Starting to understand why Trump and Nigel Farage hit it off pretty well.

They both have considerable entertainment value.

 

Just think what John Cleese and Monty Python could have made of this . .. . 

 

 

The person writing it is actually quite smart.   They will be outed eventually, but the anonymity has allowed for some focus on the content of what was written.   If we knew a name, then we would see the usual attempts to completely discredit the person.   There is a lot of speculation, but it's based on selected words and phrasing, which means that people have to read the message.

 

It is also getting a bit of traction from a few Republicans who have more or less conceded that it's not new to them.

 

I have a lot of conservative friends who really, really dislike Trump.   In their eyes, he is not a conservative.  His actions on tariffs and trade are against their core beliefs.   

 

Political, he is all over the place and extremely unpredictable.   

Its a nice distraction, Trumps getting a lot of other stuff done why the lefty's are all hung up on some anonymous BS story.

And the bonus, the echo chamber of Russia Russia Russia has been silenced for a few days.

It sounds like the White House needs to get an Adult Day Care License.   

 

2 hours ago, dcutman said:

Its a nice distraction, Trumps getting a lot of other stuff done why the lefty's are all hung up on some anonymous BS story.

And the bonus, the echo chamber of Russia Russia Russia has been silenced for a few days.

Can you tell us please about Trump " getting a lot of other stuff done"? What for example?

The various news coverage that I take in indicates that he is not viewing this as "a nice distraction". He certainly is distracted but that can mean that he is getting nothing else done.

can US newspapers withhold sources regardless?

 

just thinking that if there is a secret "brotherhood" in WH working under disguise to oppose/undermine the

doings of the POTUS, isn't that pretty close to being a rather serious national security issue?

And then it could be a ruse all arranged by the Trump team to cause more chaos.  Have a senior, high official deliver the OP Ed to the NY Times and have it released anonymously and watch the chaos that develops.

 

What he is saying " they all are part of a deep state trying to get rid of me".  It's surely taking all attention to everything that's going on such as the Kavvanaugh hearings, Woodward's book, the over 500 children that still have not been re-united with their families, and on and on !!

can US newspapers withhold sources regardless?
 
just thinking that if there is a secret "brotherhood" in WH working under disguise to oppose/undermine the
doings of the POTUS, isn't that pretty close to being a rather serious national security issue?

No

no what?

47 minutes ago, melvinmelvin said:

can US newspapers withhold sources regardless?

 

just thinking that if there is a secret "brotherhood" in WH working under disguise to oppose/undermine the

doings of the POTUS, isn't that pretty close to being a rather serious national security issue?

The question is whether or not it's a crime.

49 minutes ago, wayned said:

And then it could be a ruse all arranged by the Trump team to cause more chaos.  Have a senior, high official deliver the OP Ed to the NY Times and have it released anonymously and watch the chaos that develops.

 

What he is saying " they all are part of a deep state trying to get rid of me".  It's surely taking all attention to everything that's going on such as the Kavvanaugh hearings, Woodward's book, the over 500 children that still have not been re-united with their families, and on and on !!

Reading your post causes me to wonder if even Trump himself could be "anonymous". I remember reports of him making phone calls , using another name, and talking about "Trump". Maybe he is scheming a coupe de tat and this is all part of his grand plan. Nothing about him would surprise me (King Trump).

Good idea to give him the proposed lie detector test. Nah, forget about it. The machine would explode.

no what?

No, it’s not close to being a national security issue.

Try to follow along...

9 hours ago, Credo said:

The person writing it is actually quite smart.   They will be outed eventually, but the anonymity has allowed for some focus on the content of what was written.   If we knew a name, then we would see the usual attempts to completely discredit the person.   There is a lot of speculation, but it's based on selected words and phrasing, which means that people have to read the message.

 

It is also getting a bit of traction from a few Republicans who have more or less conceded that it's not new to them.

 

I have a lot of conservative friends who really, really dislike Trump.   In their eyes, he is not a conservative.  His actions on tariffs and trade are against their core beliefs.   

 

Political, he is all over the place and extremely unpredictable.   

yeah, those "conservatives" have left us in great shape, why wouldn't we want to continue down that road?

yeah, those "conservatives" have left us in great shape, why wouldn't we want to continue down that road?

What road is that?

9 hours ago, Credo said:

It sounds like the White House needs to get an Adult Day Care License.   

 

+ staff with psychatry degree rather than law degree or whatever military rank

Edited September 7, 20187 yr by Opl

9 hours ago, mogandave said:

 

No, it’s not close to being a national security issue.

Try to follow along...

 

 

try being more helpful, if you have the knowledge

 

I asked two questions, you answered with 1 syllable

 

did that syllable relate to 1 or 2 of the questions?

in case 1, then which one?

 

 

 

 

 
try being more helpful, if you have the knowledge
 
I asked two questions, you answered with 1 syllable
 
did that syllable relate to 1 or 2 of the questions?
in case 1, then which one?
 
 
 
 

I answered that clearly in post #132.

5 minutes ago, mogandave said:

 

I answered that clearly in post #132.

 

This is your idea of a clear answer:?

 

"No, it’s not close to being a national security issue.
Try to follow along..."

 

The first line is an assertion without explanation and the second is just snark.

Looks like Traitor Trump is the biggest snowflake of them all. Now he is whining about being impeached to his flock. He is putting the blame directly on his followers if he gets impeached. What a big wuss. Crying to his base. How pathetic can he get?

 

Trump tells supporters it'll be 'your fault' if he gets impeached

 

Edited September 7, 20187 yr by Silurian

Troll post removed.  

 

On 9/5/2018 at 11:52 PM, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

On 9/5/2018 at 4:33 PM, Samui Bodoh said:

 this story gives me the willies. It is scary as hell for someone to sit within an administration showing one public face while secretly showing a different one in private; the arrogance and deceit are truly frightening.

 

You mean like what Trump does every day, day after day, constantly lying and dissembling, making false statements and accusations, on virtually anything that he touches as president?  Yes, that is scary as hell!

 

 

The word DT uses is optics.  It refers to what the camera, and the public, sees.  As I've already mentioned in other posts, I suspect DT posing with junk food is just for show, probably wouldn't eat deep-oil, batter fried KFC unless it was the last food on earth.  Notice how all members of his family have a big smile to show the world, and when the cameras turn away (or they think they have), or DT turns away, the happy face is turned off as if a switch was thrown.  There is a piece of video footage where Melania is doing her Big Smile, and the moment DT turns his head the smile is gone; he then turns back to her, the smile is switched back on.  When Don Jr does it he looks downright evil.

Here's the real smile, looks almost girlish, no?  Probably thrilled to have some time away from you-know-who.

 

And here's the "reluctant First Lady" smile.

 

 

 

Edited September 7, 20187 yr by bendejo

This is your idea of a clear answer:?
 
"No, it’s not close to being a national security issue.
Try to follow along..."
 
The first line is an assertion without explanation and the second is just snark.

You asked if it was close to being a national security issue.

I said no.

You asked: No what?

I said: No, it is not close to be a national security issue.


I agree the “Try to keep up” line was snarky, and I apologize, but I am not sure how I could be more clear with my answer.

Again, you asked if it was a security issue, I answered no, it is not a security issue. How have I been unclear?