Actually no you haven’t, and yes you clearly do care what party they’re in. You may have said you think that, but your actions and arguments speak louder than your lies. Remember claiming you weren’t sexist at all minutes before (keyboard) screaming MGTOW!!!
Remember saying it was not just ok, but smart that Trump lied in depositions under oath? That only a stupid person would tell the truth if it might get them in trouble? Then you clearly stated wrong is right….and those are not the only instances.

You ignored the vote stealing, actually claimed the Republican vote harvester that admitted (his campaign workers) voting for himself thousands of times was punished when you KNOW he wasn’t because it was your district, and he remained in office until he withdrew on his own for personal reasons. Zero punishment whatsoever but you lie about it because he’s Republican.

You still call democrats the party of debauchery with zero evidence to cite, but can’t fathom that the reason I never find “my team” (I’m a Democrat only by default btw) doing that kind of wrong is because I only pay attention to reputable sources like court records and not often anonymous lying blowhards trying to score political points against their enemies, and reputable sources and police never find democrat representatives molesting children, trafficking them for sex, having cocaine fueled lemon parties, exposing themselves to pre teen girls in bowling alleys, picking up 12 year old girls in malls, having parties with Epstein and young girls and no one else, covering for child molesting coaches for decades, being long term pen palls with convicted kiddie porn producers while in office, admitting to driving for hours intending to have sex with an 11 year old girl, rewriting marriage laws so it’s legal to marry and have sex with 9 year old children, etc. …do I need to put names to all those charges? Because I can. You ignore every one of those credible accusations against Republicans and make up random accusations out of thin air about Democrats constantly.

Stealing, your hero Trump was convicted of stealing from charities for veterans, and students, and every contractor that ever worked for him, you don’t care one whit. He tried to steal an election (or two) and you cheer it on.

Cheating, why are you a Republican then, they get caught cheating for real daily, not MTG style baseless accusations based on someone’s Twitter claim. Your own district was the most egregious cheating scandal in decades, by republicans, and you would have gladly voted for him again, maybe twice. Have you forgotten how many of Trump’s administration ended up being unreported foreign assets? Hiding their foreign payments and cheating the system to allow foreign influence in our whitehouse?

It is odd, you would think statistically there must be some Democrat representative child molesters, I assume there are, but if there are they are smart enough that they aren’t getting caught. Republicans constantly are getting caught, and you are constantly ignoring it.

I do call out Pelosi for insider trading, and say she isn’t the only Democrat guilty of that crime against America, but I also say Republicans do it as a matter of course daily. Republicans went to court to make it legal for corporations to bribe them with pacs and super pacs and block any attempt to make bribery illegal again.

So you are just incorrect, again. Doesn’t that get tiring?

Do you want elections to be decided because of direct foreign influence? Or do you want Americans to decide American elections?

Donald Trump as president issued that order making it illegal for anyone to petition a foreign government/entity to help win an election. If he's doing nothing wrong and all his actions were 'perfect' he would not have tried to cover it up.

You are both saying the same thing.

The only difference is that the cynicism isn't consistently applied to everyone who warrants it.

(I heavily suspect that when the money doesn't add up - someone is making money on the side. And it just so happens that they are in the position to sell regulatory capture, so it is the most likely candidate.)




In this case AOC is on point (granted that Trump is wealthy prior to office).

If I were to criticize her, it would not be for this stuff.
(It would be for identitarianism [vs individualism])



The guilt so far is the sort of guilt everyone has. Not saying everything is kosher - just saying that everyone is guilty, malfeasance or not.

There is a saying, show me the man, I'll show you the crime.

I'm sure that the FBI can look closely enough to everyone related to trump and find something to convict everyone of. It may not be foreign influence related, but it will be something. They can even drag things out until the prez is out of office before going after the juicy targets.

-scheherazade

>> ^Pprt:

No details have yet emerged, but it is statistically likely that there is foreign influence involved. If so, the Norwegians have brought this upon themselves.
Let's hope this one will wake us up.
>> ^Smugglarn:
YAY CULTURAL RELATIVISM!
HOORAY FOR MULTICULTURALISM!


Who are you people? Like, I honestly struggle to believe you actually exist in real life. Do you live under bridges or something, like, you know, a troll?

No details have yet emerged, but it is statistically likely that there is foreign influence involved. If so, the Norwegians have brought this upon themselves.

Let's hope this one will wake us up.
>> ^Smugglarn:

YAY CULTURAL RELATIVISM!
HOORAY FOR MULTICULTURALISM!

I ain't listen' to no website based in gatdang Montenegro! Damn foreign influence, trying to weaken our state from within.

>> ^detheter:
This video stands as a monument to the death of the English language as we knew it. RIP One day, all our teachers will be required to freestyle well enough to maintain their street cred, whilst learning all the local dialects, yo


I wouldn't be so pessimistic, detheter, the intrusion of all kinds of slang (from LOLs&OMGs to this) in classroom environment is a phenomenon that I've only heard of being encountered in US and, as weird as it sounds, I think that via globalization foreign influence just might help US get the language back on the right track if what you described starts looking like a futuristic reality.

Also, I wonder if it's a good or a bad thing if I've never even been to the States and was familiar with the majority of vocabulary presented in this video..?

i is ahalf asleep

personally I think this is about struggle to form a real self-independent government in Lebanon that's free from other groups of major political powers, including religious institutions.

They don't want the Syrians there, they don't want the Israelis there, they don't want European westerners but also wouldn't want Saudi Arabians to just simply take over theiI government.

they know western capitalism works for the economy, but don't much care for their culture. Balancing western economic philosophy in a severely conservative country is a har work of its own. if you think about it.

It's an extremely deicate situations. But their goal is clear: to have an independent government free from major foreign influence. Which is really difficult thing to do in middle east.

On August 28th 2007 it was announced that 10 people were arrested in connection to her murder:

"Controversy arose because the prosecutor, Yuri Y. Chaika, suggested that the motive for killing had not been to silence Ms. Politkovskaya, whose efforts to uncover corruption and brutality under President Vladimir V. Putin had brought her international acclaim but scorn from officials here.

Rather, the prosecutor said, the killing was intended to discredit the Kremlin, by raising suspicions that it had been involved, and ultimately to destabilize the Russian state. That now-official theory is markedly different from one broadly accepted by her peers, who have said she was killed in retaliation for her work or to prevent additional articles from being published.

Among those arrested, the prosecutor said, were a police major and three former police officers, who were working with a criminal gang led by a Chechen. Also arrested, he said, was a former officer in the F.S.B., the principal successor to the K.G.B.

Mr. Chaika added that the killing had been ordered from abroad, although he refused to identify the man suspected of being the mastermind or disclose his whereabouts, and provided no evidence to support the claim. The prosecutor would not release the names of any of the suspects.

His description of the motive aligned neatly with Mr. Putin's first public statements about the killing last year and with a pattern of government contentions that foreigners were trying to undermine Russia and the Kremlin, and to tarnish their reputations."

- NYT

It was standard Soviet practice to blame any problems that occur within its borders on foreign influences in the past. The press brief went on to state the murders were designed to destabilize the political situation in Russia and blame the Kremlin for it. This is totally ridiculous considering that the only people to benefit from her death was the Kremlin and specifically Putin himself.

Alexander Litvinenko, the ex-FSB Lt.Col and dissident accused Vladimir Putin of personally ordering the assassination of Russian journalist Anna Politkovskaya. He himself was poisoned on November 1st of 2006, via lethal dose of polonium-210. As of 26 January 2007, British officials said police had solved the murder of Litvinenko. They discovered "a 'hot' teapot at London's Millennium Hotel with an off-the-charts reading for polonium-210, the radioactive material used in the killing." In addition, a senior official said investigators had concluded the murder of Litvinenko was "a 'state-sponsored' assassination orchestrated by Russian security services.

"The Kremlin press pool is a handpicked group of reporters, most of whom work for the state and the rest selected for their fidelity to the Kremlin's rules of the game. Helpful questions are often planted. Unwelcome questions are not allowed. And anyone who gets out of line can get out of the pool.

The Kremlin press pool is like so many institutions in Russia that have the trappings of a Western-style pluralistic society but operate under a different set of understandings, part of what analyst Lilia Shevtsova of the Carnegie Moscow Center calls "the illusion of democracy." Television channels air newscasts with fancy graphics but follow scripts approved by the Kremlin. Elections are held, but candidates out of favor with the Kremlin are often knocked off the ballot. Courts conduct trials, but the state almost never loses. Parliament meets but only to rubber-stamp Kremlin legislation.

Putin offered an example of that at the news conference when defending his decision last fall to abolish elections of regional governors. "The leaders of the regions of the Russian Federation will not be appointed by the president," he said. They will be approved by "regional parliaments, which are directly chosen by secret ballot." Putin compared this to the Electoral College, which selects U.S. presidents. "It is not considered undemocratic, is it?"

In fact, under the new system, Putin will appoint governors. His selections have to be ratified by regional legislatures, but if such a legislature rejects his choice twice, it will be dissolved. As for secret ballots, Russian regional leaders have proved adept at generating the outcomes they wish.

Anna Politkovskaya was just one of the dozens of reporters to meet their end during the reign of Putin, yet the press which is 80% state controlled dare not question the official line from Kremlin. She was murdered on October 7th 2006, which also happened to be Putin's birthday.

"Russia is yet another country where a free press is upheld in the language of the constitution, but the reality is one of state control of expression, concentration of media in the hands of the very few and very rich, and violence against journalists who report on crime and corruption.

Vladimir Putin's tenure has been marked by firm and incremental moves by the state against press freedom and independence. In some cases, the Putin government's strategies are relatively direct, such as strict controls on reporting in Chechnya. Other approaches -- such as the targeting of journalists with politically-motivated libel suits, or hostile takeovers of key media outlets by businessmen with close ties to Putin himself -- are more subtle, yet consistent and effective strategies for ensuring that the state influence permeates the media at all levels.

The strategy has resulted in the takeover of a prominent and outspoken, independent, national television station and the consolidation of newspaper and magazine ownership under a handful of powerful oligarchs. While an independent press does exist in Russia, the overall effect has been to stifle criticism of Putin and his regime on key issues like government corruption and abuses in Chechnya. Media support for the Putin government was particularly evident in the parliamentary elections in spring of 2004, during which Russian press groups complained of state-dominated television's promotion of the pro-Kremlin parties.

The right to free expression is more flagrantly violated at the local level, where journalists who report on corrupt politicians and organized crime are routinely harassed, attacked, and sometimes murdered, with generally only a perfunctory and thoroughly flawed prosecution to follow. A noteworthy case is the murder of the editor-in-chief of an independent newspaper in Togliatti, an industrial city in the Volga River region, in October of 2003. It was the second murder of the editor of the very same publication in less than two years. The following investigation has been denounced as a sham."

- Source http://www.pbs.org/

I watched the main prosecutors briefing on PTP Planet in Russian that morning. The rhetoric, method of presentation, hostile opposition to any questions by the press left no doubt in my mind that it was simply a political ploy to ease criticism of the Putin government with regards to the murders. Suddenly after years of inaction not one, but several murders are explained away neatly, however neither actual motives, names of other suspects nor any concrete evidence backing up the claims were presented.

For more on Russian subversion of democracy I recommend you check out my sift - http://www.videosift.com/video/The-Rise-of-Pro-Putin-Youth

Mink,

You're thinking of the George Washington Farewell address: "Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government. But that jealousy, to be useful, must be impartial, else it becomes the instrument of the very influence to be avoided, instead of a defense against it."
Or maybe about the Non-intercourse act.

That attitude held for a long while. It's the reason the US didn't intervene in WWII until Pearl Harbor. That's when the US "realized" that even if they don't act, the foreigners will still react, and the only defense is to be active abroad.

As for an alternative motive for Iraq - here's one - you have three problematic countries fomenting unrest - Iran with it's "export of the revolution" as a cornerstone of it's policy, Iraq which was working very hard to convince everybody they have WMD (kicking out the UN observers and similar games) and Saudi Arabia, where Bin Laden came from. Since Iran is democratic, and Saudi Arabia is a monarchy, while Iraq is a brutal dictatorship, what better way to get some stability to the area then topple Saddam? The grateful population, freed from their dictator will form a democracy and then the US will have a local ally, right between the two opposing Shi'ite and Suny countries. Of course, that's assuming you can accomplish everything before those two countries wise up and start meddling.