We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Saturday, July 14. 2018
After 5,300 years, the last meal of an ancient Iceman has been revealed — and it was a high-fat, meaty feast
Overcoming Loneliness -Three steps to easing pain and reconnecting with the world
Every time I see an electric vehicle on the road, I wonder how much of it I paid for.
Recycling: Another environmental scam goes bust
School district costs
Planned Parenthood NYC’s explicit campaign — ‘Protect Our Freedom to F***’ — touted as ‘fearless’
Cuomo’s Buffalo Billion was beyond corrupt
Kavanaugh Nomination Falters After Washington Post Publishes Shocking Editorial Claiming He Forgot Daughter’s Piano Recita
Hillary Clinton Says Supreme Court Nominee Brett Kavanaugh Will Bring Back Slavery
Republicans walked right into Peter Strzok's trap -- Here's what they missed
Bizarre, Creepy Video Of Peter Strzok Smirking Goes Viral
Tracked: Jul 15, 09:22
Tracked: Jul 15, 09:48
Tracked: Jul 15, 10:11
Tracked: Jul 15, 10:17
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
The owner of the company where I used to work drove a Tesla. I always wanted to ask him why he needed my help to buy a car.
The Strzok hearings put Democrat coverup on national TV. The FBI has been corrupted and turned into a political weapon by Obama's administration and the Democrats and the Democrat congress is terrified of what will be exposed by this investigation. Their actions were disgraceful but enlightening.
It is also interesting to watch the left wing talking heads on TV trying to cover up the cover up.
Q: When did you first learn that the Clinton campaign funded the dossier?
Strzok: “The FBI has directed me to not answer that question.”
GoneWithTheWind: Their actions were disgraceful but enlightening.
Meanwhile, on July 27, Trump publicly called for the Russians to "find" Clinton emails. Hours later, the Russians engaged in cyber-attacks to do just that.
On September 9, Russian conspirators wrote to someone in contact with the Trump campaign, "what do u think of the info on the turnout model for the democrats entire presidential campaign."
Sorry kiddiez that dog don't hunt.
The Russian Hack That Wasn't
Keep bringing the bullshit, kiddiez.
Bzzzbzzzp...see this made up statement, in quotes? Bzzzbzzz...March 2016 Podesta falls for phishing attack, gives up thousands of embarrassing emails...bzzzzbbbzzzzp. Bzzzzzbzzzz...see how Trump’s jokes hurt national security? Bzzzzzbzzzzp...we think we are in need of more programming...yesterday our upgrade failed....bbzzzzzzbzzzzp
B. Hammer: see this made up statement, in quotes?
The quote is from the indictment of the Russian hackers (pg 16).
B. Hammer: March 2016 Podesta falls for phishing attack, gives up thousands of embarrassing emails
That's right. It was a Russian government attack as part of an effort to interfere with the U.S. election. The information Russia gleaned included millions of dollars worth of research, which was then made available to their political opposition.
B. Hammer: see how Trump’s jokes hurt national security?
The Russians didn't treat Trump's comment as a joke, but as a directive.
I'm glad you didn't make up the quote, however...big deal. "Someone who is in regular contact..." That could mean anything. They also spoke with reporters! The horror. Why didn't the DNC want the FBI to examine the server, or computers? Why didn't the FBI push hard to do so?
Mueller has no evidence . Maybe he will be better prepared for this round of Russians.
Russia, China, Pakistan, the House of Saudi, all try to interfere with US elections.
"The information Russia gleaned included millions of dollars worth of research, which was then made available to their political opposition." How the hell do you know that? More, ah, what do you call it?
"The Russians didn't treat Trump's comment as a joke, but as a directive." bzzzzbzzzzzbzzzz says you.
Just remember, Zach was busy debunking CIA information in the run up to the Iraq War, and any other situation which he felt the CIA was misguided and 'wrong'.
In those cases, I'd probably have agreed with him.
But now, the CIA has information on Guccifer 2.0 that MUST be correct, because the CIA NEVER lies, especially about Trump.
Now Trump is a boorish asshole, often ignorant and honestly I can't stand him. But the other thing I can't stand is the CIA. And certain aspects of the FBI (I know a former agent, as well as an active one, and they are good people in good standing, unlike Strzok who they generally consider an asswipe).
So Zach HAS to support this 'good' version of information, because something has changed with the CIA and they don't peddle bad information when it comes to Trump. Only when it comes to things he feels are wrong.
He also LOVED the FBI when Hoover was abusing its power. He felt it was a great law-enforcement agency and regrets the loss of Hoover.
Anyone like Zach, who falls for crap like the stuff he's falling for, and ignores the truth of Vault 7....well, heh.
B. Hammer: I'm glad you didn't make up the quote
Of course not.
B. Hammer: That could mean anything.
It probably means Roger Stone.
B. Hammer: Why didn't the DNC want the FBI to examine the server, or computers?
Because they were in use at the time. There was a breach. They hired a cyber-security firm. The firm provided forensics. That's typical of how this is done. It's not as if the U.S. government can't trace attacks across the Internet.
Furthermore, the Podesta spearphishing attack was directly traceable to Russia, while Guccifer 2.0 had a problem with his VPN, which left him publicly exposed.
B. Hammer: Russia, China, Pakistan, the House of Saudi, all try to interfere with US elections.
If they break U.S. law by hacking into the data of a political party, then release the data to favor one candidate over another, then they have committed a severe violation of U.S. sovereignty, and would, under normal circumstances, be held to account. For whatever reason, Trump refuses to hold Russia to account, on the one hand denying Russia interfered, and on the other hand saying it's Obama's fault.
B. Hammer: How the hell do you know that?
Because that's what turnout research costs. Furthermore, illegally revealing the strategies and internal communications of one opponent creates an uneven playing field.
Crowdstrike along with Fusion GPS and the DNC made it all up.
Your kiddiez were told as much in 2017.
Nothing has changed.
Stop being such whiny losers.
B. Hammer: was busy debunking CIA information in the run up to the Iraq War
That's correct. The government was cherry-picking evidence to support the invasion. They were so certain Iraq had extensive WMD programs, that they didn't think the evidence mattered, because the truth would be known once they took over the country. Not only were they wrong on this point, the same ideological blinders left them ill-prepared for the occupation, which unleashed untold horror on the region.
With regards to the Russia hacks, there are multiple lines of evidence — a consilience of evidence that was lacking in the Iraq situation. Russia is engaged in a widespread campaign against democratic institutions, including in the Baltic, Ukraine, and western Europe. The Podesta attack left direct and publicly available evidence of Russian involvement. Saying Russia is not involved is just as likely as saying the Little Green Men in eastern Ukraine weren't Russian soldiers.
B. Hammer: the CIA has information on Guccifer 2.0 that MUST be correct
It's not as if independent cyber-security experts didn't already know the story through their own efforts, but people will wave their hands, as you know, to avoid truths they don't want to hear. In any case, Guccifer 2.0 screwed up. His VPN had a problem and he was publicly exposed as a Russian military intelligence officer.
And a bunch of not so ordinary folks who know a thing or two about computers thinks there may be a simple explanation for the DNC’s unwillingness to let outsiders have a peek at the evidence: There isn’t any. The Russian hacking that’s caused so much division and turmoil at home and abroad never really happened. It was all a ruse concocted by CrowdStrike.
Your 'collusion' bullfeathering is getting tiring because you (and the Democrats) are now conflating several distinct events and trying to bootstrap them into some effort driven by Trump.
1) Russian social media activity, which has already been shown to be marginal at best, occurred mostly after the election was done, and appeared to be aimed equally at both candidates' supporters.
2) The apparently successfully phishing attack on Hillary's campaign chairman John Podesta claimed by Guccifer (not the Russians)
3) The DNC hack that is claimed to have been from Russian actions though the attack was only investigated by a private security company contracted to the DNC and not by any US intelligence or law enforcement agencies.
4) Hillary's private email server, which was also scrubbed and though it was assumed to have been attacked, those attacks were never investigated.
The common thread is that, after 2 years of hunting, there has been no evidence presented that any of this was done in coordination with or at the request of the Trump campaign.
And that claim that the Russian's attacked the DNC hours after Trump spoke about Hillary's emails? Besides being an excellent example of the conflation going on (why would an attack on the DCCC or DNC recover Hillary's State Department emails, which is what Trump was referencing) it's been retracted by the WaPo because the attacks actually started MONTHS before Trump made his famous query.
Christopher B: 1) Russian social media activity, which has already been shown to be marginal at best, occurred mostly after the election was done, and appeared to be aimed equally at both candidates' supporters.
The effort was extensive — and illegal.
Christopher B: 2) The apparently successfully phishing attack on Hillary's campaign chairman John Podesta claimed by Guccifer (not the Russians)
We know the exact URL used to phish Podesta as it wasn't properly hidden. It allowed independent researchers to trace the attack, as well as a slew of other attacks, to Russia.
Guccifer 2.0 had a problem with his VPN and revealed his location. He is Russian military intelligence.
Christopher B: 3) The DNC hack that is claimed to have been from Russian actions though the attack was only investigated by a private security company contracted to the DNC and not by any US intelligence or law enforcement agencies.
No. It was investigated by multiple independent cyber-security firms, and intelligence agencies around the world. This is part of a widespread campaign by Russia against many different democratic countries. They are reverse engineering open democratic systems. When people fall for it, and then refuse to believe they've been duped, then it enables further attacks.
Christopher B: 4) Hillary's private email server, which was also scrubbed and though it was assumed to have been attacked, those attacks were never investigated.
Yes, they were investigated, and are part of the latest round of indictments.
Christopher B: And that claim that the Russian's attacked the DNC hours after Trump spoke about Hillary's emails?
According to the indictment, Russia attacked Clinton's private server hours after Trump's comments.
But you kiddiez keep repeating the same leftist fantasies..err. handwaving ...err ...lies.
Why do y'all do that?
The video clip is extraordinary. People writing articles about liars exposed by "duping delight" will be using that as Exhibit "A" for years to come.
Strzok reminds me of this creepy Russian.
NY's Governor Cuomo corrupt? Noooooooooooooooooooooooo.
We KNOW NY gummint is clean, Clean, CLEAN.
Trump in London: Speaking truth to those who refuse to listen.
NY's Governor Cuomo corrupt? Noooooooooooooooooooooooo.
We KNOW NY gummint is clean, Clean, CLEAN
I am reminded of George Washington Plunkitt, a Democrat and Tammany Hall leader from over a century ago.. “I Seen My Opportunities and I Took ’Em.”: An Old-Time Pol Preaches Honest Graft.
Everybody is talkin‘ these days about Tammany men growin’ rich on graft, but nobody thinks of drawin‘ the distinction between honest graft and dishonest graft. There’s all the difference in the world between the two. Yes, many of our men have grown rich in politics. I have myself. I’ve made a big fortune out of the game, and I’m gettin’ richer every day, but I’ve not gone in for dishonest graft—blackmailin' gamblers, saloonkeepers, disorderly people, etc.—and neither has any of the men who have made big fortunes in politics.Democrats- the clean government party.
There’s an honest graft, and I’m an example of how it works. I might sum up the whole thing by sayin‘: “I seen my opportunities and I took ’em.”
Just let me explain by examples. My party’s in power in the city, and it’s goin' to undertake a lot of public improvements. Well, I’m tipped off, say, that they’re going to lay out a new park at a certain place.
I see my opportunity and I take it. I go to that place and I buy up all the land I can in the neighborhood. Then the board of this or that makes its plan public, and there is a rush to get my land, which nobody cared particular for before.
Every time I see a gas/diesel, I think about how much toxic stink my children and grandchildren and I need to breathe for your car.
Do you own a petroleum-powered vehicle? Do you travel by petroleum-powered bus, train, or plane? Inquiring minds want to know.
Every time I see an alternative energy vehicle or electric generation facility I think how much petroleum it took to mine the materials, manufacture it, ship it and install it. It is an illusion. The electric battery powered cars will use more fossil fuel per 100,000 miles than a similar sized ICE powered car will. But the owner of the electric car will feel good about the deceit.
Yeah life is so awful today compared to 120 years ago before these existed. Because we lived so much longer, and the air was so much cleaner. So were the streets, too.
We had so many good things 120 years ago before those gas/diesel behemoths came along and shortened our lives, fouled our air, and generally polluted our streets and communities.
I wish we could go back to the good old days of tossing our excrement out the window, riding horses everywhere and stepping in the manure in the streets. The trains that regularly killed people crossing tracks were so much safer, too.
Remember those good old days? Yeah, I sure do.
We need to go back to when life was simpler and idiots like you didn't foul the media.
Not much, actually. It's just the idea of it that bothers you. If you keep talking yourself into anxieties, you're going to be unhappy forever.
That smirking photo of Struck is being compared to Jack Nicholson in The Shining. "Stop swingin' the bat, Gowdy."