Jump to content

may be rude

Knob Twiddlers
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    6,080

  • Joined

  • Days Won

    8

 Content Type 

Everything posted by may be rude

  1. may be rude
    friday was good. the timestamp above is nadler's action scene. the case for the second article of impeachment, obstruction of congress, seems pretty strong, as well.
  2. may be rude
    hehe ? a lot of serious people are very alarmed about this dude. things like foreign policy and doj influence can be very dangerous. concerted disinfo campaigns are underway, in earnest. the technologies and methodolgies have undergone extensive evolution over the last 2 decades. evidence is available proving the impeachment cases yet people have bought into messaging to the contrary. disinfo efforts from multiple entities have dovetailed. a de-facto alliance has emerged between Congressional GOP, Fox News, Putin's GRU, and Trump. the alliance is actively working to cover-up extensive, criminal, and honestly treacherous behavior. i believe you that this sounds extreme. fox was humored for too long. people were being polite and avoiding conflict so they avoided conversations pointing out that fox is a tabloid slinging garbage. now the fox bubble has metasticized and people are believing that the truth is a hoax on matters of utmost importance. it's really amazing to behold. histories will absolutely focus on the disinfo of this time. as stated in that disinfo podcast i linked this morning, it's not about narrative, it's about systematic manipulation.
  3. may be rude
    really. "god" modifies "tier." "tier" defines level. he is utmost level corrupt. demonstrated by reckless abuse of power at expense of national security, in order to rig elections. yes, the framers were very concerned about the power vested in the president. it just takes the wrong dude and things can go sideways. the specific reasons impeachment was put in the constitution are: in case a president is abusing power especially if they're abusing power to rig elections and the remedy they designed, impeachment, seems to have not anicipated a corrupt party shielding such a president from removal.
  4. may be rude
    literally no exageration. do you think that, if i were correct, then everyone would know it and would be talking about it? is that why you think what i said was inaccurate? that's how the new disinfo works. spray manipulative messages enough, and well enough, and it works. fox set the pattern, then cambridge analytica and the GRU got in on the action.
  5. may be rude
    dude is god-tier corrupt. the worst nightmare of the constitutional framers is happening. they didn't foresee a party shielding a president abusing power to influence elections. he is harming national security. for example, he is covering up an attack by Russia on the US. the crowdstrike theory covers up the source of the GRU's 2016 DNC hack & dump. trump was told the theory was baseless by US intel but chose to extort an ally country to legitimize it. it's beyond the pale. historic disinfo has brainwashed vast swaths of the population. the disinfo has taken a quantum leap, it is sophisticated and it works well. just so you can't say i never told you.
  6. may be rude
    i never claimed optimism. i only said it doesn't look out of the realm of possibility.
  7. may be rude
    a couple good things from lawfare. ben wittes and susan hennessey discussing their book on trump's effects on the presidency: and this Lawfare Podcast episode on disinfo: https://www.lawfareblog.com/lawfare-podcast-renee-diresta-disinformation-and-misinformation-vaccines-gru good closing from schiff on impeachment trial day 3. around 18:41 he gets into the argument for conviction. he highlights trump chosing to believe russian propaganda over us intel. the crowdstrike theory, which covers up the origin of the 2016 GRU hack & dump attack on the US election. sen murphy said mcconnell doesn't have the votes for calling bidens. i'm seeing reports collins and romney will vote for witnesses. by the time question sessions are done next week, i think the dems will have the 4 gop votes they need to get bolton and subpoena mulvaney, blair, and duffey, as well as documents. then the thing gets prolonged another week at least. that puts the state of the union concurrent with the week of bolton's testimony, possibly. these 53 gop senators are playing with fire and they know it. 9 months until november, and the country seems to be waking up to what is going on, albeit slowly. do they want to attach themselves to a ship that might be sinking? reports have been that they have been paying attention, during the house manager presentations. the house gop already signed their names on the historic cover-up. will the disinfo demons prevail? will the gop break up in flight? i'm learning to watch for the muddled, middle-road, kick-the-can, american outcome. disinfo will provide cover for GOPs to choose corrupt path. then americans wake up even more because the situation is that much more dire and the neighbor-jostling continues, and the GOP risks a severe blue wave november. but if a senate GOP faction has broken off then perhaps they will reach a point at which they calculate the best face-saving play to be a solidarity vote for conviction. they throw house gop under the bus a little but they can just say they were watching sports on their ipads during the hearings because they were. and there is now more evidence and it's more clearly presented, and bolton probably gives up more solid evidence. i really don't see it as out of the realm of possibility that trump earns a place as the first US president forcibly removed from office.
  8. may be rude
    i've spent too much time watching those videos and trying to detect pedo attraction. if i thought he were a pedo, that's something i would think the dems need to talk about now. i think he's just affectionate and a little uncomfortable. unfortunate for a candidate but i don't think there's a there there. but yeah we haven't seen the last of that shit. btw the insinuation of people peddling those videos is a damaging slander. something to consider in regard to information sources. he presided over swearing in ceremonies in the senate for 8 years. someone scraped who knows how many hours of photo session footage to cherry pick some unfortunate moments.
  9. may be rude
    here's the live feed. today is the start of the impeachment trial proper. yesterday was debate over the rules resolution. dems have 3 8-hour (plus breaks) days to present their case. they start at 1pm EST. i like hakeem, demings and nadler a lot. schiff is good too.
  10. may be rude
    anyone do a cue for that nts mix?
  11. may be rude
    nadler was good, earlier. here's the live thing today. bear witess, godel.
  12. may be rude
    that's pretty much my take. he was trying when he was younger and then got too confident. go full spaz and call it a scene.
  13. may be rude
    if anything should be redacted it's her tripe
  14. may be rude
    Is it just me or does Al Pacino fucking suck?
  15. may be rude
    All of them are non album tracks The only track that has been published from the mix is Vortrack Fracture remix ?
  16. may be rude
    does nts mix have non album tracks?
  17. may be rude
    I don't know why but I believe him.
  18. may be rude
    well he's extorting an ally to cover up an attack on US elections by the GRU. that's pretty fucking bad
  19. may be rude
  20. may be rude
    warren got a college scholarship for debate. she holds her own in debates, even when people are coming at her. she demonstrates a quality of thoughtful presence that i don't see in any other candidate. bernie shouts messaging. biden butchers messaging. pete figures out what people want to hear in real time. klobuchar vibrates about how she can do it. yang thinks UBI is why he is good on climate change. warren is the only one who seems to be internalizing what it is to lead the US right now. i wonder if bernie's ties to the word socialist would be poison in the general. it seems like most people voting GOP are doing so because of the safety-net vs sink-or-swim idealogy. also a lot of dem voters are susceptible to being swayed right based on it. bernie just flies the white flag on that. if he could win some trump supporters, it may be offset by GOP voters mobilized against a socialist, and dem voters chilled by the idea of electing an all-out socialist.
  21. may be rude
    just learned about the audio from the end of the debate, when warren wouldn't shake hands with bernie. it's pretty amazing. warren confronts bernie for calling her a liar on national tv. bernie retreats like oh shit. 1 minute in: i thought the split screen of this moment in the debate, in which the warren/bernie thing is broached, made warren look good. background for those not following closely: warren and bernie met ahead of deciding to campaign, in Dec 2018, at warren's DC condo. recently word leaked that bernie had expressed doubt that a woman could win. after the media started reporting this hear-say, warren released a statement herself, to state herself how she remembered it: i wonder if there was some ambiguity in the actual Dec '18 exchange. like bernie asked "do you think a woman can win" and she said "yes" and he said something like "i don't know". in this realistic scenario, she would be correct to describe him as having disagreed, and he would be correct to say he did not say a woman could not win. the sentiment, which is a misconception that a woman may be at an electoral disadvantage, is a factor in the decision making of primary voters. democrats want a candidate who will beat trump. there's this weird thing that happens where someone who is not bigotted will hesitate to support a candidate because of the bigotry of others. it serves to amplify and enable the effect of bigotry. in the warren campaign they are aware of this sentiment, and it is disconcerting because it is plainly not true. Hillary won popular vote by 3 mil, 2016 was tossed by Cambridge Analytica, Putin, and Comey, etc. to me, it's believable that something like the conversation occurred in that dec '18 meeting, in which warren invited bernie to her condo because they overlap in political following and both wanted to run. bernie had pushed for warren in 2016 and only announced himself running in 2016 after warren declined. i find it incomprehensible that warren could manufacture this. she is a genuine person. it's to be expected that she would mention bernie espousing this sentiment to someone else, eventually. a lot of people get caught in this subtle shade of bigotry. i caught myself saying outloud "do you really think mayor pete could win, he's gay." i reflected on it afterward and realized that it is a strange dynamic in which someone who is not strictly bigotted can, in effect, reinforce bigotry. it's a dynamic worth pointing out. it's not hard to believe that bernie could have expressed something like this idea. there is absolutely no reason warren would be sworn to secrecy about this ugly notion bernie voiced. she mentioned it to someone and word got out. this whole thing just illustrates and reinforces, for me, that warren is sharper and more on top of things than sanders.
  22. may be rude
    one of the reasons he did the interview was to get it out so that he would be less of a target. wish i could find a full interview video to post here. this was a big deal. central player singing on maddow. maybe the biggest single piece of evidence so far in the ukraine scandal. here are a bunch of clips msnbc put up. maddow split the interview because it wouldn't all fit in one show. the second half is tonight. 9pm msnbc.
  23. may be rude
    warren is no snake and no corporate shill. really wondering about the info streams consumed by some of you. she's the best candidate since barack. only disinfo is blinding people to it.
  24. may be rude
    can't handle how good the afx acid is. wtf
  25. may be rude
    reminder lossy encodings do not equal the actual songs
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.