There was no insulting language (vulgarity?) in my previous post. Nevertheless, I was ridiculing you.

But the guilty party disputes the narrative — NOS4A2

That’s diplomacy. Politicians lie in public because it serves some end. If you want to know the truth look at what they say and do when they don’t think anyone is watching.

American clown president confounds world leaders. The view of the planet from outer space is unchanged.

Except Australia looks more red than usual. ?

That’s diplomacy. Politicians lie in public because it serves some end. If you want to know the truth look at what they say and do when they don’t think anyone is watching.

I said there was no insult or mockery because I looked at what they said.

There was no insulting language (vulgarity?) in my previous post. Nevertheless, I was ridiculing you.

Doing a poor job of it as well. No wonder you thought they were ridiculing Trump.

Oh? You’ve actually complemented me in the past for it, if I recall correctly.

Truth is so often inconvenient for the Trump supporter.

I’ll retract it then. Poor job.

https://nypost.com/2019/12/05/trump-may-send-14000-troops-to-middle-east-as-iran-threat-grows-report/

BuT SyRiA wAs AlL AbOuT SeNdInG tHe TrOoPs HoMe

The lack of outrage on Schiff’s subpoenaing the call records of the opposition, the president’s lawyer and a journalist is deafening, especially giving the accusations: that Trump was digging up dirt on his political opponents.

This is unprecedented and looks like an abuse of government surveillance authority for partisan gain. Democrats were caught using the Steele dossier to coax the FBI into snooping on the 2016 Trump campaign. Now we have elected members of Congress using secret subpoenas to obtain, and then release to the public, the call records of political opponents.

Schiff’s Surveillance State - WSJ

Digging up dirt and investigating possible impeachment - or investigating anything - are different activities, wouldn't you say?

Digging up dirt and investigating possible impeachment - or investigating anything - are different activities, wouldn't you say

I would say that. But I would argue investigating fellow members of the house, a journalist, and Trump’s personal attorney is a different activity than inquiring into the impeachment of the President.

The House Intel committee tells The Daily Beast that they did not subpoena the phone records for Devin Nunes or John Solomon.

Patrick Boland, the top spokesman for Democrats on the House Intelligence Committee, told The Daily Beast on Thursday that investigators “did not subpoena call records for any member of Congress or their staff...or for any journalist,” including—Boland added—the committee’s ranking member, Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) or John Solomon, a columnist formerly of The Hill whose reporting formed much of the public case for Rudy Giuliani and others to do their muckraking in Ukraine.

...

The report indicates that all of the call records obtained by the committee belonged to Parnas or Giulini.

Parnas and Giuliani were the targets because they're central to the Ukraine quid pro quo allegations. The fact that Nunes, Solomon, and anyone were on those calls is because they happened to have called or been called by Parnas or Giuliani, so your criticism here is mistaken.

The Editorial Board at the Wall Street Journal need to get their facts straight.

Parnas and Giuliani were the targets because they're central to the Ukraine quid pro quo allegations. The fact that Nunes, Solomon, and anyone were on those calls is because they happened to have called or been called by Parnas or Giuliani, so your criticism here is mistaken.

There they are in the report, in the public eye. None of that hand waving changes the fact that Schiff was using “secret subpoenas to obtain, and then release to the public, the call records of political opponents.”

There they are in the report, in the public eye. None of that hand waving changes the fact that Schiff was using “secret subpoenas to obtain, and then release to the public, the call records of political opponents.” — NOS4A2

He used subpoenas to obtain and release to the public Parnas' and Giuliani's call records. Nunes' inclusion is incidental.

https://nypost.com/2019/12/05/trump-may-send-14000-troops-to-middle-east-as-iran-threat-grows-report/

BuT SyRiA wAs AlL AbOuT SeNdInG tHe TrOoPs HoMe — StreetlightX

Saudi Arabia is totally different!

Time Magazine cover this week is about how the Trump campaign is exploiting the impeachment enquiry for fund-raising and building support via Facebook. If anything can sum up Trump's utter corruption and contempt for the rule of law, then that would be it. Profiting off his own lies, while being defended with more lies, by a party of liars.

Nobody cares if it means he wins. It's only pansy leftists that backtrack on a joke containing an important truth (while Trump can name his son Barron he can't make him a baron). Why should she backtrack and apologise for it when it's the last thing Trump would do? It's not as if she's going to alienate anyone who already agrees with her and the Republicans aren't sitting there to be convinced as their positions have already been established. Trump will be impeached and acquitted, farcical show trial wasting everybody's time while society and the environment continue to go down the shitter.

I read a lot of the coverage of Trump in what Trumpista's declare 'fake media'. Of course, in reality, despite their biases and occasional errors, they present the hard facts, which are that Trump did break the law, did violate his oath of office, and does obstruct Congress and hold it in contempt.

But the scary thing is that when it comes to Trump supporters and Trump himself, the facts don't matter. Neither Trump's defenders nor Trump himself will engage with or attempt to defend him against the facts of the crimes he's charged with - the accounts of all of the diplomats and public officers that have testified. They are serious and principled people, and they're not lying. They're trying to do their jobs, and protect public order. But they are the ones being attacked for conspiracies, being undermined and vilified by those in positions of high office who dismiss the facts as hatred, prejudice, and fake news. And this might actually work, for Trump. The 'trump base' is now so thoroughly corrupted, so immune to reason, that they don't know facts when they look at them. They were rightly named deplorable, and the entire movement is deplorable, along with Fox State Media.

If he's acquitted by the Senate, surely he will see this as vindication, and having been absolved of these proven crimes, then what will stop him? The lies will have won, the bad guys will have won. It'll be like a dreadful Hollywood dystopia, with no happy ending. The hero doesn't ride off into the sunset, instead she's put in solitary confinement for crimes against the state.

But the scary thing is that when it comes to Trump supporters and Trump himself, the facts don't matter. — Wayfarer

That's the lesson. Facts don't matter, power does.

Welcome to the gulag comrade.

But the scary thing is that when it comes to Trump supporters and Trump himself, the facts don't matter. — Wayfarer

Don't underestimate the disdain for government in the USA. This goes way back to the government's anti-communist practises, Kent State shootings, and beyond. With the war of independence, the civil war, etc., it's in the blood of the American, as an essential ingredient of the "melting pot".

This disdain for government has been well documented, highly popularized, and romanticized by the media in the sixties and seventies, with memes like "flower power", and the Hollywood image of "The Wild West". It has assaulted us with demonstrations like Oklahoma City 1995, and it now insults us with the Trump presidency. One important fact which we ought not overlook, American citizens who hate the rule of the democratic government, are still allowed to vote. Therefore the American government has no inherent defence against anarchy. Self-destruction of the government is completely acceptable, so we ought not be afraid of it.

The story about the troops was, according to trump and the pentagon, fake news.

That was the Wall Street Journal again (although they reported 14,000, not 12,000). They're not doing very well at the moment.

It’s impossibl to report accurately on a president that makes major foreign policy decisions on an impulse and then announces them via Twitter, and dismisss all reporting as fake news. And in any case, Trump’s lies outnumber media mistakes 100:1.

Written by some anti-Trumpers at the WSJ, yes. Poor job.

"They buy a lot from us".

Of course, Trump's most notable export to Saudi Arabia was a licence to murder American journalists. Although I think they overpaid for that as he's likely to be giving it away for free soon.

Yo NOS4, Just a real simple obvious question. I know you're a Trumper till death, so maybe you can tell us this:

If Trump is innocent, why won't he allow both the subpoena'd witnesses and documents exonerate himself? It only adds to the other articles in the impeachment, of obstruction of justice.

Yo NOS4, Just a real simple obvious question. I know you're a Trumper till death, so maybe you can tell us this:

If Trump is innocent, why won't he allow both the subpoena'd witnesses and documents exonerate himself? It only adds to the other articles in the impeachment, of obstruction of justice.

My guess is because it’s an unjust investigation and a fishing expedition. If he participates it increases the likelihood they’ll get him on process crimes, like Bill Clinton.

Appreciate the reply. I think it's real simple, he should allow them to testify. In fact, now that you mentioned Clinton, Trump himself should testify just like Clinton did... .

Appreciate the reply. I think it's real simple, he should allow them to testify. In fact, now that you mentioned Clinton, Trump himself should testify just like Clinton did... .

Any reason why?