Advertisement

Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Friday, October 01, 2021

Tampa Bay Times Editorial: Florida had a terrible summer for COVID deaths, and early fall hasn't fared much better.

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.

Rona Ronnie

#1 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2021-10-01 07:13 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

This just in.... COVID 19 has endorsed Rona Ron for President.

#2 | Posted by Nixon at 2021-10-01 07:29 AM | Reply

Thanks Death Santis, keep on lying to constituents and you may get nominated for President. Do yourself a favvor Death, don't go there. You're a terrible governor and you'd make an even worse President and would live in shame forever. We're saving yourself from yourself by giving you good advice. A person needs to have convictions and intelligence to be a good President, that's why Trump was the worst President in history. He actually believes in nothing and conspired with Putin to gain the Presidency. Death, are you going to also conspire with Putin?

#3 | Posted by danni at 2021-10-01 10:44 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

#3, that Putin crap has not only been thoroughly disproven but we have powerful people who violated the law pushing it starting to receive indictments.

#4 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-10-01 10:49 AM | Reply | Funny: 2

This spring, an upper Midwest state, I think it was Michigan, had a huge and inexplicable spike. None of its neighboring states experienced anything similar. It was really weird.

#5 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-10-01 10:51 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

Related...

How Ron DeSantis won the pandemic (March 2021)
www.politico.com

...Ron DeSantis wants you to know how well he has done.

"We've had tremendous success," the Republican governor of Florida said recently at a vaccine site in Sumterville in the central part of the state when I caught up with him while reporting for this week's POLITICO Magazine Friday Cover, which we published early for Nightly readers.

"Really good numbers," he said in front of the pharmacy in the back of a Jacksonville Walgreens.

And just today he hosted like-minded experts in Tallahassee to help him crow and then headed to Panama City for a (very brief) press conference. He all but gloated.

"It's interesting. Now you're starting to see some of the mainstream and national media admit: Oh, Florida had schools open -- it was the right decision. Oh, Florida has a 4.8 unemployment rate -- and yet their mortality rate for Covid is less than a lot of these lockdown states," he said. "People were saying Florida was going to end up hit the worst on everything." But Florida's way? His way? "That's proven to be a better approach."...



#6 | Posted by LampLighter at 2021-10-01 11:23 AM | Reply

but we have powerful people who violated the law pushing it starting to receive indictments.

#4 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER AT 2021-10-01 10:49 AM

Link?

Are you talking about the Durham flop? We were told over and over again that there was a huge deep state conspiracy that it uncovered and the indictments were going to rain down, and then it turned out to be a humongous nothingburger which accomplished its primary goal of riling up gullible and ignorant conservatives with baseless accusations. So forgive me if I am a bit skeptical of these general claims of "powerful people" who are going to "start receiving indictments".

#7 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2021-10-01 11:32 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

It's sad that Liberals still need explaining of how a novel virus works.

#8 | Posted by humtake at 2021-10-01 11:32 AM | Reply | Funny: 1

It's sad that Liberals still need explaining of how a novel virus works.

#8 | POSTED BY HUMTAKE

Feel free to explain it to everyone, Einstein.

#9 | Posted by Zed at 2021-10-01 11:42 AM | Reply

" that Putin crap has not only been thoroughly disproven"

Huh?

The only thing "disproven" was Team Trump's ability to tell the truth about meetings with Russians.

Did you miss Jeff Sessions' three tries at telling "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth" when it came to his meetings with Russians? And why did Manafort hand over sensitive polling info to a crony of Putin? Team Trump told over 100 lies about meetings with Russians. And as DJTJ's meeting proved, any lack of collusion wasn't for lack of trying.

#10 | Posted by Danforth at 2021-10-01 11:43 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

Are you talking about the Durham flop?

You mean the single indictment filed at the very last minute of one attorney "lying" to the FBI over who his firm worked for while submitting evidence regarding communications between Trump and a Russian bank that the FBI never used anyways?

"Ultimately, the FBI found that there was insufficient evidence to support the allegations that there was a secret communications channel between the Trump Organization and the Russian bank. "

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

#11 | Posted by Nixon at 2021-10-01 11:55 AM | Reply

And as DJTJ's meeting proved, any lack of collusion wasn't for lack of trying.

The only reason Traitor Tot was prosecuted for that was "he was too stupid to know he broke the law".

There's white privilege if Ive ever seen it.

#12 | Posted by Nixon at 2021-10-01 11:57 AM | Reply

It may prove to be a flop. Ha I g said that it's awfully premature to call an investigation a flop while it's still ongoing.

#13 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-10-01 12:09 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

It's sad that Liberals still need explaining of how a novel virus works.

#8 | POSTED BY HUMTAKE

Your comment is about 1.75 years too old.

We're hardly in the dark regarding COVID spread, disease pathogenesis and mitigation measures.

#14 | Posted by jpw at 2021-10-01 12:11 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"It may prove to be a flop."

May?!?

The deadline was before the 2020 election, remember? The frog-marching of Comey, Clapper, and Brennen was supposed to help Trump win. How'd that work out?

FLOP.

#15 | Posted by Danforth at 2021-10-01 12:29 PM | Reply

#15 It never had a deadline. That deadline was what partisan Republicans wanted, of course.

This really shouldn't be about artificial deadlines or partisan politics given what the IG already uncovered.

#16 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-10-01 12:37 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

" It never had a deadline. That deadline was what partisan Republicans wanted, of course."

Let me know when you choose one of the above two.

#17 | Posted by Danforth at 2021-10-01 12:38 PM | Reply

@#11 ... You mean the single indictment filed at the very last minute of one attorney "lying" to the FBI over who his firm worked for while submitting evidence regarding communications between Trump and a Russian bank that the FBI never used anyways? ...

On the Special Counsel's Weird Prosecution of Michael Sussmann
www.lawfareblog.com

...Attorney General William Barr appointed John Durham, lo these increasingly-many years ago, to investigate a supposed scandal inside the FBI: There had been an attempted coup, President Trump alleged, and Barr himself hinted that there had been an effort spuriously to investigate a candidate for president. The FBI counterintelligence investigation of figures surrounding Donald Trump, the attorney general warned darkly, may have begun earlier than the FBI said it did. It may not have been properly predicated. There may have been other agencies involved.

Durham himself at times lent his solid reputation as a career prosecutor to such fantasies. When the Justice Department's inspector general found that the investigation of L'Affaire Russe had been properly predicated and had, in fact, begun when the FBI always said it had, Durham publicly questioned the judgment. He also has taken a mind-bogglingly long time to complete his as-yet almost-wholly unproductive investigation, which has gone on longer than the Mueller investigation itself, building up expectations among many Trump supporters that Durham was going to deliver the goods.

And until this week, Durham's investigation had added exactly zero new facts to the public's understanding of the FBI's handling of the Russia matters. The only case he had brought"against a low-level FBI lawyer for altering a document in connection with a surveillance application"was entirely derivative of facts developed by the inspector general. Durham had, beyond that one case, issued no findings or reports and had charged nobody with anything. He had merely existed and, by existing, allowed expectations and conspiracy theories to swirl around him.

But now Durham has spoken on his own. He has indicted a cybersecurity lawyer named Michael Sussmann for allegedly making a single false statement in a conversation in 2016 with then-FBI General Counsel Jim Baker. The allegedly false statement concerned not Trump or Russia, but whom Sussmann represented when he brought Baker some information about an alleged electronic connection between the Trump Organization and a Russian bank. (Disclosure: Baker is a personal friend and former colleague at Brookings and Lawfare.)

The indictment is, in other words, far removed from the grave FBI misconduct Durham was supposed to reveal. Very far removed. In fact, it doesn't describe FBI malfeasance against Trump at all, but portrays the FBI as the victim of agitprop brought to it by outside political operatives. It describes the FBI as diligently running down the leads it had been fed by these operatives and then, well, dropping the matter when it learned they had no merit. The misconduct it portrays is an alleged lie by Sussmann that is, at best, wholly peripheral to the substance of the allegations Durham was supposedly peddling. ...

[emphasis mine]

Quite the interesting (albeit, long read, article).

Worth the read, imo.

#18 | Posted by LampLighter at 2021-10-01 12:43 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

" given what the IG already uncovered."

That one lawyer no one's ever heard of lied about who he was working for?!?

Oooh, what a scandal you've uncovered!

#19 | Posted by Danforth at 2021-10-01 12:43 PM | Reply

#19 I'm talking about the Horowitz IG report.

#20 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-10-01 12:45 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Also, are you really going to try and distill the Sussman indictment down to that?

#21 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-10-01 12:46 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Alright. I'm done talking about the Durham investigation. It's not even remotely related to the subject of this page.

#22 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-10-01 12:47 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Northern states are starting to see increases. Why? It's getting colder and people are spending more time indoors. Southern states like Florida saw a spike in cases for a similar reason - it's oppressively hot and people spend more time indoors in the A/C to avoid the heat.

#23 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-10-01 12:48 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

" It never had a deadline. That deadline was what partisan Republicans wanted, of course."
---
Let me know when you choose one of the above two.

#17 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

That wasn't clear? "It never had a deadline." That has always been my choice.

#24 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-10-01 12:51 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

@#23 ... Northern states are starting to see increases. ...

Here in Connecticut, number of cases and hospitalizations have been dropping.

The positivity test rate has been under 2%.

While there may be an uptick in cases as we go into the winter, I doubt if it will be anything like Idaho and Florida have been going through.


#25 | Posted by LampLighter at 2021-10-01 12:59 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#3, that Putin crap has not only been thoroughly disproven but we have powerful people who violated the law pushing it starting to receive indictments.

#4 | Posted by BellRinger

Do I have to make you run away from the thread AGAIN?

Ok here we go: Why was trump giving campaign polling data to putin?

#26 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-10-01 01:03 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

" That has always been my choice..."

...once Barr announced Durham would have nothing before the election.
www.axios.com

At least be honest enough to finish the sentence.

#27 | Posted by Danforth at 2021-10-01 01:03 PM | Reply

While there may be an uptick in cases as we go into the winter, I doubt if it will be anything like Idaho and Florida have been going through.

*Fingers crossed*

#28 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-10-01 01:03 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Ok here we go: Why was trump giving campaign polling data to putin?

#26 | POSTED BYi>

SPEAKSOFTLY

First off, what law was broken with that.

Secondly, that was reported shortly after it happened and wasn't cited as a predicate for an investigation.

#29 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-10-01 01:05 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

*Fingers crossed*

Sorry, that's the Red State approach.

Blue States seem to be going more with vaccines, masking, distancing, and boosters.

#30 | Posted by Danforth at 2021-10-01 01:05 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

#27 Honest about what?

If you are going to try and assign a position to me, don't be coy about it.

#31 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-10-01 01:06 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#30 I'm beginning to sense you see everything through a partisan lens.

I'm hoping that we don't see spikes in the north this winter. You act like that's a bad thing.

#32 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-10-01 01:07 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"First off, what law was broken with (Manafort giving Russians sensitive polling data)."

That's got to be the all-time distance record for the movement of goalposts.

#33 | Posted by Danforth at 2021-10-01 01:08 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"I'm hoping that we don't see spikes in the north this winter."

Yet you're addressing it as if luck is the only thing you can rely on.

Again...a Red State approach.

#34 | Posted by Danforth at 2021-10-01 01:09 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

#33 How so? He acted like that was the crime of the century. It's not like Trump's team was paying a foreign national to go to Russia and dig up false dirt on his competitor.

Yet you're addressing it as if luck is the only thing you can rely on.

I am doing no such thing.

#35 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-10-01 01:11 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"Honest about what? If you are going to try and assign a position to me, don't be coy about it."

I literally printed it out.

#36 | Posted by Danforth at 2021-10-01 01:12 PM | Reply

First off, what law was broken with that.

Secondly, that was reported shortly after it happened and wasn't cited as a predicate for an investigation.

#29 | Posted by BellRinger

I didn't ask you that.

I asked why trumps campaign manager was giving trump campaign's polling data to putin. So why was he doing it?

Your response "its not illegal". Do you think we need a law to say its wrong for political candidates to give data to hostile nations so those hostile nations can help elect those political candidates?

And finding out that hostile nation is working with a candidate this way is EXACTLY the sort of thing our intelligence services should investigate and defend against. The only reason you're saying its not is because of who did it. Secretly colluding with putin, GAVE PUTIN POWER OVER TRUMP. When you commit a crime with someone, they own you.

#37 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-10-01 01:13 PM | Reply

It's not like Trump's team was paying a foreign national to go to Russia and dig up false dirt on his competitor.

#35 | Posted by BellRinger

No that's what they were doing with rudy in ukraine.

#38 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-10-01 01:14 PM | Reply

"It's not like Trump's team was paying a foreign national to go to Russia and dig up false dirt on his competitor."

Yeah...Team Trump pays them to go to Ukraine for that.

"He acted like that was the crime of the century."

You're right: it was just one of the 100+ lies told by Team Trump regarding contacts with Russians.

#39 | Posted by Danforth at 2021-10-01 01:16 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

@#25 ... Here in Connecticut, number of cases and hospitalizations have been dropping. ...

Connecticut reporting fewest cases per capita of any U.S. state
www.courant.com

...Connecticut has reported the fewest per-capita COVID-19 cases of any U.S. state over the past two weeks, data aggregated by the New York Times showed Tuesday.

As of Tuesday afternoon, Connecticut was averaging 14 daily cases per 100,000 residents, compared to 20 for the next lowest states, California and Maryland. Connecticut also has the third fewest COVID-19 hospitalizations per capita, with only Vermont and Massachusetts in better shape.

Most of the states with the fewest recent COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations also rank among the states with the highest levels of vaccination.

Connecticut's COVID-19 numbers " like those of the nation as a whole " have begun to decrease in recent weeks following a surge fueled by the delta variant....

As of Friday, 75.9% of all Connecticut residents and 87.1% of those 12 and older had received at least one COVID-19 vaccine dose, while 68.5% of all residents and 78.6% of those 12 and older were fully vaccinated, according to the CDC....


#40 | Posted by LampLighter at 2021-10-01 01:19 PM | Reply

#37 It's a non-sequitur as it wasn't cited as a predicate for any investigation.

#41 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-10-01 01:20 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

I literally printed it out.

#36 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

I said I hope we don't see spikes in the north this winter.

That's all I said. You falsely assigned the position to me that I believe luck is the only thing we can rely on.

I never said anything like that.

#42 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-10-01 01:22 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#37 It's a non-sequitur as it wasn't cited as a predicate for any investigation.

#41 | Posted by BellRinger

Do you think a presidential candidate sharing data with a hostile foreign power warrants an investigation?

#43 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-10-01 01:23 PM | Reply

"It's a non-sequitur"

No it's not. It'a an inconvenient fact you can't explain away.

"...it wasn't cited as a predicate for any investigation."

Neither was Jeff Sessions' three versions of "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth". That doesn't change the facts on the ground. Why did Team Trump lie about contacts with Russians at least 100 times?
thehill.com

#44 | Posted by Danforth at 2021-10-01 01:23 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"wasn't cited as a predicate for any investigation."

Who needed a predicate, when members of the Trump campaign would walk into a Russian's room the FBI was bugging? Especially after the FBI had warned both campaigns of possible Russian influence, and instructed each campaign to report to the FBI any attempts by Russia.

The FBI knew Team Trump was contacting Russians, not telling the FBI, and lying to the American public. They would have been derelict not to follow up.

#45 | Posted by Danforth at 2021-10-01 01:27 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Bellringer? Did the question scare you off?

Do you think a presidential candidate sharing data with a hostile foreign power warrants an investigation?

#46 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-10-01 02:10 PM | Reply

#46 Polling data? By itself, no.

It's a far cry from paying a foreign national to go to a hostile foreign power to try and dig up fake dirt on your political opponent to be peddled to the FBI and then used as a predicate to launch a 3rd world type of investigation of one political party leader at the behest of the opposing party.

#47 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-10-01 02:15 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"Polling data? By itself, no."

Sorry, but if it's important enough to be requested or received by a Putin crony, the FBI should find out why.

"It's a far cry from paying a foreign national to go to a hostile foreign power to try and dig up fake dirt on your political opponent..."

Stop bringing Rudy, Lev, and Igor into this!

#48 | Posted by Danforth at 2021-10-01 02:20 PM | Reply

@#47 ... Polling data? By itself, no. ...

I disagree.

The sharing of polling data with a hostile foreign power definitely warrants an investigation.

If for no other reason than to find out why it was done, and whether or not it was a "tip of the iceberg" type of occurrence.



#49 | Posted by LampLighter at 2021-10-01 02:23 PM | Reply

"a 3rd world type of investigation of one political party leader at the behest of the opposing party."

WTF was the FBI supposed to do when it was bugging a Russian's office and Jeff Session's walks in?!?

What were they supposed to do when Team Trump didn't come to them about (FBI known) contacts with Russians?

What were they supposed to do when Team Trump was lying to the American people about contacts with Russians?

#50 | Posted by Danforth at 2021-10-01 02:25 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Do you think a presidential candidate sharing data with a hostile foreign power warrants an investigation?

#43 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

Dingdonger has no answer to that one.

Or why there were hundreds of contacts between the trump campaign and the Russians.

Like I've always said ... If you don't want to be wiretapped or investigated by the FBI don't be interacting with Russian spies.

#51 | Posted by donnerboy at 2021-10-01 02:29 PM | Reply

#50 I guess the answer was to use the Steele Dossier to unlawfully obtain FISA warrants to spy on members of the Trump campaign and via drop-two, Trump himself.

The argument can be made that possibly enough was there to warrant a counter-intelligence investigation, but certainly not a criminal investigation (they are two very different things).

#52 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-10-01 02:29 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#46 Polling data? By itself, no.

#47 | Posted by BellRinger

Does the sharing of polling data with a hostile foreign power suggest that maybe it would be a good idea to see what else is involved in that relationship?

You know - an INVESTGATION?

#53 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-10-01 02:30 PM | Reply

Manafort shared data with Kilmnik. it is unknown why he did this or what Kilmnik did with the information.

#54 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-10-01 02:31 PM | Reply | Funny: 3

The argument can be made that possibly enough was there to warrant a counter-intelligence investigation, but certainly not a criminal investigation (they are two very different things).

#52 | Posted by BellRinger

Do you ever get tired of having SEMANTICS be the only way to defend trump?

You started this topic by saying the russiagate investigation wasn't justified. Now you're saying - well it justifies THIS kind of investigation but not THAT type of investigation.

You never answered so I'll ask again - why was trump sharing his campaign polling data with a hostile foreign power?

#55 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-10-01 02:33 PM | Reply

The bigger issue was how the investigation was conducted. That's where the IG uncovered all sorts of shenanigans and likely illegal activity.

I will acknowledge that enough was there to warrant a counter-intelligence investigation.

#56 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-10-01 02:34 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#55 DO you know the difference between a counter-intelligence investigation and a criminal investigation?

#57 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-10-01 02:35 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Manafort shared data with Kilmnik. it is unknown why he did this or what Kilmnik did with the information.

#54 | Posted by BellRinger

It's only "unknown" why or what was done with it to morons like you who need proof that water is wet. Kilmnik doesn't do international espionage without putin's orders unless he wants polonium in his pudding.

And we know what they did with it - they used it to target their russian propaganda facebook ads that your cult falls for so easily.

Maybe if your cult hadn't thrwarted and limited the investigation we could have found out more about it.

Why do you think trump wanted to limit the investigation? Why did he refuse to cooperate? Why did his team tell so many lies about it?

#58 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-10-01 02:36 PM | Reply

The bigger issue was how the investigation was conducted. That's where the IG uncovered all sorts of shenanigans and likely illegal activity.

I will acknowledge that enough was there to warrant a counter-intelligence investigation.

#56 | Posted by BellRinger

"The bigger issue was how the investigation was conducted."

Yeah that's the OJ simpson defense. When the evidence is so damning that its indefensible, whine about the investigators.

Your whole anti american cult isn't mad that a presidential candidate was colluding with our enemies to get elected, they're mad that it was discovered. How dare our intelligence agencies protect us from putin?

#59 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-10-01 02:38 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#59 You were actually calm up to that post. Meds wearing off?

#60 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-10-01 02:39 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Are you familiar with the contents of the Horowitz IG report?

I'll bet you aren't.

#61 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-10-01 02:39 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#59 You were actually calm up to that post. Meds wearing off?

#60 | Posted by BellRinger

Uh oh, out of defenses and excuses. Better try a new tactic of making jokes.

Lets try again - why was trump sharing his campaign polling data with putin?

#62 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-10-01 02:40 PM | Reply

Are you familiar with the contents of the Horowitz IG report?

I'll bet you aren't.

#61 | Posted by BellRinger

Does it answer the question that you're refusing to answer - why trump was giving his campaign polling data to hostile foreign power that wasn't to destroy america?

#63 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-10-01 02:41 PM | Reply

*wants

#64 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-10-01 02:41 PM | Reply

Maybe if your cult hadn't thrwarted and limited the investigation we could have found out more about it.

Thwarted and limited? Mueller spent tens of millions of dollars, 2 years and had a team of roughly 40 agents/lawyers/staff. He was given a VERY wide berth to do what he wanted by Rosenstein.

Like so many you were wedded to a narrative. When it proved to be false, instead of being angry about being mislead for almost 3 years you've convinced yourself that criminal activity was rampant yet none was found.

#65 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-10-01 02:44 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

why trump was giving his campaign polling data to hostile foreign power

I don't know why. I haven't read anything that definitively explains why.

Now, on to the question you are avoiding. Are you familiar with the contents of the Horowitz IG report?

#66 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-10-01 02:46 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Thwarted and limited? Mueller spent tens of millions of dollars, 2 years and had a team of roughly 40 agents/lawyers/staff. He was given a VERY wide berth to do what he wanted by Rosenstein.

Like so many you were wedded to a narrative. When it proved to be false, instead of being angry about being mislead for almost 3 years you've convinced yourself that criminal activity was rampant yet none was found.

#65 | Posted by BellRinger

He wasn't allowed to look into ANY of trump's financial connection to russia. DO you think that would be relevent?

He was blocked access to many witnesses who refused to testify, and trump wouldnt even testify himself.

Do you think that's a full investigation? An investigation without the testimony of the accused?

The only narrative that was proved to be false was that republicans love their country. They proved they're just fine with a hostile nation installing a president in our country.

#67 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-10-01 02:46 PM | Reply

Lets try again - why was trump sharing his campaign polling data with putin?

#62 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

Let me try!

Hey ding dong!

Why was trump sharing his campaign polling data with putin?

#68 | Posted by donnerboy at 2021-10-01 02:46 PM | Reply

He was blocked access to many witnesses who refused to testify

He had subpoena powers.

#69 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-10-01 02:48 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

why trump was giving his campaign polling data to hostile foreign power

I don't know why. I haven't read anything that definitively explains why.

Now, on to the question you are avoiding. Are you familiar with the contents of the Horowitz IG report?

#66 | Posted by BellRinger

You know why it happened. Because trump was willing to take help from our enemies to win an election. Because he was willing to commit a crime with our enemies to get elected, giving our enemies power over him.

But you admit it happened. So since trump was giving polling data to putin - what does that mean for people who say russiagate was a hoax that turned up nothing - totally debunked. Are they right or are they liars?

As for horowitz - if you're harping on it I already know what it contains - semantics and bullcrap about procedures. Focusing on problems with the investigation. Not anything to do with the actual crisis of a foreign enemy controlling our president.

#70 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-10-01 02:50 PM | Reply

He was blocked access to many witnesses who refused to testify

He had subpoena powers.

#69 | Posted by BellRinger

Why was a subpoena necessary for an innocent man?

#71 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-10-01 02:50 PM | Reply

Well sorry that didn't work. Too confrontational ... lol.

Let me try this.

" Because trump was willing to take help from our enemies to win an election."

WAS trump was willing to take help from our enemies to win an election?

Maybe dingalingdong can answer that one.

#72 | Posted by donnerboy at 2021-10-01 03:07 PM | Reply

Oops typo. Made that too confusing.

How about a simple

To my conservative friends

Was Trump actually willing to take help from our enemies to win an election? And how does that make you feel about him?

#73 | Posted by donnerboy at 2021-10-01 03:10 PM | Reply

The Horowitz report?

The report found that the bureau's decision to open an investigation "was in compliance with Department and FBI policies, and we did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that political bias or improper motivation influenced" the decision.

That makes everything else partisan noise.

#74 | Posted by Danforth at 2021-10-01 03:12 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

To my conservative friends

Was Trump actually willing to take help from our enemies to win an election? And how does that make you feel about him?

#73 | Posted by donnerboy

The answer to that will be "dems would have done it too!" without evidence.

Or some pathetic false equivilance saying trump colluding with putin is the same as when a democrat sneezed one time.

#75 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-10-01 03:17 PM | Reply

#74 If 1 sentence is all you got out of the report....Jeez.

Are you OK with the FBI unlawfully obtaining FISA warrants to spy on Americans?

#76 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-10-01 03:22 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Are you OK with the FBI unlawfully obtaining FISA warrants to spy on Americans?

#76 | Posted by BellRinger

Are you OK with the FBI not investigating a hostile enemy's control over our president because of paperwork?

Why do you think putin tried to help elect trump TWICE? Do you think putin wants what is best for the USA? Does preferring the same president as putin does make you question your choice at all?

#77 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-10-01 03:34 PM | Reply

#77 Not when Xi preferred Biden

#78 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-10-01 03:37 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#75 I've noticed that you like asking questions but never answer them.

My question was straightforward and simple.

#79 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-10-01 03:38 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#75 I've noticed that you like asking questions but never answer them.

My question was straightforward and simple.

#79 | Posted by BellRinger

What question?

You dodged "why was trump giving polling data to putin" for DAYS before you finally mustered "I don't know.(and I'm too stupid to reach the obvious conclusion)"

And just as predicted, you come in with a false equivalency. When was Xi colluding with biden? When was Xi spreading propaganda on facebook for biden? When was Xi busted funding the DNC through corrupt middlemen, like putin was with the GOP? (trump pardoned the middleman btw)

That's another question for you - why did trump pardon the criminal who was locked up for funneling money from Putin to the GOP?
www.politico.com

And the most basic question of all - why does putin, a brilliant man who wants to harm america, do so much to help trump and the GOP?

#80 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-10-01 03:55 PM | Reply

What question?

I'm guessing it got lost in the shuffle (I do give you credit for admitting you are unfamiliar with the Horowitz IG report).

Here is the question:

Are you OK with the FBI unlawfully obtaining FISA warrants to spy on Americans?

#76 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER AT 2021-10-01 03:22 PM

#81 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-10-01 06:02 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"Are you OK with the FBI unlawfully obtaining FISA warrants to spy on Americans?"

Absolutely not, and the guilty person(s) should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

Now...get back to the questions you've been dodging.

#82 | Posted by Danforth at 2021-10-01 06:05 PM | Reply

#82 Good answer.

I thought I'd answered all of the questions posed to me. Most of them were calling for speculation.

#83 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-10-01 06:10 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"Most of them were calling for speculation."

No! Really???

Thank God none of your other posts are based on speculation.
/s

#84 | Posted by Danforth at 2021-10-01 06:12 PM | Reply

Why was a subpoena necessary for an innocent man?

#71 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

Wrong question.

You said that some witnesses refused to be interviewed. I pointed out the fallacy in that - if Meuller really wanted to interview a possible witness he had the power to compel it via subpoena.

#85 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-10-01 06:13 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Are you OK with the FBI unlawfully obtaining FISA warrants to spy on Americans?

#76 | POSTED BY BELLRINGER AT 2021-10-01 03:22 PM

#81 | Posted by BellRinger

No but I've seen no evidence that's what happened.

In the future, if a foreign enemy who wants to destroy america is colluding with a treasonous american presidential candidate just weeks before an election, do you think it's more important to immediately investigate and expose this massive threat to our nation and it's voters, or do you think it's more important to get all the paperwork done properly, hiding this treasonous act from the voters til after they've voted?

#86 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-10-01 06:14 PM | Reply

I thought I'd answered all of the questions posed to me. Most of them were calling for speculation.

#83 | Posted by BellRinger

Calls for your speculation are inquiries into your intellectual honestly.

Someone saying they have no idea why trump was giving polling info to putin during the election isn't being intellectually honest. Anyone intellectually honest person knows why.

#87 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-10-01 06:16 PM | Reply

You said that some witnesses refused to be interviewed. I pointed out the fallacy in that - if Meuller really wanted to interview a possible witness he had the power to compel it via subpoena.

#85 | Posted by BellRinger

Again - why does it need a subpeoana? Why did trump refuse to be interviewed without one?

This is a question about your intellectual honesty again.

You know how long a subpeona on a president would take right? It wouldnt have even been enforced before the 2020 election if ever.

#88 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-10-01 06:19 PM | Reply

"If 1 sentence is all you got out of the report."

How does that "one sentence" not refute your central claim?

The IG concluded the FBI did things, by and large, by the book, and any (rare) deviation didn't change the central worth of the investigation.

#89 | Posted by Danforth at 2021-10-01 06:19 PM | Reply

"if Meuller really wanted to interview a possible witness he had the power to compel it via subpoena."

You're being disingenuous. Mueller knew it would take years to play out in the courts; for further proof look at...oh, I don't know...maybe every other court case Trump has dealt with in his life.

#90 | Posted by Danforth at 2021-10-01 06:21 PM | Reply

The IG concluded the FBI did things, by and large, by the book

That is not at all what the IG concluded. Far from it - quite the opposite, actually.

I watched his entire senate testimony a few days after the report was released. He expounded on that - he said he didn't find concrete evidence of political motivation but also the answers and reasons he was given were completely unsatisfactory. Further, he found all sorts of malfeasance. During his Senate testimony he said it was REALLY bad.

#91 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-10-01 06:29 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

You're being disingenuous. Mueller knew it would take years to play out in the courts;

Did he not convene a grand jury? With a grand jury he can compel testimony and it doesn't require playing out in the courts. A grand jury is essentially a form of pre-trial.

#92 | Posted by BellRinger at 2021-10-01 06:31 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Most of them were calling for speculation.

#83 | Posted by BellRinger

How much speculation is required?

Here are the facts:

During the election trump was sharing polling data with putin. Putin wanted trump to win and was spamming america with propaganda to help him.

After winning, trump rewrote the republican platform to allow putin to keep Crimea. This was the ONLY part of the platform trump bothered changing. (TELL YOU ANYTHING YET? YOU NEED TO SPECULATE REALLY HARD ABOUT THIS?)

Trump picked manafort as his campaign manager - a man who charged trump NOTHING, but was in debt to russians for 17 million.

Trump's team lied 100 times about their contacts with russians.

Trump obstructed justice to stop the investigation - as concluded in muellers report. Is obstruction still a crime?

Trump picked putin's favorite oil executive to run our foreign policiy. A man who had ZERO experience in government. But his company exxon stood to make a trillion dollars if sanctions against russia could be lifted. He tried to lift them but was thwarted.

Trump picked putin's favorite general as national security advisor. A man who was putin's guest of honor in russia and now spouts Q anon conspiracy theories to your whole stupid cult.

Trump dismantled the state department, moving or firing people who have been keeping russia in check for decades.

Trump weakened NATO, putin's biggest enemy.

Back before he was a politician, when he was just a failed businessman, no one would lend to trump anymore. But guess who would? PUTIN

Trump sold a property in florida 4 years after buying it to one of putin's pals, for 60 million more than he paid.

Trump lied about not having any projects in russia. He was even proposed a suite for putin in trump tower moscow.

Trump PARDONED the criminal who was found guilty of funneling russian money to the GOP.

These are all FACTS.

Now how much SPECULATION does it require to conclude russiagate was not a hoax and that trump's relationship to A HOSTILE FOREIGN NATION was not only suspicious, but corrupt and treasonous?

#93 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-10-01 06:33 PM | Reply

Did he not convene a grand jury? With a grand jury he can compel testimony and it doesn't require playing out in the courts. A grand jury is essentially a form of pre-trial.

#92 | Posted by BellRinger

A grand jury isn't public knowledge. It would still allowed trump to keep anything from coming out til after the election.

#94 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-10-01 06:33 PM | Reply

I'm eagerly waiting for bellringer to read #93 and then ignore it all and say FISA warrants are the real scandal. Just as trump and putin taught him to.

#95 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2021-10-01 07:11 PM | Reply

"That is not at all what the IG concluded. Far from it - quite the opposite, actually."

The central quote I posted says more than all your spin. It goes to the heart of your claim, and blows it up entirely. NOTHING rose to the level of invalidating the investigation.

#96 | Posted by Danforth at 2021-10-01 07:18 PM | Reply

Horowitz found no problem with the central reasons for the investigation; but problems with the methodology.

So this all comes down to, You had to right to uncover my wrongs!

aka The Bleat of the Guilty

#97 | Posted by Danforth at 2021-10-01 07:25 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I watched his entire senate testimony a few days after the report was released.

I remember JeffJ was just fascinated by the Horowitz testimony.

#98 | Posted by REDIAL at 2021-10-01 08:02 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#98 Malfeasance mixed in with textual diarrhea was the tell.

#99 | Posted by bored at 2021-10-01 08:49 PM | Reply

#65 Like so many you were wedded to a narrative. When it proved to be false, instead of being angry about being mislead for almost 3 years you've convinced yourself that criminal activity was rampant yet none was found.

Except massive amounts of criminal activity was found. Many indictments and convictions that forced the unindicted co-conspirator to pardon many to save his traitorous hide.

#100 | Posted by bored at 2021-10-01 08:52 PM | Reply

I wonder how much kompromat Putin has on DeathSentance.

Is there another explanation for his concerted effort to kill Floridians? It can't just be to protect his d-owners money can it?

#101 | Posted by bored at 2021-10-01 08:56 PM | Reply

I wonder how much kompromat Putin has on DeathSentance.

Is there another explanation for his concerted effort to kill Floridians? It can't just be to protect his d-owners money can it?

#101 | POSTED BY BORED

There are fairly strong rumors that DeathSantis is connected to Gaetz's illegal activities that he is under investigation for.

#102 | Posted by a_monson at 2021-10-02 04:52 PM | Reply

I wonder how much kompromat Putin has on DeathSentance.

Is there another explanation for his concerted effort to kill Floridians? It can't just be to protect his d-owners money can it?

#101 | POSTED BY BORED

There are fairly strong rumors that DeathSantis is connected to Gaetz's illegal activities that he is under investigation for.

#103 | Posted by a_monson at 2021-10-02 04:53 PM | Reply

I see ding dong is still having trouble Trumpsplaining Florida's recent Covid record.

#104 | Posted by donnerboy at 2021-10-03 12:00 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 2021 World Readable

Drudge Retort