ThePlague [S] 5 points ago

Her degree is in "International Relations and Economics". I'd love to see a transcript, to see what courses she actually took and the grades in them.

ThePlague [S] 1 point ago

He's probably a Linux guy, a penguin is their mascot.

ThePlague [S] 1 point ago

I count from the day after election 2016. There were dire warnings in the MSM about the Stock Market tanking when it started looking like he was going to win, so I give him credit for the rally that started the next day. Dow is up over 11k up since then, or close to 40% of its current value in 3 years 1 month and some change.

ThePlague [S] 3 points ago

Yeah, and they need 2/3 (67) to convict. So, 20 Pubs.

I do have to wonder, though: there were an awful lot of Never Trumpers who have since turned around. Remember back in 2016 he had almost as much opposition from the Pubs as from the Dems, and that continued at least into his first year in office. I wonder if some of those see this as their chance.

Nightmare scenario, of course, and I rather doubt it's going to happen: DJT's polling waaaaay too well among Republican voters.

ThePlague [S] 1 point ago

>Graham's reading of cartoonishly biased texts from the key people who committed all the errors (that just happened to run uniformly in the anti-Trump direction)as pretty tactically smart.

I was hoping this would start getting some traction. There were 17 errors in the FISA applications, which were brushed off due to "poor training". Ok, the FBI isn't as good as it use to be, I guess. However, if it was due to only incompetence, then we would expect essentially coin-flip odds on whether it was detrimental or beneficial to DJT. That is, they would be just as likely to fuck up in his favor as to his disadvantage. Instead, 17 errors that just so happened to be unfavorable. The odds of that are 2^-17 , assuming 50/50 chance for each incident. That's less than one in 131,000. While not impossible, of course, but personally, if I saw a coin hit heads 17 times in a row, I would suspect it was weighted. Or, in other words, there was a bias that affected the outcome

ThePlague [S] 1 point ago

I'm glad the articles are being put to a vote. I want the names of every Dem that votes for it. I also hope it passes: I want to see the short work Cruz makes of this ridiculous ham sandwich indictment. I also hope that Mike Lee gives a presentation on it.

ThePlague [S] 2 points ago *

Perhaps a "Cancel Culture" list needs to be made. I'll start with one I've been saving for a while. The movie "The Good Liar" is currently out. The executive producer of that movie is Jack Morrissey: https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0991118/

This is the same Jack Morrissey who advocated throwing the Covington kids into wood chippers: http://archive.md/ZgXXd

If you do decide to patronize that movie, know that you will be funding someone who apparently has no problem with killing children who hold the wrong political beliefs.

ThePlague [S] 1 point ago

Hmmm, not seeing that: https://cnn.it/34YlGTt

This link comes from the "share link" icon on the page. Here's the direct URL: https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/pensacola-naval-base-shooter/index.html

I've tested both in private windows as well as private Tor Windows, and they all work.

Not to defend CNN or anything, but please, there's plenty already without making fake allegations about them.

ThePlague [S] 2 points ago

In the West, there have been very few "true Catholics" for 50 years or more. It's just a buffet-style identity now.

ThePlague [S] 7 points ago

JFC, do their founders and owners just not give a shit anymore?

ThePlague [S] 3 points ago *

Germany has essentially conquered Europe, fulfilling their centuries old national dream. The only differences now to the last major attempt of the 30s and 40s are all of France is Vichy, Spain is added as bonus and a sizable proportion of the UK are collaborators. Modern day Germany is more-or-less what the National Socialists had as their goal for Europe, with sole exception being Russian land. Surprise, surprise, a neo-Red scare has been promoted for the last several years.

ThePlague [S] 1 point ago

I've been saying it for a long time: fuck NATO. It's a cold war relic that the U.S. doesn't need and which accomplished its primary goal of defeating the USSR nearly 30 years ago. It's what Washington called an "entangling foreign alliance" that is expensive and all downside with no benefit.

ThePlague [S] 15 points ago

IF it does indeed go to the Senate for a trial, can someone explain to me how people running for POTUS such as Senators Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, Cory Booker and Amy Klobuchar could actually vote to convict without a conflict of interest? It would be like having Steve Jobs on the jury to determine whether Microsoft had and abused their monopoly.

ThePlague [S] 2 points ago

Maybe she'll date Donkey in the next Shrek movie.

ThePlague [S] 4 points ago

They were doing that in 2016. Hell, I don't think I was even MAGA yet, but I remember distinctly making a point on Twitter and being labeled a Russian Bot. Not only that, there was some website linked which supposedly analyzed my posts and determined there was a 90%+ chance I was a bot. LOL. Yeahhhhh.

And they wonder why people like me, who had never bothered voting in their life previously, voted for Trump.

ThePlague [S] 9 points ago

I remember election night 2016 when the MSM started to get worried that the magnificent bastard might actually stand a chance of winning. Dire warnings of DOW futures being down a thousand points and it was going to be a bloodbath the next day if he won. Instead, the market rallied, and is up 11k since then.

That is absolutely amazing, going from 17k to 28k in 3 years, despite the MSM and the dems trying to sow FUD non-stop. If they were just the "loyal opposition" instead of grand inquisitors, it would probably be knocking on 35k at this point.

ThePlague [S] 1 point ago

Yeah, Impeachment Proceedings in the House are essentially the attempt to get an Indictment, similar to a Grand Jury. As has been said by lawyers for over a century, a Prosecutor can get a Grand Jury to indict a ham sandwich.

I want a Senate trial. It would be beyond epic to see Cruz question these bozos.

ThePlague [S] 3 points ago

Possibly, but I really wonder if Dem senators currently running for POTUS (Sanders, Warren, Harris) will recuse themselves since they have a blatantly obvious conflict of interest.

ThePlague [S] 3 points ago *

When in the Course of Spez events it becomes necessary for pedes to dissolve the political bans which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God Emperor entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all Pepes are created equal though some are rare and others are spicy, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Meming. That to secure these rights, Boards are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the posters, — That whenever any Form of website becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the Pedes to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new site, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Shadilay and Happiness.

ThePlague [S] 2 points ago

I have to wonder if this woke marketing might be accidental genius. Consider, a woman sees that ad. If she's a big fat cow, she feels affinity, and would be more likely to buy them. If she's not a big fat cow, then she'll think "I'll look waaaay better in those than her" and likewise would be more willing to buy them.

ThePlague [S] 2 points ago

Tim, if you're reading this, I have one piece of unsolicited advice: stop trying to make analogies. You are horrendous at them and they inevitably end in you saying "It's complicated". That does not make for a clear, or at least more penetrable, explanation, which is the point of analogies.

ThePlague [S] 2 points ago

Good point, but I would contend the J.D./Elliot thing was nowhere near as central as the usual trope examples.

ThePlague [S] 7 points ago

Nah, that will sink him. It's analogous to the "will they/won't they" in sitcoms, such as Sam/Diane, Ross/Rachel, etc. Once the cherry is popped, it's far less interesting.

view more: Next ›