62 thoughts on “De Tuesday Papers

        1. Mary Lambe

          Hello jusayinlike who is Pat? Does he work for the Clintons? The Russians? Trump? Double agent maybe? Triple? You sound like a sick little boy. Get well soon and hope you can put your morbid obsessions behind you.

      1. f_lawless

        That’s confused thinking if ever I saw it. Justsayinglike is highlighting that those who are getting taken in by the ‘Trump and the Russians have compromised US democracy’ furore are in fact the ‘conspiracy nuts’ as you put it, when no actual evidence as to how this might be the case has ever been presented even though we’re now a year down the line since the accusations were first made.
        Imagine for a second if it had been Trump rather than Clinton who signed off on a deal allowing Putin to nearer his goal of controlling much of the global uranium supply chain (as referred to in the New York Times article that Justsayinglike linked to). It would be like mana from heaven for his detractors: “Look Putin’s puppet! Now you see!” they would be saying.
        The way I interpret things is this: during the 2016 US election, one of the establishment parties was exposed via Wikileaks as being criminally corrupt in the tactics it was using to oust Sanders, the Dem supporters’ popular choice (by the way I’m pretty sure the same level of corruption goes on in Republican party). Rather than face up to any criminal investigation or even proper public debate in the media, the establishment has ran with this “Putin did it” story as a distraction and shows no sign of giving it up no matter how farcical it gets. That’s how bad things have gotten in US politics.

        1. Nigel

          ‘Taken in?’ However wild the speculation surrounding this, three former Trump campaign staffers have had indictments handed down against them. How is this not huge news? Surely the reheated Clinton stories coming from the right wing noise machines are the real attempted distraction? Why would someone as smart as yourself get taken in by such an obvious and transparent base-feeding ploy?

          1. f_lawless

            @Nigel sure it is huge news – but in the same way the witch hunts in the McCarthy era were huge news. Attempts to link Russia to the Clinton email leaks have been woefully lacking any evidence. If you can point me to somewhere on the net to some credible information that doesn’t rely on faith-based assertions from US intelligence services, then I’d be all ears.
            Unfortunately it’s a scientically observed human failing that if a lie is repeated often enough, even people who should know better start to believe it. Goebbels knew this. So do the “Russia did it” camp.

            I’m really starting to think we must be living in two alternate realities! In your reality there must have already been a police investigation into how top-ranking DNC staff members criminally subverted the will of the majority of Democratic party members to oust Sanders from being nominated as presidential candidate and those guilty have faced justice. You never seem to address that issue. Willful self-distraction?
            And by the way, there was book released some time ago, “Shattered: Inside Hillary Clinton’s Doomed Campaign” which, through interviews with campaign staffers and Clinton insiders, details how in the wake of her election defeat, a plan was hatched to blame it all on Russia as a diversionary tactic. I personally find the version of events it puts forward highly credible and I’ve yet to come across any rebuttal of the book on the net.

          2. Mary Lambe

            I personally find your faith based banging on about a Clinton conspiracy to be profoundly relevant. Only joking. You’re a pub bore. Go away.

          3. f_lawless

            Mary you’re making yourself look an uninformed fool. There’s nothing faith based about criminal corruption in the upper echelons of the DNC.
            Whatever one might think of Assange the individual, or whether one might even think Wikileaks is wrong to expose high level corruption, its record for releasing only authentic material is impeccable. Not one credible challenge to it over the years.
            Those in the US establishment know this – that’s why there’s been no attempts to claim that emails were faked. Rather the tactic’s been to try to whip up hysteria among the US public that their own democracy is under threat from the Russians in hope to distract them from fully digesting the content of those leaked emails.
            You’re the bore for resorting to tired putdowns about being a “conspiracy nut”.

          4. Nigel

            I think it’s more a refusal to be distracted by this astonishing tripe. Since the investigation is in it’s early stages and doesn’t leak, the evidence will either be forthcoming or it will not, but it’s stupidly soon to declare it utterly void. It’s hardly a witch-hunt unless you have faith in the absolute innocence of those currently indicted. The behaviour of the DNC seems irrelevant to a current investigation into the Trump campaign and besides was well hashed out during the election. Since Clinton has been the target of a huge onslaught of lies and disinformation, not to mention decades of hostile and hysterical Republican investigations, the fact that you who proclaim your skepticism so loudly take the resurgence of obvious right-wing anti-Clinton stories on the eve of these indictments as right and proper distractions is a remarkable outbreak of forced naivete. Your willingness to repeat Goebellian anti-Clinton stories as received fact means you really are merely a more articulate jusayinlike.

          5. f_lawless

            Of course, I’m just a guy on the internet gathering using my own judgment to gather what information I find credible and thereby draw my own conclusions. My appraisal of the current indictments at this point is that it’s more of the same mud slinging. Can you explain to me how, even if those in question are convicted of the charges, it would demonstrate that US democracy was somehow subverted? Are we ever going to get any actual evidence presented a year down the line since the accusations?

            …Hmm pointing out that both sides of the political spectrum in the US (as narrow as that may be!) have had past dealings with the Russians – in an attempt to put this current Trump-Putin hysteria into a bit of perspectve – is now “Goebbelian anti-Clinton”? I think not.

            “The behaviour of the DNC seems irrelevant to a current investigation into the Trump campaign and besides was well hashed out during the election” It’s just my opinion of course but you don’t seem very good at joining the dots on this one..and what does “hashed out” even mean? They reached an agreement on it?! Hah! Try telling that to the Sanders supporters within the Democratic party who crowd-funded a class action lawsuit against the DNC staffers. The DNC’s defence was to brazenly argue that its voters have no reason to trust it to maintain free and fair elections and surprisingly (or unsurprisingly) the judge overseeing the case recently sided with them. So much for the US justice system. http://www.lifezette.com/polizette/bernie-supporters-call-demexit-dnc-fraud-lawsuit-dismissed/

            Also I guess when Clinton’s own emails and the emails of DNC staffers can be dismissed as “obvious right-wing anti-Clinton stories” then there’s no point in debating any more.

          6. Nigel

            I don’t think indictments are mud-slinging. They’re part of a criminal process. As for the rest, that’s what investigations are for. I’m quite happy to see politicians being held accountable, aren’t you? It isn’t as if they didn’t know he was a crook when they elected him. It’s a bit rich to whine about Clinton when the guy behind Trump University turns out to have, at a minimum, hired people who are now under criminal charges.

            ClintonClintonClintonClintonClinton. ‘Both sides.’ Clinton and the DNC are so obviously guilty that a complete failure to uncover anything criminal on her part and a judge deciding otherwise in their part is actually PROOF that they’re guilty. Also, her emails. Both sides have dealings with Russians you say? And yet it’s only Clinton’s that matters. The one who lost the election. Not the other one, the guy who won it. Who, apparently, should not be held accountable for anything. That would be a witch-hunt. Now investigate Clinton some more. You’re ridiculous.

          7. f_lawless

            “Also, her emails. Both sides have dealings with Russians you say? And yet it’s only Clinton’s that matters. ”
            I can’t even follow your ramblings any more Nigel. What have the CONTENTS of the leaked emails got to do with the Russians? Answer: nothing. Have you even bothered to read them I wonder?

          8. Mary Lambe

            LAwless by throwing epithets around like “uninformed fool” you’re projecting your own manifest insecurity at your own worthless beliefs in increasingly incredible arguments. If you’re not going to argue from facts or reason but merely from I read it on infowars you can go lie down

          9. Nigel

            The e-mails they were pushing have aren’t related to the Russians, but they prove she was colluding with the Russians I’m alluding, and the pestle with the poison’s in the flagon with the dragon.

            I believe I am, in fact, applauding the current investigation of criminal corruption in the upperest echelons of Washington DC. Yet you keep wanting to talk about something else. Why oh why do you want to keep talking about Clinton when the Trump stuff is unfolding as we speak?

          10. f_lawless

            Mary you’re not seriously trying to equate Wikileaks with Infowars? Sorry to be so blunt but I’d have to stand by what I said.That is both really uninformed and foolish. Keep digging that hole ;)

          1. Ram Trilogy

            Seriously though , lots of issues. Endless cycle of poverty with very little prospects, users being jailed and falling into revolving door justice system, stigmatized and ostracized users from community, all perpetuate the cycle.
            Other countries deal with it radically differently and see much better results

  1. Shayna

    It’s unfortunate that Kevin Spacey doesn’t remember raping a kid, he apparently has “struggled” with his sexuality and now is living his life as a gay man. “House of Cards” has been cancelled as a consequence.
    The celebrity card has been pulled, yet again, he thinks that an apology will suffice, despite having no memory of the rape.
    Court, prison – the house of cards has fallen.

    1. Walter Ego

      There was no rape. He made inappropriate sexual advances on a 14 year old kid which was inexcusable. But no rape occurred. .

    2. rotide

      Considering you can’t remember the details of something you read on this page, you should be more forgiving of other peoples memory

    3. Ram Trilogy

      He didn’t rape anyone, far from it. You shouldn’t really throw the term rapist around so carelessly.

  2. Shayna

    I get it that people have their proclivities, but with children? I’m pretty sure everyone remembers Jimmy Saville, where there is one claim, others will come forward.

  3. Happy Molloy

    Nothing scary on RTE tonight. I remember as a gasur that Halloween was on nearly every year and we would watch after trick or treating

  4. Shayna

    I have to say I’m surprised at the comments in support of Kevin Spacey. I’m a big fan of his work. The thing is, he interfered with a kid (one that we know of) rape/assault is merely a term assigned to insidious behaviour. I don’t apologize for my wording.

  5. gerry

    Missed the Broadsheet post about the charges in the Mueller investigation. What’s the story Bodger?

Comments are closed.