And yes, Hillary funded to Steele's operation. — raza

I said "misleading", not "false". It may have been Hillary's opposition research, but it was also the professional findings of a credible ex-MI6 operative who specialised in matters involving Russia and who has a history of providing reliable information to the FBI. Describing it just as the former and not also as the latter is disingenuous.

How does impeachment of the President work? Impeachment is basically a trial of any civil official, including the president, without a judge, a jury or a prosecutor. The judicial branch has nothing to do with it. It all happens on Capitol Hill.

That fact makes all this deep state bullshit just that... bullshit. Senate hears the case and decides on it. So if the "ruling class" really wanted to oust Trump, they would've done so almost immediately on something flimsy like lying. There isn't an "incredibly" high bar, the bar is enough Senators wanting to get rid of him.

but it was also the professional findings of a credible ex-MI6 operative — Michael

Yeah, I already responded to this opinion of yours that somehow Steele is automatically scrupulous merely because of his job title.

Yeah, I already responded to this opinion of yours that somehow Steele is automatically scrupulous merely because of his job title. — raza

Nowhere have I expressed the opinion that Steele is automatically scrupulous. I have only stated the fact that Steele is an ex-MI6 operative who specialised in matters involving Russia and who has a history of providing reliable information to the FBI and is thus credible.

I have only stated the fact that Steele is a credible ex-MI6 operative — Michael

There you go again. A "fact" he is "credible". Try looking up definitions of "credible" and "scrupulous".

There you go again. A "fact" he is "credible". Try looking up definitions of "credible" and "scrupulous". — raza

You accused me of saying that Steele is automatically scrupulous because of his job title. And I didn't. The facts are that a) he is an expert, and b) he has a history of providing reliable information.

a) + b) = c)redible.

It's a fact prior intel of his proved to be reliable. Should we all add the following disclaimer: "Prior results are not a guarantee for future performance"?

We'll see if the prediction made here becomes manifest.

What Trump once said to the media now applies to all of official Washington: “No one believes you anymore.” From Strzok to Brennan, from Yates to Comey, from Rosenstein to Mueller, they all assume that the day of reckoning approaches. What they don’t realize is that the wrath will befall them. A public fed up with phony FISA warrants and partisanship that masquerades as “professionalism” will not see Trump as the villain in this sorry tale but its victim.

Yeah, and we should believe something Trump says because a) he's well informed and b) never lies. :rofl:

You accused me of saying that Steele automatically scrupulous because of his job title. And I didn't. The facts are that a) he is an expert, and b) he has a history of providing reliable information. a) + b) = c)redible. — Michael

As I said it is your opinion coupled with your report of other opinion. So we will see how Steele goes over time. It is very early yet. It may take until after the 2020 election when things really get done on this (if and once Trump gets a firmer grip on staff or has made appropriate staff changes. He would certainly deserve to make wholesale changes if he secured a 2nd term).

Yeah, and we should believe something Trump says because a) he's well informed and b) never lies — Benkei

They all lie. It just depends on what.

However, the "Russia" conspiracy theory will not be proved or disproved merely on what Trump says.

As I said it is your opinion coupled with your report of other opinion. — raza

Which part is my opinion? That he is an expert? That he has a history of providing reliable information? Or that to be credible just is to be an expert with a history of providing reliable information?

Which part is my opinion? That he is an expert? That he has a history of providing reliable information? Or that to be credible just is to be an expert with a history of providing reliable information? — Michael

This is all according to who he has done bossiness for and with. Their opinion. Your opinion is to automatically believe their opinion.

So, all this Steele Dossier stuff looks as though it will be tested. We shall see, maybe, what that test may reveal.

In an ideal world it should be fairly obvious to everyone that criticizing one's work colleagues publicly is generally employment suicide,

and I know we do not live in an ideal world, such as that which would accommodate the factor above, as evidenced by your opinion being posed as absolute fact.

Honestly, Trump’s mendacity has reached such a staggering level of brazenness that it’s become completely surreal. He doesn’t even have to pretend to be telling the truth, or to care about what it is. Yet apparently there are enough ‘supporters’ in the US electoral system to insulate him from the consequences. It would be funny, if it weren’t diabolical. — Wayfarer

Well said.

My goodness! Look at the language of that article. The author clearly has an agenda. I like the irony of the term "hopelessly biased" cropping up in the very first sentence. Is that reading material or propaganda?

My goodness! Look at the language that that article uses. The author clearly has an agenda. — Sapientia

Don't most, at least in terms of what they perceive as going on?

I agree that he dramatizes.

\Although he does not pretend to sit on the fence he does make predictions which makes it a bit brave. If he is proven right it pays well, presumably. If not? Maybe he could get a job at buzzfeed.

I wonder how many of Trump's anti-abortion supporters would turn against him if it turned out that he'd paid (or otherwise pushed) for an abortion.

Honestly, Trump’s mendacity has reached such a staggering level of brazenness that it’s become completely surreal. He doesn’t even have to pretend to be telling the truth, or to care about what it is. Yet apparently there are enough ‘supporters’ in the US electoral system to insulate him from the consequences. It would be funny, if it weren’t diabolical.
— Wayfarer — Sapientia

The feminization of the left has made them vulnerable to the soap opera fantasy that the main stream media is putting out as news. In this daily soap opera, Trump is the evil villain. Like any TV villain there is no good side to the TV villain, since he has to epitomize all that is taboo and evil. The villain cannot be portrayed in any good fashion, such as a renewed economy, since that would spoil the over the top TV villain character. Fake news is soap opera news.

This social drama is useful, in terms of psychology, because it shows how a large section of the population, mostly from the left, can easily be detoured from reality, by a good ole fashion soap opera. The main problem with Trump, is he is not totally playing his villain role as expected. Rather he is spoiling the games of the left by doing things that are not expected of the villain.

More and more people are relating to the soap opera villain, as a victim, since the majority of the negativity and games come from the characters portrayed as the good guys and gals. The left way outpaces Trump in terms of the negativity and shady games played. What type of good guy attacks family members who have not done anything?

Trump has experience with reality TV and has learned to how to turn it around, in time for the midterms. For example, Trump said he is being harder on the Russians than any another president, so Putin is now expected to help the Democrats in the midterms, so they can destabilize the US. This means Trump will ask for more controls in the election process, making it harder for the left to cheat. States, like California, that refuse to show voter rolls and cooperate can now be accused of Russian collusion and can be investigated and audited using the Democrat led template. This adds a twist to the soap opera drama that hurts the left.

What I also heard is Trump is going to release many of the classified documents that have been requested, but have been stalled by the FBI and Justice Departments. The release is expected just after the left picks their nominees for the midterms elections. Those nominees, who run and win, based on the momentum of the left wing soap opera template, will be devastated by the truth. They will look either like morons, or the true villains in the plot, who betrayed the trust of the audience. Season 2 of the soap opera will be upside down.

Trump may very well get away with his crimes, but the idea this will have no political backlash is a fantasy. Trump's public support stems almost entirely from the Republicans.

The Russia Investigation

Trump did not collude with the Russian government to influence the 2016 presidential election, American voters say 48 - 39 percent. But voters are divided on whether the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians, as 46 percent say it did and 44 percent say it did not.

Special Counsel Robert Mueller is conducting a fair investigation into possible collusion, voters say 55 - 31 percent.

This investigation is "legitimate," 54 percent of voters say, while 40 percent say it is a "witch hunt."

A total of 63 percent of voters are "very concerned" or "somewhat concerned" that the Russian government may try to interfere in the 2018 elections, as 36 percent are "not so concerned" or "not concerned at all."

From July 18 - 23, Quinnipiac University surveyed 1,177 voters nationwide, with a margin of error of +/- 3.5 percentage points, including design effect. Live interviewers call landlines and cell phones.

The Quinnipiac University Poll, directed by Douglas Schwartz, Ph.D., conducts nationwide public opinion surveys, and statewide polls in Pennsylvania, New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Florida, Ohio, Virginia, Iowa, Colorado and Texas as a public service and for research.

https://poll.qu.edu/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2557

The feminization of the left has made them vulnerable to the soap opera fantasy that the main stream media is putting out as news. — wellwisher

Did you just suggest that women are more gullible than men?

A breakdown of perceptions/beliefs not facts.

Nothing unexpected. After all, it has been the dominant narrative of the mainstream media business cartels.

I'm more surprised at the resistance to dominant narrative.

Of coures it is the public's perceptions. Did you already forget that you were talking about how the public views this. I am addresing your misconceptions on that point.

I have seen different polls covering similar questions with different results.

The poll that will count politically is yet to come.

Censorship of conservative opinion on some sites, such as facebook, could become a factor. The EU and UN seem to want it.

The feminization of the left... — wellwisher

The point at which you're vindicated to read no further.

:lol:



Do you mind if I ask what your main source of news is? What's your go-to news website?

Do you mind if I ask what your main source of news is? What's your go-to news website? — Baden

Facebook.