The Big Cat

Sharing the content of an unclassified memo that Comey himself wrote...is...bad? I guess?

The election of a non-liberal president spawned an army of literalist skeptics on this site. From 2009-2017, if anyone so much as farted within 500 miles of the President, the same literalist clowns crapped their own pants in a rush to connect the President to a scheme employing mustard gas to silence any/all dissent. By the powers of copy/paste, they had the lunatic right wing propaganda to prove it, too! Comey--after getting backhanded by both parties over the private server fiasco--is taking the literal route. The born-again the literalists among us conveniently ignore the rest of this exchange: COMEY: Wasn't unanimous. One of the members of the leadership team had a view you that although it was technically true we did not have a counter-intelligence file case open on then President-elect Trump. His concern was because we're looking at the potential, again, that's the subject of the investigation, coordination between the campaign and Russia, because it was President Trump, President-elect Trump's campaign, this person's view was inevitably his behavior, his conduct will fall within the scope of that work. And so he was reluctant to make the statement. I disagreed. I thought it was fair to say what was literally true. There was not a counterintelligence investigation of Mr. Trump, and I decided in the moment to say it, given the nature of our conversation. WARNER: At that moment in time, did you ever revisit that as in the subsequent sessions? COMEY: With the FBI leadership team? Sure. And the leader had that view that didn't change. His view was still that it was probably although literally true, his concern was it could be misleading, because the nature of the investigation was such that it might well touch, obviously it would touch, the campaign, and the person that headed the campaign would be the candidate, and so that was his view throughout. Can you imagine people here saying that just because Hillary's campaign was up to no good, doesn't mean she was? Jesus. Give me a break. Some of you are such shameless hypocrites.

right anyways

no. no because there's no reason to believe a guy who's been cut five times in four years should.

no

They used their first round pick on a CB, third round pick and a first round pick.

That's the precise play I would have brought up. Every !@#$ing thing you need to know about the 21C Bills.

The seconds leading up to kickoff of opening Sunday is one of my favorite moments of the year because then and there I have more Bills football to look forward to than at any other point. Frankly, I'm tired of that puttering out in meaningless week 17 games, but when they're entertaining, like they were to close out 2015, it's a satisfying experience. This season's debacle of a closer was a pathetic and disheartening way to limp across the finish line. I've never been less into an offseason than I am this year. So am I happy we're up five slots? Yeah, sure. Why not? Did the exasperatingly deplorable manner in which that game unfolded (THE KICKOFF RECOVERED FOR THE TOUCHDOWN, THE KICKOFF RECOVERED FOR A TOUCHDOWN) have me teetering on an existential breakdown? You bet it did.

It's preposterous that a person like this wasn't brought in before.

There have been at least 6 (debatably more) first round picks since the start of the drought that were worse than CJ Spiller: Mike Williams McGahee Losman McCargo Maybin Manuel

His on-camera skills are more overrated than his coaching skills. He's at his best when he's not trying to be funny. Which is about 3% of the time. He might actually be funny if he could go blue. But he can't. So he's not.

NO

I think you're assumptions about me are pretty far off the mark. Nothing you've posted here is contrary to anything I believe or have posited here or elsewhere. WaPo's coverage against Trump has been deplorable for the better par of year. And the DNC has been in turmoil longer than that. I want the DNC to be strong and to represent progressive ideas that can be sensibly enacted into policy (may be that's a unicorn, who knows?, this country has never tried it before). But the establishment and their general money whoring has managed to strip them of both their identity AND the grass roots movements they depend on to win elections. I want the RNC to elect candidates who actually govern on the ideals and principles they campaign on. But that doesn't happen either.

It's many things. Absurd it is not. But this is the kind of twisting in the wind that disappoints me so.

Yep. You got a funny way of doing that. And I'll have you know, I'm killing time until I have to get my hair cut. Come on. Two or three of them have to be smart, right? RIGHT!?

The more they reach, the less credibility they have. But I'm not convinced that there's nothing there. There are too many dots. If dems expose themselves in the process, great! Same standard applies to everyone. And if you're so !@#$ing stupid as to go on a witch hunt for stuff you're also guilty of, then I don't want you in my Congress.

I've already addressed this. He was asked a question under oath, and the answer he provided was untrue. Whether he meant to, or whether or not it slipped his mind is to decide whether he's a liar or just stupid.

If you're reading the transcript, then you can see that he objectively said something that wasn't true. Your rationale for that = !@#$ery. Because I know for certain that when the shoe was on the other foot you didn't concern yourself with technicalities or what so and so meant to say. Then you must be a busy man these days. https://theintercept.com/2017/02/28/the-new-yorkers-big-cover-story-reveals-five-uncomfortable-truths-about-u-s-and-russia/ The New Yorker’s Big Cover Story Reveals Five Uncomfortable Truths About U.S. and Russia Obama and Clinton have radically different views on Russia. The risk of a new Cold War is very real and very dangerous. The U.S. media refuses to say if the U.S. interferes in Russia’s domestic politics. The U.S. government still has provided no evidence of its theories about Russian hacking Fixating on Russia continues to be used to distract from systemic failures of U.S. elites. Follow link for details. Tough to refute a lot of this stuff. The GOP shouldn't want Pelosi and Schumer gone. They're rotting the party from the inside out.

Laugh at liberal hypocrisy all you like, they deserve it. But the toggle switch on the outrage flipped REAL fast around here. And that really can't be ignored.

You missed it because there was no need to spit into the PPP ocean. Nice try though. Totally not like you to respond with YEAH BUT THE DEMS! Were you pissed at them then? Are you pissed at the Repubs for doing the same **** now? Right, and I think it's predictable that you're giving him the benefit of the doubt. And we can debate the space between, whether or not he willfully lied or not, that's fine. I won't profess to know what he did or didn't know he was saying, and I wouldn't be so willing to give him the benefit of the doubt you are. But if his memory is so shaky, perhaps he's not fit to hold higher office. If he couldn't have foreseen his interpretation of fact as being problematic, perhaps his judgement isn't the best. So if he's not a liar, then he's stupid. Either way, I'm not surprised to see you hesitate to critique him.

I have no explanation. I'm very much aware of the irony. And I don't really care. It's Friday.

By now you of all people should have enough piss on your leg to know it's not actually raining.

Completely agree. And the WaPo smear campaign is only serving to discredit them. Trump's a dick. He's incompetent and he's surrounded himself with crooks, thieves and cronies. But the media has already jumped the shark and they're losing any credibility they'd have on the stuff he should really be held up for. Even the liberal Chicago rag thinks so: http://www.chicagoreader.com/Bleader/archives/2017/03/02/donald-trump-has-become-a-meme-for-tyranny They were also way too easy on Obama. So they're doomed to lose the battle on both fronts. But when this is your retort to an AG being caught with his hand in the cookie jar having lied under oath, when your inclination is to skew the point toward something else unrelated, I question your ability to call balls and strikes against both teams with the kind of accuracy you claim to have.

Wow. That was easy.

Didn't think so, starter stache.