Doesn’t Matter Who Wins the K Race; We’re All the Same

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

I thought I had read once that the FISA court had only denied 3 warrant applications, but I appear to be wrong - https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...arrants-2017-/

I am certainly sympathetic to the idea that judges generally give law enforcement too much latitude to get search warrants.

[Hank Chinaski]

https://educateinspirechange.org/sci...kes-are-jerks/


Hello dtb? Hello?

[Hank Chinaski]

My ex-daughter -in-law was granted permanent green card status today. She is the hardest working person I've met, a great addition to the country.

While married she got her green card. They were really on the rocks by the time she could apply for permanent. The divorce was finalized so she could apply for a waiver- essentially one must show the marriage was legit and not just to get in the country.

I understand that a few years ago, the grant of the waiver would have been routine- they were legit and had a half dozen affidavits to attest, plus interviews. Problem is she is from a "shithole country" (Haiti) and it is not a few years ago.

I guess the staff people working the files are lifers though and not so swayed by the fuckhead-in-chief? Anyway, a good piece of news today.

And I assure you if she does eventually petition for citizenship she is quite pragmatic and will not squander her vote on a 3rd party candidate.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

My ex-daughter -in-law was granted permanent green card status today. She is the hardest working person I've met, a great addition to the country.

While married she got her green card. They were really on the rocks by the time she could apply for permanent. The divorce was finalized so she could apply for a waiver- essentially one must show the marriage was legit and not just to get in the country.

I understand that a few years ago, the grant of the waiver would have been routine- they were legit and had a half dozen affidavits to attest, plus interviews. Problem is she is from a "shithole country" (Haiti) and it is not a few years ago.

I guess the staff people working the files are lifers though and not so swayed by the fuckhead-in-chief? Anyway, a good piece of news today.

And I assure you if she does eventually petition for citizenship she is quite pragmatic and will not squander her vote on a 3rd party candidate.

We’re living through such a dark, hate-filled time. But at least Sebby’s taxes are a little lower.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Adder

We’re living through such a dark, hate-filled time. But at least Sebby’s taxes are a little lower.

Not to worry. We can trust Barr to uphold the rule of law, if only to save himself from embarrassment.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Not to worry. We can trust Barr to uphold the rule of law, if only to save himself from embarrassment.

You've left Crazytown and wandered into the Cuckoo Pants Wilderness. Say hello to Alex Jones for me.

https://www.rollcall.com/news/congre...mueller-report

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...=.85b99d2f1aee

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/...report-1272203

https://www.wsj.com/articles/rod-ros...rt-11555021002

https://thehill.com/policy/national-...mueller-report

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Adder

We’re living through such a dark, hate-filled time. But at least Sebby’s taxes are a little lower.

We're all gonna die!!!!


Presidents come, Presidents go. The world keeps spinning.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

You've left Crazytown and wandered into the Cuckoo Pants Wilderness. Say hello to Alex Jones for me.

https://www.rollcall.com/news/congre...mueller-report

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...=.85b99d2f1aee

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/...report-1272203

https://www.wsj.com/articles/rod-ros...rt-11555021002

https://thehill.com/policy/national-...mueller-report

I should just trust Barr because another Republican political appointee says so. I don't think you are really such an idiot, but I question why your desire to be oppositional here impels you to say idiotic things.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

I should just trust Barr because another Republican political appointee says so. I don't think you are really such an idiot, but I question why your desire to be oppositional here impels you to say idiotic things.

Rosenstein has zero allegiance to Trump. Trump has been ripping him in the media for the past several months.

Rosenstein has nothing to lose. He’s a respected career service type who’ll slide into a lucrative private sector gig.

This interview was the moment where Rosenstein could have damned Trump with any of a number of responses.

Instead, not only did he get Barr’s back, but he called people like you “bizarre.”

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Rosenstein has zero allegiance to Trump. Trump has been ripping him in the media for the past several months.

Rosenstein has nothing to lose. He’s a respected career service type who’ll slide into a lucrative private sector gig.

This interview was the moment where Rosenstein could have damned Trump with any of a number of responses.

Instead, not only did he get Barr’s back, but he called people like you “bizarre.”

"Trust in the Federalist Society, because otherwise Democrats." Not sure why you think I'm ever going to be persuaded by an argument that boils down to insisting that what I think it bizarre. You have endless sympathy for morons who voted for Trump, but can't find a way to speak to people who didn't.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

"Trust in the Federalist Society, because otherwise Democrats." Not sure why you think I'm ever going to be persuaded by an argument that boils down to insisting that what I think it bizarre. You have endless sympathy for morons who voted for Trump, but can't find a way to speak to people who didn't.

This proves my point. You’re so blindered, so locked into the Team D vs. Team R element, you can’t evaluate anything outside that binary construct.

I don’t care about people for or against Trump. What I’m interested in is the tribal behavior. You’ve locked in hard, and no matter the exculpatory information that comes out, Trump Must Be Culpable, Damnit!

Consider this: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2...=pocket-newtab

Group fervor is fascinating. The reaction to politicians since Clinton has become more and more extreme. We blame Trump for creating polarization, but when conspiracy theories are accepted (or aggressively wished to be true) here, where we should be rational enough to be dispassionate, it suggests we might be the polarizing agents, and Trump the inevitable extremist the country deserves.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

This proves my point. You’re so blindered, so locked into the Team D vs. Team R element, you can’t evaluate anything outside that binary construct.

Seriously, go fuck yourself. You pretend to talk to me, but it's a pretense. You don't engage with what I say, but invent reasons to tell me that I'm thinking irrationally. It's intellectually lazy, and it's disrespectful. Go find someone who is impressed with your crap and will take it seriously, because I don't. If you want to have a conversation with me, it's starts with actually engaging with anything I say.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Seriously, go fuck yourself. You pretend to talk to me, but it's a pretense. You don't engage with what I say, but invent reasons to tell me that I'm thinking irrationally. It's intellectually lazy, and it's disrespectful. Go find someone who is impressed with your crap and will take it seriously, because I don't. If you want to have a conversation with me, it's starts with actually engaging with anything I say.

Talk about what? There is no honest conversation to be had here.

Whatever exculpatory information comes out will be dismissed by the anti-Trump crowd. You argued here that Rosenstein, a 30 year career prosecutor, and the man who authorized the raid on Cohen - the act placing Trump in the greatest jeopardy in all of these investigations - is a hack who's doing Barr's bidding, which by extension makes him a hack acting for Trump. Rosenstein, a man whose public sector career has been damaged directly and indirectly by Trump, is nevertheless making false (or at least disingenuous) statements to protect Trump.

Unlike the exculpatory findings we know, whatever bad facts come out in the full report you will trumpet. "Look. Trump is culpable. He's done so much wrong." Every conceivable effort to inflate those facts to argue Trump should be prosecuted criminally or through impeachment will be made.

This is entering Benghazi territory. It's entering Whitewater territory.

My conversation with you would be, this incessant criticism of everything this buffoon does, this obsessive fixation on the Mueller investigation -- this is "picking a side" in a manner beneath any rational person. It recalls the argument, "Obama is a socialist!" No matter how much you'd tell a right winger that Obama was, at least economically, a classic old school Republican or moderate Democrat, and show them evidence of that (usually in their portfolio going up, or the cynically business friendly Holder Doctrine), they'd find some quantum of evidence to prove he was a socialist.

When people do this, they are against, or for, something. They are locking in and not really looking to find out what happened, but looking for a result -- in this case, a finding that Trump did something awful. There's some "resistance" thinking there, a feeling that justice is not being had because, well, "justice has to align with what I think happened." And if it doesn't, There Was a Conspiracy to Avoid It.

Maybe there wasn't. Maybe there's no there there, or at least not much of a there there. Maybe by courting Russian assistance on live TV, Trump hacked our political and justice systems. I don't know. But I do know this. Rosenstein and barr know a lot more than we do, and Rosenstein has every reason to deep six Trump, and no reason to help him.

You tell me I can't talk to people who didn't vote for Trump? Recall, I didn't vote for Trump. (Cue Hank here.) I talk to people who detest Trump all the time. Many Republicans I know dislike him. The people who are impossible to talk to, however, are the people who insist that whatever facts come out, he's a criminal and should be thrown out of office. It takes me right back to 1997, to Republicans being led around by Richard Mellon Scaife, investigating and castigating the Clintons. Were the Clintons involved with dirtballs in Arkansas? Yes. Was there a there there adequate to impeach? No. Was there ever a good reason to impeach a President who was presiding over such a robust economy? Christ, no.

Trump is dirty. But to accuse Rosenstein of participation in a cover-up betrays a deep-seated annoyance that Trump wasn't dirty enough to remove via impeachment or resignation following Mueller stating he'd found criminal conduct... an inability to accept have that what you were certain was coming ultimately did not and likely will not materialize. Republicans still think Hillary and Obama got away with something.

The only silver lining with Trump is, unlike the Clintons, his family will exit politics permanently when he is done. Twenty years of investigations of the Trump family would be the most boring and mindless exercise in political and media history.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Presidents come, Presidents go. The world keeps spinning.

You've heard of this term the kids are using, "privilege," right?

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Talk about what? There is no honest conversation to be had here.

Whatever exculpatory information comes out will be dismissed by the anti-Trump crowd. You argued here that Rosenstein, a 30 year career prosecutor, and the man who authorized the raid on Cohen - the act placing Trump in the greatest jeopardy in all of these investigations - is a hack who's doing Barr's bidding, which by extension makes him a hack acting for Trump. Rosenstein, a man whose public sector career has been damaged directly and indirectly by Trump, is nevertheless making false (or at least disingenuous) statements to protect Trump.

Unlike the exculpatory findings we know, whatever bad facts come out in the full report you will trumpet. "Look. Trump is culpable. He's done so much wrong." Every conceivable effort to inflate those facts to argue Trump should be prosecuted criminally or through impeachment will be made.

This is entering Benghazi territory. It's entering Whitewater territory.

My conversation with you would be, this incessant criticism of everything this buffoon does, this obsessive fixation on the Mueller investigation -- this is "picking a side" in a manner beneath any rational person. It recalls the argument, "Obama is a socialist!" No matter how much you'd tell a right winger that Obama was, at least economically, a classic old school Republican or moderate Democrat, and show them evidence of that (usually in their portfolio going up, or the cynically business friendly Holder Doctrine), they'd find some quantum of evidence to prove he was a socialist.

When people do this, they are against, or for, something. They are locking in and not really looking to find out what happened, but looking for a result -- in this case, a finding that Trump did something awful. There's some "resistance" thinking there, a feeling that justice is not being had because, well, "justice has to align with what I think happened." And if it doesn't, There Was a Conspiracy to Avoid It.

Maybe there wasn't. Maybe there's no there there, or at least not much of a there there. Maybe by courting Russian assistance on live TV, Trump hacked our political and justice systems. I don't know. But I do know this. Rosenstein and barr know a lot more than we do, and Rosenstein has every reason to deep six Trump, and no reason to help him.

You tell me I can't talk to people who didn't vote for Trump? Recall, I didn't vote for Trump. (Cue Hank here.) I talk to people who detest Trump all the time. Many Republicans I know dislike him. The people who are impossible to talk to, however, are the people who insist that whatever facts come out, he's a criminal and should be thrown out of office. It takes me right back to 1997, to Republicans being led around by Richard Mellon Scaife, investigating and castigating the Clintons. Were the Clintons involved with dirtballs in Arkansas? Yes. Was there a there there adequate to impeach? No. Was there ever a good reason to impeach a President who was presiding over such a robust economy? Christ, no.

Trump is dirty. But to accuse Rosenstein of participation in a cover-up betrays a deep-seated annoyance that Trump wasn't dirty enough to remove via impeachment or resignation following Mueller stating he'd found criminal conduct... an inability to accept have that what you were certain was coming ultimately did not and likely will not materialize. Republicans still think Hillary and Obama got away with something.

The only silver lining with Trump is, unlike the Clintons, his family will exit politics permanently when he is done. Twenty years of investigations of the Trump family would be the most boring and mindless exercise in political and media history.

Sebby, he told you to go fuck yourself. This is not fucking yourself. Really. Stop. Pause. And fuck yourself.