The inevitable end result of our last 56 years

[Joe Bauer]

55 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

Joe,

     Just to clarify, Mathew Koch was the guy who posted the comment, "I'm starting to consider you mentally ill," in response to my post summarizing the Mueller Report, which Mathew had requested (above.)

Of course. I knew that. 

[John Cotter]

23 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

Bunk.  It's hardly a nothing burger, Mathew.  It's a very specific, detailed summary of the Trump campaign's involvement with Russian interference in our 2016 election, and of Trump and Manafort's efforts to conceal the evidence.

You requested a summary, and I posted it for you. 

Now you refuse to face the facts, just as you have refused to read the Mueller Report and the Senate Intel Report on Russiagate-- opting, instead, to believe the false alternate narratives in the MAGA-verse.

And, BTW, Trump, Bill Barr, Rupert Murdoch, Breitbart, Kremlin propagandists, et.al., have invested a great deal of time and resources in promoting false narratives about Russiagate.

John Cotter's misleading Wikipedia quote (above) is one example.

Anyone interested in the subject should take a few minutes to review the summary of the Mueller Report findings that I posted above-- which Mathew Koch erroneously calls a "nothing burger."

 

William, how was my post misleading?

[Kirk Gallaway]

15 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

The whole Russia-gate-bots story turns out to be state propaganda.

As Greenwald points out, there is a newish and curious coalition of Donks, neoliberals and neocons (same thing, no?) and establishment 'Phants, and they want the US populist movement suffocated in the crib. 

Note that one-time CIA Director Michael Morell is part of a group that funded Hamilton 68. 

Hamilton 68 is the Jayson Blair of our times, but on steroids.  

Has the American left been co-opted by shadow-government and globalist actors? Is "being against Trump" enough to link arms with neocons, Wall Street, globalists, Giant Tech and Big Pharma, and anti-laborists? 

Evidently so. 

 

Ben:The whole Russia-gate-bots story turns out to be state propaganda!

BEN: VOICE OF REASON? OR VOICE OF NOISE?                                              heh heh

That's solely your statement..Have you really researched this?

 

Ben:there is a "newish" and curious coalition of Donks, neoliberals and neocons

Newish Ben? or "newsy" or New York Post? or even newsworthy?, I'm not sure.

 

Ben, this organization,and  it's members  are not a secret. (unlike Taibbi's twitter files)  It has been around since July 2017. Probably started  in regards to perceived Russian interference. Trump fired Comey in early May.

Did you check their website? It's here. Do you think that might be germane to telling others what it is? Or do you want make it seem secret and another conspiracy?

I'm not surprised that the people who do that work are super patriot types on both sides, even though I'm not.I don't like Michael Chertoff or Bill Krystol, but they're right on the website! What's the news here? Or is this what you mean by newish, or newsish?

Just don't accept the cookies.!

https://securingdemocracy.gmfus.org/

They're going after the Chinese and the Iranian interference a lot now. Aren't  you big on the government going after the Chinese Ben?  Oh, but despite being the biggest Ukraine hawk here, not Putin? He's off limits?

Do you have any doubt, that countries are doing this? Why not? It's cheap, and you can do it with impunity! What are you  thinking??

 

Greenwad said that literally every story about Russia in the MSM came from them, but he has no basis in fact to really say that. A lot of that info that started with Flynn came before the group was ever formed!

 

That Michael Mc Faul and John Podesta would be concerned after Trump fired Comey? I was concerned! and I hated Comey!

 

It sounds like more social media wars to me. On the website, they give general categories of alleged interference under "Authoritarian Interference Tracker". The charge that that some of these sites are Trumped up, (pun) is interesting, but no evidence is given. Prove it!

Remember when Ben  posted a thread here starting with the words "Spectacular Glenn Greenwald"? As if Ben has explored every nook and cranny of Glenn, and Glenn's the Grand Canyon!                  heh heh

Isn't this just more Benfanboy? I think Matt Taibbi is wearing make up. He  looks 20 years younger! Tell him to make his twitter  files public!

Ben:The whole Russia-gate-bots story turns out to be state propaganda!

Ok, we've got Ben's BS noisy headlines.What substantive new charge are you making here? Or do you know?

 

Just to clu ya'

Is it really inconceivable to you sleuths?

 

 

[W. Niederhut]

54 minutes ago, John Cotter said:

William, how was my post misleading?

John,

     My responses to your post are in blue (below.)

John wrote:

Thanks for that, William, though a link to the article would have sufficed. 

Mathew Koch explicitly requested a summary, in lieu of my link to the Mueller Report.

There seems to be some ambiguity about the whole matter as suggested in the following extract from Wikipedia:

"The (Mueller) report concludes that the investigation 'did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.'"

"Did not establish" is the key phrase here, John, and it is misleading in that Mueller did not establish Trump's innocence in Russiagate.  Trump and his campaign staff, including Paul Manafort, repeatedly lied to Mueller's investigators about their 2016 campaign contacts with Russian assets--including GRU agent Konstantin Kilimnik-- and/or refused to answer questions.  (Trump, himself, repeatedly claimed he "couldn't recall" details in his written response to Mueller's questions.)

Trump also obstructed/stonewalled the Mueller investigation by floating pardons to Flynn, Manafort, Gates, and others, during the investigation.  And, in fact, Trump pardoned Manafort and Stone after they were both convicted of felonies (which were prosecuted in an effort to get at the suppressed facts about Russian collusion with the Trump campaign.)

But Mueller explicitly stated that his investigation did NOT exonerate Trump in the Russiagate scandal, and that, in fact, Trump had repeatedly engaged in obstruction of justice-- for which Mueller was not allowed to indict him.

It's also worth noting that on 1st December 2020 Attorney General William Barr stated, "FBI and Justice Department investigators found no evidence of irregularities that would have changed the outcome of the presidential election".

Bill Barr is a former CIA lawyer who was the mastermind of the Reagan/George H.W. Bush Iran-Contra scandal cover up.

After his narrow, party-line Senate confirmation as AG in 2019, Bill Barr lied about a great many things.  He shut down Mueller's investigation of Russiagate, then redacted and misrepresented Mueller's Report publicly to create the false impression that Trump and his campaign associates had been exonerated.

Here's the latest on Bill Barr's imploding campaign to rehabilitate his reputation.

Bill Barr's 'hollow and self-serving' image rehabilitation tour shredded in scathing NYT editorial - Raw Story - Celebrating 18 Years of Independent Journalism

While it certainly seems there was much sculduggery going on, it remains the case that the main reason the Democrats lost the 2016 election was, as I've already said repeatedly, their chronic betrayal of of those who Hillary Clinton called the "deplorables".

Not accurate at all, John.  Hillary Clinton was systematically smeared by the U.S. mainstream media in the weeks and months leading up to the 2016 election, as described by subsequent media studies from the Harvard University Berman Center and the prestigious Columbia Journalism Review.

She was also smeared by endless Republican "investigations" of the Benghazi pseudo-scandal, from 2012-16.

As for alleged "betrayal" of the American working class by the Democrats, recall that the Republican Party has repeatedly cut taxes for billionaires during the past 40 years, (largely creating the U.S. national debt) while simultaneously trying to sabotage and de-fund healthcare legislation benefiting American workers-- Medicare, Medicaid, and Obamacare.

Edited January 30, 2023 by W. Niederhut

[John Cotter]

50 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

John,

     My responses to your post are in blue (below.)

John wrote:

Thanks for that, William, though a link to the article would have sufficed. 

Mathew Koch explicitly requested a summary, in lieu of my link to the Mueller Report.

There seems to be some ambiguity about the whole matter as suggested in the following extract from Wikipedia:

"The (Mueller) report concludes that the investigation 'did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.'"

"Did not establish" is the key phrase here, John, and it is misleading in that Mueller did not establish Trump's innocence in Russiagate.  Trump and his campaign staff, including Paul Manafort, repeatedly lied to Mueller's investigators about their 2016 campaign contacts with Russian assets--including GRU agent Konstantin Kilimnik-- and/or refused to answer questions.  (Trump, himself, repeatedly claimed he "couldn't recall" details in his written response to Mueller's questions.)

Trump also obstructed/stonewalled the Mueller investigation by floating pardons to Flynn, Manafort, Gates, and others, during the investigation.  And, in fact, Trump pardoned Manafort and Stone after they were both convicted of felonies (which were prosecuted in an effort to get at the suppressed facts about Russian collusion with the Trump campaign.)

But Mueller explicitly stated that his investigation did NOT exonerate Trump in the Russiagate scandal, and that, in fact, Trump had repeatedly engaged in obstruction of justice-- for which Mueller was not allowed to indict him.

It's also worth noting that on 1st December 2020 Attorney General William Barr stated, "FBI and Justice Department investigators found no evidence of irregularities that would have changed the outcome of the presidential election".

Bill Barr is a former CIA lawyer who was the mastermind of the Reagan/George H.W. Bush Iran-Contra scandal cover up.

After his narrow, party-line Senate confirmation as AG in 2019, Bill Barr lied about a great many things.  He shut down Mueller's investigation of Russiagate, then redacted and misrepresented Mueller's Report publicly to create the false impression that Trump and his campaign associates had been exonerated.

Here's the latest on Bill Barr's imploding campaign to rehabilitate his reputation.

Bill Barr's 'hollow and self-serving' image rehabilitation tour shredded in scathing NYT editorial - Raw Story - Celebrating 18 Years of Independent Journalism

While it certainly seems there was much sculduggery going on, it remains the case that the main reason the Democrats lost the 2016 election was, as I've already said repeatedly, their chronic betrayal of of those who Hillary Clinton called the "deplorables".

Not accurate at all, John.  Hillary Clinton was systematically smeared by the U.S. mainstream media in the weeks and months leading up to the 2016 election, as described by subsequent media studies from the Harvard University Berman Center and the prestigious Columbia Journalism Review.

She was also smeared by endless Republican "investigations" of the Benghazi pseudo-scandal, from 2012-16.

As for alleged "betrayal" of the American working class by the Democrats, recall that the Republican Party has repeatedly cut taxes for billionaires during the past 40 years, (largely creating the U.S. national debt) while simultaneously trying to sabotage and de-fund healthcare legislation benefiting American workers-- Medicare, Medicaid, and Obamacare.

What you seem to be implying here, William, is that the extract from the Mueller Report that I quoted is misleading.

That is very different from what what you previously said, namely, that my post was misleading.

You need to be more careful when you say things that can be reasonably construed as calling another member's bona fides into question. Unfortunately, however, people on your side of the debate seem to enjoy more freedom in that regard.

The whole spiel about Hillary Clinton's personality and Hillary Clinton being smeared is (like the whole Russiagate shemozzle) largely irrelevant to the substantive point I've repeatedly made about why the Democrats lost in 2016, which is that it was due mainly to the Democrats' chronic betrayal of the constituency they're supposed to represent - the non-rich.

I've already said repeatedly that the Republicans favour the rich. Why are you banging on about it here again?

Edited January 30, 2023 by John Cotter

[W. Niederhut]

48 minutes ago, John Cotter said:

What you seem to be implying here, William, is that the extract from the Mueller Report that I quoted is misleading.

That is very different from what what you previously said, namely, that my post was misleading.

You need to be more careful when you say things that can be reasonably construed as calling another member's bona fides into question. Unfortunately, however, people on your side of the debate seem to enjoy more freedom in that regard.

The whole spiel about Hillary Clinton's personality and Hillary Clinton being smeared is (like the whole Russiagate shemozzle) largely irrelevant to the substantive point I've repeatedly made about why the Democrats lost in 2016, which is that it was due mainly to the Democrats' chronic betrayal of the constituency they're supposed to represent - the non-rich.

I've already said repeatedly that the Republicans favour the rich. Why are you banging on about it here again?

John,

    The subject of why Hillary won in 2016 by 3 million votes, but lost the Electoral College tally by a combined 80,000 votes (in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania) is complex.

    One professor in Wisconsin later estimated that roughly 23,000 legitimate Democratic ballots had been "disqualified" in metropolitan Milwaukee alone.  Democratic Detroit had a similarly low tally.

    And we know that the Russian GRU hacked voter registries in multiple states.

    The Democrats established the first framework for universal healthcare coverage in U.S. history in 2009.

    Republicans repeatedly voted to de-fund it, after 2009, and damaged it in 2017 with a rider in their Trump/GOP Tax Cuts For Billionaires Act.

    Where are you getting the notion that Democrats "betrayed" the working class?  (From Benjamin Cole?)

[Kirk Gallaway]

No W.   I do take  what I believe is John's point  that  the Democratic party has left  some of it's traditional working class base over the last few decades with a sense of betrayal over their abandoning of labor unions and international treaties. But the good majority poor and working class people are still Democrats.

It is unclear to me, however how many of the disaffected working class Trump voters were voters in previous elections.  I assume a lot weren't  because 25% more people voted for President in 2020 than 2016! So Trump has done a lot to bring people to the polls.

I went into Hillary Clinton's perceived personality, because  i do think personalities and superficial perceptions have a lot more to do with electability in the U.S. than they do in Europe for example.

 

Oh, and about your other thread. I'll give you a hint. i was referring to another poster here, whose well read, can be very logical but also rather scary.

Edited January 30, 2023 by Kirk Gallaway

[W. Niederhut]

1 hour ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

No W.   I do take  what I believe is John's point  that  the Democratic party has left  some of it's traditional working class base over the last few decades with a sense of betrayal over their abandoning of labor unions and international treaties. But the good majority poor and working class people are still Democrats.

It is unclear to me, however how many of the disaffected working class Trump voters were voters in previous elections.  I assume a lot weren't  because 25% more people voted for President in 2020 than 2016! So Trump has done a lot to bring people to the polls.

I went into Hillary Clinton's perceived personality, because  i do think personalities and superficial perceptions have a lot more to do with electability in the U.S. than they do in Europe for example.

 

Oh, and about your other thread. I'll give you a hint. i was referring to another poster here, whose well read, can be very logical but also rather scary.

Kirk,

     I think you would agree that, in reality, Trump was always a pseudo-populist.  As a Trump Organization mogul, he hired non-union workers-- including illegal aliens.  He always despised poor people.

     Obviously, he was able to convince a lot of poor, angry, white people to vote for him in 2016 and 2020, but he never had their best interests in mind-- just the opposite.  He even slipped up in a December 2017 Fox interview with Maria Bartiromo by admitting, "I represent rich people," and bragging that his tax cuts would, "make a lot of people richer."

      As for "populism," David Axelrod pointed out that Trump was the (Hegelian) Anti-Obama in 2016-- the Great White Birther candidate for the NOBAMA-ers who wanted to Put Whitey Back in the White House.

      But, in economic policy matters, Trump was always another Koch/GOP Trojan Horse.

      He cut more taxes for billionaires, approved the Keystone Pipeline for Big Oil, and tried to sabotage Obamacare.

      IMO, DeSantis will use the same pseudo-populist strategy of Anti-Woke-ism going forward.

 

[John Cotter]

2 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

John,

    The subject of why Hillary won in 2016 by 3 million votes, but lost the Electoral College tally by a combined 80,000 votes (in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania) is complex.

    One professor in Wisconsin later estimated that roughly 23,000 legitimate Democratic ballots had been "disqualified" in metropolitan Milwaukee alone.  Democratic Detroit had a similarly low tally.

    And we know that the Russian GRU hacked voter registries in multiple states.

    The Democrats established the first framework for universal healthcare coverage in U.S. history in 2009.

    Republicans repeatedly voted to de-fund it, after 2009, and damaged it in 2017 with a rider in their Trump/GOP Tax Cuts For Billionaires Act.

    Where are you getting the notion that Democrats "betrayed" the working class?  (From Benjamin Cole?)

William,

Why are you asking a question which I’ve answered many times before?

My “notion” that the Democrats have betrayed the working class is based on the following facts.

Like every other pseudo left-wing/centre political party in every other pseudo democracy, the Democrats have never advocated economic equality. They have never even advocated placing an upper limit on the wealth of individuals or families.

I use the term pseudo democracy, because the fundamental principle of democracy is equality, and economic equality is the most important form of political equality.

Instead, they advocate the big lie of equal opportunity. It’s a big lie because, as everybody knows, the poor and the children of the poor especially don’t have the same opportunities as the rich.

[Benjamin Cole]

5 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

 

Ben:The whole Russia-gate-bots story turns out to be state propaganda!

BEN: VOICE OF REASON? OR VOICE OF NOISE?                                              heh heh

That's solely your statement..Have you really researched this?

 

Ben:there is a "newish" and curious coalition of Donks, neoliberals and neocons

Newish Ben? or "newsy" or New York Post? or even newsworthy?, I'm not sure.

 

Ben, this organization,and  it's members  are not a secret. (unlike Taibbi's twitter files)  It has been around since July 2017. Probably started  in regards to perceived Russian interference. Trump fired Comey in early May.

Did you check their website? It's here. Do you think that might be germane to telling others what it is? Or do you want make it seem secret and another conspiracy?

I'm not surprised that the people who do that work are super patriot types on both sides, even though I'm not.I don't like Michael Chertoff or Bill Krystol, but they're right on the website! What's the news here? Or is this what you mean by newish, or newsish?

Just don't accept the cookies.!

https://securingdemocracy.gmfus.org/

They're going after the Chinese and the Iranian interference a lot now. Aren't  you big on the government going after the Chinese Ben?  Oh, but despite being the biggest Ukraine hawk here, not Putin? He's off limits?

Do you have any doubt, that countries are doing this? Why not? It's cheap, and you can do it with impunity! What are you  thinking??

 

Greenwad said that literally every story about Russia in the MSM came from them, but he has no basis in fact to really say that. A lot of that info that started with Flynn came before the group was ever formed!

 

That Michael Mc Faul and John Podesta would be concerned after Trump fired Comey? I was concerned! and I hated Comey!

 

It sounds like more social media wars to me. On the website, they give general categories of alleged interference under "Authoritarian Interference Tracker". The charge that that some of these sites are Trumped up, (pun) is interesting, but no evidence is given. Prove it!

Remember when Ben  posted a thread here starting with the words "Spectacular Glenn Greenwald"? As if Ben has explored every nook and cranny of Glenn, and Glenn's the Grand Canyon!                  heh heh

Isn't this just more Benfanboy? I think Matt Taibbi is wearing make up. He  looks 20 years younger! Tell him to make his twitter  files public!

Ben:The whole Russia-gate-bots story turns out to be state propaganda!

Ok, we've got Ben's BS noisy headlines.What substantive new charge are you making here? Or do you know?

 

Just to clu ya'

Is it really inconceivable to you sleuths?

 

 

Add Ron Paul to the growing list of skeptical and intelligent Americans who think the whole Russiagate-bots hysteria was a hoax. 

"Thanks to the latest release of the “Twitter Files,” we now know without a doubt that the entire “Russia disinformation” racket was a massive disinformation campaign to undermine US elections and perhaps even push “regime change” inside the United States after Donald Trump was elected president in 2016.

Here is some background. In November, 2016, just after the election, the Washington Post published an article titled, “Russian propaganda effort helped spread ‘fake news’ during election, experts say.” The purpose of the article was to delegitimize the Trump presidency as a product of a Russian “disinformation” campaign.

“There is no way to know whether the Russian campaign proved decisive in electing Trump, but researchers portray it as part of a broadly effective strategy of sowing distrust in US democracy and its leaders,” wrote Craig Timberg. The implication was clear: a Russian operation elected Donald Trump, not the American people.

Among the “experts” it cited were an anonymous organization called “Prop Or Not,” which in its own words claimed to identify “more than 200 websites as peddlers of Russian propaganda during the election season, with combined audiences of at least 15 million Americans.”

The organization’s report was so preposterous that the Washington Post was later forced to issue a clarification, even though the Post provided a link to the report which falsely accused independent news outlets like Zero Hedge, Antiwar.com, and even my Ron Paul Institute as “Russian disinformation.”"

More at the link. 

http://ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2023/january/30/the-real-disinformation-was-the-russia-disinformation-hoax/

 

[Kirk Gallaway]

Ron Paul?

This is why you'll really never be for the working guy, Ben.

He's honest,  he'd cut government drastically and whole local economies , particularly in the red states would collapse.

He's under an illusion that the "freedom money" that would result from him and others not paying taxes anymore would magically transform the economy.

There's no way he'd get re elected, but by that time, it would be too late anyway..

That's why him Tucker, the Fox crew always talk of of strangling the government.

They won't be very kind to you if you come back and try to collect for your  SS benefits or Public Assistance.

 

Anyway, more recently,  it's been done before on a state level before, with disastrous results.

And of course, who was he a political friend of?

The biggest fault in American democracy is even people who have opinions about  everything.

Don't know how to vote in their interest.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Brownback

 

 

 

[Matthew Koch]

58 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Add Ron Paul to the growing list of skeptical and intelligent Americans who think the whole Russiagate-bots hysteria was a hoax. 

"Thanks to the latest release of the “Twitter Files,” we now know without a doubt that the entire “Russia disinformation” racket was a massive disinformation campaign to undermine US elections and perhaps even push “regime change” inside the United States after Donald Trump was elected president in 2016.

Here is some background. In November, 2016, just after the election, the Washington Post published an article titled, “Russian propaganda effort helped spread ‘fake news’ during election, experts say.” The purpose of the article was to delegitimize the Trump presidency as a product of a Russian “disinformation” campaign.

“There is no way to know whether the Russian campaign proved decisive in electing Trump, but researchers portray it as part of a broadly effective strategy of sowing distrust in US democracy and its leaders,” wrote Craig Timberg. The implication was clear: a Russian operation elected Donald Trump, not the American people.

Among the “experts” it cited were an anonymous organization called “Prop Or Not,” which in its own words claimed to identify “more than 200 websites as peddlers of Russian propaganda during the election season, with combined audiences of at least 15 million Americans.”

The organization’s report was so preposterous that the Washington Post was later forced to issue a clarification, even though the Post provided a link to the report which falsely accused independent news outlets like Zero Hedge, Antiwar.com, and even my Ron Paul Institute as “Russian disinformation.”"

More at the link. 

http://ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2023/january/30/the-real-disinformation-was-the-russia-disinformation-hoax/

 

Thanks for sharing Ben, I really liked this part; 

The whole “Russia disinformation” hoax was a shocking return to the McCarthyism of the 1950s and in some ways even worse. Making lists of American individuals and non-profits to be targeted and “cancelled” as being in the pay of foreigners is despicable. Such fraudulent actions have caused real-life damages that need to be addressed.

[Benjamin Cole]

31 minutes ago, Matthew Koch said:

Thanks for sharing Ben, I really liked this part; 

The whole “Russia disinformation” hoax was a shocking return to the McCarthyism of the 1950s and in some ways even worse. Making lists of American individuals and non-profits to be targeted and “cancelled” as being in the pay of foreigners is despicable. Such fraudulent actions have caused real-life damages that need to be addressed.

The ersatz, fake, phony, bogus Hamilton 68 Russian-bot hoax-fraud went back to the well---any American online who did not recite the official story line was "Russian-influenced" or a "Russian asset." So says Hamilton 68. 

This reminds me of when earnest citizens who opposed the Vietnam War were defined as "fellow travelers," "weak sisters," or "communist influenced." Or even as Russian assets.

Ron Paul wonders if the whole Russiagate hoax was a regime-change op. 

That is worth pondering. 

We saw the JKFA, and then possibly a soft coup on RMN (who I loath as a war criminal, btw.)

Then Trump, another not very likable character, but who was legitimately elected by the American people. 

What Trump had in common with the JFK and RMN was the temerity to not cravenly cater to the intel state and globalists on every event and issue. RMN wanted to see the Bay of Pigs files. 

Trump was talking peace with North Korea and putting tariffs on China imports, closing the border to cheap labor. A non-globalist, and the globalists do not like interlopers in DC. Trump talked about releasing the JFK files, and then caved. 

None of this makes Trump a nice guy. Nixon was perhaps deeply flawed character, while JFK strikes me (on policy) as enlightened. 

The intel state-globalists have their own agenda. 

 

 

[Matt Allison]

I'm growing tired of countering Russian misinformation and propaganda on this forum.

There was no "Russia hoax".

Paul Manafort was Trumps Presidential campaign manager.

Manafort shared Trump polling data with a Russia spy to assist the Russians in their cyber campaign to influence American voters.

Not a hoax.

Treason? IMO, definitely.

 

According to Mueller, Manafort met with Kilimnik in New York on Aug. 2, 2016 and “months before that meeting, Manafort had caused internal polling data to be shared with Kilimnik, and the sharing continued for some period of time after their August meeting.”

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/u-s-has-new-intel-manafort-friend-kilimnik-gave-trump-n1264371

[Sandy Larsen]

On 1/29/2023 at 9:56 AM, Matthew Koch said:

On 1/29/2023 at 9:26 AM, Sandy Larsen said:

The Republican Party and right-wing media have had to become more and more deceitful over the years in order to get enough votes to continue winning elections. This explains why the Republican/Democratic vote has remained fairly close over the years.

On 1/29/2023 at 9:56 AM, Matthew Koch said:

Trump tax cuts allowed people to have more money and when you have more money you can get on a health insurance plan if your company doesn't have one.

 

Thank you Matthew.... you have given a perfect example of how right-wing media and Republican politicians trick people, like you, into believing what you do. Had you checked out the facts, free of bias, like I did, you would know that what you said (and I quoted above) is nonsense.

At the time Trump got his tax cut passed, my family's income tax was about $38,000. Our Trump tax cut was $60 per year. (Compare that to ~$30,000 for rich people. I don't recall the income level for that amount.)

I would have needed to pay ~$800 per month for medical insurance premiums, which is $9600 annually. Trump's $60 did nothing for us.

Good thing for us, the Democrats passed Obamacare years earlier and Republicans were unable to kill it, which was their goal for several years. My family got Obamacare and it lowered the ~$800 monthly payment down to ~$80. Now that, we could afford.

But Matthew Koch wants everybody to believe that Trump's Tax cut is a better solution.

 

On 1/29/2023 at 9:56 AM, Matthew Koch said:

Obama care where if you didn't buy private insurance the government fines you. Democrat plan for health care is to punish people for not buying it.. aka Fascism.

 

Obamacare fines were no different than advance payments like FDIC tax for Social Security and the monthly income tax for Medicare. We've had those taxes for several decades and people are no longer afraid of them. In fact, most people like Social Security and Medicare. Eventually most people will like Obamacare, though it will likely go through a number of changes to make it simpler and available to everyone. And the fines will return but in the form of taxes like FDIC.

 

On 1/29/2023 at 9:56 AM, Matthew Koch said:

How does Nancy Pelosi and Bloomberg fit into your false Rich vs Poor narrative, Sandy? Classy Joe Biden got rich how?

 

There's nothing wrong with being rich Matthew. It's giving tax breaks to the rich that is wrong.