Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Thursday, July 25, 2019

Senate Republicans blocked two election security bills and a cybersecurity measure on Wednesday in the wake of former special counsel Robert Mueller warning about meddling attempts during his public testimony before congressional lawmakers.

Advertisement

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

I would have been shocked the GOP had allowed a vote on anything that would limit Russia's interference in our elections.

Every American should be outraged over this, but many will be happy just to poke libruls in the eye.

#1 | Posted by Nixon at 2019-07-25 12:07 PM | Reply

Gasp!

...you mean they want help?

Great Scott!!!

#2 | Posted by bocaink at 2019-07-25 12:08 PM | Reply

Those Republicans should go back where they came from because no American would block security for our own elections. Traitors! Move to Russia you pieces of crap!

#3 | Posted by danni at 2019-07-25 12:10 PM | Reply

Black lives matter
ANTIFA
All people with a sexual identity interest
A large portion of the female population
All the groups who speak for the latino population(s)
the un / under employed
the sick or their representatives who can't afford health care

these groups need to unite ASAP...MODUS VIVENDI or perish

#4 | Posted by 1947steamer at 2019-07-25 12:17 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

It was the Senator from Mississippi that blocked both of these bills and she did so without any explanation.

How can one individual out of a hundred in the Senate block a bill that is meant to help secure our democratic process WITHOUT A GOD DAMN EXPLANATION AS TO WHY?!!!

#5 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2019-07-25 12:25 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

"Every American should be outraged over this, but many will be happy just to poke libruls in the eye."

Even the one's who don't support Trump are more outraged about the people who have been complaining about it and are indifferent to blocking measures to address interference as a way to spite them. Welcome to the new normal.

#6 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2019-07-25 12:29 PM | Reply

So much DRama, so little time.

This was an obvious PR move by the Dems, who were seeking to pass these bills on unanimous Consent rather than having debate and a vote. Just like the First Responders bill, the only reason that the Dems did this was to make the GOP look bad and get the mouthbreathers all wound up.

Like the last time that this happened with the same bills, they were withdrawn by the Dems without requesting that they go to Committee and get a vote. The same thing will probably happen this time.

#7 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-07-25 12:30 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Russians are still interfering in US elections.

"They're doing it as we sit here,"
-Mueller

#8 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-07-25 12:32 PM | Reply

"This was an obvious PR move by the Dems"

So Protecting our Democracy from foreign interference is a PR move?

No... actually it is our duty.

All of us.

#9 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-07-25 12:33 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

This was an obvious PR move by the Dems, who were seeking to pass these bills on unanimous Consent rather than having debate and a vote. Just like the First Responders bill, the only reason that the Dems did this was to make the GOP look bad and get the mouthbreathers all wound up.
Like the last time that this happened with the same bills, they were withdrawn by the Dems without requesting that they go to Committee and get a vote. The same thing will probably happen this time.
#7 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCENTER

I would have been happy with that explanation.

What pisses me off is that there was no explanation. In wake of Mueller's testimony that Russia is still attempting to affect our democratic process, what do you believe should be done that doesn't come across as a PR move? Is the Republican party solely capable of bringing something similar without it being considered a PR move?

Lastly, it wasn't the Dems that made the Repubs look bad re: First Responders' bill. That was the Repubs all on their own. 98-2 vote (you know who the 2 were) explains that in spades.

#10 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2019-07-25 12:38 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Advertisement

Advertisement

"They're doing it as we sit here,"
-Mueller

#8 | POSTED BY DONNERBOY

In your diaper. "They're doing it"

Doing what, it? What is 'it' exactly? Do you even know? Is it photoshop and mean slogans again?

#11 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-07-25 12:40 PM | Reply

Doing what, it? What is 'it' exactly? Do you even know? Is it photoshop and mean slogans again?
#11 | POSTED BY SHEEPLESCHISM

Go ask the Deep State, they're probably in cahoots with the Ruskies, for all YOU know.

#12 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2019-07-25 12:43 PM | Reply

dems do your research. trump has been tougher on Russia than Obama and Clinton(s) combined

dems also are the ones that allow and want interference by wanting Illegals to vote!! no voter ID!! allow Felons and Inmates to vote!! No border wall, etc...

hell just let all the Russians come up through our southern border and vote

#13 | Posted by Maverick at 2019-07-25 12:46 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

if the Russians were to interfere they would have wanted Hillary. she just would want to "push the restart button" LOL what a joke she is

#14 | Posted by Maverick at 2019-07-25 12:47 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

America no longer has free elections.

#15 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2019-07-25 12:50 PM | Reply

It was the Senator from Mississippi that blocked both of these bills and she did so without any explanation.
How can one individual out of a hundred in the Senate block a bill that is meant to help secure our democratic process WITHOUT A GOD DAMN EXPLANATION AS TO WHY?!!!

#5 | POSTED BY RSTYBEACH11 AT 2019-07-25 12:25 PM | REPLY | NEWSWORTHY 1

If you bothered to research it you would see that she did it because it was way too upen ended and could not be enforced and as ROC stated this was a show from the Dems and not actually a passable bill but don't let the facts get in the way. And btw, why do we even need this, all you Dems cheered when Obama told Putin to "cut it out" , that should be enough I would assume.

#16 | Posted by fishpaw at 2019-07-25 12:51 PM | Reply

If the Russians were to interfere they would have wanted Hillary.

#14 | Posted by Maverick a

"Were" to interfere?

"Wanted" Hillary instead of Trump?

Yesterday was just such a long, long time ago.

#17 | Posted by Zed at 2019-07-25 12:51 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Such drama. So easily played.

#18 | Posted by visitor_ at 2019-07-25 12:52 PM | Reply

And btw, why do we even need this, all you Dems cheered when Obama told Putin to "cut it out" , that should be enough I would assume.
#16 | POSTED BY FISHPAW

You clearly have no clue what you're talking about.

I've been a B. Hussein's critic on this site for years. Throw your -------- tripe at someone else.

#19 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2019-07-25 12:53 PM | Reply

America no longer has free elections.
#15 | POSTED BY BRUCEBANNER

Bruce wants MORE free stuff!

#20 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-07-25 12:54 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

if the Russians were to interfere they would have wanted Hillary. she just would want to "push the restart button" LOL what a joke she is
#14 | POSTED BY MAVERICK

You truly have no idea what you're talking about.

JFC this site is just nutz.

#21 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2019-07-25 12:54 PM | Reply

America no longer has free elections.

#15 | POSTED BY BRUCEBANNER AT 2019-07-25 12:50 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

You sound like Bernie after the 2016 primary.

#22 | Posted by fishpaw at 2019-07-25 12:54 PM | Reply

What pisses me off is that there was no explanation.

The Dems tried to do this on the same procedural maneuver last August 1, this June 18, June 25, and today, and each time the reason given by the one Senator who objected to the consent procedure was the same: the Bills are overbroad and there are no controls on how the allocated money was to be spent. If the Dems were serious about this, they would put these bills through Committee but they know that they would never get through as written because they are too broad and poorly crafted.

It's a brilliant move by the Minority since this is such a hot button issue, but this is sausage making at its finest.

#23 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-07-25 12:54 PM | Reply

"But election interference bills face an uphill climb in the Senate, where Republicans aren't expected to move legislation through the Rules Committee, the panel with primary jurisdiction, and have warned about attempts to "federalize" elections."

thehill.com

#24 | Posted by danni at 2019-07-25 01:00 PM | Reply

#23 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCENTER

Appreciate that explanation, but considering the Repubs had acknowledged Russian interference post 2016 and had plenty of control to get a election security bill through for 2 years, why are we now sitting here with a single House majority member proposing election security bills that are being nullified by a single House minority member? Does it have anything to do with Donny Littlehand's fragile ego?

This is the least efficient means imaginable, IMO.

#25 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2019-07-25 01:00 PM | Reply

#24

There is a definite States Right angle here, and that is a problem for a lot of Senators, mostly on the GOP side but a couple of Dems, including Manchin and Jones, have also voiced concerns.

When the NYT even calls these bills "highly partisan" you know that they are not serious but merely to make headlines.

Election security bills in the Senate are hitting one big roadblock: Mitch McConnell

#26 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-07-25 01:08 PM | Reply

Strange that the bills proposed were intended to require by law what isn't required now, but said that Trump violated law.

If Trump violated the law, why do we need these repeated legal requirements.

#27 | Posted by Petrous at 2019-07-25 01:11 PM | Reply

The article says the right thing to do should be a legal requirement. So, Trump didnt violate law because these bills say it isn't law yet?

#28 | Posted by Petrous at 2019-07-25 01:12 PM | Reply

8 | POSTED BY DONNERBOY

In your diaper. "They're doing it"

Doing what, it? What is 'it' exactly? Do you even know? Is it photoshop and mean slogans again?

#11 | Posted by SheepleSchism

they are doing what you have claimed over and over is a Nothingburger and a HOAX.

Yes, Comrade, I know EXACTLY what "IT" is. I have even explained here in great detail how it is being done based upon the Mueller report and the report from our intelligence agencies and my own persona experience with defending against these attacks in my Agency.

Couple that with the fact that I have worked in Information Technology field since information became a "technology". I was on the "front lines" and been dealing with attacks on our IT infrastructure for ~20 years. So yes, I know exactly what they are doing and how they do it.

And so does DJT because he knew what he was doing when he cooperated with the Russians and took full advantage of this particular attack.

The question is, Comrade do you have any idea what is going on and what are YOU doing about it?

#29 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-07-25 01:13 PM | Reply

GOP TO WORLD:
Anyone want to come illegally help us win this election?

#30 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-07-25 01:13 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

The best way to do this is to get several moderate Senators from both sides of the aisle to put together well crafted legislation that assists the States meet defined goals with Federal money to help them protect their elections, debate it, pass it and send it to the House.

You know, like how the Senate used to work before Reid and McConnell fccked it up.

#31 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-07-25 01:15 PM | Reply

Doing what, it? What is 'it' exactly? Do you even know? Is it photoshop and mean slogans again?

#11 | Posted by SheepleSchism

Doing what you do every day. Spamming the internet with pro trump propaganda.

Then they'll hack our voting machines. Too bad you're too stupid to know how to hack. Then you wouldn't have to resort to your current career.

#32 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-07-25 01:15 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Trump to the World:

‘I'd Take It' if Russia Again Offered Dirt on an Opponent

#33 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-07-25 01:16 PM | Reply

The best way to do this is to get several moderate Senators from both sides of the aisle to put together well crafted legislation that assists the States meet defined goals with Federal money to help them protect their elections, debate it, pass it and send it to the House.

You know, like how the Senate used to work before Reid and McConnell fccked it up.

#31 | Posted by Rightocenter

That would require a republican party who objects to taking illegal help from foreign nations to get elected, which doesn't exist.

#34 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-07-25 01:17 PM | Reply

I just think that it is interesting that now that the DNC/MSNBC/CNN have seized on this soundbite as the only real score that they got from yesterday's debacle they are totally up in arms about this.

#35 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-07-25 01:17 PM | Reply

Election security bills in the Senate are hitting one big roadblock: Mitch McConnell
#26 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCENTER

Why doesn't McConnell propose an election security bill and make the Republicans the heroes in this matter?

#36 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2019-07-25 01:18 PM | Reply

If you think that, you're not watching MSNBC.

#37 | Posted by YAV at 2019-07-25 01:18 PM | Reply

Strange that the bills proposed were intended to require by law what isn't required now, but said that Trump violated law.

If Trump violated the law, why do we need these repeated legal requirements.

#27 | Posted by Petrous

How can we be this far into russiagate and still have people so ignorant about it?

Trump violated obstruction of justice laws.

Mueller said there wasn't enough evidence to bring a slam dunk case on collusion (although there was evidence).

#38 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-07-25 01:18 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Why doesn't McConnell propose an election security bill and make the Republicans the heroes in this matter?

#36 | Posted by rstybeach11 a

Because mcconnell thinks republicans controlled by russia are better than democrats controlled by americans.

#39 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-07-25 01:19 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"There is a definite States Right angle here, and that is a problem for a lot of Senators, mostly on the GOP side but a couple of Dems, including Manchin and Jones, have also voiced concerns."

The GOP depends on stolen elections, they defend their right to steal elections in their home state....that's state's rights....always has been.

#40 | Posted by danni at 2019-07-25 01:20 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Then they'll hack our voting machines.
#32 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

Democrat dark money threw a billion dollars at Hillary. Maybe they can throw it to the party for election security in each county and state where the election money is controlled?

Why do you want the feds to throw money at democrat election cyber networks? while the lobby money, billionaire cash gets thrown at advertising and election influence? The feds don't buy voting machines and LAN networks.

Call your party and complain. I'm sure they don't have enough nutter messages on voicemail.

#41 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-07-25 01:22 PM | Reply


@#23 ... It's a brilliant move by the Minority since this is such a hot button issue, but this is sausage making at its finest. ...

Agreed.

It's an even more brilliant move since it highlights what the Republicans have been doing all along regarding the security of the elections, i.e., little to nothing in support and a lot against.

Republicans Abandon Election Security (May 2019)
prospect.org

Republicans block $250 million to beef up election security (Aug 2018)
www.usatoday.com

House GOP refuses to renew election security funding as Democrats fume over Russian interference (July 2018)
www.washingtonpost.com

The security of our election process should be a bi-partisan issue, with sweeping support from both sides of the aisle. Why do the Republicans appear to try to stifle election security at every chance they get?

#42 | Posted by LampLighter at 2019-07-25 01:22 PM | Reply

Wow, so many Anti-American (R)tards in this thread.

Every one of these alt-right POS KNOW that their political party of traitors has NO chance to win a free and fair election. That's why they support voter suppression, gerrymandering, and RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE!

These fools would rather live under Russian influence then American freedom.
They've all be radicalized because they are gullible AF!

#43 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2019-07-25 01:23 PM | Reply

"I just think that it is interesting that now that the DNC/MSNBC/CNN have seized on this soundbite as the only real score"

I think it is interesting that you think that is the only real "score".

Did you miss the whole discussion on Obstruction of Justice?

or this...

"we did not reach a determination as to whether the president committed a crime."
(not exonerated)

"Could you charge the president with a crime after he left office?" Buck asked.

"Yes," Mueller said.

"You believe that he committed -- you could charge the president of the United States with obstruction of justice after he left office?"

"Yes," Mueller said. This time, he had no clarification to offer.
(Obstructed Justice)

"The president told the White House staff secretary, Rob Porter, to try to pressure [Don] McGahn to make a false denial. Is that correct?" Democrat Karen Bass asked Mr Mueller.

"That's correct," he replied.
(Abuse of Power)

#44 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-07-25 01:24 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

The security of our election process should be a bi-partisan issue, with sweeping support from both sides of the aisle. Why do the Republicans appear to try to stifle election security at every chance they get?

Because the bills, as noted by the NYT, are highly partisan. The only bi-partisan bill to recently come up made it through House committee but during debate it was loaded up with so much non-discretionary money that even the GOP sponsor withdrew his name from the Bill before the final vote.

#45 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-07-25 01:27 PM | Reply

Democrats best hope at this point is that Iran, North Korea or China decided they want to get rid of Trump and run a cyber campaign to help the Dems. Either that, or Putin decides the best way to upend democracy in the US is to turn on Trump and the GOP and so greenlights cyber ops against them, complete with leaking the GOP emails Russia also hacked. Maybe then Republicans will decide to care about securing our elections.

#46 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-07-25 01:28 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Democrat dark money threw a billion dollars at Hillary."

Isn't that funny?

And your friends, the Russians, only had to spend 14.4 million a year to beat her!

#47 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-07-25 01:28 PM | Reply

#44

Didn't miss any of that, but none of it was new, groundbreaking or earthshattering, since it was all in the Report in the first instance. Since the whole point of yesterday's debacle was to move the needle and it failed miserably, the DNC and the MSM are scrambling for lipstick to put on that pig.

Keep eating it up if it makes you sleep better at night.

#48 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-07-25 01:29 PM | Reply

"Every American should be outraged over this, but many will be happy just to poke libruls in the eye."

Even the one's who don't support Trump are more outraged about the people who have been complaining about it and are indifferent to blocking measures to address interference as a way to spite them. Welcome to the new normal.

#6 | POSTED BY HAGBARD_CELINE

Speaking of Dull Sheep and RoCheney....

#49 | Posted by Corky at 2019-07-25 01:31 PM | Reply

The Republicans go all out to win while Democrats curl up in the fetal position and cry about the unfairness of it all. The Democrats might be morally correct, but immorality disguised as toughness, at this point, is looked upon as a virtue in today's society. Politics is a dirty endeavor. Democrats had better find their inner fortitude or winning dirty wins again. Either fight or take a backseat.

#50 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2019-07-25 01:32 PM | Reply

Politics is a dirty endeavor. Democrats had better find their inner fortitude or winning dirty wins again. Either fight or take a backseat.

#50 | POSTED BY LEE_THE_AGENT

Yep. McCain said he'd rather lose with dignity than win dirty. Guess what? He lost.

The Obama campaign slung dirt all over the place and won twice.

It sucks and it's unfair, but it's reality.

#51 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-07-25 01:34 PM | Reply

Because the bills, as noted by the NYT, are highly partisan. The only bi-partisan bill to recently come up made it through House committee but during debate it was loaded up with so much non-discretionary money that even the GOP sponsor withdrew his name from the Bill before the final vote.
#45 | POSTED BY RIGHTOCENTER

Aaaaand here we sit without any practical manner of moving forward. It's truly pathetic.

#52 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2019-07-25 01:36 PM | Reply

Why do you want the feds to throw money at democrat election cyber networks?
#41 | Posted by SheepleSchism

I'd ask why you dont want the government to protect the country from foreign espionage, but we know the answer. YOu'd lose the only job you could get.

#53 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-07-25 01:36 PM | Reply

It sucks and it's unfair, but it's reality.
#51 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

What's unfair about it?

#54 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2019-07-25 01:38 PM | Reply

#54 Unjust might be a better word. It's unjust that fighting dirty is often successful.

#55 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-07-25 01:39 PM | Reply

The Republicans go all out to win while Democrats curl up in the fetal position and cry about the unfairness of it all. The Democrats might be morally correct, but immorality disguised as toughness, at this point, is looked upon as a virtue in today's society. Politics is a dirty endeavor. Democrats had better find their inner fortitude or winning dirty wins again. Either fight or take a backseat.

#50 | Posted by lee_the_agent

You are ignoring that the way repubs now "go all out to win" puts them in a position to endanger america, if they are taking help from foreign enemies and making themselves vulnerable to blackmail and foreign control.

If you're watching a soccer game and the goalie takes out a gun and shoots an approaching opponent, would you admire the goalie for "going all out to win" and criticize the other team for not doing the same?

#56 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-07-25 01:39 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 3

#54 Unjust might be a better word. It's unjust that fighting dirty is often successful.

#55 | Posted by JeffJ

Coordinating with hostile nations is not fighting dirty.
That's like calling gang rape "overly ambitious romance"

#57 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-07-25 01:40 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"The Obama campaign slung dirt all over the place and won twice.

Such as? I never heard John McCain say that nor Mitt Romney. Some folks did throw birtherism all over the place, I do remember that. John McCain defeated himself with "bomb, bomb, bomb, let's bomb Iran," and with Sarah Palin. Mitt Romney defeated himself with his own comments recorded by a bartender.

#58 | Posted by danni at 2019-07-25 01:40 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

WikiLeaks began releasing Podesta's stolen emails on October 7, 2016, less than one hour after a U.S. media outlet released
video considered damaging to candidate Trump.

#59 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-07-25 01:45 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 9

October 7, the Department of Homeland Security and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence issued a joint public statement "that the Russian
Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations ." Those "thefts" and the "disclosures " of the hacked materials through online platforms such as WikiLeaks, the statement continued, "are intended to interfere with the US election process."

The Mueller Report Volume 1 page 15, paragraph 1

#60 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-07-25 01:50 PM | Reply

#59

No Collusion!!

#61 | Posted by Corky at 2019-07-25 01:50 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

August 2, 2016 , Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort met in New York
City with his long-time business associate Konstantin Kilimnik, who the FBI assesses to have ties
to Russian intelligence. Kilimnik requested the meeting to deliver in person a peace plan for
Ukraine that Manafort acknowledged to the Special Counsel's Office was a "backdoor" way for
Russia to control part of eastern Ukraine; both men believed the plan would require candidate
Trump 's assent to succeed (were he to be elected President).

#62 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-07-25 01:53 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

RE #62

The Mueller Report Volume 1 page 14, paragraph 6

#63 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-07-25 01:54 PM | Reply

Who's surprised that the documents themselves don't bother you?

Nobody, that's who. Your corrupt party got exposed by a party insider,

and you cry Russia to deflect and diminish the fallout. #HandWaving #Busted #CorruptParty

#64 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-07-25 01:56 PM | Reply

Summer 2016.

Russian outreach to the Trump Campaign continued into the summer of 2016, as candidate Trump was becoming the presumptive Republican nominee for President.

On June 9, 2016, for example, a Russian lawyer met with senior Trump Campaign officials Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner, and campaign chairman Paul Manafort to deliver what the email proposing the meeting had described as "official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary."

The materials were offered to Trump Jr. as "part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump." The written communications setting up the meeting
showed that the Campaign anticipated receiving information from Russia that could assist candidate Trump's electoral prospects, but the Russian lawyer ' s presentation did not provide such information.

Days after the June 9 meeting, on June 14, 2016, a cybersecurity firm and the DNC announced that Russian government hackers had infiltrated the DNC and obtained access to
opposition research on candidate Trump, among other documents.

The Mueller Report Volume 1 page 14, paragraph 2

#65 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-07-25 01:57 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

- Podesta's stolen emails

Spelling out DNC corruption and collusion with Hillary campaign.

#66 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-07-25 01:59 PM | Reply

#56

Didn't say I admired it. Power means more to Republicans than defending what your perception of America is. You can whine like a puling liberal or street fight. Trump's election and Republican dominance of Alpha male Kenny Powers types personifies what American voters want at this point. Mealy mouthed candidates that dither instead of fight will lose today. For Republicans, it's winning uber alles. They're the ones writing history. Like Mueller said yesterday, interference is the new normal.

#67 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2019-07-25 01:59 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Who's surprised that the documents themselves don't bother you?

Who is surprised that you think you can read minds, Comrade?

They bother me. Does it bother you that they were STOLEN PROPERTY?

Stolen by the Russians to hurt one of our best Candidates for President?

Does it bother you that the Russians decided who, in the best interest of THEIR country, would be our President?>

#68 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-07-25 02:00 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Democrats whine about doing their best. Republicans go home with the prom queen.

-Sean F'n Connery
Paraphrased for this family oriented site.

#69 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2019-07-25 02:06 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

On December 29, 2016, then-President Obama imposed sanctions on Russia for having interfered in the election. Incoming National Security Advisor Michael Flynn called Russian
Ambassador Sergey Kislyak and asked Russia not to escalate the situation in response to the sanctions.

The following day, Putin announced that Russia would not take retaliatory measures in response to the sanctions at that time.

Hours later , President-Elect Trump tweeted, "Great move on delay (by V. Putin)."

The next day, on December 31, 2016, Kislyak called Flynn and told him the request had been received at the highest levels and Russia had chosen not to retaliate as a result
of Flynn's request.

But, NO COLLUSION!!

The Mueller Report Volume 1 page 15, paragraph 5

#70 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-07-25 02:07 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

DNC helpin Hillary vs. Trump campaign colluding with Russia? Really Sheeple? That's not even whataboutism, it's just nonsense.

#71 | Posted by danni at 2019-07-25 02:11 PM | Reply

#69 "Never bring a gun to a knife fight."

"They send one of ours to the hospital. We send on of theirs to the morgue. That's the Chicago way."

#72 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2019-07-25 02:16 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

On May 17, 2017, Acting Attorney General Rod Rosenstein appointed the Special Counsel and authorized him to conduct the investigation that Corney had confirmed in his congressional testimony, as well as matters arising directly from the investigation , and any other matters within the scope of 28 C.F .R. § 600.4(a), which generally covers efforts to interfere with or obstruct the investigation.

President Trump reacted negatively to the Special Counsel's appointment.

He told advisors that it was the end of his presidency, sought to have Attorney General Jefferson (Jeff) Sessions unrecuse from the Russia investigation and to have the Special Counsel removed, and engaged in efforts to curtail the Special Counsel's investigation and prevent the disclosure of evidence to it, including through public and private contacts with potential witnesses. Those and related actions are described and analyzed in Volume II of the report.

The Mueller Report Volume 1 page 16, paragraph 5,6

(Trump proving he is innocent by actively blocking any investigation))

#73 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-07-25 02:17 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

Democrats whine about doing their best. Republicans go home with the prom queen.

-Sean F'n Connery
Paraphrased for this family oriented site.

#69 | Posted by lee_the_agent

Democrats whine about doing their best. Republicans put bath salts in the punch at the prom.

#74 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-07-25 02:24 PM | Reply

This thread would be a valuable teaching tool for most Americans' understanding of the Mueller Report.

#75 | Posted by danni at 2019-07-25 02:36 PM | Reply

#74

...and win.

#76 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2019-07-25 02:57 PM | Reply

#75

They don't care, Danni. They don't care.

#77 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2019-07-25 02:59 PM | Reply

67
Love me some Kenny Powers.

#78 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2019-07-25 03:03 PM | Reply

Love me some Kenny Powers.

#78 | Posted by 101Chairborne

Most people who love kenny powers are too stupid to realize that that character is mocking them, not celebrating them.

#79 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-07-25 03:18 PM | Reply

They don't care.

#77 | Posted by lee_the_agent

NYET.

They do not care nyet.

They will never care as long as trumpy seems to be "winning".

We will have to make them care.

It is negligent for this President to not prepare us and defend us against cyber attacks from Russia.

#80 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-07-25 03:18 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I have faith that when Obama said "the 80s called and wanted their foreign policy back", he knew what he was talking about.

#81 | Posted by visitor_ at 2019-07-25 03:28 PM | Reply

#81 | Posted by visitor_

I am impressed you had faith that Obama knew what he was talking about.

#82 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-07-25 03:35 PM | Reply

Jun 3, 2016, at 10:36 AM, Rob Goldstone wrote:

Good morning

Emin just called and asked me to contact you with something very interesting.

The Crown prosecutor of Russia met with his father Aras this morning and in their meeting offered to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father.

This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump - helped along by Aras and Emin.

What do you think is the best way to handle this information and would you be able to speak to Emin about it directly?

I can also send this info to your father via Rhona, but it is ultra sensitive so wanted to send to you first.

Best
Rob Goldstone

Jun 3, 2016, at 10:53, Donald Trump Jr. wrote:

Thanks Rob I appreciate that. I am on the road at the moment but perhaps I just speak to Emin first. Seems we have some time and if it's what you say I love it especially later in the summer. Could we do a call first thing next week when I am back?

Best,
Don

#83 | Posted by chuffy at 2019-07-25 03:35 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

I suspect that the real issue for the GOP is that if the proposed safeguards were put in place, where attempts to undermine the integrity of our elections were easier to identify, and where there were new tools available to both detect and apply countermeasures, that this would make it harder for Republican controlled states to continue their efforts to suppress the vote of minorities and others groups who tend to vote for Democrats. Many of the things that these states have already attempted to do often look and feel like something that might have been engineered by some foreign entity. This includes, but is not limited to, social media efforts aimed at reducing the number of people who actually turn out to vote as well as attempts to use 'bots' to post 'fake news' and stories aimed at giving the impression that certain candidates, or their supporters, are acting in an unpatriotic or UN-American fashion.

We all saw what happened in 2016 and how it was so effective. Why would we think that domestic groups would not take that model and use it for helping their own candidates?

OCU

#84 | Posted by OCUser at 2019-07-25 03:55 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I have faith that when Obama said "the 80s called and wanted their foreign policy back", he knew what he was talking about.

#81 | Posted by visitor_

What else did you like about obama?

JUST the part where he said we shouldnt worry about the hostile country that your party needs help from to get elected?

#85 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-07-25 04:02 PM | Reply

Every time Trump and his adoring fans mock accounts of Russian election interference, the practice is emboldened just a bit more. Their goal is being accomplished, and you guys are falling for it. Now other countries are seeing how successfully Russian interference has been at not only tainting one election, but just as importantly, provoking Americans to attack each other. They want us to fight each other while they steal the cheese.

The Washington Post published an article today that starts like this...

"A recent tweet from Alicia Hernan -- whose Twitter account described her as a wife, mother and lover of peace -- did not mince words about her feelings for President Trump: "That stupid moron doesn't get that that by creating bad guys, spewing hate filled words and creating fear of ‘others', his message is spreading to fanatics around the world. Or maybe he does."


"That March 16 tweet, directed to a Hawaii congressman, was not the work of an American voter venting her frustration. The account, "@AliciaHernan3," was what disinformation researchers call a "sock puppet" -- a type of fictitious online persona perfected by Russians when they were seeking to influence the 2016 presidential election.


"But it was Iranians, not Russians, who created @AliciaHernan3, complete with a picture of a blonde woman with large, round-framed glasses and a turtleneck sweater. It was one of more than 7,000 phony accounts from Iran that Twitter has shut down this year alone.


"And Iran is far from the only nation that has, within its borders, substantial capacity to wage Russian-style influence operations in the United States ahead of next year's election. That means American voters are likely to be targeted in the coming campaign season by more foreign disinformation than ever before, say those studying such operations."

www.washingtonpost.com

#86 | Posted by cbob at 2019-07-25 04:16 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I know how much a tweet from somebody I don't know or will never read influences me...

Why do stupid people and the media treat tweets from nobody's as if they mean anything?

#87 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2019-07-25 04:24 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"I know how much a tweet from somebody I don't know or will never read influences me..."

Some of the Russian tweets got copied and pasted here.
Especially the Russian tweets about Ukrainian Nazis shooting down MH-17.
Andrea, a mattress parroted that propaganda for months.

#88 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-07-25 04:27 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Better bone up on your Russian folks.

If it's up to the traitorous POS in the GOnP we will all be forced to speak it soon.

#89 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2019-07-25 05:28 PM | Reply

Better bone up on your Russian folks.
If it's up to the traitorous POS in the GOnP we will all be forced to speak it soon.

POSTED BY ABORTED_MONSON AT 2019-07-25 05:28 PM | REPLY

I wished I knew Russian then I could understand the cuss words in those Russian car crash videos.

#90 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2019-07-25 05:29 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

I wished I knew Russian then I could understand the cuss words in those Russian car crash videos.

#90 | POSTED BY LAURAMOHR AT 2019-07-25 05:29 PM | FLAG:

Man, those things are wild, aren't they? Holy f**k.

#91 | Posted by cbob at 2019-07-25 08:05 PM | Reply

Man, those things are wild, aren't they? Holy f**k.

POSTED BY CBOB AT 2019-07-25 08:05 PM | REPLY

They drive like bats out of hell. I thought we were bad. They actually don't care how they drive.

#92 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2019-07-25 08:23 PM | Reply

In Russia they use the dashboard cameras like we use auto insurance. It how they know who's at fault when there's an accident.

OCU

#93 | Posted by OCUser at 2019-07-25 08:57 PM | Reply

Re #93

I learned important lessons from Russian car dashboard videos.

I use both. Insurance and car cams.

Also, you never know, you might record an Asteroid hitting the earth.

#94 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-07-26 10:56 AM | Reply

New motto for Today's GOP,
"Cheating in elections and getting away with it,
since Bush V. Gore 2000"...

#95 | Posted by earthmuse at 2019-07-26 10:59 AM | Reply

Why do stupid people and the media treat tweets from nobody's as if they mean anything?

#87 | POSTED BY 101CHAIRBORNE

Why I don't plonk you I will never know.

The woman is running for Mitch the bitch's senate seat.

"DescriptionAmy M. McGrath-Henderson is an American former Marine fighter pilot and political candidate. She was the first female Marine Corps pilot to fly the F/A-18 on a combat mission. McGrath served for 20 years in the Marine Corps during which time she flew 89 combat missions bombing al Qaeda and the Taliban." Wikipedia

So not a "nobody".

Like you.

#96 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-07-26 11:01 AM | Reply

#84 | Posted by OCUser

Mitch McConnell reveals the real reason for not wanting to support the protection of our election process (and it's exactly what I suspected all along, as noted in my post above):

Mitch McConnell is right. Secure, open elections would elect more Democrats.

www.washingtonpost.com

OCU

#97 | Posted by OCUser at 2019-07-26 01:41 PM | Reply

--www.washingtonpost.com

Can't read. Paywall. Next.

#98 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-07-26 01:44 PM | Reply

The GOP doesn't need Russia, but they do need holes in the election security system. How else will they ever win again.

#99 | Posted by bayviking at 2019-07-26 03:47 PM | Reply

I'm going to play nice for a post.....

I have a serious and honest questions for all of the (R)'s here.

Why aren't you concerned about foreign election interference? Yes, your side benefited in 2016 from it.

.....but for the sake of argument, let's pretend 2020 is going to be a close election. .....what happens if Iran (who hates Trump) interferes to the level that swings the election to the dems and the Republican Party loses the senate and the presidency due to Iran's interference?

You can't cry foul after your party accepted russian interference in 2016, as you wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

Why do you think that your side is always going to benefit from foreign interference?

Are you not concerned that not only are the Russians are still interfering in our elections, but Iran and China have been rumored to have attempted to interfere currently as well?

Election security in no way shape or form should be a partisan issue, but an American issue.

#100 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2019-07-26 11:16 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

#100 | POSTED BY ABORTED_MONSON

Suck it, Hilljack! Take your potatoes and vodka back to mother Russia!

You're busted, binch! *a female dog in St. Petersburg - where you work*

Everyone knows your game Monson/Zed/Lamp/Tremain and your other 5 sock puppets.

#101 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-07-26 11:22 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

I'm going to play nice for a post.....

I have a serious and honest questions for all of the (R)'s here.

Why aren't you concerned about foreign election interference? Yes, your side benefited in 2016 from it.

.....but for the sake of argument, let's pretend 2020 is going to be a close election. .....what happens if Iran (who hates Trump) interferes to the level that swings the election to the dems and the Republican Party loses the senate and the presidency due to Iran's interference?

You can't cry foul after your party accepted russian interference in 2016, as you wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

Why do you think that your side is always going to benefit from foreign interference?

Are you not concerned that not only are the Russians are still interfering in our elections, but Iran and China have been rumored to have attempted to interfere currently as well?

Election security in no way shape or form should be a partisan issue, but an American issue.

#102 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2019-07-26 11:45 PM | Reply

United States Constitution Article III Section 3.

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person Attainted.

Look's like the Republicans in Congress just engaged, and are complicit in, Treason, against the United States. So has POTUS. So has the Attorney General. So has the Director of the FBI. A Red Handed act.

A couple Democrats with BALL'S need to stand up, in session, read the statute, read off the names of all complicit, and make a declaration. 4 Democrats from each house.

#103 | Posted by gitmboy at 2019-07-27 02:27 AM | Reply

Every American should be outraged over this, but many will be happy just to poke libruls in the eye.

You can bet this stonewalling on national security issues will be a major issue for republicans during the 2020 senatorial and presidential debates. It may even cost the republicans control of the senate.

WRT the presidential debates (if there are any): I suspect that one of the first questions to be asked of Trump during a debate will be if he is seeking and/or accepting support from a foreign entity. He's going to have to come up with a better answer than he did a few weeks ago when he said that he would accept support. That, with all of the stuff in the Mueller report, I predict that there will be no presidential debates for 2020.

#104 | Posted by FedUpWithPols at 2019-07-27 05:27 AM | Reply

From a political tactical standpoint this is where Democrats routinely own Republicans.

They pick a vague issue - like 'election security' - and introduce a bill that doesn't really address the issue and has so many deliberately inserted poison pills that the GOP could never support it and then campaign on the GOP opposing election security. They did this masterfully during the 2012 election and the whole 'war on women' meme. The MSM, as they always do, then acts as the DNC public relations firm and the GOP sits lamely on the outside offering up little as a defense or counter-attack.

#105 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-07-27 11:31 AM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

What was the poison pill on these bills, Jeff?

Even the dumbass Republican that blocked the bills won't/can't say. FTA:

"But Sen. Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-Miss.) blocked each of the bills. She didn't give reason for her objections, or say if she was objecting on behalf of herself or the Senate GOP caucus."

Even Blackburn had a "reason" (though specious at best given what's in the bill):

"Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) similarly blocked the legislation in June, arguing that it was overly broad."

That's the kind of "overly broad -------" that means there's nothing to actually object to in the bill.

#106 | Posted by YAV at 2019-07-27 12:38 PM | Reply

"and introduce a bill that doesn't really address the issue "

Shumer invited McConnell to proffer a Republican version which would...you know..."address" whatever issue you want, and Moscow Mitch demurred.

"that the GOP could never support it"

Sorry, but if you're offered the opportunity to write your own bill, that you COULD support, and you pass...

...the problem isn't in the language; it's in the concept.

#107 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-07-27 12:41 PM | Reply

I should have posted and not flagged your post, Jeff, instead of flagging it and then responding.
I did think it the post was peculiarly entertaining, in a blind-site way.
Then I thought I have something to actually say about it.
Not changing it to "Newsworthy" though - not since Null already did that. :)

#108 | Posted by YAV at 2019-07-27 12:44 PM | Reply

"They did this masterfully during the 2012 election and the whole 'war on women' meme."

Based on Kavanaugh's nomination, it looks like they were right.

Well that, and some of the Republican states currently trying to turn women into second-class citizens. Seems those memes were downright prescient.

#109 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-07-27 12:54 PM | Reply

#108 | POSTED BY YAV

It's all good, Yav.

"They did this masterfully during the 2012 election and the whole 'war on women' meme."
----
Based on Kavanaugh's nomination, it looks like they were right.

That's funny in a pathetic sort of way. Don't worry though, I won't sarcastically flag it as funny. I won't pull a Yav on you.

:-)

#110 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-07-27 01:25 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"That's funny in a pathetic sort of way."

Yeah...funny when Kavanaugh lost it, and pathetic when he blamed the Clintons.

#111 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-07-27 01:26 PM | Reply

The allegations were ridiculous.

It was peak #MeToo at its absolute worst.

Did you really find Swetnick's claims to be credible?

The closest thing to a credible allegation was Ford and her story had more holes in it than Swiss cheese.

#112 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-07-27 01:50 PM | Reply

"Did you really find Swetnick's claims to be credible?"

No. But I found Ford's testimony compelling, and Kavanaugh lacking in both temperament and impartiality.

For example, did you really believe Kavanaugh's claims about (gasp!)The Clintons?!?

#113 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-07-27 01:57 PM | Reply

Kavanaugh's performance was a mixed bag.

He was emotional and lashed out a bit too much for my liking.

Having said that, he was being dragged through the mud in a horrible way.

The fine-toothed parsing of his High School yearbook was too much for me.

#114 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-07-27 02:05 PM | Reply

His track record as a circuit judge was exemplary as was his treatment of female staffers.

#115 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-07-27 02:06 PM | Reply

"He was emotional and lashed out a bit too much for my liking."

He basically admitted his decisions would be based in part on political payback.

"he was being dragged through the mud in a horrible way. "

Yeah...thank God "the investigators" never interviewed the guy named in the room, huh?.

#116 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-07-27 02:11 PM | Reply

He was emotional and lashed out a bit too much for my liking.

Having said that, he was being dragged through the mud in a horrible way.

The fine-toothed parsing of his High School yearbook was too much for me.

#114 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-07-27 02:05 PM | Reply

So much for your "caring" about women shtick. You just use cis gender women to bash we trans girls/women. You don't really care. I bet you don't even care about the women in those concentration camps at the southern border.

#117 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2019-07-27 02:21 PM | Reply

Laura,

The only gender you care about is transgender. That's it.

In your miserable pit of identity politics trangender reigns supreme, no matter what.

Your bigotry is appalling.

#118 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-07-27 05:56 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2019 World Readable

Drudge Retort