leh-nerd skin-erd

It’s impossible to derive what happened from a 3 or 4 page news article, but your steadfast belief in your side of the aisle is impressive. If what you say is true, then a deep dive into it will simply prove it out. Personally, I cannot square extremely reckless behavior with “nothing to see here.” It’s an awful lot like the release of social security data on political opponents by the 1/6 committee.

No, I think I addressed that. It’s possible he was completely clueless on the proper disposition of classified documents, that his attorneys never looked into it, and as a private citizen may be his truth was he could keep whatever he wanted. Unfortunately, there’s a whole lot of ground to cover between 2016 and 2023. It certainly makes sense to know who had access to these documents, from the guy slugging boxes down the hall to admin assistants to maintenance staff to landlords and beyond. I’m not suggesting Biden was trafficking in these secret classified documents, but if he’s being candid and truthful about his actions, as they say,there’s nothing to worry about. I’m also not suggesting he wasn’t trafficking in this intel, we simply don’t know. I also think it’s possible and quite likely that presidents and VPs keep classified documents on a fairly regular basis, and it became an issue for Trump because he was Trump.

I read the facts. Turns out when Biden left office, he took classified documents when he left. He then co-mingled those documents with personal documents, and for reasons as yet unknown, failed to return them as was his responsibility. Several years then passed, the documents in his possession and accessible by an as-yet-undetermined number of people. Those documents may have been shared with foreign nationals in some quid pro quo, or may have been his ‘get out of jail free’ card in the event the H Biden scandal became an issue. It’s possible of course he was just forgetful and careless, something of a resume booster for dem presidential candidates. We know that the documents were discovered, as if by magic really, by his attorneys, whom one would assume do not have proper credentials to view said documents, combing through personal paperwork with 5 years of dust on them, just two days before a pivotal midterm election with much riding on the line for Team Biden. It doesn’t seem all that complicated to me, Chi. Since we now know he played fast and loose with national security, and this story is 15 years in the making, at a minimum a serious inquiry into his record keeping processes (online and paper) since his time in office should take place. What other documents does he have in his possession, and at what location(s)? I think you have to review email, hard drives, investigate acquaintances etc. You certainly cannot rule out incompetence, but malfeasance must also be considered. I would hope the gloves come off on this one. What an I missing here, Chi?

Ah, I see. Steve Bannon's dopey tweets are worthy of scrutiny, Donald Trump's every word is dissected, reanimated and reimagined, but to discuss Brother Chuck you need a Miranda disclosure and 25 years worth of background checks. All I can tell you is it sure seems like he spoke the truth.

See this is why I balked at agreeing to your declaration about Bannon, our perspective is completely different. As to your characterization of 'dark, underworld political operatives', I guess that's a fine way to attempt to marginalize or mock my perspective. I do the same thing from time to time, mock, that is. Now, that said, if I was looking to work the shadowy underworld angle, I'd start with this clip from Chuck Schumer, a major dem leader if there ever was one. In this clip, he talks about the intelligence community finding ways to get to a body, and does so in a particularly ominous fashion. I believe him when he says that, and honestly, if he was a Republican working for Trump or W Bush---people, you maybe, would completely agree that something most foul was afoot. Here's one way the IC might participate in that sort of thing: https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/16/politics/john-brennan-donald-trump-treasonous-vladimir-putin/index.html There are other ways, of course. FISA warrants, unmasking citizens etc, but that's all been talked about ad nauseum. Another would be the infamous dozens of former intelligence big wigs declaring something was Russian propaganda when it wasn't: https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/19/hunter-biden-story-russian-disinfo-430276 Swing. Miss. Like, really, really big miss. During the run up to the election. That's weird. But as with everything else, it's an issue that deals with a guy detested by democrats, some independents and some republicans too...so they look the other way. In response to Giuliani et al (and I'd agree there's some occasional first rate clownery there), we simply need to listen to what people said. Here's a clip, apologies in advance for the fact that it was produced by the RNC. I got through about 4 minutes of it but addresses the reality of dem's sowing seeds of doubt on election integrity and flat out telling voters and constituents that Donald J Trump was illegitimate and stole the 2016 presidency. There's also a clip or two about W Bush stealing an election as well. https://gop.com/video/12-minutes-of-democrats-denying-election-results/ I think the Mueller investigation and it's genesis, the crazed, near rabid allegation that Trump colluded with the Russians to steal the election is proof positive of a coordinated attempt to destroy a president and presidency, though I would acknowledge that it was perfectly legal. You know by now what his report said, and the comments made by William Barr after Mueller's dreadful appearance before congress: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/03/24/us/politics/barr-letter-mueller-report.html Of course, AG Barr went on to speak about the big lie told by democrats out to hamstring his administration and cause chaos and confusion among the American people. https://www.foxnews.com/media/bill-barr-russia-collusion-trump-dealing-putin I'll circle back to where I first started. The dems ran a dirty and completely preposterous campaign to unseat Trump, failed, but kept repeating the narrative until supporters---you, perhaps---believed the narrative or stopped caring about fairness and equity because the target was a guy they detested. I thought that was pretty bad, of course, but I wasn't the one being manipulated there. 4 years go by, the stage is set for the next election, it turns out that Biden wins. To me, that means tens of millions of people supported the treachery that was the Russia Lie, and would have supported a continuation of exactly that campaign had Trump prevailed for 2020. As it turns out, he lost, but following the model that worked on tens of millions of democrats--you included, perhaps---he ran the same game from a different angle. Suddenly, though, as if by magic---none of the preceding 4 years of torment and treachery mattered. In this case, because the allegations were made by someone the winners reviled, well, suddenly democracy is in the crosshairs and the world stopped turning. I'd prefer neither party follow the model, of course, and said that at the time Biden was elected. He's a dufus, an establishment politician, with a long history of questionable behavior, likely dirty as ****, but at the end of the day, he's the President of the United States, and I'm a citizen. All I can do is cast my vote and hope for the best. So...Bannon? Yeah, whatever. He's a guy with a microphone and not much beyond that.

You’re declaring that there is a character analogous to Bannon and asking me to define the terms of your declaration. I am not interested in that sort of dialogue. If your suggestion is that there were not claims made by prominent Dems that the election of Trump was illegitimate, etc, it seems silly to discuss Steve Bannon.

And dem leaders spread lies about the illegitimacy of our elections, supported protests that led to anarchists causing chaos in our streets, including the spread of COVID which surely significantly increased the death count during the pandemic. As I said, your question is best answered by folks who can answer your question. This is it.

You would have to ask someone who thinks that’s an effective way to effect change. I’m not that guy. From my perspective, anarchists want anarchy wherever they can find it. I think it’s fashionable to try and draw a parallel between one group and another to support preconceived notions and biases, but I don’t see much difference between 1/6, the leftist riots that caused chaos across our country and the anarchists in Brazil. For clarity, I have no idea what the history of Brazilian politics reveals, from corruption to infighting to coups and the like. I’m simply running with the narrative as offered, which is likely not 100% accurate.

My goodness, it’s like you cracked the DaVinci Code!

I think I follow your reference but I suppose I didn’t set that up very well. That’s supposed to be a GIF with Dwight shunning someone on the show. The point was now that Zelensky has said something positive to a Republican, his days as darling of the left are likely over. As for Andrew Clyde and supporting Officer Fanone, I was disgusted by the 1/6 attacks and support prosecution for offenders, and support generally the police officers who stood guard that day. I still wonder why they were overmatched and overrun, how the Capitol was breached that day, and think partisan politics and a willingness to sacrifice a few officers was part of the bigger plan. That said, I’m not sure there could be a bigger bunch of s***bags (Bernie Sanders included) in dem politics than many there now as it relates to supporting law enforcement outside of the ones that protect them personally. It would be awesome to see them (and liberals generally) tone down the rhetoric directed against law enforcement, and give the same benefit of the doubt they have to the officer who dispatched Ashley Babbitt on 1/6.

Biden and the left in 3….2…..1

That might be plausible had that ship not already sailed in the months, weeks and years following the 2016 race, and the coordinated attempt to unseat the duly elected President. They obviously were more comfortable with the Dem model of questioning the security and integrity of our elections, and the Special Counsel with virtually unlimited power to knock heads, but what happened, happened. We do agree the proof in the outcome though.

And monkeys. Devils and monkeys. Oh, and Nazis too.

Yeah, I know this one too, Andy. It’s one of the oldest dialogue parlor tricks in interpersonal communication, typically filed under the category of “I don’t want to talk about THAT…”. What I can tell you is really pretty simple, and that’s the history of our government is loaded with people bending or outright breaking the sacred trust held with the American people, that Trump’s lies and half truths were no better, no worse than many who went before, the great faux Russia scourge of 2015 was neither new nor particularly creative, and that the “Stolen election of 2020” wasn’t all that different than the “Illegitimate election of 2016”. The one constant the manipulators of people can count on is that people will reply as you did, attempting to secure their place in the moral high ground of American politics with “This guy is way worse than my guy” followed by a very tepid and impotent statement like yours and “I won’t defend Bill…” followed by a few line items where you do just that. The reason we get what we always got is because we always do what we always did, Andy. Meanwhile, people of otherwise good will do what you just did—thinking somehow or someway you’ve contributed to some grand narrative when all you really do is reveal your own personal bias and willingness to look the other way so long as your guy is winning. Santos is just another in a long line of liars and manipulators, but he’s still a small gator in a very large swamp. Communication and dialogue on uncomfortable subjects, such as support of politicians with some very ugly skeletons in their closet is nothing to fear. Growth comes from introspection at times.

By voting for Hochul, the people who did so indicated a support of business as usual politics—didn’t matter that she kept her mouth shut on Cuomo’s indiscretions in the #metoo era, didn’t matter that NY was underprepared for pandemic management, didn’t matter that fraud was perpetrated with respect to COVID death counts, didn’t matter that corruption exists, didn’t matter that large numbers of tax payers are leaving the state. So it goes.

https://nypost.com/2022/12/01/rep-denounce-hakeem-jeffries-as-election-denier-after-house-dems-elect-him-leader/ ….and, on cue, the elevation of an election denier, who refused to acknowledge our safe and secure election of 2015, is lauded by a poster (and pundits) supposedly upset by such things, but support it 100% along party lines. This is why it happens, and this is why it works.

Again, Andy, while Santos is an extreme example, people voting for a known liar and misrepresented of truth is nothing really new. Hillary Clinton was a known enabler of sexual predation by her husband, he himself known as “Slick Willy” and a known liar who has been a dem mainstay for decades, after lying through his chompers and committing perjury. Blumenthal, Clinton, Clinton, Biden, Schiff, Swalwell…the list goes on and on.

This reminds me of the AOC melt down when the comedian approached her on the Capitol steps and she got emotionally overwrought. Things happen when emotions run high and people lose control of their emotions. My only question here is Rogers hair real or a wig?

“Then Biden said—seriously dude, no one really cares!”.

Other than looking and acting 110 years old, I think it’s completely fair to grieve for a police officer killed in the line of duty. I wish, honestly, that dem leadership gave as much care and concern for officers not protecting Washington politicians as they do for the ones they have a vested interest in supporting. Give the average officer half the care and cover they gave the guy who shot Ashley Babbitt and we would be a better society for it.

Wow, this is really something. The exceptional January 6 Committee, out to save the world and bring darkness to light, “accidentally” releases the social security number(s) of nearly 2000 citizens who just happen to hold different political views. This, after rumors circulate about the committee protecting certain special interests who may have acted illegally or unfavorably up to and including 1/6 (thanks to @ChiGoose for bringing that to our attention) . This after the raid on Mara Lago. This after Trumps private tax returns we’re made public long after he left public office, and of which he had no legal obligation to reveal. https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/01/06/social-security-numbers-jan-6-committee-documents/ Death by a thousand paper cuts—-the New Democrat model of politicking apparently includes providing grifters and one’s enemies with sensitive/confidential personal information. But….Trump was the authoritarian. 🧐

You brought the bottle out with 13 seconds left, didn’t open it but thought that would neutralize the jinx factor? I don’t know much about X and O strategy, Wide 9 formations and the rest, but I know all about the jinx. Why don’t you take that @&$”@ bottle and $@&($$& shove it $& $$)()$ and $&@@&$ and &$&@9!!!

That was a nice gesture on his behalf. Kudos to the president. I’m sure Damar’s family was touched by the leader of the world calling them to express support for their son’s recovery.

I don’t know, I bet he found the triscuits after I left.

I’m just going to say it as plainly as I can: I think what you’re saying is a patch on the jeans is if we do the neighborhood things that we need to do. Sorry if that hurts but it had to be said.