WWTBAM Bored

I'm SURRRRRE there are several a 'good' explanations for Susan Rice's 'misstatements'. And why the MSM refuses to talk about it. Let's see how creative they are.
BJ?, SSS?

flockofseagulls104 wrote:I'm SURRRRRE there are several a 'good' explanations for Susan Rice's 'misstatements'. And why the MSM refuses to talk about it. Let's see how creative they are.
BJ?, SSS?

Considering that there were no misstatements, then there's nothing to explain or to talk about. This is yet another feeble attempt by right wingers like Mr. Pizzagate, Hannity, and Flock to find some sort of false equivalency between all of the Trump team lies, misstatements, and evasions and any statement by someone affiliated with Obama that they can twist and fabricate into something sinister.

silverscreenselect wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote:I'm SURRRRRE there are several a 'good' explanations for Susan Rice's 'misstatements'. And why the MSM refuses to talk about it. Let's see how creative they are.
BJ?, SSS?

Considering that there were no misstatements, then there's nothing to explain or to talk about. This is yet another feeble attempt by right wingers like Mr. Pizzagate, Hannity, and Flock to find some sort of false equivalency between all of the Trump team lies, misstatements, and evasions and any statement by someone affiliated with Obama that they can twist and fabricate into something sinister.

Of course not. Your side is pure and innocent. It is only the other side that is politically motivated.

flockofseagulls104 wrote:

silverscreenselect wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote:I'm SURRRRRE there are several a 'good' explanations for Susan Rice's 'misstatements'. And why the MSM refuses to talk about it. Let's see how creative they are.
BJ?, SSS?

Considering that there were no misstatements, then there's nothing to explain or to talk about. This is yet another feeble attempt by right wingers like Mr. Pizzagate, Hannity, and Flock to find some sort of false equivalency between all of the Trump team lies, misstatements, and evasions and any statement by someone affiliated with Obama that they can twist and fabricate into something sinister.

Of course not. Your side is pure and innocent. It is only the other side that is politically motivated.

The person asking for the unmasking doesn't know who the unmasked person is before the fact. That's the purpose for unmasking. So, you're suggesting that Susan Rice is going around asking to reveal names in the hopes that it's someone in the Trump campaign and that what's revealed is juicy.

My feeling is that this information is going to come out, in bits and pieces, eventually, and that when it finally does, it will be something that the Trump people wish that their boss had kept his mouth shut about the whole affair initially.

silverscreenselect wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote:

silverscreenselect wrote:
Considering that there were no misstatements, then there's nothing to explain or to talk about. This is yet another feeble attempt by right wingers like Mr. Pizzagate, Hannity, and Flock to find some sort of false equivalency between all of the Trump team lies, misstatements, and evasions and any statement by someone affiliated with Obama that they can twist and fabricate into something sinister.

Of course not. Your side is pure and innocent. It is only the other side that is politically motivated.

The person asking for the unmasking doesn't know who the unmasked person is before the fact. That's the purpose for unmasking. So, you're suggesting that Susan Rice is going around asking to reveal names in the hopes that it's someone in the Trump campaign and that what's revealed is juicy.

My feeling is that this information is going to come out, in bits and pieces, eventually, and that when it finally does, it will be something that the Trump people wish that their boss had kept his mouth shut about the whole affair initially.

Is that what they're pushing on ms-lsd? Not very creative.

flockofseagulls104 wrote: Is that what they're pushing on ms-lsd? Not very creative.

The truth doesn't have to be creative. That's Trump's department.

silverscreenselect wrote:So, you're suggesting that Susan Rice is going around asking to reveal names in the hopes that it's someone in the Trump campaign and that what's revealed is juicy.

You nailed it.

BackInTex wrote:

silverscreenselect wrote:So, you're suggesting that Susan Rice is going around asking to reveal names in the hopes that it's someone in the Trump campaign and that what's revealed is juicy.

You nailed it.

Of course, the simpler solution is that whatever the Russkis were talking about raised red flags so that anyone in the intelligence community would want to see if there's a pattern involved. And keep in mind that Rice didn't reveal any of this information. The only person who's been revealing anything has been Devin Nunes.

silverscreenselect wrote:

BackInTex wrote:

silverscreenselect wrote:So, you're suggesting that Susan Rice is going around asking to reveal names in the hopes that it's someone in the Trump campaign and that what's revealed is juicy.

You nailed it.

Of course, the simpler solution is that whatever the Russkis were talking about raised red flags so that anyone in the intelligence community would want to see if there's a pattern involved. And keep in mind that Rice didn't reveal any of this information. The only person who's been revealing anything has been Devin Nunes.

Keep in mind that she completely denied knowing anything about it two weeks ago. Now she is deflecting that she didn't leak anything, which no one has accused her of. Obama's last minute decree that all this information was disseminated everywhere took care of the leaks. But it's a nice try.

No one has explained what the Trump team was supposedly doing that was so nefarious with the Russians. Is it that they were arranging for Putin to give the Podesta emails to Wikileaks for some kind of favors? Is that what this is all about?

flockofseagulls104 wrote:No one has explained what the Trump team was supposedly doing that was so nefarious with the Russians. Is it that they were arranging for Putin to give the Podesta emails to Wikileaks for some kind of favors? Is that what this is all about?

There's a reason why they use the words "ongoing investigation."

Wow. It's like watching Clinton Watts' testimony play out in real time.

flockofseagulls104 wrote:
Keep in mind that she completely denied knowing anything about it two weeks ago. Now she is deflecting that she didn't leak anything, which no one has accused her of. Obama's last minute decree that all this information was disseminated everywhere took care of the leaks. But it's a nice try.

No, she denied knowing exactly what reports Nunes was referring to and with good reason since he was flying off the handle with generalities. What's come out since then, and has been confirmed by several national security experts as a routine practice is that she did unmask information from time to time in order to be able to assess it properly, but that she didn't do anything for political purposes, and also that she didn't request specific reports (which would seem likely if she was looking for embarrassing information) but instead reacted from time to time in regard to information that was brought to her.

And if, by some chance the Russians who were recorded did indicate they had vital information such as in regard to possible payoffs to or from various American sources, or about funneling confidential information to Wikileaks, wouldn't that be something our intelligence community would want more information about, regardless who was President?

But, but, it's much more important to figure out who might be disclosing information than to figure out whether Americans, particularly those associated with the campaign, actually cooperated with Russian efforts to influence our election. That's why Republicans have been so diligent about figuring out who leaked Democratic e-mails to Wikileaks. They have been, haven't they? --Bob

flockofseagulls104 wrote:No one has explained what the Trump team was supposedly doing that was so nefarious with the Russians. Is it that they were arranging for Putin to give the Podesta emails to Wikileaks for some kind of favors? Is that what this is all about?

You realize that the Trump team is admitting that they did have many phone calls with the Russians that came to the attention of the NSA, right? This is like a drug dealer complaining that a cop had no right to stop him when drugs were found in his car.

Bob Juch wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote:No one has explained what the Trump team was supposedly doing that was so nefarious with the Russians. Is it that they were arranging for Putin to give the Podesta emails to Wikileaks for some kind of favors? Is that what this is all about?

You realize that the Trump team is admitting that they did have many phone calls with the Russians that came to the attention of the NSA, right? This is like a drug dealer complaining that a cop had no right to stop him when drugs were found in his car.

Yes, and as Sean Spicer noted, Trump had Russian Dressing on his salad last night. They also had phone calls with other countries. A very biased analogy. Where's the crime here? When someone shows me the 'Drugs in the car', then I will reconsider, but this seems to be purely another in a long series of political hit jobs.
As Bob the Evader perfectly illustrates, democrats and the media are in the position of the boy who cried wolf. They are pointing at everything they see and calling it a wolf. I just don't believe them anymore.

flockofseagulls104 wrote:

Bob Juch wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote:No one has explained what the Trump team was supposedly doing that was so nefarious with the Russians. Is it that they were arranging for Putin to give the Podesta emails to Wikileaks for some kind of favors? Is that what this is all about?

You realize that the Trump team is admitting that they did have many phone calls with the Russians that came to the attention of the NSA, right? This is like a drug dealer complaining that a cop had no right to stop him when drugs were found in his car.

Yes, and as Sean Spicer noted, Trump had Russian Dressing on his salad last night. They also had phone calls with other countries. A very biased analogy. Where's the crime here? When someone shows me the 'Drugs in the car', then I will reconsider, but this seems to be purely another in a long series of political hit jobs.
As Bob the Evader perfectly illustrates, democrats and the media are in the position of the boy who cried wolf. They are pointing at everything they see and calling it a wolf. I just don't believe them anymore.

Perhaps you'll believe the results of the ongoing investigation of the Senate Intelligence Committee. --Bob

By the way, flock, you never did answer my question.

How do private health insurance companies add value to the system? Why is the evidence provided both by Medicare (with its huge efficiencies) and by other countries that have adopted a single-payer system all wrong, and our own experience prior to the Affordable Care Act (the most expensive health care in the world buys us only mediocre results) not applicable? --Bob the Persistent

flockofseagulls104 wrote:

Bob Juch wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote:No one has explained what the Trump team was supposedly doing that was so nefarious with the Russians. Is it that they were arranging for Putin to give the Podesta emails to Wikileaks for some kind of favors? Is that what this is all about?

You realize that the Trump team is admitting that they did have many phone calls with the Russians that came to the attention of the NSA, right? This is like a drug dealer complaining that a cop had no right to stop him when drugs were found in his car.

Yes, and as Sean Spicer noted, Trump had Russian Dressing on his salad last night. They also had phone calls with other countries. A very biased analogy. Where's the crime here? When someone shows me the 'Drugs in the car', then I will reconsider, but this seems to be purely another in a long series of political hit jobs.
As Bob the Evader perfectly illustrates, democrats and the media are in the position of the boy who cried wolf. They are pointing at everything they see and calling it a wolf. I just don't believe them anymore.

The attack on the "cops" in this case makes the Trump team sound guilty as hell.

Bob78164 wrote:
Yes, and as Sean Spicer noted, Trump had Russian Dressing on his salad last night. They also had phone calls with other countries. A very biased analogy. Where's the crime here? When someone shows me the 'Drugs in the car', then I will reconsider, but this seems to be purely another in a long series of political hit jobs.

I'm glad that you and Sean Spicer have sufficient security clearance to review these recordings and determine there's nothing on them.

Let me see if I get this straight.

Devin Nunes tells the public that our intelligence people have picked up recordings of Trump's people talking with foreign suspects. No one has revealed yet what the content of those conversations is. So, the only one shooting his mouth off here is Nunes (after some intelligence sources that are favorable to Trump show him and no one else in Congress this information); without him, none of this would have been made public. But somehow, that's Obama's and Valerie Rice's fault.

That Obama is smarter than I thought. He must have known that people would reveal this information to Devin Nunes and that Nunes would shoot his mouth off and thus cause Trump additional embarrassment. That's some eleven dimensional chess game he's playing there and Nunes fell right into his trap.

Bob78164 wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote:

Bob Juch wrote: You realize that the Trump team is admitting that they did have many phone calls with the Russians that came to the attention of the NSA, right? This is like a drug dealer complaining that a cop had no right to stop him when drugs were found in his car.

Yes, and as Sean Spicer noted, Trump had Russian Dressing on his salad last night. They also had phone calls with other countries. A very biased analogy. Where's the crime here? When someone shows me the 'Drugs in the car', then I will reconsider, but this seems to be purely another in a long series of political hit jobs.
As Bob the Evader perfectly illustrates, democrats and the media are in the position of the boy who cried wolf. They are pointing at everything they see and calling it a wolf. I just don't believe them anymore.

Perhaps you'll believe the results of the ongoing investigation of the Senate Intelligence Committee. --Bob

Perhaps I will. But I will wait until they tell us what they find out before I come to any conclusions, counselor. It's a simple concept which I thought people in your profession were supposed to subscribe to.

Bob78164 wrote:By the way, flock, you never did answer my question.

How do private health insurance companies add value to the system? Why is the evidence provided both by Medicare (with its huge efficiencies) and by other countries that have adopted a single-payer system all wrong, and our own experience prior to the Affordable Care Act (the most expensive health care in the world buys us only mediocre results) not applicable? --Bob the Persistent

I answered your question, counselor. I'm sorry you choose to ignore it. Now suppose you answer mine.

silverscreenselect wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:
Yes, and as Sean Spicer noted, Trump had Russian Dressing on his salad last night. They also had phone calls with other countries. A very biased analogy. Where's the crime here? When someone shows me the 'Drugs in the car', then I will reconsider, but this seems to be purely another in a long series of political hit jobs.

I'm glad that you and Sean Spicer have sufficient security clearance to review these recordings and determine there's nothing on them.

Let me see if I get this straight.

Devin Nunes tells the public that our intelligence people have picked up recordings of Trump's people talking with foreign suspects. No one has revealed yet what the content of those conversations is. So, the only one shooting his mouth off here is Nunes (after some intelligence sources that are favorable to Trump show him and no one else in Congress this information); without him, none of this would have been made public. But somehow, that's Obama's and Valerie Rice's fault.

That Obama is smarter than I thought. He must have known that people would reveal this information to Devin Nunes and that Nunes would shoot his mouth off and thus cause Trump additional embarrassment. That's some eleven dimensional chess game he's playing there and Nunes fell right into his trap.

This whole response makes no logical sense. No, you didn't get anything straight. Not even Susan Rice's name. You need to go back and replay Rachel Maddow or whatever else on on msnbc and get your talking points straight.

silverscreenselect wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:
Yes, and as Sean Spicer noted, Trump had Russian Dressing on his salad last night. They also had phone calls with other countries. A very biased analogy. Where's the crime here? When someone shows me the 'Drugs in the car', then I will reconsider, but this seems to be purely another in a long series of political hit jobs.

I'm glad that you and Sean Spicer have sufficient security clearance to review these recordings and determine there's nothing on them.

Let me see if I get this straight.

Devin Nunes tells the public that our intelligence people have picked up recordings of Trump's people talking with foreign suspects. No one has revealed yet what the content of those conversations is. So, the only one shooting his mouth off here is Nunes (after some intelligence sources that are favorable to Trump show him and no one else in Congress this information); without him, none of this would have been made public. But somehow, that's Obama's and Valerie Rice's fault.

That Obama is smarter than I thought. He must have known that people would reveal this information to Devin Nunes and that Nunes would shoot his mouth off and thus cause Trump additional embarrassment. That's some eleven dimensional chess game he's playing there and Nunes fell right into his trap.

Nunes just resigned from heading the Russian investigation.

Bob Juch wrote:

silverscreenselect wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote:
Yes, and as Sean Spicer noted, Trump had Russian Dressing on his salad last night. They also had phone calls with other countries. A very biased analogy. Where's the crime here? When someone shows me the 'Drugs in the car', then I will reconsider, but this seems to be purely another in a long series of political hit jobs.

I'm glad that you and Sean Spicer have sufficient security clearance to review these recordings and determine there's nothing on them.

Let me see if I get this straight.

Devin Nunes tells the public that our intelligence people have picked up recordings of Trump's people talking with foreign suspects. No one has revealed yet what the content of those conversations is. So, the only one shooting his mouth off here is Nunes (after some intelligence sources that are favorable to Trump show him and no one else in Congress this information); without him, none of this would have been made public. But somehow, that's Obama's and Valerie Rice's fault.

That Obama is smarter than I thought. He must have known that people would reveal this information to Devin Nunes and that Nunes would shoot his mouth off and thus cause Trump additional embarrassment. That's some eleven dimensional chess game he's playing there and Nunes fell right into his trap.

Nunes just resigned from heading the Russian investigation.

Temporarily stepped aside is what I read. Because he himself is under investigation by the House Ethics Committee.

And someone screwed up the quote tags. I didn't make the Russian dressing remark. --Bob