The "tolerable amount of (sic) subversion" is a drastically different question than "...the right number of these types and how do we calculate that in order for them to be newsworthy". Did you mean to significantly alter the question?

[kalm]

You didn’t answer my questions. What’s a tolerable amount subversion?

The "tolerable amount of (sic) subversion" is a drastically different question than "...the right number of these types and how do we calculate that in order for them to be newsworthy". Did you mean to significantly alter the question?

It doesn’t alter the question. Just a different phrasing. How about answer one or the other?