Search the Lounge


« Your Cheatin' Heart | Main | The other explanation for Brendan Dassey’s conviction »

July 15, 2018


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


"It thus seems reasonable to conclude that the biggest shoes in the Russia investigation have not yet dropped."


The indictment explains the foreign half of the operation, but the american side has yet to be revealed. Considering that the indictment against the Russian agents is so detailed, one imagines that the one against the Americans will be as well. The Americans must be held accountable. Publicly. So that we can restore our democracy and excise the rot of trumpism.


So many errors, so little time.

Let's start with the end: "or that shed light on why Putin so adamantly wanted Trump elected."

Please go back and read the indictment re: when the "Russians" started using the means described in the indictment with respect to the upcoming 2016 elections. What was the response of the US government? The President?

Second, should "the Russians" (and others) indict US CIA and other operatives for engaging in the same or similar conduct? (Carrie Matheson on trial in Moscow?) Discuss.

Third, please tell us whether you agree or disagree with the way that MSNBC and others are "reporting" the "fact" that there is an inescapable conclusion our president should not have met with the president of Russia.

Fourth, while touting the "awe-inspiring display of American intelligence capabilities" (oh, how one longs for the days when Bush was President and the leftists condemned these same agencies for their incompetence, overreaching and venal acts) please let us know what you think about launching counter intelligence investigations, using the means and methods of the surveillance state, against US citizens. And, btw, did you read the indictment? TO what extent did the allegations rely on circumstantial evidence? How strong was that evidence (if you know)?

Before you or the leftist commentators start in with the accusation that this commentator must be "a Russian," let me say this: ethnic slurring aside, your analysis of "Russian" interference is so overblown and hysterical that you discredit justified resistance to cyber crime. You are poisoning the discourse so thoroughly with your zeal to impeach the president that you have set back our efforts to combat cyber crime for perhaps a decade or more.

Thanks (not). It is your unmitigated hate of Trump (and your unquestioning worship of the prior president before him) that has ruined any possibility for constructive actions. Scholars should be thinkers, not partisans, because both parties are riddled with error and need for improvements.

Scott Pruitt Edndowed Chair in Enviconmental Justice

I remind all readers that President Bush looked into Putin's eyes and told us that he sees a "straightforward and trustworthy man." Obama in an off mike comment told Putin "wait until after the election..." Trump whispers sweet nothings in Putin's ear All three Presidents have something in common...trying to bullshit this guy. Why? Unlike Saddam,.Noreiega or any of the war lords and tin horn dictators we took out, we can not take out Putin. So the President tells him what he wants to hear ie, "Yes Dear" and then turn around and kink him the back and undermine him.

Just stop it

"both parties are riddled with error and need for improvements."

Clueless bothsiderism or brilliant parody? You decide.

Scott Pruitt Edndowed Chair in Enviconmental Justice

Just stop it,

Both parties must be doing something right. If you had $1 Billion dollars to invest, would you put that money into Russia? Or how many Americans emigrate to Russia and seek citizenship? None. How many Russians come here? Lots. Putin is a brutal dictator.


Clueless bothsiderism?

Ignorant partisanship or toxic egotism?

you decide

BTW, this is the commentator who doesn't like name calling.
I would say, in response ... [fill in the blank]

The comments to this entry are closed.


  • StatCounter
Blog powered by Typepad