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
Thursday, December 21. 2017
Russia is a crappy country with an economy the size of Italy's. Still, Putin seems to know how to put his paws on all sorts of things. Clever little scheming SOB. Can't blame him for putting his country first, though. That's his job.
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
And that is why it's such a shame that the Democrats and the Koch-sucking Rove Republican swill are doing their best to keep President Trump and President Putin from reaching an agreement that put BOTH countries "first". There is no good reason why the United States and Russia cannot work together to clean out the true sewage in this world.
Yeah, yeah, yeah. Iran, Iran, Iran. Well you can thank the Peanut Farmer for that. We owned Iran as a valuable ally until "Killer Rabbit" Carter forced the shah from power. And for Russia, Iran is merely a counter to our Saudi swill. But then certain people cannot stand for the US and Russia to remain independent sovereign nations, because that does not fit into their One World Government plans...
You don't have any idea why that's not persuasive, do you?
"Clever little scheming SOB. Can't blame him for putting his country first, though. That's his job."
Unfortunately, our former presidents haven't seen their job the same way. Maybe, just maybe, we've gotten lucky this time around.
The News Junkie: Russia is a crappy country with an economy the size of Italy's. Still, Putin seems to know how to put his paws on all sorts of things. Clever little scheming SOB. Can't blame him for putting his country first, though.
Putin has played well with a weak hand. That he could upend U.S. politics by hacking and leaking emails is only one of many ways Putin has leveraged his position.
Putin probably sees himself as a patriot, but he is the head of a kleptocracy, with much of Russia's wealth being siphoned off and laundered in overseas banks. In the long run, Russia can only prosper by modernizing its economy, which is still largely dependent on resource extraction. That will require reining in corruption, as well as investment in new technologies.
Z: Russia can only prosper by ...
Not to mention building stable relationships with other nations conducive to long-term trade and growth.
And quite a bit of that 'siphoned off wealth' ended up in the pockets of the Clintons...and others we are about to find out about in coming months and years.
The Manafort indictment is a small window into that. At least 2 lobbying firms helped launder Russia cash through Ukraine. I'm curious where it all went...into the pockets of politicians? Which ones? What non-profits in our country got a cut? Etc.
Can't wait to find out and take down the whole dirty operation.
IF russia "hacked" hillary's 30,000 yoga pants-wedding emails (as anyone could), they did not release them.
It is pretty clear that the DNC email was downloaded to a thumbdrive (faster than possible by an internal "hack") in an inside job. Quite likely involving Seth Rich, whose murder, surveillance footage, and laptop are still hidden in secrecy. The Democrat's top secret IT specialist Awan also had access to the DNC files, as well as all classified congressional materials of the Democrats. The Awans are allegedly connected to the pakastani spy service. You must be claiming that the insider was a russian agent, not a disgruntled Bernie supporter, or the pakastani Awans?
Zach, isn't it the clintons who are the head of a kleptocracy which siphons off US wealth? How do the clinton's become enormously rich on a government salary and pension? As an example, accepting a $150 million bribe to sell off 20% of our uranium sources is literally very profitable "resource extraction" from the US by the clintons. The thing that was "upended" was putin's hope to have hillary elected, who putin knew he could bribe, having done so successfully already.
There is no evidence that those emails were hacked.
An optimistic view is that the scum floats to the top. Maybe just skimming off the top putrid layers of the Justice Department and FBI can leave honest hardworking base personnel?
MissT: And quite a bit of that 'siphoned off wealth' ended up in the pockets of the Clintons
Presumably you are referring to the Clinton Foundation. There's no evidence that the Clintons profited monetarily from the Clinton Foundation, which is subject to independent audits annually.
jaybird: It is pretty clear that the DNC email was downloaded to a thumbdrive
Accepting what you read on the byways of the Internet because it confirms your preconceptions doesn't constitute evidence. The claim by The Forensicator has been disputed even within his own organization. Among many problems is that the analyzed file may not have been original to the DNC, as The Forensicator has pointed out.
jaybird: How do the clinton's become enormously rich on a government salary and pension?
The Clintons have released their tax returns covering many decades. If you really wanted to know, you could look. Turns out that they made money legally, primarily by writing books and giving speeches.
jaybird: As an example, accepting a $150 million bribe to sell off 20% of our uranium sources is literally very profitable "resource extraction" from the US by the clintons.
Except they didn't receive $150 million. Presumably you are referring to the Clinton Foundation. There's no evidence that the Clintons profited monetarily from the Clinton Foundation, which is subject to independent audits annually.
jaybird: The thing that was "upended" was putin's hope to have hillary elected, who putin knew he could bribe, having done so successfully already.
That makes little sense. It's clear from their actions that the Russians wanted to weaken Clinton.
Assistant Village Idiot: There is no evidence that those emails were hacked.
That is simply incorrect. Not only do we have the expert opinion of the U.S. Intelligence Community, and the expert opinion of a multitude of independent experts, but we even know the URL used to spoof Podesta's account. Furthermore, this is part of a pattern of cyberwarfare that Russia with which has been engaged, using cyberattacks against other nations, including nascent democracies in eastern Europe.
zach, you make about as much sense as a fish on a bicycle. The russians have not given 150 million dollars to the jaybird foundation. jaybird is willing to speak to the russians for $500,000 but no takers - maybe if I had jobs and favors to give out and uranium to sell at the state department, and a history of selling presidential pardons, donor prospects would be better?
Its pretty clear the russians wanted and hoped for hillary., who they knew they could bribe.
jaybird: The russians have not given 150 million dollars to the jaybird foundation.
Perhaps if you actually had a foundation, perhaps one that is known for helping provide live-saving medicine for millions of poor people in the third world, raised hundreds of millions of dollars for research and development for new treatments and vaccines, and helped provide better maternal and child care for millions of families more.
jaybird: jaybird is willing to speak to the russians for $500,000 but no takers
The amount you can charge for speaking largely depends on your fame and success. The going rate for Presidents typically ranges from $250-500 thousand. Reagan received $2 million for two speeches. George Clooney receives several hundred thousand dollars per speaking engagement, and he's just an actor.
Opinions are not evidence, kiddiez, but y'all know that...
It has long been clear to us that the reason the U.S. government lacks conclusive evidence of a transfer of a “Russian hack” to WikiLeaks is because there was no such transfer.