great reporting. he did that well. set it up, filled in the damning details then - 🤦 - he's a MINISTER! Batman is his HERO!

"additional evidence" reads more like 'we have no case, will let it drop if you do'. the cops/lawyers are using it as cover. Hoping to wait out a possible civil suit.

Richie Rich should have known he was the problem. what vendor passes over 200K? seems like the buyer is too fat, flush & short a soul. what a douche.

BSR: I'd say it's Two-Face since the Duck w/the Bucks, Sheriff Swindle, and Marie McNotLaughin are talking out boths sides of their mouths.

The issue is the wrong guy, a dishonest blowhard trying to cover his own failures, claimed this early on with absolutely zero evidence. It was a clear dodge, his normal MO. Refusing any responsibility for ending the international pandemic response team that would have been able to actually say when and where the outbreak started, and likely be able to keep it relegated to one small area in China. By blaming it on a Chinese lab, actually saying it was intentional, he deflects from his abject failure to protect America from a clear, obvious, incontrovertibly deadly threat on the horizon….or any time after it’s discovery.
Were the Chinese studying Covid, yes, so were we. That’s not an indication of where it came from. There’s no evidence it came from any lab, only supposition at best.

Edit:Even if the guess that it came from a Chinese lab is correct, it doesn’t excuse one second of Trump’s (lack of) response and outright denials for months-years. The origin has nothing to do with the danger level, in fact, if it WERE enhanced/created in a lab as he claimed, that’s more reason to consider it MORE dangerous, not reason to claim it’s just a cold or mild flu and will disappear like magic in a few weeks. Granted, it was fun to see him (only after his trade deal fell apart) blame this deadly virus on the Chinese as an unforgivable deliberate act of germ warfare and accuse them of minimizing the danger and hiding the size and severity of the outbreak and in the same breath claim it’s nothing to worry about, not dangerous, probably not deadly, not worth any action to protect against, and just a minimal annoyance soon to disappear….but also disappointing to see how easily so many Americans glossed over the two faced hypocritical responsibility shirking stance he took.

This guy claims most, nearly all viruses can’t both infect people and be transmitted….what utter nonsense. If that were true, there would have never been epidemics, pandemics, not even outbreaks. Credibility destroyed.

I guess he didn’t hear about swine flu, or bird flu, or flu, or colds, or any transmittable virus. 🤦‍♂️
I guess they haven’t heard new mutations are far less deadly (but more transmittable) than earlier versions, so they are getting less dangerous, contrary to his claim.

Not transmitting well outdoors means it’s not natural?! Bullshit, animals nest together. Many natural viruses require close contact to transmit.

DNA testing proved early on that this is not a man made virus. Is it possible a Chinese lab made a natural virus more dangerous, then a lab mistake released it? Yes, but there’s no evidence that’s the case, even these people who’s livelihood relies on people accepting “the lab hypothesis” (hypothesis=guess) admit it’s all conjecture, there’s no evidence, certainly no proof. It’s not the lab theory because it’s unproven.

Duh.

BTW, this couple are married, anti vaxers, Ivermectin proponents, and were thrown out of Evergreen College, and are now both now discredited and disgraced. Their main source of income is now their anti vax, pro Ivermectin, Covid isn’t dangerous podcasts loved by morons like Joe Rogan, and a source of much of his misinformation that’s getting him removed from his platform.
“Bret Weinstein is one of the foremost purveyors of COVID-19 disinformation out there,” says Dr. David Gorski, a surgical oncologist and professor at Wayne State University who also debunks quack remedies as managing editor at a website called Science-Based Medicine. “Weinstein can be ‘credited’ with playing a large role in popularizing the belief that ivermectin is a miracle cure or preventative for COVID-19, that the vaccines are dangerous, and that the disease itself is not. Why are Rogan and Maher attracted to his messages? Contrarians and conspiracy theorists tend to be attracted to each other.”
https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2021/09/16/bret-weinstein-and-heather-heying-go-unvaccinated-take-ivermectin/

Downvote discredited shills who profit from misinformation. No surprise at all, considering who posted this dishonest propaganda from discredited propagandists.

No Bob, you don't need to keep crying "but I love him"....we know you'll gladly ignore any foibles he has while viciously attacking others for the same, or similar but lesser crimes he claimed they were guilty of.
We know you allow him to bold faced lie to you about anything.
We know you're ready and willing to repeat any stupidity or nonsense he feeds you.
We know you're 100% prepared to accept his word over your own eyes, ears, or memory.
We know you're prepared to claim financial and civil gains even though reality disagrees.

You really don't need to keep telling us you love your lying fraud of an abuser....we know.

Do I need to remind you about Carter again? A politician who was never two faced or untruthful. Please, please don't display your stupidity by attempting to attack his undeniably excessive levels of intelligence or morality. Dumb people don't design nuclear submarines, immoral people don't command them with honor....they get phantom bone spurs that miraculously disappear the minute the draft ends so they can screw the wives of their honorable associates while they go to war.

Good, if Trump is really done playing politician, that's great for all of us. I hadn't heard he had quit.
It's just asinine to claim the person holding the most powerful political position in the world isn't a politician. You might as well claim he's not a fraud, not a thief, not a philanderer, not a business failure, not a hypocrite, not immoral, not a misogynist, and not dishonest while you're denying reality.

As noted above, your video evidence and your claims have nothing in common.

You have inner city gang killings that no one cares about.
Thousand youths murdered yearly and no one cares.



You have mental people killing children at schools and now we must ban guns.
50 murdered / year and all hell breaks loose for gun control.


When American stop being two faced then may be we can address the issue.

I gather you are talking about Paul Manafort, A lobbyist and insider for decades who worked for anyone any government for a fee. Two faced Trump saying drain the swamp and have Manafort ( and Roger Stone) on his team- sure. But that still does not mean there were collusion with Russia.

If I were an non politician it would be prudent to employ some heavy hitters who know who is who and what is what and how to win would be a good thing. Doesn't go with the whole draining the swamp message.

Time and investigations will tell.

I hate disagreeing with you, but I come at things differently. When I find an individual or new outlet is willing to wilfully obstruct and manipulate the truth, I stop trusting them and rarely waste my time with listening to it anymore. In the rare instance they have a story that seems important that isn't sourced anywhere else, or something otherwise unique I'll sometimes look, but always fact checking what is said. The amount of time that can be wasted on fact checking is why I largely dismiss strongly biased sources.

Fox and MSNBC are good examples, but RT puts them to shame.

Chris Hedges I was only familiar with in name, and not reputation. The fact he was speaking on RT was enough for me to dismiss him out of hand. The fact you seemed to think he was a lone credible individual got me to look further.

On looking further I'd encourage you to read Hedges own work form Nov 8, 2001:
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/08/world/a-nation-challenged-the-school-defectors-cite-iraqi-training-for-terrorism.html

Despite the fact he's appeared earnest and genuine in the instances you've seen him, and despite him seemingly bravely standing against the American administration and it being an act of character to speak out against the war, the above article seems to reveal Chris Hedges true nature. He was a paid lackey of American propaganda to prop up the lead in to the Iraq war, but at some point afterwards Russia paid better and now he's singing the tune of the current highest bidder.

I wish I could say I'm surprised to find it, but an RT report or opinion piece on why Russia is innocent of something turns out to be being forwarded by somebody clearly willing to be completely two faced when the money is good.

Thanks Rad. I would still imply that there IS a purpose to the refrigerator angle and "rant" form rather than "report" form. The opinion is strong but the reporting is meh.

Glen Greenwald is weak. A journalist should only breach privacy if there is a crime or significant damage to "public interest" involved (oversimplified). What is the crime?

Lee Fang - I see his point on banks and fracking and being a two-faced liar. I understand how exposing this is worthwhile to hurt Hillary. I just see this as repeating the words "email scandal" ad nauseam without enough substance.

You cant read your neighbors mail, hoping to prove they killed someone, and then inform the public that the mail proves they are an unpleasant person.

The claim "if someone had stolen the e-mails sooner she might have lost to Bernie" is just plain funny.

Nice kitchen dude, why are you talking to your refrigerator? Is this like the "underground" of news reporting, so the "censors" dont catch you? Is it that bad in the USofA now?

Is it now OK to steal and expose private e-mails of people in any public office? Because 2016? Seriously?

What NEWS is in those e-mails that makes them worth ranting about?

The general idea of "she sucked up to banks in those undisclosed private speeches and is soft on them in general" is old news. Everyone has known that ever since she first undisclosed them.

The general idea of discussing tactics, yes even dirty tactics, in private, before deciding if they are moral and practical and should be used publicly - is that news?

The general idea of Hillary being a not very good actress (some would say "two faced *****") - is that news?

What NEWS is in those e-mails? I dont want to yawn just yet but this is leading up to a big yawn.

Thieves, thieves and liars, murderers
Hypocrites and bastards 

Hey thanks for nothing!
Morals in the dust
Two-faced bastards and syncophants
No trust

Thieves! Liar!
Inside, outside, which side, you don't know
My side, your side, their side, we don't know
Which side are they? Which side are they?
Which side of their mouth do you suppose that it came?
Which side are they? Which side are they?
Which side of the grass is greener?
Inside, outside, which side, you don't know
My side, your side, their side, we don't know

You're like a great big fucking gun,
Just waiting to get squeezed!

Breathe, forfeit erection!
Toxical injection
Geriatric fuck-fest
We still believe in lies

Thieves! liar!
Inside, outside, which side, you don't know
My side, your side, their side, we don't know
Who started it? Who started it?
Which side are they? Which side are they?
Which side of their mouth do you suppose that it came?
Which side are they? Which side are they?
Which side of the grass is greener?
Inside, outside, which side, you don't know
My side, your side, their side, no one knows

You're like a great big hit of acid,
Waiting to be taken!

Bah, she's a two faced manipulator who pulled a cheap stunt (ie. crying discrimination/misogyny) because her popularity was in the shitcan. If you saw her operate during the Howard years in opposition, she was one of the most effective attack dogs the ALP had. She didn't allow being a woman to slow her down then, but as soon as the opinion polls fell away, suddenly the mean ol' men are treating her badly... /eyeroll

This is the same woman who doesn't believe in marriage equality...

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/oct/01/julia-gillard-equal-marriage

Discrimination is okay as long as you're not the one being discriminated against... So fuck her and fuck her sniveling "Oh poor me" bullshit. Equality is something everyone should have, not just a convenience to be exploited for political gain.

but...but...but, aren't all opinions valid?

What happened to mister "lets all be friends?" What happened to calling me brother and "loving my commentary?"

You just got exposed as being completely two-faced, "brother"

Don't worry. If the sift ever gangs up on me, I know that I can count on you to swoop to my defense in order to fan the controversy.

oh and btw, there is no right to be on a private website, but I'm pretty sure you already knew that.

OMFG... the threads... First Bob calls liberals two faced, but Conservatives were upset at the Dixie Chicks when they spoke out against Bush and his wars. Many conservatives demanded the Dixie Chips sponsors drop them and had large CD burning events, all over the fact they spoke their mind and their beliefs. Now these same people are upset at A&E for suspending a guy (a rather worthless suspension since the upcoming season is already filmed and he's already in it, and it is making free publicity for a stupid show about rich people).

This isn't a free speech issue. He isn't in jail for espousing anti-gay and racist remarks. He was suspended for saying something that made his part time employer look bad. Food Network fired Paula Dean. There was a PR lady who was going to Africa on a business trip that got fired after she tweeted she hopes she doesn't get AIDS, but no problem since she's white. You represent your company, officially or not, and make them look bad, your employer can fire you. You can say what you want, but sometimes that speech has consequences. A&E created the Duck Dynasty image, he made their network look bad, they have the right to suspend him... suspend, they didn't even fully fire him. Were they really outraged they would have pulled the show or edited him out of the upcoming season, but they didn't do any of that. They made a publicity grabbing move to suspend him.

This video also highlights the one key point I've been saying the whole time. That Jesus Himself said it is impossible for a rich man to get into heaven, doesn't matter if they want to or do follow Him, they have their reward here, and won't have one in Heaven. So Phil goes off on how gays are "full of murder" and how they won't inherit the Kingdom of God, but ignores that part where Jesus Himself said that people like Phil won't go to Heaven.

Then high, blaming it on some Atheist agenda. The same thing would have happened regardless of what religion or lack there of he had. This has nothing to do with Atheist wanting to make Christians look bad, as there is plenty of outrage over what he said in many Christian circles... you do know most liberals are Christian as well. Yes, most Atheist tend to be liberal, but the largest voting block of Democrats and Greens are Christian. People who take the Bible as the literal word of God, and believe Jesus was serious when He said to help the needy and poor, that the rich won't go to Heaven, that blessed are the peacemaker and not the warmongering Republicans, that when you pray, to pray in secret and not make a show of it the way modern Conservatives do, that know the reason for the destruction of Sodom according to the Bible was that "she was a land of plenty and did nothing to help the needy and poor", basically full of modern Conservatives, that the thing with the Angels happened after the city was condemned to be destroyed and they were there to rescue Lot's family, before Lot pulled the father of the year by offering his young daughters (think Olson Twins) over the angelic warriors of God (think Conan the Barbarian and Rambo) with magical powers, rather than just a simple "no". Anyhow, plenty of Christians are upset at what Phil said, because it makes Christians look bad, he not only bashed gays, but thought blacks were fine under the old Jim Crow era laws, thought Nazis were Jesus free, though Jesus and the Bible was their main defense for all they did... He basically made the Conservative Christians look like they ignore the main teaching of Jesus which was to Love one another. Jesus hung out with the sinners and tax collectors and told them of the love of God, not how God is going to condemn them all to Hell. If Jesus was alive in modern day America, he'd be hanging out in San Francisco talking about the love of God, not fighting to deny them equal rights under the law.

And of course Shiny... The controversy with Chick-fil-a isn't so much what some stupid old rich man says, he also made it clear that was the position of the company as a whole. And that anti-gay money was going to organizations that actively campaign not only to make being gay illegal in the US, in other countries where it is gay and punishable by death, they campaign to keep the death penalty attached to it. That said, at least Siny agrees that A&E had no choice... though, based on past posts, I don't think Shiny sees that the whole modern day Conservative movement is driven by the greed factor, that modern Christian Conservatives are willing to toss out every government program to help the needy and the poor so that they can give tax breaks to the rich...

It's all a free publicity stunt. I'm sure A&E will cave in, or Phil will issue some semi apology, "like I still believe it is a sin, but I'm sorry I likened them to murderers and I'm sorry about offending any blacks, I was just noting my personal observations growing up" type thing and he'll continue to rake in millions, going against the very Jesus he claims to follow... and he'll be right back on.

You -do- know that Baldwin got fired too...right? Let's talk about two faced and hypocritical. The difference is that liberals didn't get all up in arms and try to say the network was in the wrong, or that his firing was a conservative plot.

In fact, neither instance was about beliefs. They were both about a company's right to remove representatives from the products they sell, if they believe those representatives would damage their brand. True with both men (and Martin Bashir). Case closed.

But I really do enjoy the Christian need to feel persecuted. It's cheap entertainment, so thanks for the chuckles @highdileeho

Right again, Mr. Chomsky. Then after the rubes have been softened up, enter the smarmy, two-faced Barack Obama, whose plan to save us from global warming is a such a hack job that it's hardly worth the industry shills (like the ones taking up so much space commenting here) to bother with. Like his gift to the insurance industry -- America's sad excuse for "universal health care" -- Obama's environmental "program" is just another load of pretty B.S. thrown up to cover his real agenda, which in this case is to hand over the keys to America's energy industry to people like Dick Cheney, whose hands might as well be guiding the marionette strings coming out of his back. The "president" really doesn't have a choice about pushing natural gas; he sold out to the oiligarchs while still a do-nothing Senator. But that doesn't mean the few of us who are awake and aware shouldn't scream at him about it and do everything in our dwindling power to make him and the rest of the gasoholic cabal wish they'd never been born. Indeed, part of what the moribund U.S. environmental movement needs -- and in particular the fractured and chronically outclassed anti-fracking movement -- is a significantly angrier soundtrack, not bogged down with insipid musical baggage from old, hippy-dippy environmental campaigns. Pete Seeger and his sweet, smiling ilk don't cut through all the background noise any more. With that in mind, here's a new American anthem guaranteed to stir the soul of any red-blooded environmentalist, as well as lure a few emotionally sensitive people over from the dark side. Feel free to use it. Scream your anger! soundcloud.com/biff-thuringer/to-america