Post Superbowl Open Thread

I did watch the Superbowl – it was quite good. Still a bit too much SJW in the commercials, but the game, itself, was great as a game. I’d like to think the NFL has learned its lesson…but it probably hasn’t. The ratings for the Superbowl were at an 8 year low…and if the NFL wants to turn that around, they’d better drop the SJW drivel.

Of course, Philly then went on to behave rather badly. That is something I just don’t get – rioting after a game. But it seems a thing in the deep, blue cities. I’ll leave it to you to speculate why.

Always remember that the Trump/Russia thing started with the paranoid conspiracy theory that Putin had altered votes in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan to throw the election to Trump. This did not happen. We know it didn’t happen because you can’t do that – it isn’t physically possible…and, of course, Stein’s recounts confirmed that the vote was valid. But that didn’t stop the Democrats from running with it. They just can’t get over the fact that Hillary lost – and so, here we are, 14 months later, still wallowing in their psychological stew. But do keep in mind where it came from – it is like starting a math equation with 1+1=3: no matter what you do after that, it will be wrong. Those who are trying to claim that this or that aspect of the Trump/Russia investigation is valid are being quite silly about the whole thing…the underlying basis of it is false; all that follows from that underlying basis is also false. It can’t be otherwise…no amount of addition to a lie will ever make a lie true. This is why I’m quite confident that Trump will never be tripped up over Trump/Russia…there’s nothing to trip him up over. Its also why I think that Trump should just shut it down: yeah, it would cause shrieks, but that will be rapidly drowned out by rising wages and increased employment.

Steele apparently had a second dossier about Trump…and it was peddled back and forth between State and Team Hillary. This is the real scandal: that Obama’s Administration placed itself at Hillary’s disposal for the 2016 campaign. That is what we need to investigate.

A Colt’s linebacker was killed by a drunk driver…this tragedy apparently caused by an illegal immigrant. There’s a reason to enforce the laws, folks.

The MSM is getting filled with heart-wrenching stories of poor, sweet Dreamers being deported by that cruel, racist Trump…and Don Surber digs into one and finds, surprise!, that the MSM isn’t really giving the whole story. Of course they aren’t. Bottom line, folks, is that getting deported from the United States isn’t easy. You’ve really got to work at it, especially if you’ve been here any length of time. The subject of the linked story did work at it – getting convicted on drug offenses. Obama let him skate, Trump is enforcing the law.

We have been working on a thing called a “railgun” for a while…and haven’t done a very good job at it. Now, China is picking up the idea. This is bad news – we daren’t let China get ahead of us on this. This is revolutionary stuff – it could be as decisive a change to naval warfare as was the introduction of the aircraft carrier. The railgun will fire a projectile at about Mach 7 and will have a range of about 100 miles…though I’ve read that this could be extended to 200 miles. There is no explosive…it is just a piece of metal fired so fast that it completely destroys whatever it hits (think about it: we’re basically reviving the cannon ball…and this might revive the Battleship: we were about to build the USS Montana BB-67 when we dropped the Battleship concept, so I say we go with that when we start again). Nothing in anyone’s inventory at present can withstand it (though, I’ve also read of some new metals being developed which might provide protection against it…in the battle between offense and defense, there’s never a final answer). The main thing is that if such a weapon is practical (and it looks like it is, though more R&D is necessary), then we want them…and we want them before anyone else has them. Imagine a ship carrying, say, four such weapons parked 20 miles off an enemy coast…anything up to 80 miles inland from it is doomed. Time for Trump to get busy on this – and I think he is: you might recall he wants an end to the Defense budget sequestration and it has been, partially, lack of money which has held us back here.

67 thoughts on “Post Superbowl Open Thread

  1. Amazona February 5, 2018 / 3:22 pm

    …if the NFL wants to turn that around, they’d better drop the SJW drivel…. and if we want the NFL to turn it around we’d better stop supporting them.

    It cracks me up to see someone who supported it all by watching the game, and the ads, say it all has to be “turned around”. Yeah, the Correction Fairy will step in and magically “turn it all around” while the subsidizers are still glued to their TV sets and advertisers look at the numbers and decide they have a good audience for their crap.

    The ads are what they are because they know they have access to a lot of otherwise conservative viewers they probably couldn’t reach otherwise. The NFL approves them, the conservatives see them because they have to get their football fix, and it all rolls on. Oh, there’s a little symbolic fussing but nothing changes because no one wants to pay the price to exert the pressure to force a change.

    • M. Noonan February 6, 2018 / 1:06 am

      Pardon me, I’ve been trying to get the swelling down on the side of my face all day!

      Point taken!

  2. Cluster February 5, 2018 / 3:40 pm

    It was a great game – one of the best ever. And I loved it when TE Zach Ertz, Coach Doug Pederson, and MVP QB Nick Foles gave thanks and praise to their savior Jesus Christ before mentioning the game at the post game interview. All of them are stand up guys and represent the NFL VERY WELL.

    Those men are worth supporting and watching.

    • Amazona February 5, 2018 / 11:09 pm

      All of them are stand up guys and represent the NFL VERY WELL. Too little, too late—-and no, they do NOT “represent the NFL very well”. You know who represents the NFL? THE NFL The spineless lowlifes who peed down their legs and gave in to the blackmail of a few radical players, who basically held the whole game hostage so they could pose and posture in front of the country. The Lefties who banned a veterans’ ad at the precious Super Bowl but let Leftist messaging in.

      Three good guys are not “the NFL”. And a nice shout-out to God from a couple of guys after winning a game does’t make up in any way for the behavior of the league, its management, most of its coaches and way too many players.

      “Those men are worth supporting and watching.” Fine. Put them in a football league that is ethical, that deserves respect and actually EARNS loyalty and I’ll be happy to support them. Did they have the integrity to stand up to their spineless coaches and virtue signaling teammates? Did they speak up for respect for the country? Did they do the right thing when there was something on the line? Or did they just go along with the program till it was all over and then do a little virtue signaling of their own when there was nothing to lose?

  3. casper3031 February 5, 2018 / 4:37 pm

    I skipped most of the game. Took the dogs for a long walk instead. I did watch the last 5 minutes. Very exciting.

    “Always remember that the Trump/Russia thing started with the paranoid conspiracy theory that Putin had altered votes in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan to throw the election to Trump. This did not happen”

    I agree that Putin didn’t physically alter votes in any of those states and as far as i can tell no one has suggested otherwise. What we do know is the Russians targeted voters in those ares using social media. Both Twitter and Facebook confirms this. We also know that the Russians hacked the DNC emails and used wikileaks to release them as a way of influencing the election. That has been confirmed by numerous security organizations both here and abroad. Did all of this affect the election? I’m guessing it did, but it would be impossible to prove how much. The fact is though that a foreign country actively attempted to influence the election. The question now is did Russia coordinate with the Trump campaign? What would Russia expect in return? Perhaps not imposing sanctions passed by congress.

    • Cluster February 5, 2018 / 6:48 pm

      Cap, that’s not at all what the story is about. Russia trying to interfere in our elections should be expected and in fact Obama knew about months before the election and chose not to say anything. It was also revealed that the DNC DID RIG the primary, and we can thank the Russians/Wikileaks for exposing that. Poor Bernie. Secondly, the only people that DID influence the election was the Clinton campaign, and now Seth Rich is dead.

      The serious issue at hand is that one political party paid foreign operatives to fabricate oppo research against their political opponent and then used partisan players within the DOJ and FBI to obtain a FISA warrant to spy on a private American citizen and ultimately their opponents campaign. And they lied to a federal judge, not once, but three times to obtain that warrant.

      Does that concern you?

      • casper3031 February 5, 2018 / 7:45 pm

        The private citizen (Carter Page) had been on the FBI’s radar since 2013 when they warned him The Russians were trying to recruit him. The DOJ and FBI “partisan players were mostly Republicans. The FBI has never been headed by a Democrat in it’s history. Nor did they lie to the judge in obtaining the warrant and apparently were finding something from the taps or the court wouldn’t have renewed it twice. Fusion GPS was first hired by The Washington Examiner to do opposing research on Trump and Steele has a sterling reputation for finding information about the Russians. Much of what he found has since been verified by other sources.

        What concerns me is that Trump now refuses to to enforce the sanctions congress voted on and he signed into law. Why would he do that?

      • M. Noonan February 6, 2018 / 1:09 am

        Because conducting foreign policy based upon hysteria isn’t wise? Just spitballin’ here…

        As it is, our increased oil production is doing more to harm Russia’s position than any sanctions we could think of…and Hillary and Obama both hated our increased oil production. So, you tell me – who was doing more for Russia?

        The main thing to remember, however, is that Russia isn’t this existential threat. China is our problem. Iran is our problem. Russia is just Russia – you deal with it and move on. It will always be Russia…crafty, dishonest, always looking out for the easy steal, always trying to throw a spoke in your wheel. But they have a GDP smaller than South Korea’s…

      • Cluster February 5, 2018 / 9:16 pm

        I can’t help you Cap, nor do I want to. You are as interesting and educated as a bag of hammers.

      • casper3031 February 5, 2018 / 9:48 pm

        Sorry Cluster that I’m so dumb you can’t answer my questions nor respond to the points I made. Have a wonderful night.

      • Retired Spook February 6, 2018 / 10:00 am

        What concerns me is that Trump now refuses to to enforce the sanctions congress voted on and he signed into law. Why would he do that?

        I’m guessing the complete answer is above your paygrade, Casper, but this is about as good an unclassified answer as I’ve seen.

      • Retired Spook February 6, 2018 / 12:06 pm

        Sorry Cluster that I’m so dumb

        Well, recognizing the problem is half the battle.

    • Retired Spook February 5, 2018 / 6:50 pm

      Did all of this affect the election? I’m guessing it did, but it would be impossible to prove how much.

      Probably not as much as Hillary not campaigning in Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin. And I don’t think the Russians had anything to do with that.

      I did not watch the game, and I can’t remember the last time I missed a Super Bowl. I have this problem with people who give me the finger and then ask for my time and my money. Same goes for entertainers – I don’t care if they have won 3 Academy Awards or 4 Grammys. Withholding my support, my time and my money is the only non-violent recourse I have for people who don’t recognize my right to disagree with them.

    • Amazona February 5, 2018 / 11:02 pm

      “We also know that the Russians hacked the DNC emails and used wikileaks to release them as a way of influencing the election. “

      No, we don’t know that.

      This is what we DO know.

      We know that the only people with direct knowledge of the DNC emails have repeatedly explained that they were not “hacked” but were physically copied, by someone who had access to them, within the DNC and then physically handed off to someone who turned them over to wiki leaks. This has been explained over and over again, including several official comments by Julian Assange steadfastly denying that their information came from any electronic intrusion into the DNC computers.

      There has been speculation that this information was copied and turned over by someone in the DNC outraged at the sabotage of the Sanders campaign by Hillary supporters and the DNC itself.

      “That..” (the alleged “hacking” of the information turned over to wikileaks) “…has been confirmed by numerous security organizations both here and abroad.”

      No, it hasn’t.

      We know that at some point the DNC claimed its computers had been “hacked”—–however, they denied access to the computers by the FBI computer forensics people and hired their own people to allegedly examine the computers and prepare a report for them, which they then presented to the FBI. When the FBI was finally able to examine the system they found some indications of Russian hacking, but several of the FBI people said the “clues” were so clumsy and blatant they did not resemble the subtle and sophisticated fingerprints of Russian hacking they had seen in the past. There has never been any untainted evidence of what, exactly, WAS taken in that alleged electronic invasion of the DNC records. That whole claim stunk to high heaven.

      The only actual evidence known about the source of the wikileaks information has come from wikileaks, and it has steadfastly denied that it came from a hack.

      Twitter and Facebook have alleged that some Russian agency was responsible for some social media trolling regarding the election. Twitter and Facebook have both been identified as strongly Liberal and have used their forums to discriminate against conservatives. If you choose to believe that they are telling the truth about this, go ahead.

      “The fact is though that a foreign country actively attempted to influence the election.” Except that this is not a fact, it is speculation fueled by gossip, innuendo and outright lying.

      (Just a quick question here, Cappy—–how did you feel when China was actively trying to influence an American election by funneling illegal campaign funds to Bill Clinton? Manipulation of our intelligence services in efforts to cover this up may have contributed to the intelligence failure that led to 9/11. )

      Only the most naive American can fail to recognize that Russia would benefit by domestic unrest within the United States. If these people are so blinded by irrational hatred of the Right that they willingly let themselves be led around by their collective noses (pun intended, to quote Spook) and engage in activities ranging from civil unrest to overt efforts to subvert our government because Russia has tossed out some shiny thing for them to chase after, that speaks to their intelligence and integrity, not to the value of what they are howling after.

      The big thing that no conspiracy theorist is willing to admit is that IF any of the revealed information, no matter what the source, influenced the election, it is because it told Americans some ugly truths about Hillary Clinton. If this alleged interference and alleged impact had been based on lies, there might be a slightly more legitimate reason to be upset. But whoever or whatever the source of the material might have been, IT WAS TRUE.

      And truth is lethal to the Left.

      And THAT is what has the Left’s panties in a twist, and THAT is what the Left avoids discussing.

      What you people are saying, Casper, is that you wish the truth about Clinton had never come out because then maybe she would have been able to continue fooling enough people to win an election.

      What we are saying is that some of you didn’t care. And that is the saddest, ugliest truth to come out of this whole thing.

      If Russia DID have anything to do with revealing this information about Hillary, we as a nation owe them a great debt of gratitude. This is the choice you Lefties have to deal with . (1) They didn’t and you have bought into a load of crap, not even well disguised as anything but crap or (2) they did and we should throw them a party. Vote here. And, as the Dems say, vote often.

    • M. Noonan February 6, 2018 / 1:11 am

      The recounts were started because the left believed that Trump could not have won honestly – that there must have been some vote tampering to give Trump the win. Team Hillary, Fusion GPS dossier in hand, just managed to leverage this bit of Progressive insanity into Trump/Russia. The ultimate basis of Trump/Russia is 1+1=3…that Putin cheated to ensure Trump’s victory…as if Putin would want an America vigorously committed to protecting American interests around the globe. It is just stupid.

      • casper3031 February 6, 2018 / 1:29 am

        Mark,
        The recounts were started because the results were close. No one is arguing the results of the recounts. So what has Trump done to counter Putin? Why won’t he enforce the sanctions congress passed and he signed into law? What has Trump done to stop Putin and Russia from expanding their influence?

      • M. Noonan February 6, 2018 / 1:59 am

        Bull – if that was the reason, why was Stein used for it? It wasn’t close enough to require a recount…everyone knows that recounts don’t change results even if the difference is just a thousand votes. There was no doubt that Trump had won fair and square…that is why Hillary conceded.

        The whole thing is based upon the paranoid delusion that Russians “hacked the election”.

  4. casper3031 February 6, 2018 / 12:58 am

    So let’s look at your response.

    “We know that the only people with direct knowledge of the DNC emails have repeatedly explained that they were not “hacked” but were physically copied, by someone who had access to them, within the DNC and then physically handed off to someone who turned them over to wiki leaks. This has been explained over and over again, including several official comments by Julian Assange steadfastly denying that their information came from any electronic intrusion into the DNC computers.”

    Funny that the NSA, FBI, CIA, and number of other security organizations from our country and others disagree with you. Sad that you believe Julian Assange over all of these organizations.

    “The only actual evidence known about the source of the wikileaks information has come from wikileaks, and it has steadfastly denied that it came from a hack.”

    And you believe them over everyone else. Sad.

    “Twitter and Facebook have alleged that some Russian agency was responsible for some social media trolling regarding the election. Twitter and Facebook have both been identified as strongly Liberal and have used their forums to discriminate against conservatives. If you choose to believe that they are telling the truth about this, go ahead.”

    They didn’t allege it, they testified before congress that it happened with data.

    “The fact is though that a foreign country actively attempted to influence the election.” Except that this is not a fact, it is speculation fueled by gossip, innuendo and outright lying.”

    “Only the most naive American can fail to recognize that Russia would benefit by domestic unrest within the United States”

    Thanks for making my point for me.

    So no one has answered my question. Why Trump refuses to to enforce the sanctions congress voted on and he signed into law. Why we he do that?

    Thank God the Trump economy is doing well.

    • Retired Spook February 6, 2018 / 9:45 am

      Funny that the NSA, FBI, CIA, and number of other security organizations from our country and others disagree with you. Sad that you believe Julian Assange over all of these organizations.

      The upper echelons of the organizations you mention are occupied by known liars who got caught attempting first to use their power to influence an election and then to overthrow a duly elected president. It IS sad that Julian Assange is more credible than our own leaders.

      • Cluster February 6, 2018 / 9:56 am

        But to people like Casper, pointing out the partisan bent and corruption of top DOJ and FBI officials is tantamount to maligning the entire department, rank and file on up. That is of course only when conservatives point it out. When liberals attacked Comey for even investigating Hillary, that was entirely acceptable.

    • Amazona February 6, 2018 / 10:49 am

      We all know Casper is a tool, a vapid little parrot of Leftist nonsense. Here he is at it again. He says, of my comment that there is no proof that the DNC computers were hacked at all much less hacked by “the Russians: “… the NSA, FBI, CIA, and number of other security organizations from our country and others ….”

      Casper, please cite your sources. I am not aware of anyone other than the FBI being involved in the alleged computer hack. Don’t bother with sources from other countries.

      Here is what people learn when they get their news from sources other than Colbert and the Jimmies: I’m quoting large chunks of the article as I doubt that Casper has the integrity to actually go to a link if he thinks it might rebut his claims. (emphasis mine)

      “…One of the most crucial pieces of evidence is being withheld from Senate and FBI investigations into whether Russia interfered with the 2016 U.S. presidential elections.

      A cornerstone of the Democrat-led allegations that Russia helped Trump get elected is based heavily on the belief that Russian cyberattacks hit the servers of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and the devices of Clinton campaign manager John Podesta, and stole their emails, which it then provided to whistleblower website WikiLeaks.

      However, according to former FBI Director James Comey, the DNC never gave the FBI permission to investigate the devices.

      By blocking federal investigations into the hacked servers, the DNC is withholding a key piece of evidence that would either prove or refute allegations that Russia was behind the cyberattacks.

      Comey said during a March 20 House Intelligence Committee hearing that the FBI “never got direct access to the machines themselves.”

      On Jan. 10, Comey told the Senate Intelligence Committee on that the FBI had made “multiple requests at different levels” to gain access to the devices for their investigations, but in the end they needed to rely on a private company hired by the DNC to “share with us what they saw.”

      He confirmed the FBI had requested and was denied access to both the DNC servers and Podesta’s personal devices.

      So the entire claim of hacking, and particularly that the Russians were behind the hacking, came THROUGH the FBI but FROM a company hired by the DNC, which did its own “investigation” and then told the FBI what it wanted the FBI to believe. This firm was, of course, hired by the DNC. (Seeing a pattern here?)
      ………………………..

      “After the DNC hired CrowdStrike, the company published a blog post on June 15, 2016, outlining its claims that the cyberattack on the DNC was carried out by Russia.

      Claims from the CrowdStrike blog post were subsequently used by the FBI in a similar report, released during Trump’s transition into office, published in conjunction with the Department of Homeland Security on Dec. 29, 2016.

      Neither the CrowdStrike blog post nor the FBI report contained conclusive evidence that Russia was behind the attack, however. While CrowdStrike stands by its claims, much of its analysis has since unraveled.

      CrowdStrike’s hasty investigation was based on inconclusive methodologies, which merely looked at tools used in the attack, the type of target, and code used in carrying out the attack.Not only are tools and code such as these often bought, sold, and shared between hacker groups, but, as many cybersecurity experts have pointed out, it’s also easy to spoof such information to intentionally frame a target.

      “Malicious actors can easily position their breach to be attributed to Russia,” states a blog post from the Institute for Critical Infrastructure Technology, a cybersecurity think tank.

      “It would be easy to baselessly declare that all of the attacks were launched by Russia based on the malware employed,” it states.

      CrowdStrike received additional criticism over its methodologies while trying to attribute other cyberattacks to “Fancy Bear” and “Cozy Bear,” the names it gave to the alleged Russian hackers.
      It issued a report on Dec. 22, 2016, in which it claimed to have evidence that the Russian government hacked a Ukrainian artillery app to disable howitzers that were being used against pro-Russian separatists.

      That evidence has since been discredited. Ukraine’s Ministry of Defense noted false information in the report and also said the alleged cyberattack never took place. The CrowdStrike report also claimed to have spoken with the International Institute for Strategic Studies for its analysis, but the institute disavowed the report and said the contact never took place.”

      https://www.theepochtimes.com/democratic-party-would-not-let-fbi-investigate-servers-for-russia-hack

      So, Casper, are these multiple US intelligence agencies actually claiming that their own investigations have proved that “the Russians” hacked into the DNC? And if so, on what do they base their claims, as the forensic evidence of any such intrusion was destroyed by the DNC’s own “investigators”?

      In the meantime, there are credible witnesses, actual real live identified human beings, who have repeatedly explained that the information that was given to wikileaks did not come from an electronic invasion of DNC records but from a DNC insider who physically copied this information and physically handed it to an identified human being in a face to face meeting. Their explanation was that the information had been taken by a DNC staffer who had supported Sanders and was disgusted by the way the DNC had manipulated the primaries to cut Sanders out and nominate Clinton.

      And this makes Casper sad, so sad.

      (And of course there is that unfortunate “coincidence” of a DNC staffer who had been a Sanders supporter who was very upset by the DNC’s interference in the Dem primaries and the shenanigans by which the nomination was handed to Hillary, who was found murdered not long after the DNC data was released on wikileaks, in a “robbery” in which nothing was taken.)

      • Cluster February 6, 2018 / 11:25 am

        RIP Seth Rich. He made the mistake of getting in between Hillary Clinton and power.

    • Amazona February 6, 2018 / 11:17 am

      Casper quotes some of my comments and then smirks “Thanks for making my point for me”.

      Boy, talk about missing the point completely! That’s our Casper, as clueless as ever.

      My point, Cappy, and I will expand upon it a little as you clearly cannot process information well enough to connect dots on your own, is this:

      Russia is not our friend. While we may have some interests in common and have to play nice, they benefit, in their own minds, by any weakness of ours. The ability to understand this is necessary to move on to the next dot, and I am not sure you have it. But I will continue.

      Any internal strife and domestic instability in the United States is a benefit to Russia. Every nation understands this about every other nation which may pose an eventual threat to it. A nation which was founded on the creation of and development of intense domestic upheaval and which has since been governed by a political ideology which can only flourish in an atmosphere of unrest and chaos, such as Russia, is going to be even more aware of the political advantages of chaos in an opponent.

      Still with me, Teacher-Boy?

      OK, and I’m typing slowly here so you can keep up.

      What interest, other than that of fomenting strife and domestic discord in the United States, would Russia have in our presidential election? One of our candidates was notorious for having erratic and unfocused international policies that were formed primarily by what would enrich her personally, and a history of not only being able to be bought but a history of Pay to Play with Russia. So it would seem that this candidate would be the one preferred by Putin.

      On the other hand, both Clintons had betrayed Putin in different ways (which I outlined in a much earlier blog post, about a year ago) and on a personal basis he loathed them.

      So it would not be unreasonable to think that these two things balanced each other out, as we have no way of knowing if the chance for revenge would have outweighed the political advantage of having a lightweight like Hillary in the White House.

      Trump was a wild card. He had changed sides and changed his mind and changed his position so often he couldn’t really be predictable. And there was no reason to think he could be bought. There doesn’t seem to be anything indicating a preference for Trump over Clinton.

      So that brings us back to the basic concept of just stirring things up in the United States, to get us off balance. Back to that Leftist tactic of creating chaos. With millions of Americans not much smarter than Casper, willing to be led around by Leftist hysteria and lies, all Russia would have to do would be to plant some hints that there was a skunk in the Trump woodpile, and let the Lefty useful idiots build on it. Send in some paid antagonists using fascist tactics in pretend-protests against non-existent fascists and the useful idiots will fall for the theater and howl at the moon right along with them.

      And THAT was my point, which went so far over the head of the “teacher” (who still does not know, after decades in the classroom, that “it’s” means “it is” and is not, never has been and never will be a possessive, as just one example of how ill-equipped he was to teach the young) that he didn’t even hear its whistle as it passed over.

      The POINT, Casper, is that Russia didn’t need to try to influence who was elected, and probably didn’t even seriously try. The POINT, Casper, is that all Russia had to do and in all probability did do, was throw some gasoline on the fires of Leftist ignorance and surliness and rage, and stand back to watch them run around with their hair on fire.

      Which they did, and which you did.

      So thank YOU for making MY point.

      • Retired Spook February 6, 2018 / 12:58 pm

        Trump was a wild card. He had changed sides and changed his mind and changed his position so often he couldn’t really be predictable. And there was no reason to think he could be bought.

        Hence the made up dossier that attempted to portray him as someone who could be blackmailed.

  5. Cluster February 6, 2018 / 7:53 am

    I marvel at people like Casper who are so blind and stupid they refuse to see the truth. They refuse to acknowledge that Hillary Clinton committed felonies by setting up a private server to conduct her StateSec duties, that Comey, Lynch, Holder, etc, went out of their way to cover for her, that Strozk, Ohr, Page, Abedin, and Mills, all played roles in ultimately exonerating Clinton despite her and many of her colleagues blatantly lying to the FBI about the issue, that the DNC rigged the primary meaning of course they were going to try and rig the general, that Hillary Clinton did pay foreign operatives for fabricated oppo research, that they lied to federal judges, that they deceived the FISA court, that they weaponized the IRS, that they …….. it goes on and on. But people like casper are wanting to know why sanctions aren’t enforced !!!! UN fucking believable. Obama GIVES Crimea to Russia, and denuclearizes the Baltic States AND Casper wants to know why Trump doesn’t impose sanctions.

    People like Casper need to be dismissed. They’re too stupid to live.

    Re: the NFL – I am more upset over the increasing bad calls during the game, the endless commercials, and the celebrity culture taking over than I am with a bunch of morons who disrespect the flag. Let’s be honest, if it wasn’t for the NFL many of these players would be in prison, so I don’t give them a lot of credit for their critical thinking abilities. They are merely pawns being used by the SJW culture, and you are right, the NFL needs to grow a spine and do something, but I won’t let them stop me from enjoying a good game and to watch truly deserving people win.

  6. Cluster February 6, 2018 / 8:30 am

    Here Casper, I found someone you might be able to relate to. Chris Matthews:

    MSNBC’s Chris Matthews inexplicably referred to House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi as an “ethnic sort of person” during a “Hardball” segment Monday night.

    “Picking on somebody from the coasts, usually ethnic, and making them the poster person of the Democratic Party is old business for the Republicans,” Matthews claimed. “They did that for Tip O’Neil, they did it after Teddy, and now they do it after Nancy Pelosi.”

    “They take an ethnic sort of person from one of the coasts and make them the banner person,” he concluded.

    Matthews also alleged that Republicans like to attack Pelosi because she “looks well-off, she’s well-dressed, she seems like somebody who comes from pretty good circumstances.”

    You and Chris share about the same IQ and estrogen levels.

  7. Cluster February 6, 2018 / 8:43 am

    Here’s another example of people who refuse to see the truth – because admitting the truth, would be an admission that everything they believe is wrong:

    CBS and NBC ignored the killing of Indianapolis Colts linebacker Edwin Jackson at the hands of a drunk-driving illegal immigrant during their popular morning and evening shows Monday. Instead, CBS Evening News hyped Space X launching a Tesla Roadster into space and NBC Nightly News whined about how cold the WINTER Olympics were going to be.

    • Retired Spook February 6, 2018 / 9:38 am

      Many initial reports only said that Jackson was killed by a drunk driver with no mention of the fact that he was a twice-deported illegal alien.

  8. Cluster February 6, 2018 / 8:52 am

    Democrats are mocking everyday Americans for being excited on having extra “crumbs” in their paychecks, and Chuck U. Schumer has announced that he will not work with Trump on resolving DACA and legalizing 1.8 million kids.

    And that right there sums up the authoritarian Democrat Party. They are worthless, sub human people

  9. Cluster February 6, 2018 / 10:05 am

    We need more people like this:

  10. Retired Spook February 6, 2018 / 2:26 pm

    From the YCMTSU file:

    Speaking to a group of college students at Georgetown University, as part of a panel on “Women & Human Rights,” Clinton addressed a woman in the audience who suggested that weather, typically an objective force that impacts populations equally regardless of their innate characteristics, was, in fact, sexist.

    Clinton, of course, immediately agreed.

    “I would say that particularly for women, you’re absolutely right, they will bear the brunt of looking for the food, looking for the firewood, looking for the place to migrate to when all of the grass is finally gone as the desertification moves south and you have to keep moving your livestock for your crops are no longer growing, they’re burning up in the intense heat that we’re now seeing reported across North Africa, into the Middle East, and into India,” she said.

    “So yes,” Clinton continued, “women once again, will be the primary…primarily burdened with the problems of climate change.”

  11. Retired Spook February 6, 2018 / 2:32 pm

    One of the best comments of all time (in response to article about New York Safe Act that immediately turned 70,000 handgun permit holders into felons:

    It seems the Supreme Court has already given these unfortunate NY gun owners the way out. Since they are now criminals, and the court has declared that criminals are exempt from registration because it violates their 5th Amendment right, they have nothing to fear. (irony, my friends)

  12. Retired Spook February 6, 2018 / 3:05 pm

    I had figured the reason Rod Rosenstein was the only original conspirator still standing at DOJ was because he was either very smart or very good at keeping his head down. Guess I was wrong.

    Threatening those who have control of your salary doesn’t seem like a prudent act to me. I hope Deputy AG Rosenstein’s resume is up to date — well, except for the part where he conspired against a sitting president.

    • Cluster February 6, 2018 / 3:08 pm

      He is a bad egg …. among many

      DRAIN THE SWAMP

    • Amazona February 6, 2018 / 4:45 pm

      But Rosenstein’s efforts to shut down a Congressional investigation wasn’t obstruction of justice, no sirree. His threat to use the power and authority of his office to retaliate against investigators wasn’t out of line, nope.

      It’s got to be getting to the point where even lifelong Dems have to be thinking it’s time to move on……

      I said I didn’t leave the Democrat Party, it just moved out from under me, long before I knew that Ronald Reagan had said he didn’t leave the party, it left him. If the GOP had half a brain, it would start putting up billboard ads all over the country with nothing on them but that quote of Reagan’s to let it start to sink in.

    • M. Noonan February 7, 2018 / 2:01 pm

      Rosenstein does seem to be the smartest guy of the bunch so far…but, yeah, I think he’s in trouble, too. The thing is that Obama politicized the DOJ to a huge extent and then, with all these politicized people sitting on top, they were unable to actually see what was happening. Everything was through a political viewpoint…and their viewpoint was whatever was in the MSM, because the MSM is a mere transcription service for the DNC. They didn’t think Hillary would lose. And so they didn’t really think they were running risks – it was in the bag, right? And Hillary would reward such actions.

  13. Cluster February 7, 2018 / 9:07 am

    This is great:

    • Amazona February 7, 2018 / 11:17 am

      I had to stop watching, though I am going to watch some of his other videos and his book sounds good. This shrill obnoxious woman was just unbearable. She is, however, a great example of the Left and its approach to dialogue. He started off talking about infantile men, and she started in on the infamous “pay gap” where she made an absolute and utter fool of herself, while visibly preening in the delusion that she was scoring points.

      What struck me was that he had said absolutely nothing to prompt this veering off into what is obviously her pet peeve. He was talking about how women benefit from having strong partners who are equals, not baby-men, and she was off to the races with her screeching, her rudeness and her blatant misstating of what the guy said.

      He, on the other hand, held his own and should give seminars to politicians on how to deal with irrational harpies.

      This is a good followup to your link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nibRFxnxQaQ

      One of the great quotes of this analysis of Cathy Newman’s tactics is this: “She tackled it
      (what he said) in the only way she knew how: by disparaging his intentions rather than the substance of what he is saying…” and, of course, she first invented what she claimed were his intentions, in spite of his repeated explanations that those were not his intentions at all.

      • Cluster February 7, 2018 / 11:57 am

        Jordan Peterson is quickly becoming a favorite of mine. I saw a podcast with him and Ben Shapiro that was really good.

        The equality discussion between these two was priceless.

      • Amazona February 7, 2018 / 12:05 pm

        “Well, what I’m HEARING you say..” which of course means “what I am going to claim you said so I can fall back on my canned comments”

        “Well, in other words…” which of course means “well, a different idea completely opposite of what your actual words convey….”

        Typical Leftist strategy and when we hear it—-EVERY TIME WE HEAR IT—we know we are witnessing a Leftist propaganda effort.

  14. Amazona February 7, 2018 / 11:54 am

    I know I am constantly harping on the need to recognize the patterns of Leftist duplicity and propaganda, because once we see those patterns they show up time after time.

    Does anyone think the use of bogus “information” to smear a candidate is new? As this article details, all we have to do is look back to the infamous effort by CBS to take down incumbent George W. Bush with a “dossier” that was fake, invented by his political enemies, promoted as damning by the Complicit Agenda Media and hawked to the public by media whore Dan Rather.

    Rather is still at it, and the template is still being used.

    http://www.nationalreview.com/article/456172/dan-rather-memogate-legacy

    • M. Noonan February 7, 2018 / 1:55 pm

      I still doubt they’ll ever be able to trace any of it back directly to Obama…first off, his closest aids would never drop dime on him and, at all events, it would have taken the merest nudge of Jarret to get her to go out and orally instruct people at DOJ, etc what the President wanted…and the action telling DOJ what the President wanted might have happened very early on. You know, right after he gets into office and the AG is in the White House, Jarret and Holder are having a cup of coffee, “you know, Eric, the President would like to know if anything comes on the radar which affects the Administration: keep us posted”; and it just keep going on from there all through the terms of office.

      But, still, this is gigantic…and it could lead to proven corruption against all manner of high officials.

      • Amazona February 7, 2018 / 2:26 pm

        If we have learned anything from the Left (and there isn’t much reason to think we have) it should be that there is a value in putting the other side on the defensive and making them run backwards to try to explain things. They do it to us all the time. They hurl out a bunch of lies, innuendo, false claims, etc. and then we are in the position of trying to backpedal to explain why whatever isn’t what they say it is.

        That is one thing I like about Trump—he has stopped doing that. Now, when something is put out there that is misrepresented he tends to just ignore it. (That whole effort to make a big deal out him allegedly asking someone who he voted for is a good example. I could see it asked in a joking manner, or I could see it as a distortion of what was really said, or I could see it as a complete fabrication. I could also imagine Trump asking that question. The thing is, none of these matter because it doesn’t matter what Trump said, and he just ignored the effort to bait him into a big back-and-forth that would have blown it up into something someone could claim was important.)

        But this comment in this email can’t just be ignored—–it will have to be addressed. Addressing it will open up all sorts of avenues of further investigation and more disclosures. Ignoring it will mean admitting that Obama was complicit in the activities of those trying to use the government to spy on citizens because they are in the opposition party.

  15. Retired Spook February 7, 2018 / 2:17 pm

    But, still, this is gigantic…and it could lead to proven corruption against all manner of high officials.

    One can hope.

    Meanwhile, the plot thickens. I think we’re rapidly approaching the point of no return, where no amount of cover up can succeed in masking the stench of this whole affair.

  16. Amazona February 7, 2018 / 2:47 pm

    THEY. JUST. CAN’T. SHUT. UP.

    There is Lefty whining about Justin Timberlake’s Super Bowl performance. It’s not that it wasn’t good—-the NPR writer thought it was good. He liked it.

    No, it’s just that overall, according to the author, Timberlake “just doesn’t seem right for the time”..(If you detected a shrill whine in that statement, so did I, and it ran throughout the article.)

    Justin Timberlake’s entire career and art is based on his ability to be smooth — his ability to be easy, to create music that seduces us with references to the past, with appropriations, with artful mixes, and never quite shows any struggle. But we are living in a moment of struggle, and we want our pop music to also reflect that struggle. And frankly, Timberlake now embodies that phrase so often spoken today: white male privilege. It’s just not a good look for 2018. And it’s really, in some ways, not his fault — it’s just who he is.

    https://www.npr.org/2018/02/05/583362208/as-the-pop-world-seeks-accountability-justin-timberlake-seems-lost-in-the-woods

    We are living in a moment of struggle, people! STRUGGLE ! Of course, the nature of this existential struggle is seldom articulated, because when it is it is laughed out of the room or viciously dissected as utter crap. So the default approach is just to refer to it in vague ambiguous terms. a moment of struggle followed no doubt by a reverential moment of silence.

    And now “..we want our pop music to also reflect that struggle..” “WE” do? Got a mouse in your pocket, Ari? Speak for yourself.

    Yes, pretentious poseur wannabe artistes might think their calling is to “reflect the struggle”. But the rest of us, not so much. But in Loony Libland, this all makes sense. In Loony Libland an NPR writer will believe that some 20-somethings will get together on a Friday night and decide to go drop 100 bucks apiece to get into a trendy club to pay 20 bucks apiece for a bottle of water to help them deal with the thirst created by their 40 bucks a hit of Ecstasy because the DJ’s work “speaks to the struggle”.

    uh-huh

    I wonder just how Justin Timberlake, a very white man, is supposed to overcome the accusation of being successful due to “white male privilege”. After all, he would have to deal with the cardinal sin of “cultural appropriation” if he doesn’t act white enough. It was kind, I guess, for Ari to admit that this is not Justin’s fault—“it’s just who he is”. No, it’s just what some bigot at NPR has decided he is, based on the color of his skin, which has become the only thing that matters to the Left these days.

    • Cluster February 7, 2018 / 5:32 pm

      It’s sad isn’t it, how consumed these morons are with the superficial. Entertainment is another meritocracy business – you either sell albums and CD’s or not and if you don’t, no label any where will invest in you regardless of your skin color. And while Timberlake may not be my favorite, I thought he did a good job and his tribute to Prince was well done.

  17. Retired Spook February 7, 2018 / 3:21 pm
    • Cluster February 7, 2018 / 6:27 pm

      I saw this article earlier, and also saw an appearance on Russia TV, or Russia Today, by Schiff. Now do you think this story would be more widely reported if it were say ……. Devin Nunes?

  18. Amazona February 7, 2018 / 3:22 pm

    Bad filing habits always come back to haunt me. I joke that I am the kind of person who would file an apple under “L” because I plan to eat it for lunch. Anyway, in searching through some Word files I found this nugget and thought I would just pass it along.

    Aristotle and Aquinas taught us that truth is the conformity of our intellect to the things of this world, not the other way around.

    http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2017/10/2006

    • Cluster February 7, 2018 / 5:33 pm

      We can learn so much from the past – it’s a shame we don’t study it any more. Of course when you have progressive professors who know everything, what’s the point?

  19. Retired Spook February 8, 2018 / 11:13 am

    Excellent editorial in our local paper.

    In years past, a president might have simply shrugged off such a response as normal partisanship. But Trump’s unfortunate and juvenile tendency to personalize differences and insult opponents has been matched and often exceeded by the very people who claim to represent something better.

    The ACLU, for example, immediately complained that Trump referred to “America” more than 80 times in his first inaugural address. In a statement, National Political Director Faiz Shakir cautioned that, “after a divisive first year, we hear and feel how exclusionary that ‘America’ is, with policies that have harmed so many vulnerable American communities. In particular, the immigration plan put forth by Trump would hold ‘Dreamers’ hostage to his demands for a harmful border wall.”

    Can it get any more bizarre than to see the American Civil Liberties Union condemning references to America while invoking American values in defense of millions of people in the country illegally? (emphasis – mine)

    That’s a rhetorical question, as CNN’s Jake Tapper proved by declaring the best and most necessary line in Trump’s speech — “Americans are Dreamers, too” — was somehow offensive.

    “Some of the things he said about immigration are going to turn off a lot of people in that chamber,” Tapper said. So-called “Dreamers” refers to hundreds of thousands of people illegally brought to America as children, and Trump has said he is willing to offer a path to citizenship for Dreamers in exchange for tough border security and other immigration reforms.

    This is all getting truly bizarre, with a president being criticized for insisting the aspirations and needs of his own citizens are at least as important as the desires of people who have no legal right to be here in the first place.

  20. Retired Spook February 8, 2018 / 11:31 am

    Interesting recap of fake news, particularly this part about Carter Page that I’ve never heard before.

    The Inspector Clouseau of spies

    If you spend any time watching the propaganda media, I pity you, because there’s actual scientific evidence that for every 10 minutes of watching you lose 10,000 brain cells. Besides that, you have no doubt heard that Carter Page is either a hapless Donald Trump stooge, a nefarious businessman, a Russian spy, or some combination of the three. But if he’s a Russian spy, he’s the Inspector Clouseau of all spies.

    For those under age 30, (the real) Inspector Jacques Clouseau was the main character in the Pink Panther series of movies directed by Blake Edwards. He was a bumbling police detective under the employ of the French Sûreté, and portrayed primarily by the brilliant, hysterically funny and politically incorrect Peter Sellers.

    Despite doing everything wrong and focusing his investigation always in the wrong direction, his ineptness and doggedness always led him to the correct conclusion at the end, albeit for all the wrong reasons. Sometimes he even got the girl – and it was a very pretty girl like Elke Sommer or Lesley-Anne Down.

    According to Department of Just(Us) records, Page has been on the FBI’s radar for some time. In 2013 he worked with the FBI to expose Russian spies working inside the U.S.

    FBI Special Agent Gregory Monaghan attested in a sealed complaint deposition that Page had become a target of efforts by Russian Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) agents Igor Sporyshev and Victor Podobnyy who were in New York to recruit sources, according to a report by TownHall.com. Page communicated with them and went so far as to email them and meet with them in person to discuss energy business and even passed along documents. But Monaghan determined that Page had no knowledge the two men he was meeting with were anything other than businessmen.

    When the FBI contacted Page about the meetings, Monaghan says Page cooperated fully with agents and the information he passed to the FBI formed the basis for Sporyshev and Podobnyy both being charged with conspiracy to violate the Foreign Agents Registration Act, along with the prosecution of a third Russian, Evgeny Buryakov.

    That begs a few questions. First, if Page was a Russian spy, why did he help the FBI convict three Russian agents? And if Page helped finger three Russian agents, why would more Russian agents continue to interact with him, knowing he had a history of turning evidence over to the FBI? And if the Russians wanted to help Trump get elected, why did they pick a guy as a go-between who was either incompetent or a double agent? And if Page new he was on the FBI’s radar for meeting with Russians in 2013, why would he continue to meet with Russian agents on behalf of Trump?

    We’re not sure whether Page will end up the girl, but we’re sure that either Page or the Russians (or both) bumbled and fumbled so badly that a special counsel and the entire propaganda media are now digging into every aspect of their dealings. Either that, or the Trump-Russia narrative is just fake news.

    • Amazona February 8, 2018 / 12:15 pm

      I am not taking the position that Carter Page was an undercover agent of the FBI in its investigation of certain Russians. I am not taking the position that he was not.

      I merely offer this as interesting reading.

      https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/evgeny-buryakov-pleads-guilty-manhattan-federal-court-connection-conspiracy-work

      I was especially interested in this: The FBI obtained the recordings after Sporyshev attempted to recruit an FBI undercover employee (“UCE-1”), who was posing as an analyst from a New York-based energy company. In response to requests from Sporyshev, UCE-1 provided Sporyshev with binders containing purported industry analysis written by UCE-1 and supporting documentation relating to UCE-1’s reports, as well as covertly placed recording devices.

      We don’t know who UCE-1 was, but whoever he was, he was (1) apparently an undercover FBI employee prior to being contacted, and (2) that he actively participated in the investigation, both by providing the Russians with FBI-approved material and by “covertly” planting recording devices.

      Will the FBI publicly identify its undercover employees? Probably not, and for good reason.
      Will an undercover FBI employee admit to being same? Probably not, and for good reason.

      Whoever that undercover FBI employee might be

  21. Retired Spook February 8, 2018 / 11:47 am

    Kurt Schlichter’s analogy of the Democrats stepping on a rake, over and over is right on the money.

    So, the Washington Post says that Donald Trump wants to honor the military with a parade, which the Trump-haters inform us is the worst thing that ever was because it’s Donald Trump who wants to honor the military with a parade. The very day the Democrats decided that they should make fun of Trump’s physical disqualification for military service – Democrats were pretending to think not serving is bad that morning – the Donkeys also decided they needed to spazz out about honoring our troops.

    Whap! That’s the sound of the Democrats stepping on another rake.

    Is a parade a good idea? A bad idea? Irrelevant! It’s a hilarious idea, because when this idea erupted on social media, it was absolutely certain that the liberals would immediately take a position that required them to say, “No, we should totally not honor our troops.”

    Oh, I’m sure they’ve got plenty of nuance to that position – my favorite is their newfound concern about spending – but at the end of the day the message is clear. Trump wants to honor the troops, and the Democrats don’t.

    Hilarious! And Trump does this to them all the time.

    The president’s quarters have to be echoing with laughter every night after another day of the Beltway Bubble Boys ‘n Girls dancing to The Donald’s tune. By leveraging tweets, leaks, and off-the-cuff statements, no one has ever owned the mainstream media like Donald Trump. Those Democrat court reporters hate him, to be sure, but when he says “Jump,” they say, “How low?”

  22. Cluster February 8, 2018 / 3:57 pm

    And here I thought Democrats were opposed to foreigners meddling in other countries elections. This reported just today:

    George Soros, the billionaire known as the man who “broke the Bank of England”, is backing a campaign to overturn Brexit, the Telegraph can disclose.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/02/07/george-soros-man-broke-bank-england-backing-secret-plot-thwart/

    And this from 2016:

    The State Department paid hundreds of thousands of dollars in taxpayers grants to an Israeli group that used the money to build a campaign to oust Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in last year’s Israeli parliamentary elections, a congressional investigation concluded Tuesday.

  23. Retired Spook February 8, 2018 / 4:17 pm

    One of the best essays I’ve ever read in this month’s Imprimus newsletter of Hillsdale College.

    • Amazona February 8, 2018 / 7:59 pm

      “Good” as in “scary as hell”. The very idea that people of assumed educational accomplishment can misread straightforward sentences in such bizarre ways is scary. The very idea that academics not only object to hearing opinions that don’t fit into their very rigid political templates they actually encourage students to monitor writings for such opinions so the writers can be reported is scary.

      There was a time when those on the Left objected to being accused of promoting “Thought Police”. Now they proudly sign their names to letters demanding it.

      Scary as hell.

      • jdge1 February 8, 2018 / 10:51 pm

        Will be interesting when this comes full circle and bites them in the backside, especially when they come looking for sympathy and those they previously mocked and ridiculed laugh at them or simply walk away.

Comments are closed.