Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[Mainevent]

Reading about how the NATO meeting is being dumbed down for Trump is alternately hilarious and embarrassing.

[Da Geezer]

Harvard released a study today about the positive/negative treatment of Trump in seven US news outlets. The chart for the 7 US news outlets( CNN, NBC, CBS, FOX, NYT, WP, WSJ:

https://heatst.com/culture-wars/harvard-study-reveals-huge-extent-of-anti-trump-media-bias/

correlates quite well to the conservative-liberal chart that someone posted last year where 50 was neutral, 100 was most liberal, 0 most conservative.

[Da Geezer]

I notice Wiener cops a plea and, on the same day, Huma files for divorce. IMO, if Wiener had not finalized his case, she would have stayed married to him so she didn't have to testify against her "husband".

[Da Geezer]

I'm convinced, however, that Trump is and has been unethical, stunningly so,...

Hold on young fella, you are convinced that Trump "is and has been unethical, stunningly so.....". OK ethics is not a court case, but let's hear about his bad ethics. How about some examples?

[froot loops]

Yeah it's the media's fault he is getting a little negative coverage. He only admitted to firing Comey to relieve the pressure of the Russia investigation. He should have been praised for that.

[Da Geezer]

DSL:

In crash's world Julian Assange, Alex Jones, and Bretibart are more credible than Seth Rich's parents, the DC Police, or the FBI (all of whom take orders from Hillary herself)

How about a quote where he said that, or anything close to it.

BTW, is Seth Rich related to Marc Rich, the international criminal Clinton pardoned at the urging of Acting Attorney General Eric Holder in January of 2001?

Oh, and when discussing any "possible crimes", at least crash starts with a corpse that was shot. How about any evidence at all that would point to Trump colluding with the Russians. Anything? Any starting place other than a room with Hillary and Podesta deciding to begin the story? I thought not.

[froot loops]

I laughed audibly at the post, it always comes back to the Clintons.

[Da Geezer]

Uh oh, White House official is a person of interest in the Trump Russia probe according to Washington Post. The source would not reveal who it was.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/ampht...b69_story.html

If there is such a person, then my bet would be on one of the 3,300 people who are actually officials in the white house who is unknown to any of us now, and of no relevance to the Trump Administration.

http://westwing.bewarne.com/discontinuity/payroll.html

By the way, did anybody get me a copy of that Comey memo that had this place on fire? Or that audio tape that the NYT claims it heard but can't find?

I notice Comey refused to testify to Congress in a closed session where he would not be able to duck questions using the old, "...sorry, but that is part of an ongoing investigation...." tactic.

[Dr. Strangelove]

DSL:

How about a quote where he said that, or anything close to it.

BTW, is Seth Rich related to Marc Rich, the international criminal Clinton pardoned at the urging of Acting Attorney General Eric Holder in January of 2001?

Oh, and when discussing any "possible crimes", at least crash starts with a corpse that was shot. How about any evidence at all that would point to Trump colluding with the Russians. Anything? Any starting place other than a room with Hillary and Podesta deciding to begin the story? I thought not.

To believe that Rich was murdered because he leaked to Wikileaks is to believe that the DC Police and FBI are lying. There's really no argument there, because they've said that there's no eivdence Rich was in any communication with Wikileaksr, in spite of what your far-right websites are telling you and crash.

He is also no relation to Marc Rich.

What's amusing is hack Republicans keep saying the Russia/Comey stuff is of no interest to "real Americans", then act like f'ing Vince Foster and the Clinton Foundation are at the forefront of their minds every day.

[Dr. Strangelove]

If there is such a person, then my bet would be on one of the 3,300 people who are actually officials in the white house who is unknown to any of us now, and of no relevance to the Trump Administration.

http://westwing.bewarne.com/discontinuity/payroll.html

By the way, did anybody get me a copy of that Comey memo that had this place on fire? Or that audio tape that the NYT claims it heard but can't find?

I notice Comey refused to testify to Congress in a closed session where he would not be able to duck questions using the old, "...sorry, but that is part of an ongoing investigation...." tactic.

My guess is it's Jared Kushner. In fact, some outlets are explicitly saying it is.

Tons and tons of leaks are coming from Trump 'loyalists" themsevles. Likely because they realize the boss is an imbecile with a 10-second attention span who genuinely knows next to nothing about any consequential issue.

He's used to pushing around contractors delivering chandeliers to his hotels, not people who have the power to push back.

[froot loops]

Yes I'm sure the person of interest is some unknown, anonymous figure working at the White House that is significant and close to the President. Good call on that.

[Jeff Buchanan]

Hold on young fella, you are convinced that Trump "is and has been unethical, stunningly so.....". OK ethics is not a court case, but let's hear about his bad ethics. How about some examples?

Seriously ...... are you trolling? Did you actually read my post on this?

Here's a link to the information you are asking me for. I don't feel compelled to find it for you when it's really EASY to do:

https://www.google.com

[Da Geezer]

Seriously ...... are you trolling? Did you actually read my post on this?

Thanks for the link, but I found nothing of any consequence. Here is your whole previous post :

Originally Posted by Da Geezer View Post
.........And your specific instances are......?

We're not talking about irrefutable evidence in a court of law, nor are we attemping to build a case for criminal misconduct that can be prosecuted.

We'll (sic) before a prosecuteable case could be made against Bernard Madoff, his world started to unravel when his unethical investment practices were unmasked. Not saying this will happen to Trump nor comparing Trump's ethics to Madoff's. But there is an established record of Trump's questionable behaviors both before and during his presidency. A simple Google search will produce a long list of them.

Yes, geezer, there is a "vast difference in how the major media behaves now as opposed to (Water Gate)." Yes, it is more flaggrantly bias. No, that does not mean I can't choose my reading materials carefully with a goal of finding balance.

Yes we did have "Congresmen of integrity like Sam Ervin and Howard Baker (from both parties) doing the (work of Congress)" Both political parties are guilty of blocking the other party's routine appointments. While I think there is more political polarization, I don't see how that applies to assessing DJT's behavior.

I'm on record as opposing special prosecutors, council or whatever but not because of the emotionally charged language that they are "Stalinist".

Could you please highlight the part(s) of your post that support your assertion that trump "is and has been unethical, stunningly so...? I'm not trying to build a court case, as I've already conceded. I'm simply asking for instances of unethical behavior. Maybe it is just me, but the way Bernie Madoff acted before crashing doesn't seem persuasive. When I asked for proof, your only attempt was; "But there is an established record of Trump's questionable behaviors both before and during his presidency. A simple Google search will produce a long list of them." So there are lots of them, but I can't find any, or think of any from my own mind.

Truth is, you are unable or unwilling to give even one example of unethical behavior, much less anything "unethical, stunningly so...". You simply repeat the "facts" that your preferred alt-left sources give you. Maybe you believe them, or maybe you are virtue signalling to the vast majority of posters here who are progs. But don't give me that crap about balance. Jeff, you are not even sniffing at balance!

The reason I point your hard-left bias is that you are the moderator of this forum. I believe you actually think you are even handed. But making totally unproven assertions arising from your prog belief system is a symptom you should examine. I've brought this up before when I said that if the WSJ is 85 on the 1-100 scale with 50 being neutral, someone who is at 100 might view it as a conservative newspaper. Yesterday I posted a Harvard study that showed FOX news as having most of their stories as negative in tone toward Trump. But woe to anyone who posts anything from FOX here. Jeff, IMO, you personally are at least at 100 on that scale (but well to the conservative side of the NYT or the other progs here). Better to just recognize that than to claim some form of "balance".

[Da Geezer]

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aypl2aFlT8w"]Tucker Carlson Tonight vs Alan Dershowitz 5/19/17 - YouTube[/ame]

an interesting (and balanced) interview of Alan Dershowitz, who distinguishes between the criminal and the political, and makes the point that having a special council might actually help the Trump Administration.

[Da Geezer]

Kind of an interesting article about "peer reviewed" academic articles, Gender Studies, and Climate Change:

http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2017/05/20/delingpole-penises-cause-climate-change-progressives-fooled-by-peer-reviewed-hoax-study/