Holy sheep shit! The CIA has released information about a plot by Trump/Kushner in Oct 2020 to set up a secret communication channel with Russia using Russian diplomatic facilities in order to avoid any American monitoring of the pre-inauguration discussions (but clearly Russia would know all). Just one more instance of maga selling America to our long term enemies, in your eyes another “nothingburger” like every crime Trump commits, but if Biden did anything close it would be treason that requires a civil war.

Meanwhile maga representatives are saying on camera that everything they do in the House of Representatives should be about electing Trump…not protecting America, not improving the economy, not addressing immigration, not working to solve America’s issues, not anything positive, just help Donny….but nooooo…it’s not a cult. 😂

The judge actually corrected VonShitsinpants’s lies from the bench, namely the idiotic lie that the gag order means he cannot testify, a pure total lie he’s telling his moronic followers to excuse his not testifying…because there’s no way in hell he’s testifying without convicting himself of multiple crimes, he’s absolutely incapable, everybody knows it. It seems he was trying to set up an ineffectual council defense pretending his lawyer told him the gag order stops him from testifying or is even in effect inside court…the judge destroyed that weak attempt by correcting the lie on the record, Trump CAN testify, he chooses not to, just like every other case he’s been convicted of, he never testifies, it’s the smartest move he’s ever made.
His second chair lawyer ruined her legal reputation today arguing with Merchan over getting pre approval to violate the gag order again by retweeting posts that violate the orders, which is not a thing. The judge obviously turned them down, saying the order is crystal clear on its face, judges don’t give advisory opinions to defendants, and if they’re unsure if they’re about to violate the order AGAIN maybe just don’t post it, duh.

Came out today from people in the room that when sanctions were being set he tried to remove China from the countries being sanctioned because Xi was nice to him on the phone and so he promised he would.
Also in court today, Trump and Cohen on tape discussing setting up payments to his mistresses, how to hide the payments and not pay in cash, etc. 😂

PS- STILL WAITING!

This has become an international scandal…it’s possible he’s correct about what people have told him was really happening and that guy was a military guard for a high ranking official’s wife/daughter filming cultural videos in public and taking over areas by force.



This wouldn’t fly in America, they would be surrounded by large men with guns, knifes, and large fists in short order. Try it out CCP….see if diplomatic immunity stops bullets.

I want to expand on this bit. This right here is from the Treaty of Tripoli, which as newtboy noted was ratified unanimously a mere 10 years after the signing of the Constitution. Treaties are part of the "Supreme Law of the Land" and are not just happy words between diplomats - they've the full weight and support of the US legal system behind them.

So VERY CLEARLY, the early politicians of the US had absolutely ZERO objection to the notion that this is NOT a Christian nation. It is secular, beyond a shadow of a doubt. Any claims to the contrary are absurd revisionist history.

Oops this turned into a semi rant. But I am legitimately open to discussion here, and am curious to get your thoughts on a few points Bob. That is, IF you're willing to actually think about them beyond the level of repeating talking points.

I find it interesting how divergent the two overall "sides" are in this country, in terms of where they focus. None of the issues brought up in this video are really on the radar of most progressives, beyond being aware some on the right are talking about them. And I'm guessing a lot of the concerns progressives discuss rarely come up in your chosen media landscape. A lot of the issues in the video are largely off of my radar, and I have to wonder how you feel they should be addressed - like, actual proposed solutions rather than just complaining about / worrying about them.

We only dedicate one day to remember our fallen soldiers

How many should there be? Arguably we have more than one already: there's Memorial Day and Veterans Day, and it seems that Sept 11th is often used for the purpose as well.

I'd argue we should spend more time acknowledging and understanding the principals behind WHY our soldiers died in the various conflicts which caused them to fall in the first place. Let's make sure our citizenry appreciates what we collectively rejected in the Revolutionary war. Why it was important that we kept the country together rather than allowing the south to split off in the mid-1800s. Why we chose to honor our diplomatic agreements and support our allies in WW1. Why we fought against the countries and governments we did in WW2. What our goals were in Korea and Vietnam, and what lessons we learned from those conflicts and from the Cold War in general. Commemorating and remembering those we've lost absolutely matters, but if we're ONLY doing that while forgetting why they fought OR ignoring what we learned then we're doing them an equal or greater disservice. Remember that America was built on the idea of forming "a more perfect union" - not a perfect one, a MORE perfect one - a work in progress. We're striving towards an ideal, not assuming we're already there. Learning from our past successes, failures, and our struggles around both outcomes is vital. If our self-analysis is no deeper than hero worship we'll never make real progress towards that theoretical perfect union.

The only mask that's gonna save us is duct tape on their mouths

Yeah, sound medical advice and evidence-based science is terrifying. Better to shut up those whose words we dislike, because we're reactionary authoritarian babymen. I truly do not understand being more afraid of reasonable safety measures than of a virus which has been shown to cause serious harm in the short and long terms. The only reason this "masks = liberal / maskless = conservative" crap came about is because politics has devolved to the level of team sports in the US, and one party has chosen "the opposite of whatever our political opponents say" as their entire governing philosophy. (And yes, ONE party - research and understand the GOP's 2020 platform if you want to argue the point.) This video even seems to reach a reasonable conclusion at the end, while coming up just short of that final logical leap to "maybe I should question what the public faces of MY side have been claiming in this Us vs Them madness." Seriously - keep going friend, you're almost there! George Washington was 100% right in wanting to avoid political parties being a force in the US, and it makes me immensely sad that his fears came true.

Big oil runs the world / the only wars to get fought are with the countries who have natural resources they want

Solid point here, no sarcasm. The US military has long been a tool of our profit-driven form of "free market" imperialism. A really great way to combat this, specifically with an eye to ending Big Oil's goddamn death grip on our foreign policy goals, would be an aggressive implementation of renewable energy projects. Remember the space race? America can be an absolute beast at clever engineering solutions when we dedicate ourselves to it. Fuck the petrostates, we have the available land and resources to absolutely kick ass in the realms of solar and wind power, and be leaders in the the post-hydrocarbon reality. We can certainly agree on that, right Bob? Left / Right nonsense fully aside, I think any reasonable American can agree on at least two points: let's stop sending heaps of cash to buy oil off of the Saudis (etc), and Fuck Cancer.

But if a white man acts too white he's white trash / he's a racist he's a bigot he's a monster

What the fuck is this horseshit? What does "acting too white" even fucking look like? Watching NASCAR on a sailboat while listening to polka? Typically when I see racism from white people it's in the form of denying that brown-hued people deal with any additional difficulties in life due to their skin tone, or denying that there have been structural obstacles for them through history, or lamenting that their white children are being burdened with a broader lens on culture or with (gasp! shock!) an accurate accounting of actual US history, including the ugly bits that we shouldn't be proud of (but MUST learn from). I'm progressive / lefty as fuck and there is no aspect of "white culture" or "acting white" which upsets me in the slightest. UNLESS one counts "denying racism exists / has ever existed" as a fundamental value of being white. Which... why would anyone want to claim that nonsense? If you want to listen to classic country music in a rusty pickup truck while driving to an evangelical church, then discuss hockey over Buds after 18 holes with the rest of your tractor pull team, then absolutely go nuts my fellow caucusoid! Just recognize and understand that your life experiences may not be the same as those of others. Further, if we care about trying to avoid unnecessary, avoidable unfairness in life (recognizing that life will never truly be fair, for anyone), then it might be reasonable for some governmental / legal / structural recognition in furtherance of that notion. There is absolutely room for legitimate policy disagreement here without being accused of racism. It's denial of others' reality which tends to garner the label of racist (sexist etc) - steer clear of denying the lived experiences of other people, allow for the possibility they may have encountered difficulties you haven't / won't, and we've room for further discussion.

Edit / final point: I voted the video back up to 0 from the -1 where I found it. Because while I disagree with a lot of the positions taken by the performer, they may have reached them through no fault of their own and with no true malice. Misinformation / disinformation is a devious shit of a motherfucker, and the rot it causes can run deep. It is painful to abandon deeply-held beliefs, on a fundamental level. If nothing else, the video gives us room to discuss some specific viewpoints held by people who think of themselves as good, but which can lead to harm.

I'm suffering from serious confirmation bias on this because it agrees with a lot of what I heard around the 2014 revolution and since.

I was in Russia when they invaded Georgia in 2008. Specifically, I was staying with family in Ossetia, which is a mountain state that was split between Russia (North Ossetia) and Georgia (South Ossetia). Russia invaded because Georgia was attacking a Georgian town in South Ossetia. On the day of the invasion I was working in the mountains collecting water samples, and got a very close view of what was happening, got local confirmation of what was being reported, got to talk to refugees, etc.

Without going into it too much, when I got back to Ireland and saw what was being said and how it was being framed it was absolutely laughable and so obviously wrong. Some were worse than others - Sky News in the UK and Fox News being the worst offenders - but no major news media that I saw was giving the side of the story that I saw.

Also, when the UN report on what happened came out several years later it completely matched with my take on what happened.

The point of all this is that when the invasion happened earlier this year I knew there was no way I'd have the time or expertise to find out what's going on, even though I have friends and family in Ireland, Russia, and Ukraine. All sides are pushing their narrative hard. All sides are lying to us and manipulating us to the best of their ability. Depending on where you live you'll hear one side louder than the other, and the people around you will tend towards that narrative.

Personally I believe both sides have committed atrocities. I don't know who's been worse. I've seen both sides, including journalists, manipulating footage to support their narrative.

My only take on this is that invading a sovereign country is absolutely wrong except in extreme circumstances where every practical diplomatic means has been exhausted.

To come back to this video, my instinct was to promote it because it does seem to be a well informed take on the context of what's happening, but I've been hesitant because of my confirmation bias and because it muddies the message of "war is very very very bad".

Feck it, though. *promote

Constant unAmerican, anti democratic, Russian propaganda.
Do you know how many flags have flown over the US in that time? To name just a few….French, British, Spanish, Mexican, Every state (before their statehood), dozens of different US flags (changed every time a state was added), hundreds of indigenous nations, even Canada. Remember 6 flags over Texas? Does that make Texas less part of America? I guess Mexico should take it back. No need to defend it I suppose.
What idiocy. Jesus, bob.

I recall how happy you were when we assassinated an Iranian general in an unprovoked act of war against a Russian backed country, so why was starting a war fine with you but keeping our clear obligations agreed on by an international nuclear disarmament treaty is bad? *crickets*

I’m not saying you are definitely a Russian America hating troll, I’m just saying there wouldn’t be a single letter changed in anything you post if you are, and there’s not one shred of evidence that you aren’t one.

Love the way you want to walk away from our treaty too….so no country will ever negotiate based on a promise by America to defend them. Ukraine would still have nukes if we hadn’t agreed to permanently secure their borders, and Putin would never have invaded a nuclear nation.

At every opportunity you are anti democracy, Bob. You’re so blind you don’t see how that makes you look. I thought you hated socialism and communism….so why do you support it being forced on others?

🤦‍♂️

Edit: have you been listening to super racist failed diplomatic appointee and Fox “invasion expert” Douglas MacGregor, a Trump appointed Russia Propagandist on Fox who’s suggesting Russia should be more aggressive, borders should just be redrawn (without Ukraine), Zelinski is a terrorist, and claims people in the west and Europe and China all support Russian expansion? Sure sounds like it.

You really believe this crazy bullshit then, eh? I thought some of it was an act.

Yo;

Yes of course. Of course they did. Because it's a

REAL DISEASE THAT PEOPLE GET IN REALITY

So when he encourages behavior that promotes spreading disease, says it'll 'magically go away', and closes the boarder with China BUT puts enough exceptions in the China travel ban that 40,000 Americans/Chinese diplomats come back to three usa


Yes. When he's saying people are immune when THAT'S JUST NOT TRUE yeah, i expect that they should complain about it.

The key point here is that the Emancipation Proclamation, although widely celebrated, had no real legal effect. It did not apply to states that had not seceded, and for states that had seceded US federal government proclamations didn't mean much. The real effect of the Emancipation Proclamation was diplomatic, it made it more difficult for European governments, particularly the UK, to support the Confederacy, as was in their economic best interest.

He did violate the Logan act. Absolutely no question.

He lied to the FBI and said he hadn't talked to any Russian about any policy before Trump was in office, but they had him on tape telling the Russians not to worry about sanctions, Trump would remove them asap, a clear violation of the Logan act because it directly contradicted and contravened the then current government's international policy actions.
It hadn't been used before because no previous pre-administration had been so anti American as to violate it, or so stupid as to violate it using direct diplomatic phone lines that are routinely recorded, then deny it under oath.

He lied to the FBI directly, outright, saying absolutely no conversation concerning any policy happened, under oath....after first trying to deny any contact whatsoever. They proved it, so he pleaded guilty. It wasn't as he describes.

No Bob. Wrong again. Some were background witnesses that prove the mindset....removing a top diplomat known internationally for her anti corruption successes in the manner he did it was like like photos of Trump dismantling video cameras the night before he robbed his own bank, they don't prove he did it, and he has the right to remove them, but it's still good evidence he was planning the crime. There were also direct witnesses to his actions, and what the Ukrainians were saying.
We get more direct witnesses today, including numerous professionals who were listening in on the phone calls.

Most leaks have come directly from the Whitehouse, and a never ending stream from Giuliani, but he used them. Secondly, what exactly was he so worried might leak about his perfect phone calls that he needed to create a secret non governmental channel to do foreign policy based on ridiculous false claims from criminal Ukrainians who paid him for access, then hide all evidence behind a top secret clearance firewall? Could it be because the State Department had already debunked both theories thoroughly, or because the payments from Russian tied Ukrainians was totally illegal, as is selling American policy to the highest foreign bidders? Next excuse.

Bob, you know the Republicans aren't asking about the facts or offering a defense, but are only using their time to make false statements about Biden and the witnesses, and to whine about the process they themselves designed, right?

...and you add a video from rabid nutbag Jordan why? His animated blatherings were only designed to confuse and obfuscate, and had no logical bearing on the procedure. His rapid fire naming players only works on morons who can't follow along, anyone with an iq above 80 understands Songland was revising his testimony because others testified he was lying. Taylor recalled having been told by Songland's staff, Mr Morrison, about Songlands conversations with Mr Yarmack, a Ukrainian official, about meetings with Zelensky and Pence (and what he told Yarmack was the meeting was conditional on an investigation announcement over Biden, not Burisma or corruption, and it was cancelled because there was no such public announcement). Mr Morrison would testify the same, so Songland had to admit the conversation happened. Hilariously, until that admission, Songland was your guy, now you guys pretend you can't follow one sentence if it has 5 names in it. This from the guy who brought you Benghazi, numerous closed door secret investigations over nonsense with zero evidence or corroboration. *facepalm

Btw, Zelensky had a scheduled interview to announce his Biden investigation in a quid pro quo for the funding release, but the illegal funding hold and related extortion was discovered publicly first and the scheme fell apart days before he gave the interview, which he cancelled as soon as the funds were released and the extortion plot ruined. If he wasn't being extorted, he would have had that interview anyway.

Funny how they repeatedly use their time to complain about not being allowed to ask questions (a total lie btw) in closed door sessions or to make false accusations against others like Biden or Schiff instead of asking questions about this case....even the Republican lawyer. It's like they have no defense....oh, wait.

Keep laughing. I know Jordan being the best you've got gives me a chuckle. Rational people see him as the total nutjob he is.

Isn't that exactly what Trump said, that the investigation of him was illegal because Democrats were involved, making it partisan? That since what he claimed was the impetus (or as he says, the oranges) for the investigation was an imperfect dossier the whole thing was illegal?
The impetus for his Biden witch hunt is unambiguously a made up story by corrupt Ukrainians that doesn't fit the documented facts in the slightest, which every professional involved told him clearly, a fake story furthered directly by Trump in public.

In fact, it is hands off for the president. Using the power of the office to direct investigations of political rivals is impeachable.
Using the office to blackmail foreign powers to interfere in our election by starting false investigations for political reasons is a crime.
Taking foreign money in exchange for illegal and corrupt policies that are against the national interests but personally beneficial is treason. He has done exactly that.

But in YOUR mind, Treasonous Trump can do no wrong, and things that were treason when you baselessly claimed Democrats did them are patriotism when Trump brags about them. You can't even understand that Trump openly committed the very crime he was convinced by foreign criminals Biden committed...using the power of his office and public funds to pressure foreign investigations for personal gain...the difference being Trump did it secretly for personal political gains and was caught, Biden didn't do anything besides join international and bipartisan efforts to remove a corrupt prosecutor who wouldn't prosecute corruption. Trump removed a top notch anti corruption diplomat because she wouldn't push for a corrupt and baseless politically motivated investigation of his political rival, exactly what the corrupt Ukrainians had paid him to do.

Trump couldn't come up with any other corruption he wants investigated besides the Biden fantasy he was sold, and when asked exactly what he expected from Ukraine, he said he specifically expected them to investigate Biden, not fight corruption. Same for China, which was not a joke or trolling of the public, his trade advisor admitted he brought it up in official trade talks before he said it publicly.

You keep chanting 'he'll drain the swamp' ignoring he is the swamp thing, and the swampiest administration ever with more corruption convictions than any two administrations combined (an educated guess, might be >2) and more scandals than any 10 combined.

If I weren't sure you were a Russian troll only trying to sew division with ridiculous republican regurgitation of baseless claims based on delusion and corruption, I would be seriously worried about your mental state.

Edit: remember these days in 15 months. When Democrats control congress and the executive, the same "see no evil" tactics will be more than fair play. No matter how unconstitutional their actions might be, no matter how unacceptable, we will see no wrong....just cleaning up the Trump mess. Nothing to worry about.

We say Venezuela's government is illegitimate and Maduro isn't President, but he's doing a pretty good impression of one so far(much better than the pretender Guaido), including commanding their armed forces. One can be a general without fighting for a legitimate government as well, commanding a large regular military unit is the defining characteristic. As far as citizenship, just saying you're renouncing it doesn't do the trick today, there's a specific process you have to go through(and some do for tax reasons) I don't know if the law was changed since the civil war, but just declaring yourself a rebel and non-citizen doesn't legally make it so today. There's a case in the news today the Trump admin trying to deny a woman ever was a citizen(born to a foreign diplomat) because they know just because she joined ISIS doesn't nullify her citizenship.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-isis-bride-hoda-muthana-court-bid-to-come-home-donald-trump-says-not-citizen/

love how diplomatic he is to his mum in person vs redit post.

Lockheed Martin and the Pentagon say the F-35’s superiority over its rivals lies in its ability to remain undetected, giving it “first look, first shot, first kill.”

Hugh Harkins, a highly respected author on military combat aircraft, called that claim “a marketing and publicity gimmick” in his book on Russia’s Sukhoi Su-35S, a potential opponent of the F-35. He also wrote, “In real terms an aircraft in the class of the F-35 cannot compete with the Su-35S for out and out performance such as speed, climb, altitude, and maneuverability.”

Other critics have been even harsher. Pierre Sprey, a cofounding member of the so-called “fighter mafia” at the Pentagon and a co-designer of the F-16, calls the F-35 an “inherently a terrible airplane” that is the product of “an exceptionally dumb piece of Air Force PR spin.” He has said the F-35 would likely lose a close-in combat encounter to a well-flown MiG-21, a 1950s Soviet fighter design.

Robert Dorr, an Air Force veteran, career diplomat and military air combat historian, wrote in his book “Air Power Abandoned,” “The F-35 demonstrates repeatedly that it can’t live up to promises made for it. … It’s that bad.”

The development of the F-35 has been a mess by any measurement. There are numerous reasons, but they all come back to what F-35 critics would call the jet's original sin: the Pentagon's attempt to make a one-size-fits-all warplane, a Joint Strike Fighter.

History is littered with illustrations of multi-mission aircraft that never quite measured up. Take Germany's WWII Junkers Ju-88, or the 1970s Panavia Tornado, or even the original F/A-18. Today the Hornet is a mainstay of the American military, but when it debuted it lacked the range and payload of the A-7 Corsair and acceleration and climb performance of the F-4 Phantom it was meant to replace.

Yeah, the F/A-18 was trash when it first came out and it took YEARS and multiple changes/fixes to allow it to fully outperform the decades old aircraft it was designed to beat when it was released.

The F35 is not the best at anything it does, it is designed to fully be mediocre at all roles in order to allow it to be a single solution aircraft. That may change with more money, time, and data retrieved from hours spent in actual combat, but as it stands it is what it was designed to be. A jack of all trades and master of none, not something I would want to be flying in a role where I could encounter a master of that role.

As @ChaosEngine says, it is far beyond time that we move to a design where the pilot is not in the plane. There is no reason at this time that we cannot field a plane that could successfully perform it's role with the pilot in a secure location nearby. Such planes could be built cheaper, could perform in g-forces that humans cannot withstand, and would be expendable in a way that current planes are not. However, this would mean that our corporate welfare system for huge defense contractors would take a massive hit. We can't have that, can we?