RugbyRebels

I’m just one of those bad hombres with no tan. I enjoy telling people that I am from Polynesia and watching their faces as they attempt to process.

paddy no 11 wrote:If morepork isn't exactly like his avatar I'd be amazed

Puja wrote:
Unrelated:


Puja

We get it, Ms Odent and some others believe their violence is the good kind

Eugene Wrayburn wrote:

morepork wrote:

Eugene Wrayburn wrote: Letting your sponsor pay for the murder of Americans whilst simultaneously arguing for his country to rejoin the G7 is definitely a new low. I think (hope) this will remove the last vestiges of support amongst the military for him. I've been really enjoying the work of the Lincoln Project and Meidas Touch and their attack ads. This could fuel them most of the way to the election. I would recommend following them and sharing to amplify their signal. There is no one quite as brutal as the Republicans, even on someone who is supposed to be one of their own.

If neither Trump nor Pence are aware of intelligence generated by their own administration, then why are they there? Commander in chief? The fuck he is.

And having found out that his security services has been hiding this from him, he ...er... played golf. And still no reaction. Is anyone believing he didn't know?

Reporting now suggests at minimum Russians paying bounties was his his written daily briefings back in late February, I'd previously heard March as the earliest he'd have been made aware. Either this is a gigantic false story of it's an absurd and pointless lie, there will be hearings into this and oddly they keep records around things like presidential briefings, if Trump is lying he's going to need a huge number of people to perjure themselves and risk going to jail to stand even a slim chance of making a cover up work.

That however is only one part of this mess, beyond the inaction and seemingly shit attempt at a cover up we've got what happens next. And once again Washington disappears up its own fundament, perhaps again with most of the blame falling on the GOP. It would seem Trump is organising some briefings to set out what was known when and what was done for Congress, but they're only inviting members of the GOP. Whereas in the House Intelligence Committee they've started hearings into this and the GOP members are declining to attend, because seemingly it's okay for holders of the highest offices to behave like spoilt and over-tired toddlers. Some of the GOP members have commented they cannot attend the House Intelligence hearings because they're not secure enough, but some of these hearings are open to the public so wouldn't contain any classified information and thus it doesn't seem feasible there could be security concerns. Basically yet again Washington is incapable of even the most basic of non partisan steps to address a serious problem, and we haven't even got onto what to do about Russia, it's again breaking down on a disagreement about whether water is wet, a situation that sadly ensures we're likely to hear from Jim Jordan and those of a similar ilk.

Digby wrote:

Puja wrote:
Unrelated:


Puja

We get it, Ms Odent and some others believe their violence is the good kind

Yeah... violence... against statues. Completely equivalent.

Puja

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:

Puja wrote:
Unrelated:


Puja

We get it, Ms Odent and some others believe their violence is the good kind

Yeah... violence... against statues. Completely equivalent.

Puja

Statues vs human life no, but the part around people justifying the violence that supports their world view yes.

From Axios reporting, and an initial attempt by newly Trump appointed DNI John Ratcliffe to sit on the fence rather than pick Trump or the Intelligence community

"Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe said in a statement Monday night it's a "crime" to leak sensitive information, after Democratic and Republican lawmakers demanded answers over reports that intel alleged Russian operatives placed bounties on U.S. troops.

Details: "We are still investigating the alleged interference referenced in media reporting and we will brief the President and Congressional leaders at the appropriate time," Ratcliffe said. "Unfortunately, the unauthorized disclosures now jeopardize our ability to find out the full story with respect to these allegations."

CIA Director Gina Haspel said in a statement Monday evening "initial tactical reports often require additional collection and validation" and preliminary details are in general shared in the national security community and with U.S. allies. "Leaks compromise and disrupt the critical interagency work to collect assess, and ascribe culpability," she said."

Given they already think they know what Russia has been doing and they know in enough detail and certainty it's part of their briefing to the President one wonders what possible (legitimate) concerns there could be about how reporting this story stymies their investigation into the details of the story. Clearly it's politically embarrassing, hopefully politically damaging, but the concerns raised by Ratcliffe and Haspel read like bullshit attempts to placate a lunatic in the Whitehouse rather than doing their jobs

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:

Puja wrote:
Unrelated:


Puja

We get it, Ms Odent and some others believe their violence is the good kind

Yeah... violence... against statues. Completely equivalent.

Puja

How about smashing up someones house because you don't like their viewpoint? She is promoting criminal damage and regardless of whether you agree with the cause or not, that's unlawful. If we all pick and choose what laws we like or when they apply then you equally cannot complain when someone breaks something you would prefer remains intact.

#Statue'sLivesMatter!

Everyone seen the latest from Trump?



But sure, the violence is fine, there's literally no down side

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

That's a really weird line they've included from Biden. Almost now scans like Trump owns the violence, is ignoring the police violence, and Biden is the way to get out of this mess, and that seems an odd message even if you assume those the ad is targeted at will be ignoring the police violence.

I wonder where they've tested that ad and what responses they've gotten

Donny osmond wrote: But sure, the violence is fine, there's literally no down side

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

Which people is that even directed at?

Mikey Brown wrote:

Donny osmond wrote: But sure, the violence is fine, there's literally no down side

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

Which people is that even directed at?

Republicans and independents: I know you don’t like Trump, but you have to vote him because the alternative is destruction and chaos, and our entire civilization is at stake.

The Biden part is strange: it’s like saying “and Trump will keep things as they are, as they should be”. In short, there is no problem with systemic racism or police brutality, only with rioters and looters, and Biden is bending to the far left. But the delivery is soft at best.

It’s like there is a fifth column in Trump’s campaign. Biden comes across pretty well for an attack ad. Not the first time I notice it.

I meant more who is it that Donny is putting the words “violence is fine, there is literally no downside” into the mouths of.

Sandydragon wrote:

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:

We get it, Ms Odent and some others believe their violence is the good kind

Yeah... violence... against statues. Completely equivalent.

Puja

How about smashing up someones house because you don't like their viewpoint? She is promoting criminal damage and regardless of whether you agree with the cause or not, that's unlawful. If we all pick and choose what laws we like or when they apply then you equally cannot complain when someone breaks something you would prefer remains intact.

Bitch pleeze...

gransoporro wrote:

Mikey Brown wrote:

Donny osmond wrote: But sure, the violence is fine, there's literally no down side

Sent from my CPH1951 using Tapatalk

Which people is that even directed at?

Republicans and independents: I know you don’t like Trump, but you have to vote him because the alternative is destruction and chaos, and our entire civilization is at stake.

The Biden part is strange: it’s like saying “and Trump will keep things as they are, as they should be”. In short, there is no problem with systemic racism or police brutality, only with rioters and looters, and Biden is bending to the far left. But the delivery is soft at best.

It’s like there is a fifth column in Trump’s campaign. Biden comes across pretty well for an attack ad. Not the first time I notice it.

They haven't settled on a line of attack they like on Biden, at worst they seem to be saying Biden isn't too bad but you can't trust the left of the party and they'll control Biden. And that looks to be nonsense, if they left were in control there's no way Biden would even be the candidate

The other line is Sleepy Joe, but Trump by contrast is so sleepy by his own claims he didn't realise Russia was putting a bounty on US troops, doesn't spend hours working and instead spends hours watching TV and tweeting or just fecks off and plays golf, and the only times we do see Trump animated he comes across like someone abusing amphetamine

About the best that can be said for Trump right now is he's the underdog, and he's built from there before, and the idea of don't tread on me is something he can build on if he shows even limited competence

morepork wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

Puja wrote:
Yeah... violence... against statues. Completely equivalent.

Puja

How about smashing up someones house because you don't like their viewpoint? She is promoting criminal damage and regardless of whether you agree with the cause or not, that's unlawful. If we all pick and choose what laws we like or when they apply then you equally cannot complain when someone breaks something you would prefer remains intact.

Bitch pleeze...

Ah, the misogyny defence

We've had this on the America thread, so I'll say this and leave it here - the argument that all civil disobedience and vandalism is wrong assumes that we're in a world where the problems are getting solved or even even attended to with peaceful unobstrusive protest. Being black in America means that any interaction with the police might be the end of your life. The one I posted about in the America thread was Elijah McClain, a 5ft7 black guy who was stopped and forcibly searched last August because they thought he looked suspicious. When he had a panic attack, he was beaten, choked out, injected with a huge amount of ketamine to restrain him, and subsequently died. The people who did that weren't even fired. Appeals, petitions, and protests went unheard. No-one gave a shit about the death of Mr McClain - a completely innocent man who the police had no reason to stop, let alone search - until this uprising happened. Suddenly his case is being "reviewed" by the governor.

No, of course I'm not in favour of randomly smashing up people's houses. Being in favour of destroying a statue of Nathan Bedford Forrest that was put up in the 50s as a response to the Civil Rights movement doesn't mean you have to be in favour of all destruction of any property. Not every action is equivalent to other actions and context is important. If we lived in a world where the statues came down because people peacefully protested and agitated for it, if we lived in a world where death by police wasn't the fate of 1 in 1000 US black men because things changed when Kaepernick took a knee, if we lived in a world where police were punished for the deaths of the people they kill because people had protested peacefully, I would join you in being outraged at laws being broken when there were so many peaceful and lawful ways to get redress. Right now, that's not the world that's being lived in and civil disobedience and vandalism is accomplishing things because it can't be ignored.

I shall let you have your responses and leave you with the last word, as we've already got into this fairly decently in the America thread and I don't see much value in going through it here as well.

Puja

Puja wrote:if we lived in a world where death by police wasn't the fate of 1 in 10 US black men

Is this stats by Dianne Abbot or is that an actual stat? On the face of it that's an astonishingly high stat, does it refer to a very specific age group, or to stats around victims of homicide?

Digby wrote:

Puja wrote:if we lived in a world where death by police wasn't the fate of 1 in 10 US black men

Is this stats by Dianne Abbot or is that an actual stat? On the face of it that's an astonishingly high stat, does it refer to a very specific age group, or to stats around victims of homicide?

It is definitely a policitian's stat - I mistyped the number of zeros on my phone and it should have read 1 in 1000 US black men. It's still a horrible stat - it's the 7th highest cause of death for a black male - but it's less so than 1/10!

Puja

Why are we dancing around the point?

Puja wrote:

Digby wrote:

Puja wrote:if we lived in a world where death by police wasn't the fate of 1 in 10 US black men

Is this stats by Dianne Abbot or is that an actual stat? On the face of it that's an astonishingly high stat, does it refer to a very specific age group, or to stats around victims of homicide?

It is definitely a policitian's stat - I mistyped the number of zeros on my phone and it should have read 1 in 1000 US black men. It's still a horrible stat - it's the 7th highest cause of death for a black male - but it's less so than 1/10!

Puja

I don't think relief is the right word, I'll settle for saying that's less alarming if still a horrific stat. Probably not to be overlooked that death by cop surely trails suicide by a long way, and one could likely make a strong case that racial and wider societal injustice has a significant impact on the number of suicides

morepork wrote:Why are we dancing around the point?

You must be new to t'interweb

Puja wrote:We've had this on the America thread, so I'll say this and leave it here - the argument that all civil disobedience and vandalism is wrong assumes that we're in a world where the problems are getting solved or even even attended to with peaceful unobstrusive protest. Being black in America means that any interaction with the police might be the end of your life. The one I posted about in the America thread was Elijah McClain, a 5ft7 black guy who was stopped and forcibly searched last August because they thought he looked suspicious. When he had a panic attack, he was beaten, choked out, injected with a huge amount of ketamine to restrain him, and subsequently died. The people who did that weren't even fired. Appeals, petitions, and protests went unheard. No-one gave a shit about the death of Mr McClain - a completely innocent man who the police had no reason to stop, let alone search - until this uprising happened. Suddenly his case is being "reviewed" by the governor.

No, of course I'm not in favour of randomly smashing up people's houses. Being in favour of destroying a statue of Nathan Bedford Forrest that was put up in the 50s as a response to the Civil Rights movement doesn't mean you have to be in favour of all destruction of any property. Not every action is equivalent to other actions and context is important. If we lived in a world where the statues came down because people peacefully protested and agitated for it, if we lived in a world where death by police wasn't the fate of 1 in 1000 US black men because things changed when Kaepernick took a knee, if we lived in a world where police were punished for the deaths of the people they kill because people had protested peacefully, I would join you in being outraged at laws being broken when there were so many peaceful and lawful ways to get redress. Right now, that's not the world that's being lived in and civil disobedience and vandalism is accomplishing things because it can't be ignored.

I shall let you have your responses and leave you with the last word, as we've already got into this fairly decently in the America thread and I don't see much value in going through it here as well.

Puja

On a slightly lighter Trump related note, I had missed this story from a while back where he called WWE to check that Vince McMahon was okay after a big on-air limo explosion.

“Back in 2007, WWE ran a storyline that culminated with CEO Vince McMahon being blown up in a limo. You don’t need me to tell you that McMahon is still alive and was not actually blown to pieces, because you aren’t a moron who thinks wrestling is real. Apparently, the same cannot be said for our future president.”

https://deadspin.com/triple-h-donald-tr ... 1790037536

Certainly ties in with the stories we hear that his most strongly held opinions tend to just be those of the last thing he saw on TV or the last person he happened to speak to.