![]() |
Maggie's FarmWe 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
Categories
QuicksearchLinks
Blog Administration |
Friday, August 15. 2025Friday morning links Russiagate Redux: Can't Keep A Good Hoax Down TGIF: Life of a Showgirl - Trump builds his crypto empire. D.C. gets Trump touts eye-popping number of illegal migrants and dead Americans he's kicked off Social Security Trump’s immigration crackdown sparks economic boom the experts said couldn’t happen DC homeless camps cleared out in Trump takeover as Bondi replaces police commissioner with DEA chief Democrats Are Lying to Themselves About Why Their Party Is Collapsing Miranda Devine: Bumbling Obama aides actually admit Russiagate was a smear campaign against Trump Comments
Display comments as
(Linear | Threaded)
QUOTE: Russiagate Redux: Can't Keep A Good Hoax Down The term "Russiagate" is ambiguous. Sometimes it refers to the claim that Russia interfered in the 2016 election. Other times, it refers to the claim that Russia interfered in the 2016 election to Trump's benefit. QUOTE: I won’t try to cover all the obvious ways in which the evidence points to a massive conspiracy to defame Trump and defraud the public. Looking at the provided link to RealClearInvestigations: QUOTE: Russiagate's Architects Suppressed Doubts to Peddle False Claims ... Nevertheless, the January 2017 ICA stated that U.S. intelligence had “high confidence” that Russia engineered the hack. And evidence since that time has only strengthened the claim. That the hack was engineered by Russian agents is directly supported by errors made by the Russian agents; including a mistake on masking the original bit-ly phishing email, and a temporary problem with their VPN that pointed to the exact location of the leaker. Frankly, it was pretty obvious that Putin was trying to damage Clinton and the public's confidence in the election, in the event she won as expected, and that helping Trump was part and parcel of that effort. QUOTE: We learned last week that Attorney General Pam Bondi has ordered a grand jury probe to investigate the culpability of Brennan, Clapper, former FBI director James Comey, and possibly even Hillary Clinton for their roles in what Gabbard called a “treasonous conspiracy” to interfere with the 2016 election and subsequently to undermine the first Trump administration. How can you take an Attorney General seriously who uses the legal term "treason" so cavalierly? QUOTE: “I will tell you this: Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press. Let’s see if that happens. That’ll be next.” This is standard Trumpism and from the standard authoritarian playbook. Part of the peanut gallery pretends it's a joke even while others root it on. In point of fact, Clinton's server was attacked by hackers from within Russia in hours of that statement. And yet, the writer pretends Russia didn't attempt to interfere to Trump's benefit. The old IC borg narrative is falling apart while the narrative defenders just look foolish trying to defend the IC fiction.
QUOTE: Democrats Are Lying to Themselves About Why Their Party Is Collapsing ... the stupidity of the radical left’s insane reaction to the ad campaign while admitting Can someone name a major public figure on the "radical left" who has had an "insane reaction" to the Sweeney advertisement? Sydney Sweeney is the very least of the Dem party problems and your attempt to project Sweeney as a significant problem for Dems is why Dems can't get a grip on their public popularity problems.
"Can someone name a major public figure..."
Deflection, as usual. The article states "Yes, the criticism of American Eagle began “among a few hyper-online lefty TikTokers,” but this group is now the cornerstone of the Democrat base, and Republicans know it." CNN called the ad a “white supremist dog whistle.” Everyone knows where CNN stands. No one claimed a major party figure said anything. However, everyone saw the endless sad crying about it on social media and even if you didn't catch it there, all the mainstream media reported on it. Hilariously, if you ask Chat-GPT about the controversy it will bend over backwards to push the same ideas as Zach-GPT pushes here. It knows the party line. Z: Can someone name a major public figure on the "radical left" who has had an "insane reaction" to the Sweeney advertisement?
Didn't think so. We did find saltlacroix (0.04) and jessbritvich (0.05) expressing a negative opinion on the Sweeney advertisement, so there is that. For context, compare that to Khaby Lame with (180) or Beyoncé (396) who have not as yet expressed an opinion on the Sweeney advertisement. However, on the political right, the controversy has been stoked by whom some might consider to be major public figures: President Donald Trump (158), Vice President JD Vance (19.6), and Senator Ted Cruz (10). (Social media followers in millions provided in parentheses.) And we found Salon, while not strictly a major public figure, it certainly speaks for the radical left, weighing in on the ad and the attendant backlash from the left on July 27, well before Trump and others mentioned the ad: https://www.salon.com/2025/07/27/sydney-sweeneys-new-campaign-draws-fire-for-racial-undertones/
Anon: And we found Salon, while not strictly a major public figure, it certainly speaks for the radical left, weighing in on the ad
The article you linked doesn’t “weigh in on the ad”. Oh my God. It weighs in on the response to the ad. Is that better, you pedantic imbecile?
#2.3.1.1.1
Anon
on
2025-08-17 00:49
(Reply)
|
Tracked: Aug 17, 09:26
Tracked: Aug 31, 10:50