Where Do Things End With Vlad? (h/t romad1)

[Screwball]

You people are hilarious. We are quoting the Daily Beast in this thread, and Amanda Morcotte (from Salon) in the other. Why should we give one good crap about what the Daily Beast says (it's a tabloid ffs) instead of what our own country agencies say? Why hasn't the US of A declared Gabbord a foreign asset and removed her from service and put her in jail?

Maybe they should read the Daily Beast. LOL!

And the Salon writer, Marcotte, is one of the most egregious political hacks in the country. A left version of Sean Hannity. How do I know that? I've known her for a long time. She was a writing partner with my ex son-in-law (at Salon) and was in their wedding. She is about the last person someone should look to for news.

But whatever fits the narrative.

[Tigeraholic1]

35 minutes ago, pfife said:

Just makin up stuff again

https://www.motownforums.com/topic/79-where-do-things-end-with-vlad-ht-romad1/page/289/#findComment-281876

Sooo why or how is she still an active duty lieutenant colonel? 🤣 

[pfife]

Because she hasnt been found guilty of treason? Seems obvious

[pfife]

Oh and obviously this is another example of you just straight up lying

[pfife]

9 minutes ago, Screwball said:

You people are hilarious. We are quoting the Daily Beast in this thread, and Amanda Morcotte (from Salon) in the other. Why should we give one good crap about what the Daily Beast says (it's a tabloid ffs) instead of what our own country agencies say? Why hasn't the US of A declared Gabbord a foreign asset and removed her from service and put her in jail?

Maybe they should read the Daily Beast. LOL!

And the Salon writer, Marcotte, is one of the most egregious political hacks in the country. A left version of Sean Hannity. How do I know that? I've known her for a long time. She was a writing partner with my ex son-in-law (at Salon) and was in their wedding. She is about the last person someone should look to for news.

But whatever fits the narrative.

The absence of end wokeness from twitter in this rant is hilariously telling

[Tigeraholic1]

5 minutes ago, pfife said:

Because she hasnt been found guilty of treason? Seems obvious

Is she on trial? When does her trail start? This is all news to me.

[pfife]

She is not.

[pfife]

The stuff you make up is news to you?  

[ewsieg]

18 minutes ago, Tigeraholic1 said:

Is she on trial? When does her trail start? This is all news to me.

No trial needed when you've already won the court of public opinion.

[pfife]

A trial actually is necessary to be found guilty of treason and put in jail

Edited December 4, 2024 by pfife

[ewsieg]

10 minutes ago, pfife said:

A trial actually is necessary to be found guilty of treason and put in jail

Legally of course, my point is the dems have smeared her enough by claiming she's a Russian asset that they don't really need to worry about 'proof'.  If there is actual evidence, I suspect it'll come out during her confirmation.

And this isn't directed to you pfife, but proof needs to be more than Russia likes her.  Iran wanted Harris to win, while I voted for Harris, I wouldn't classify myself as an Iranian asset.

[pfife]

Just now, ewsieg said:

Legally of course, my point is the dems have smeared her enough by claiming she's a Russian asset that they don't really need to worry about 'proof'.  If there is actual evidence, I suspect it'll come out during her confirmation.

And this isn't directed to you pfife, but proof needs to be more than Russia likes her.  Iran wanted Harris to win, while I voted for Harris, I wouldn't classify myself as an Iranian asset.

We are talking about legally.   We never werent.   It was literally asked why she was not in jail for treason.  

[pfife]

Also it doesnt matter what evidence of treason there is if we arent at war with Russia which we are not.  Thats a component of the crime of treason.

[Tigeraholic1]

... wrong thread

Edited December 4, 2024 by Tigeraholic1

[pfife]

More state media posted in unrelated thread.

[Tigeraholic1]

9 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

Legally of course, my point is the dems have smeared her enough by claiming she's a Russian asset that they don't really need to worry about 'proof'.  If there is actual evidence, I suspect it'll come out during her confirmation.

And this isn't directed to you pfife, but proof needs to be more than Russia likes her.  Iran wanted Harris to win, while I voted for Harris, I wouldn't classify myself as an Iranian asset.

Smear is all the left has these days....

[pfife]

Just now, Tigeraholic1 said:

Smear is all the left has these days....

Pot kettle

[chasfh]

2 hours ago, Screwball said:

You people are hilarious. We are quoting the Daily Beast in this thread, and Amanda Morcotte (from Salon) in the other. Why should we give one good crap about what the Daily Beast says (it's a tabloid ffs) instead of what our own country agencies say?

Offhand, I would say because Daily Beast and Salon are journalists, while the Trump regime is a party with an interest in obscuring any bad truths about her and all of their appointees from all of us.

Laugh if you want about the "journalists" part, but do you truly believe Daily Beast is flat out lying about what Russian state TV verifiably said? After all, the only counter to it is, "Russian state TV didn't say that at all." Would the Daily Beast spin out such a lie at the expense of their integrity? Or is it because the Daily Beast is not CBS, or Fox News, or whatever news source you most frequent?

Also, what do our country's agencies actually say about Tulsi? I don't mean what her technical standing is with them—I mean what do they say, in words?

[chasfh]

Not the Daily Beast.

 

[Tigeraholic1]

1 hour ago, chasfh said:

Not the Daily Beast.

 

 

[ewsieg]

4 hours ago, chasfh said:

Not the Daily Beast.

 

The Independent uses AI to write their articles and post their instructions to ChatGPT on their blog.  Here is the one for this article.

"Write an article about Tulsi Gabbard from the viewpoint of John Bolton.  Don't ever say it's John Bolton though as many on the left think he has horrible foreign policy ideas.  If they know it's Bolton, and he disagrees with her foreign policy views, they might come to the realization that it could mean they might actually agree with her foreign policy views."

[ewsieg]

3 hours ago, Tigeraholic1 said:

 

Allsides says The Independent leans left, but if the above is true, they must be MAGA by now.

[pfife]

Imagine defending the credibility of your links to a dude that posts state media missives from pepe lives matter, chuck kirks, end wokeness and libs of tiktok

[Screwball]

5 hours ago, chasfh said:

Offhand, I would say because Daily Beast and Salon are journalists, while the Trump regime is a party with an interest in obscuring any bad truths about her and all of their appointees from all of us.

Laugh if you want about the "journalists" part, but do you truly believe Daily Beast is flat out lying about what Russian state TV verifiably said? After all, the only counter to it is, "Russian state TV didn't say that at all." Would the Daily Beast spin out such a lie at the expense of their integrity? Or is it because the Daily Beast is not CBS, or Fox News, or whatever news source you most frequent?

Also, what do our country's agencies actually say about Tulsi? I don't mean what her technical standing is with them—I mean what do they say, in words?

It has been repeated over and over on this board she is a Russian asset. If so, why is she still one?

This isn't difficult.

[pfife]

Why do you ask a bunch of dudes on a message board about why tulsi chooses to do the things she does?