I am curious if you guys like DonaldTrump, or do you hate him?
Your defence of the 'journalists' going out of their way to catch one nation out. 'Journalists' from a state run media organisation, to make things even worse, pretty grubby desperate stuff.
As I said, you were only reiterating the bullshit lines from above ie. that one nation getting caught out was only a minor by product of a larger investigation into the NRA. I don't believe that for a minute. They went after them like a rabid dog!
Total set up, totally! a dangerous precedent for 'journalism' going forward, as some on the 'insiders' panel suggested.
Ha ha ha...and what a defence you have!
Is not 'Insiders' also run by a "state run organisation"?
None of AJ's investigative unit are Qatari, none are even Australian. Rodger Muller was roped in, and ON subsequently targeted, because they spoke to the NRA and gave them a chance to articulate their responses to massacres on film. "Offense, offense, offense."
Not sure why that's hard for you to believe.
Don't get too excited, it wasn't an attack on you, just the dodgy defence line coming from above.
Yes abc is state run, but they're not setting people up with entrapment in their investigations, They're reporting what happened - as journalists are supposed to do - not manufacturing stories decieving people, which is what aljazeera did.
As I said originally, a three year investigation involving one nation, no doubt costing 100s of thousands of dollars, it's all a bit much to believe it suddenly sprung from a bigger story about the NRA. I'm not buying it at all.
If the bigger story and investigation comes out I'll change my mind. Until I see a significant story about the NRA from those jounalists....I call bullshit!!!
"Don't get too excited..."
Says the guy dropping triple exclamation marks.
For emphasis, not excitement
It's some big bullshit they're peddling
So what's your take on the One Nation / NRA thingie?
Entrapment? stuff up? fucktards doing what fucktards do?
My money is on option 3 by the way but would love to hear your views on what was said by the honourable ON operatives.
Well, most proponents of free speech say something like. '...let people (dickheads) say whatever they want, eventuality they'll hang themselves', as one nation did...
A basic principle you clearly don't seem to believe in.
Having said that, this 'thingie' was clearly entrapment, and I still think it's super dodgy that aljazeera went after one nation so rabidly. Blowing so much cash and time to catch them out. As West apparently said, ...maybe the end justified the means, that'll depend on one's perspective...
I just can't stand the misinformation being peddled...constantly....if you set them up - own it - don't make up some bullshit story. But they had to make up some bullshit story, because they know what they did is dodgy, super dodgy for a journalist to do.
I know you guys get all uppity and irritated about talking about this shit, but I believe my intentions are good. The left are so delusional about the merits and their ability of controlling the narrative they're self sabotaging. It's a brand new, brave new world out there, and they're about ten years behind in terms of adjusting to it...
Combined with their penchants for political correctness, no platforming, and a heap of other means they're addicted to, even their supporters cannot talk them seriously anymore, and it just seems to be getting worse as they struggle to adjust.
Ha, so entrapments gets them off the hook?
Soooo, entrapment or no entrapment, did those ON fucktards seek foreign donations from the NRA, in a proposed exchange for support to weaken Australian law or not?
No one put the words in their mouth. They’re just pissed they were outed as muppets, and they clearly failed to do any background research on their proposed partners.
I for one am happy for some transparency on what politicians / staffers are happy to put on the table in exchange for favours and cash. There should be a public register and a record of conversation.
Ps: James Ashby is a lightweight journeyman goon - the sooner that shitstain is gone from any form of political influence the better.
I agree etarip, but that transparency has to work both ways.
No it doesn't get them off the hook. I've said nothing to defend one nation. I've only talked about the dodgyness of aljazeera. And that dodgyness stands until I see a two part special (at least) on the NRA.
Ref transparency: Does AJ get money from Australian taxpayer? ON does. That’s the difference.
I’d like to see the NRA special too. Probably pretty bland and generally unsurprising tho. The golden nugget was likely ‘our’ muppets, but that ain’t going to interest many people outside Australia so they ran with it.
Public interest trumps entrapment.
"Let people (dickheads) say whatever they want, eventuality they'll hang themselves."
Making legal analogies about entrapment is a waste of time and a distraction from the issue - which is exactly why One Nation is prosecuting the argument. Anyway, to overlay the legal interpretation of entrapment on the story would require knowledge that wasn't gleaned from the TV show so for people to rush in with that accusation is hasty. What do they know that others don't? Sypkan seems to think he knows more.
Did you get uppity at Donal Macintyre or Matt Taibbi, each who've been commended for their undercover work?
Why the righteousness now? And why do you think Rodger Muller's story is bullshit? ("own it...blah blah blah")
Also, I'd say any journalist that points the finger is simply jealous of AJ's gumption and more so their financial backing - investigative journalism is dying in Aust and the US.
Sure is funny reading the articles about Meuller’s report. You’d think that the investigation had been into obstruction instead of the conveniently forgotten Russian collusion.
Sorry seems to be the hardest word.
Stephen Fry said it best on Twitter this morning.
”The #MuellerReport perfectly crystallises our age. Those who dislike Trump are leafing through looking for only that which incriminates, those who like him search only for what exculpates and exonerates. Each frantically ignoring what they don’t want to see. I’m guilty too”
facts o' bum - as predictable as poo. I knew as I was writimg that that you'd come back with it. But I threw it in anyway, because those two one nation morons sure did hang themselves - as one nation generally tends to do...
I'm not making analogies, and I don't think I know more than anyone else. I was just pointing out that West had made the same point I did months ago when the story first aired - as did insiders the episode directly following the story.
Not having an 'I told you so' moment either, just plessed that some journalists were asking the same question I did after watching it.
Those two guys are a fucking disgrace, they totally showed their true colours. But what stood out to me as I watched it was the dates, I couldn't believe the investigation had gone on so long.
As I said then, it raises questioms why a network like aljazeera would bother spending so much time and money following two aussie hillbilly's doing a road trip across america.
And the 'why' is obvious, with aljazeera being aljazeera and one nation being one nation, but I still think it's a little concerning that a state sponsored network would go to such lengths to smear a two bit aussie political party.
"Sure is funny reading the articles about Meuller’s report. You’d think that the investigation had been into obstruction instead of the conveniently forgotten Russian collusion.
Sorry seems to be the hardest word."
Also as predictable as poo. I think it was the federalist that ran an article well before the report came out saying, watch as the mueller report finds no collusion, that the media will seamlessly turn their focus from collusion onto obstruction. And here we are...
The question is, can you obstruct justice on a crime that someone didn't commit? And the answer for the establishment minions is a resounding Yes!
The whole media apoaratus is broken, a crumbling cesspit of mess beyond repair. And that is my main point on all of these threads. Not to make partisan points as some believe.
There is no objectivity left, anywhere at all. Not even feeble attempts to present faux journalism. it appears all journalists are totally incapable. It was probably always the case, but like many things, the internet has corrupted it beyond repair...
Journalists think they're so fucking smart, well above the average, but their pathetic presentation of 'facts' shows they're either just as dumb as the deplorables, or they're shameless partisan hacks.
A bit from column A and a bit from column B me thinks...
Hubris and contempt, a lethal combination.
"The whole media apoaratus is broken"
I assume you are talking about the mainstream media. Of course there are shades of grey but generally speaking I agree, although the ABC is capable of some excellent and crucial investigative journalism.
"There is no objectivity left, anywhere at all...the internet has corrupted it beyond repair"
Disagree. There's been links to quite a few examples of first rate objective journalism on this site recently and if it wasn't for the internet, these sites would have little hope of finding an audience. The key is to support them and spread the word.
Also, dare I say it, you have to be prepared to read and consider, instead of just looking to be entertained.
Yes andym I may have overplayed that a little bit...but it's the internet...that's how you're supposed to play it (smiley face)
It's a double edge sword, while the internet has corrupted mainstream media beyond belief - both sides! - it has spawned some excellent sites, and I'm thankful that the crew on swellnet often point you into some stuff you would never find otherwise. And that's half the problem, the over supply of information, which means your average joe has little chance of finding the real quality, and hence society is currently in a battle of the trash merchants. I do have hope we will come out the other side of this better off, but all this current talk of banning 'hate speech' and the grossly bias censorship at the likes of facebook and twitter is pissing all over my little spark of hope.
The perception of what's mainstream media (MSM) thing kind of cracks me up, with 90% of regular guadianistas constantly bagging 'MSM', it'd be funny if it wasn't so tragic...and the commenters so delusional!
Whilst I like 'new matlida', a lot actually, one could argue they are quite left wing biased too, but they do endeavour to mix it up a bit, which is great. Some of the others are fairly new to me so I won't comment.
The abc does do some excellent journalism, even with their blatant bias. It was most interesting watching the lead up and follow on from the sarah ferguson interview with steve bannon, many abc faithfuls were most critical of her before even giving him an interview. I don't know how anyone could possibly take this position considerimg his position and influence in the current political situation. I saw it as a jounalistic coup for a little aussie journalist. The old 'no platformers' certainly are a very loud squeaky wheel, and they went even more bunta after it aired because he didn't come across ogre-ish enough for their liking. What they think they achieve by this carry on puzzles me to no end.
So, syppo and blowie, you’re saying that obstruction of an investigation into collusion (which you say you have nothing to answer for) is NOT an issue?
This is the point. The President has overstepped his authority in attempting to shut down a lawful investigation.
Trump played his cards pretty badly. If he had nothing to fear, why did he react so badly? This is an entirely self-inflicted wound.
Hubris and Contempt perchance?
ABC bias - what, in favor of the US hegemon? ;)
I thought that, time and time again, the ABC have been shown to be very neutral, very center.
Are you talking about Steve Bannon? Yeah there’re a lot of Blindboys out there who are all knee jerk emotional reactions and I suppose the ABC is going to be their natural home.
I agree when you say that taking away platforms is bullshit, whether it’s Bannon or Peterson or whoever.
Take Pauline Hanson (I mean please, somebody take her) - IMO it’s better to pick the arguments apart and hang them out to dry - it lasts longer and sinks in more instead of just doing the old stick the fingers in the ears.
Ive discovered the best way to get your media ABC/SBS & Sky News/Australian
Get bias left view, get bias right view and then decide.
It's often not what they say that makes them all bias, it's also what they don't say.
Now Mueller's report has dropped,
We can see what Trump has copped.
So he's not guilty of collusion,
But there's perversion in profusion.
So let me now reiterate,
Mueller did not exonerate.
The issues around who he hired,
Are only matched by those he fired.
This document tells the sad tale,
Of how his best friends went to jail.
All in all quite an epic fail.
The Democrats have had great luck,
Donald's been such a foolish fuck.
He has left a trail a mile wide,
And he has nowhere left to hide.
The House will probably not impeach,
For now he is beyond their reach,
But soon enough it will be time,
For him to answer for his crime.
Not guilty of collusion.
“In sum, the investigation established multiple links between Trump Campaign officials and individuals tied to the Russian government. Those links included Russian offers of assistance to the Campaign. In some instances, the Campaign was receptive to the offer, while in other instances the Campaign officials shied away. ”
"“The] President slumped back in his chair and said, “Oh my God. This is terrible. This is the end of my Presidency. I’m fucked.” The President became angry and lambasted the Attorney General for his decision to recuse from the investigation, stating, “How could you let this happen, Jeff?” "
The Mueller Report
Blowin read the report its not pretty in any aspect
AKA....Not guilty of collusion.
You read a 440 page report into the Trump/ Russia dribble ?
Wow. I’m amazed. Not impressed, just amazed.
Anyway .......Trump didn’t collude. Three words summarising 440 mind numbingly boring pages.
You’re quite a funny troll at times Blowin.
That report is not an exoneration of Trump.
And it was never going to find him “guilty” of anything - it might have issued indictments for a separate trial or recommended further investigation.
I guess you’re stirring up your old mate Blindy but it’s wilful ignorance to pretend that there is no scope for criticism of Trump and his crew out of Mueller’s report.
Yeah , im stirring him up.
But there’s nothing on Trump. If there was a shred of anything there is half a billion jackels out there baying for his blood whose dream it is to see him gone in a haze of disgrace. They’ve barked up the wrong tree.
I’m sure he’s guilty of something, but it isn’t being Russia’s pet.
And the whole obstruction thing .......pffffttttt. Who gives a fuck . I reckon he showed more restraint than I would’ve.
The fact that some of his cronies were guilty of other extraneous bullshit is to be expected. You’d get the same result going through the backgrounds of 90 percent of Canberra.
AAAAh the report didn't clear him of obstruction.........read the report
Note chargers were not laid as he is a sitting president..........read the report
Sorry yes, steve bannon
Hubris and Contempt perchance?
Awww yeh! And again, a lethal combination
NYT, still can't say sorry, but conceding an inch...well a millimetre...maybe...
"For nearly four years, members of America’s ruling class, especially those in the media, the academy and government, have operated on one central, unquestioned assumption: orange man bad. This stifling orthodoxy led to a blind, counterfactual faith in the theory that Mr. Trump had somehow colluded with “the Russians” (never well defined) to win the election. Again, the specific charges were always amorphous — plastic enough to change as needed. That’s hardly surprising: That’s the way conspiracy theories always work. The Russian collusion hoax was in fact nothing more than a massively multiplayer coping mechanism for people who couldn’t accept the results of the 2016 election.
But why is it not enough to simply acknowledge that you dislike Mr. Trump and disagree with his policies? What psychological purpose does adding the fiction of a conspiracy serve?
The French philosopher and literary critic René Girard held that such scapegoating and ritual sacrifice is an essential part of group identity and solidarity. That seems to apply here. Mr. Trump ran against American elites and their insular culture. Their response was to load onto him all of the sins they see in American society and attempt to sacrifice him to appease their gods.
Mr. Girard asked a question that is pertinent today: “Why is our own participation in scapegoating so difficult to perceive and the participation of others so easy? To us, our fears and prejudices never appear as such because they determine our vision of people we despise, we fear, and against whom we discriminate.”
But the ritual sacrifice of Donald Trump didn’t work — at least not in the sense of removing him from office. It certainly did have the effect of catalyzing and uniting his opponents. Still, one of the many ironies here is that the Trump-hating media has handed him an incredibly powerful weapon for the 2020 campaign, one that may ensure his re-election.
"THE TWO-PRONGED CONSPIRACY THEORY that has dominated U.S. political discourse for almost three years – that (1) Trump, his family and his campaign conspired or coordinated with Russia to interfere in the 2016 election, and (2) Trump is beholden to Russian President Vladimir Putin —was not merely rejected today by the final report of Special Counsel Robert Mueller. It was obliterated: in an undeniable and definitive manner.
The key fact is this: Mueller – contrary to weeks of false media claims – did not merely issue a narrow, cramped, legalistic finding that there was insufficient evidence to indict Trump associates for conspiring with Russia and then proving their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. That would have been devastating enough to those who spent the last two years or more misleading people to believe that conspiracy convictions of Trump’s closest aides and family members were inevitable. But his mandate was much broader than that: to state what did or did not happen.
That’s precisely what he did: Mueller, in addition to concluding that evidence was insufficient to charge any American with crimes relating to Russian election interference, also stated emphatically in numerous instances that there was no evidence – not merely that there was insufficient evidence to obtain a criminal conviction – that key prongs of this three-year-old conspiracy theory actually happened. As Mueller himself put it: “in some instances, the report points out the absence of evidence or conflicts in the evidence about a particular fact or event.”"
Simply no evidence, or in fact conflictting evidence!
As to the last glimmering hope of obstruction?
"...As Mueller himself concluded, a reasonable debate can be conducted on whether Trump tried to obstruct his investigation with corrupt intent. But even on the case of obstruction, the central point looms large over all of it: there was no underlying crime established for Trump to cover-up.
All criminal investigations require a determination of a person’s intent, what they are thinking and what their goal is. When the question is whether a President sought to kill an Executive Branch investigation – as Trump clearly wanted to do here – the determinative issue is whether he did so because he genuinely believed the investigation to be an unfair persecution and scam, or whether he did it to corruptly conceal evidence of criminality.
That Mueller could not and did not establish any underlying crimes strongly suggests that Trump acted with the former rather than the latter motive, making it virtually impossible to find that he criminally obstructed the investigation."
Contempt is a two way street, and ocassionally justified...
"...But certain facts will never go away no matter how much denial they embrace. The sweeping Mueller investigation ended with zero indictments of zero Americans for conspiring with Russia over the 2016 election. Both Donald Trump, Jr. and Jared Kushner – the key participants in the Trump Tower meeting – testified for hours and hours yet were never charged for perjury, lying or obstruction, even though Mueller proved how easily he would indict anyone who lied as part of the investigation. And this massive investigation simply did not establish any of the conspiracy theories that huge parts of the Democratic Party, the intelligence community and the U.S. media spent years encouraging the public to believe.
Those responsible for this can refuse to acknowledge wrongdoing. They can even claim vindication if they want and will likely be cheered for doing so.
But the contempt in which the media and political class is held by so much of the U.S. population – undoubtedly a leading factor that led to Trump’s election in the first place – will only continue to grow as a result, and deservedly so. People know they were scammed, that their politics was drowned for years by a hoax. And none of that will go away no matter how insulated media and political elites in Washington, northern Virginia, Brooklyn, and large West Coast cities keep themselves, and thus hear only in-group affirmation while blocking out all of that well-earned scorn."
ah the interpretation of it all...."The report makes several things clear: that the Russian government tried to help Trump win, that the Trump campaign was eager to benefit from hackings targeting Democrats, that Trump’s campaign advisers had a host of ties to Russia, and that President Trump tried again and again to try to impede the Russia investigation."
Just to clarify. As the Mueller Report makes clear, there were numerous contacts between the Trump campaign and various figures in the Russian government. The campaign was also directly assisted by the actions of a Russian government organisation, the Internet Research Agency. Collusion occurred, unfortunately Mueller failed to find sufficient evidence of criminality to bring charges. Not guilty however, does not mean innocent and Trump is very far from being in the clear on this issue. The evidence for obstruction of justice is strong enough to charge and probably convict him if he was not President. His future is still very uncertain. The Democrats are unlikely to impeach him as they do not have the numbers in the Senate but, should he lose the 2020 election, he could easily face charges of obstruction of justice, based on Mueller's evidence. Charges of collusion could also still be brought if further evidence becomes available. Additionally, he is also the subject of a number of other investigations involving serious charges. All this explains why he has become nothing more than a front man for traditional Republican policies and why his aides consistently ignore his orders. He has no real power now. His only interest is self-interest and that dictates he cosy up tight with the Republican hierarchy so they continue to protect him at the end of his Presidency. Anyone with a reasonable knowledge of US political history can see the usual themes playing out. Weak leaders are easily bent to support the interests of wealth and property which, since the Declaration of Independence, have always taken precedence over human rights.
Blindboy says -“ Collusion occurred, unfortunately Mueller failed to find sufficient evidence of criminality to bring charges.”
Which brings us to - “A delusion is firm and fixed belief based on inadequate grounds not amenable to rational argument or evidence to contrary,”
George “ Blindboy “ Constanza
So I won't be getting my $100 bucks anytime soon then?
Sheeeesh I thought I'd been more than patient, or blindboy had forgotten, or something....
It looks like it's something....
Trump is Trump and frankly America deserves him. If people think Trump is the answer they are clearly asking the wrong question. What I hate about Trump and all American presidents for that matter is Australia is stuck in an alliance with the US. All I want is the country of my birth to have an independent foreign policy. Why should we get suckered into every conflict the US wants to inflict on the world? That’s where tiny New Zealand, the country we like to make fun of, plays well above its weight, it has an independent foreign policy free of American trickery. God bless the Kiwis.
Trump is the answer to the corruption of process bernie talks of.
Until you guys are willing to address that we'll get nowhere, and trump will get another 4 years...
I found this article particulary relevant, especially after stunet's little spiel to indod about becoming conservative as one ages. A spiel that I agree with, and check myself against constantly
"...And what has happened to that flower power, don’t trust the government consensus of the Peter Max tie-dyed days?
Some of it is still singing Simon and Garfunkel’s “America” at Bernie’s rallies, but some has matured in unexpected ways. If you really care about individual rights and liberties, and if you have no hatred or distrust for anyone else, then you just want the government to stay as small and far away from you as possible. You are, for want of a better word, a conservative.
Attorney General Barr — in his tortoise shell glasses, preppy suit and close-cropped hair — was, in truth, letting his Freak Flag Fly. He was protecting the individual against the State. Meanwhile, those who feign shock that anyone could care about government interference in elections appear to be perversely channeling the ghost of J. Edgar himself, just as two-and-a-half years of unfounded Russian collusion theories channeled the ghost of Wisconsin Joe McCarthy.
The Vietnam War generation — the Woodstock generation — is not the generation of 29 SWAT team members, with guns pointing, plus assault vehicles, plus amphibious vehicles, plus a CNN camera crew mysteriously on site, as they arrest a non-violent, old, unarmed man in his Florida retirement home. The Vietnam War generation — the Woodstock generation — is not the generation of gag orders, or solitary confinement before guilt is found, or of threats to family members to extract guilty pleas. The Vietnam War generation — the Woodstock generation — is not the generation of one political party secretly paying British spooks to plumb Russian sources for scandal dirt, or of FISA orders based on such dirt, or of anonymously sourced claims of “treason” being blasted again and again against apparently innocent people, hour after hour, for months on end.
The Vietnam War generation — the Woodstock generation — having seen J. Edgar Hoover and an out of control CIA, would have concerns over a J. Edgar Comey, a J. Edgar McCabe, a J. Edgar Brennan, a J. Edgar Strozk, if they carelessly or with bias began improper surveillance on election campaign teams of ANY party or cause.
Why does Attorney General Barr feel the need to determine if the government undertook improper political surveillance? Why indeed."
And, what has happened to them indeed?
They've become the dogs that they once abhored that's what...
Protecting the corrupt establishment, and willing to do 'whatever it takes' to maintain power.
Funny, I thought 'whatever it takes' was the catchcry of the conservative...
My eyes glaze over every time I read posts like that, not sure where you people get your inspiration from but all change, including political, is incremental. The swamp that needs draining is 40 years of neo-liberalism, do you honestly expect a messiah to appear on the horizon to fix all this corruption? If you do you’re going to be waiting longer than Jebus’ reawakening. Capitalism as practiced in the west has failed not because it’s fundamentally a bad idea but because of greed turbocharged by deregulation and tax avoidance. Exactly the sort it tripe Morrison is still trying to sell to us at this election. The reality of that swamp Trump promised to drain is that 1% of Americans own 90% of its wealth, thinking about that how is Donald the answer when he is a big part of the problem? It would be laughable if it weren’t so tragic.
Those who cannot think, cut and paste!
Capitalism has failed?
Over 2 years on, 50 pages in.
Trump still president, USA economy doing better than ever.
Haters still hating, saying the same things.
Wonder were we will be at page 100?
Got to say, i didnt think we would be where we are, thought it would have been a train wreck by now.
When do we all admit we were wrong?
Three Time Losers
One of the more interesting aspects of the release of the Mueller Report is the way it has clarified the right wing strategy around Trump. Trump is an incompetent fool, but he is THEIR incompetent fool and, since the first days of his Presidency, they have worked to increase their control over him. This includes both the power brokers of the Republican Party and their allies in traditional and social media. They saw early that he was a threat to stable governance and so to their power and wealth. But they also saw the opportunity to control him and covertly further their agenda of concentrating wealth and under-mining human rights by attacking health care, education and social welfare.
The strategy they chose was the tried and true one used to dispute both the evidence that smoking causes cancer and that climate change was being caused by our greenhouse gas emissions. The first ingredient in this strategy is distraction. For smoking, advertising filled this role. By creating glamorous images they distracted people from the toxic effects of the product. In the case of climate change it was the economy. They created the impression that switching to renewables would damage the economy when the opposite was true. In the case of Trump, and the Republicans generally, it is the creation of the "elite" as a target of hate; all those educated wealthy people looking down their noses with disdain at us poor working class drones! This process was well under way before Trump. In fact his election represents a miscalculation of the power of the illusion they created. It was not supposed to put a populist in the White House, only to keep a disadvantaged section of the population voting against their own best interests.
The second element of the strategy is to create the impression that both sides of an argument have equal weight. In the case of both smoking and climate change they created the impression that, long after the scientific evidence was conclusive, there was still substantial doubt. By setting up phoney scientific "Institutes", funding anyone with a science degree who was prepared to lie for them and pushing their message through their usual media allies, they succeeded in delaying effective responses. This was easy in the case of smoking but much harder and more expensive in the case of climate change.
It needs to be said here that these shameful deceptions have had catastrophic consequences in the real world. My father, like so many of his generation, died prematurely from smoking related disease. It is impossible to calculate how many lives might have been saved without their lies but globally it would run to the millions and is still increasing as they use their influence to block reforms to reduce smoking in developing nations.
The consequences of their behaviour over climate change will play out over hundreds of years, if not millennia. It is impossible to guess how many lives will be lost, how many people impoverished, how many ecosystems utterly destroyed or exactly how much biodiversity we will lose, but even if we respond effectively now, which is still very far from certain, the natural world our grand-children and great grand-children will live in will be radically different to the one we have grown up in.
In Trump's case, the obvious fact that he is a bumbling, lazy incompetent has had to compete with the image generated by right wing media. They talked up the economy, knowing that the credit was actually Obama's, while ignoring the poverty, drug addiction and slave labour level of the minimum wage. They promoted Trump's deal with North Korea as a breakthrough when he had given Kim a huge boost and received less than nothing in return. They lauded his courage in battling illegal migration when all he had done was to create chaos and misery along the border with Mexico. They talked up the wall, knowing it would never be built. On the balance of evidence, there is no argument. Trump has been an appalling President. He has permanently damaged the institutions of good governance and consistently appealed to the worst in human nature. The difference between the manufactured illusion of competency and the fact of pathetic failure could not be clearer. To fall for such obvious trickery once is careless. To fall for it twice is shameful. For so many to fall for it three times suggests a monumental cultural failure.
you guys crack me up!
If someone writes from the heart its 'unfounded opinion'. Someone quotes someome else its 'those that can't think cut and paste'. Or 'that"s a conservative website' blah blah fucking blah...
Thr dude's a bernie bros, and he wrote exactly what I've been thinking for myself for the last 3 years. There's even posts on here from me saying exactly the same in fewer words.
Fuckimg hilarious! The bernie bros must have cut way too close to the bone because you guys have got nothing...again...
Youse are the neo liberal stooges maintaining the status quo!
Ocassionally dropping the term to distance yourselves from the mess.
Yes politics is incremental, until something revolutionary happens, and you little piss weak faux left revolutionaries are all dark and pissed off because you missed your once in a lifetime revolution, because it went ahead without your endorsement.
At least the cut and paste made sense.
Aren't you sick of losing yet? Because I sure am sick of that other loser winning
Where's my $100 bucks?