The inevitable end result of our last 56 years

[W. Niederhut]

Good grief, Mathew.

The "whistle blower" in Trump's Zelensky extortion scam was none other than Alexander Vindman.

Vindman's concerns about Trump's disgraceful conduct in the case were confirmed by several of Trump's own staff, including Ambassador Sondland and  NSC advisors Fiona Hill and John Bolton.

John Bolton referred to the incident as Trump and Giuliani's "drug deal," remember?

You Trumplicons really seem to be living on an alternate planet.

Edited November 14, 2022 by W. Niederhut

[Mark Knight]

9 hours ago, Chris Barnard said:

 Perhaps I am splitting hairs to ask how you have bi-partisan overseers in a country that is almost entirely partisan? Even if seeking from abroad, they have exposure to news and almost everybody now is sported into two tribes.

Just so you understand me; this isn’t me singling out your process in Indiana, who may or may not got it as good possible. Electoral fraud does occur in the US, the question is to what extent?!

 

 

I acknowledge that nearly every voting-age citizen here is partisan. By stating that the election commissions and the trained poll workers are "bipartisan," I mean that there is an equal number of registered republicans and registered Democrats. Bi = two, and the two major parties are represented evenly. So there can be no Republican skullduggery OR Democrat skullduggery, as each party is observing the election and polling place activities of the other. Of course, the total population of my county is around 30,000, not several million, so "massive" voter fraud is impossible here. And dead people can't vote here unless someone can forge the decedent's signature convincingly...which isn't very likely.

[Douglas Caddy]

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Mark Knight said:

I acknowledge that nearly every voting-age citizen here is partisan. By stating that the election commissions and the trained poll workers are "bipartisan," I mean that there is an equal number of registered republicans and registered Democrats. Bi = two, and the two major parties are represented evenly. So there can be no Republican skullduggery OR Democrat skullduggery, as each party is observing the election and polling place activities of the other. Of course, the total population of my county is around 30,000, not several million, so "massive" voter fraud is impossible here. And dead people can't vote here unless someone can forge the decedent's signature convincingly...which isn't very likely.

Hi Mark, sounds tight there. Was it one of the states contested by the Republicans? I seem to remember the court hearings being somewhere else. 
 

Isn’t one of the strong arguments that there should be uniformity across all states? 
 

 

[Matthew Koch]

2 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

Good grief, Mathew.

The "whistle blower" in Trump's Zelensky extortion scam was none other than Alexander Vindman.

Vindman's concerns about Trump's disgraceful conduct in the case were confirmed by several of Trump's own staff, including Ambassador Sondland and  NSC advisors Fiona Hill and John Bolton.

John Bolton referred to the incident as Trump and Giuliani's "drug deal," remember?

You Trumplicons really seem to be living on an alternate planet.

There are two whistle blowers first one is CIA Eric Caramello second on is Alexander Vindman 

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/27/trump-ukraine-whistleblower-is-cia-employee-worked-at-white-house.html

 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-whistleblower-lawyer/second-whistleblower-in-trump-ukraine-scandal-comes-forward-lawyer-idUSKCN1WL09J

 

I will ask again Post Proofs of your allegation of Rand Paul is a Russian asset or admit you are wrong! 

Here are my Rand Paul links again that debunk you and your DISINFORMTION  

 

Edited November 14, 2022 by Matthew Koch

[Joe Bauer]

3 hours ago, Steve Thomas said:

https://twitter.com/therecount/status/1592216714380394496

"Now let me tell you this here: If we was ready for the green agenda, I'd raise my hand right now. But we're not ready right now! So don't let them fool you like this is a new agenda, this is not a new agenda! We're not prepared, we're not ready right now! What we need to do is keep having these gas-guzzling cars, because we got the good emissions under those cars. We're doing the best thing that we can!"

Steve Thomas

Brilliant!

[W. Niederhut]

4 hours ago, Matthew Koch said:

No, I haven't "Looked into it" because I don't take you to be serious person on this issue William. You silence is speaks volumes about your honesty on the subject. The Whistle Blower was Eric Caramello, Rand Paul outted him on the floor of the senate similar to the reading of the Pentagon Papers which then made it legal to say his name. 
 

Can we get some sort of ruling from the forum about this one?

I posted a link to Alexander Vindman's definitive history article in the Atlantic about Trump's January 25, 2019 phone call to Zelensky, and Mathew Koch has refused to even read the Vindman article, while continuing to post deflective Fox News stories about the other whistle blower in the case-- a CIA agent outed by Rand Paul.  As if the secondary whistle blower is the story.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2021/08/trump-ukraine-call-impeachment-vindman/619617/

Mathew has also repeatedly ignored references to the corroborating testimony of Ambassador Sondland, Fiona Hill, and John Bolton in the case.

IMO, the Rand Paul outing of the secondary CIA whistle blower was yet another bogus attempt by Trump, Rand Paul, and Fox to spin Trump's Zelensky extortion scandal as persecution of Trump by the "Deep State."  Trump used the same ruse to mislead people about his Russia-gate scandal, spinning it as Deep State persecution-- "Spy-gate," "Obama-gate," Nunes Memo, Durham Report, etc.  Basta per Dio!

Was the CIA not supposed to be concerned about Trump's Zelensky extortion scam-- in which Trump was directly undermining U.S. State Department policy in the Ukraine for his own petty political gain?

In a nutshell, Mathew is not engaging in a good faith effort to study and understand the historical details that resulted in Trump's first impeachment-- while repeatedly cluttering the forum with Trump's and Fox New's deflective attempts to blame the CIA for Trump's chicanery in the Zelensky case.

At what point does the forum say, "No mas, Mateo Koch!  No mas disinformazia, por favor!?" 🤥

Edited November 15, 2022 by W. Niederhut

[Benjamin Cole]

On 11/14/2022 at 9:07 AM, W. Niederhut said:

Ben,

     I can't reveal my confidential KGB sources, but, surely, you know that Rand Paul has served as Trump's personal courier to Putin, in addition to strongly opposing U.S. aid for Ukraine and publicly promoting Kremlin talking points in recent years. 

    If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck... 🤥

    A former staffer of Rand Paul was also busted for funneling Russian money to the Trump campaign, and was later pardoned by Trump for this crime against the United States.

    This Salon article by Jon Skolnik summarizes Rand Paul's history as a Putin gofer.

    https://www.salon.com/2022/04/26/rand-paul-goes-to-bat-for-putin-the-countries-theyve-attacked-were-part-of-russia/

https://www.salon.com/2022/04/26/rand-paul-goes-to-bat-for-putin-the-countries-theyve-attacked-were-part-of-russia/

The above article is underwhelming, to put it mildly. 

Even within the Salon article, they quote Paul saying the Russian invasion of Ukraine is not justified. I am unfamiliar with the article's author Jon Skolnick. 

And McCain throws the mud around? That is proof of Paul's supposed soldiering on behalf of Putin? 

The non-interventionists, including Paul, do have good arguments to make. Can the US afford to be the world's policeman, and is the endless string of post-WWII wars and entanglements in the interests of the US citizens (not globalist elites). 

We know what the globalists say and they command the think tanks, academia, DC (financed by Wall Street, multinationals). The US must play the lead role on the world stage in every scene and act, in all corners of the stage, even in Upper Volta (Burkina Faso, but I liked the old name better). 

I happen to support the US mission in Ukraine, for humanitarian reasons. Putin appears to be a malicious lunatic.

But the US thrived when Ukraine was part of Russia, and would rise and fall whether Ukraine is part of Russia or not.

What do we say to citizens who say, "You know Detroit needs help, reformation. Baltimore needs help, reformation. Los Angeles has a runaway homeless problem, insoluble through local efforts. Why $100 billion for Ukraine?" 

They have a point and Paul has a point. 

The globalists control both parties, and hyper-mobilized, globalized US military effort costs about $1.4 trillion a year (DoD, VA, black Budget, prorated interest on the national debt). 

That is $4,000 every year for every resident of the US, or $16,000 for an average family of four, or $32,000 just during the Biden Presidency. 

The M$M never outlines the extraordinary costs of the globalized US military efforts. 

 

 

 

Edited November 15, 2022 by Benjamin Cole

[Matthew Koch]

23 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

Can we get some sort of ruling from the forum about this one?

I posted a link to Alexander Vindman's definitive history article in the Atlantic about Trump's January 25, 2019 phone call to Zelensky, and Mathew Koch has refused to even read the Vindman article, while continuing to post deflective Fox News stories about the other whistle blower in the case-- a CIA agent outed by Rand Paul.  As if the secondary whistle blower is the story.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2021/08/trump-ukraine-call-impeachment-vindman/619617/

Mathew has also repeatedly ignored references to the corroborating testimony of Ambassador Sondland, Fiona Hill, and John Bolton in the case.

IMO, the Rand Paul outing of the secondary CIA whistle blower was yet another bogus attempt by Trump, Rand Paul, and Fox to spin Trump's Zelensky extortion scandal as persecution of Trump by the "Deep State."  Trump used the same ruse to mislead people about his Russia-gate scandal, spinning it as Deep State persecution-- "Spy-gate," "Obama-gate," Nunes Memo, Durham Report, etc.  Basta per Dio!

Was the CIA not supposed to be concerned about Trump's Zelensky extortion scam-- in which Trump was directly undermining U.S. State Department policy in the Ukraine for his own petty political gain?

In a nutshell, Mathew is not engaging in a good faith effort to study and understand the historical details that resulted in Trump's first impeachment-- while repeatedly cluttering the forum with Trump's and Fox New's deflective attempts to blame the CIA for Trump's chicanery in the Zelensky case.

At what point does the forum say, "No mas, Mateo Koch!  No mas disinformazia, por favor!?" 🤥

You sound like a Karen..

[Matthew Koch]

23 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

IMO, the Rand Paul outing of the secondary CIA whistle blower was yet another bogus attempt by Trump, Rand Paul, and Fox to spin Trump's Zelensky extortion scandal as persecution of Trump by the "Deep State."  Trump used the same ruse to mislead people about his Russia-gate scandal, spinning it as Deep State persecution-- "Spy-gate," "Obama-gate," Nunes Memo, Durham Report, etc.  Basta per Dio!

Was the CIA not supposed to be concerned about Trump's Zelensky extortion scam-- in which Trump was directly undermining U.S. State Department policy in the Ukraine for his own petty political gain?

In a nutshell, Mathew is not engaging in a good faith effort to study and understand the historical details that resulted in Trump's first impeachment-- while repeatedly cluttering the forum with Trump's and Fox New's deflective attempts to blame the CIA for Trump's chicanery in the Zelensky case.

At what point does the forum say, "No mas, Mateo Koch!  No mas disinformazia, por favor!?" 🤥

No citation on your IMO and you're asking to forum to ban me because you can't back up what you say? 

WOW! 

[Ron Bulman]

5 hours ago, Steve Thomas said:

https://twitter.com/therecount/status/1592216714380394496

"Now let me tell you this here: If we was ready for the green agenda, I'd raise my hand right now. But we're not ready right now! So don't let them fool you like this is a new agenda, this is not a new agenda! We're not prepared, we're not ready right now! What we need to do is keep having these gas-guzzling cars, because we got the good emissions under those cars. We're doing the best thing that we can!"

Steve Thomas

If they are taking 90% of his contributions, they are not trying to get him elected.  It's like get all you can off his name before December 6th.  Because it will be mud after that.  I've read about republicans holding their noses voting for him the first time to win control of the senate.  That ain't happenin.  He's a lame duck now.

Walker's campaign tells Republicans to stop 'deceptive fundraising' in Georgia runoff (msn.com)

I kind of wonder if he really wants to win.  He's got to know he would be in over his head in the Senate.  Is that the reason he keeps saying stupid stuff?

[Guest]

59 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

n a nutshell, Mathew is not engaging in a good faith effort to study and understand the historical details that resulted in Trump's first impeachment-- while repeatedly cluttering the forum with Trump's and Fox New's deflective attempts to blame the CIA for Trump's chicanery in the Zelensky case.

At what point does the forum say, "No mas, Mateo Koch!  No mas disinformazia, por favor!?" 🤥

William, this is such an interesting post. You are calling for the censorship of Matt. I understand that the democrat supporting members on the forum outnumber the republican members by anything from 10-1 to 20-1 at a guess, its significant anyway. Have you considered that a republican voter may feel exactly the same as you do now about the feed being full of The Atlantic, Daily Beast and similar media posts supporting the democrat position. I don’t think any of the republicans lately have objected of called for censorship. 
it may be that everything is more comfortable if the thread is an echo chamber or confirmation bias zone, but, then it doesn’t challenge anyones thinking.

I have a couple of sincere questions for you;

1) Why is it bothering you so much? Can’t you just ignore it? 

2) If you don’t think what Matt or Ben, or anyone else is saying is compelling, why waste a moment of your time? Why let it bother you? 
 

You’re accusing Matthew of failing to read or acknowledge your reference material. How many times have you ignored links posted by people opposing your positions? Do you see the parallel? 
 

There is little point in having a debate forum and everyone sharing identical views. 
 

Thoughts? 
 

 

[Joe Bauer]

1 hour ago, Ron Bulman said:

Is that the reason he keeps saying stupid stuff?

No!

Football head battered Walker thinks he is working man honest talking literate!

The better man than city slicker dressed men who use big words.

A tackle dodging, touchdown scoring, righteous manhood sword swinging knight in shining football uniform armor. 

 

 

Edited November 15, 2022 by Joe Bauer

[W. Niederhut]

34 minutes ago, Chris Barnard said:

William, this is such an interesting post. You are calling for the censorship of Matt. I understand that the democrat supporting members on the forum outnumber the republican members by anything from 10-1 to 20-1 at a guess, its significant anyway. Have you considered that a republican voter may feel exactly the same as you do now about the feed being full of The Atlantic, Daily Beast and similar media posts supporting the democrat position. I don’t think any of the republicans lately have objected of called for censorship. 
it may be that everything is more comfortable if the thread is an echo chamber or confirmation bias zone, but, then it doesn’t challenge anyones thinking.

I have a couple of sincere questions for you;

1) Why is it bothering you so much? Can’t you just ignore it? 

2) If you don’t think what Matt or Ben, or anyone else is saying is compelling, why waste a moment of your time? Why let it bother you? 
 

You’re accusing Matthew of failing to read or acknowledge your reference material. How many times have you ignored links posted by people opposing your positions? Do you see the parallel? 
 

There is little point in having a debate forum and everyone sharing identical views. 
 

Thoughts? 
 

 

Chris,

      My interest here has always been discerning and telling the historical truth about the subjects under discussion.

      So, naturally, I am annoyed when some forum members simply refuse to make an intellectually honest, good faith effort to discern and tell the truth about history.

     In the case of Trump's first impeachment, relating to Trump's Zelensky extortion attempt, the definitive history was witnessed and described in detail by Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman.  Vindman's version of events was corroborated by several Trump staffers, including Ambassador Sondland, Dr. Fiona Hill, and even John Bolton.

Alexander Vindman: Trump's Phone Call Changed My Life - The Atlantic

     But Mathew Koch has openly refused to read Vindman's definitive history of the incident, while repeatedly posting the deflective Trump/Fox/Rand Paul tropes implying that Trump was a victim of the Deep State.

     That's intellectual dishonesty.

     Should I simply choose to ignore it?  Perhaps, but that brings up the whole issue of how our society, and this forum, should deal with propaganda and the repetition of falsehoods.

     I made the same point a few months ago in the context of confronting Ben Cole's repetition of Tucker Carlson's false "patriot purge" narrative about Trump's January 6th coup attempt-- another attempt to blame the Deep State for Trump's chicanery.

    Some people, including some analysts at the RAND Corporation,* believe that repeated falsehoods need to be corrected by a repetition of the truth.

*  The Russian "Firehose of Falsehood" Propaganda Model: Why It Might Work and Options to Counter It | RAND

     

Edited November 15, 2022 by W. Niederhut

[Matthew Koch]

4 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

Chris,

      My interest here has always been the historical truth about the subjects under discussion.

      So, naturally, I am annoyed when some forum members simply refuse to make an intellectually honest, good faith effort to discern and tell the truth about history.

     In the case of Trump's first impeachment, relating to Trump's Zelensky extortion attempt, the definitive history was witnessed and described in detail by Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman.  Vindman's version of events was corroborated by several Trump staffers, including Ambassador Sondland, Dr. Fiona Hill, and even John Bolton.

     But Mathew Koch has openly refused to read Vindman's definitive history of the incident, while repeatedly posting the deflective Trump/Fox/Rand Paul tropes implying that Trump was a victim of the Deep State.

     That's intellectual dishonesty.

     Should I simply choose to ignore it?  Perhaps, but that brings up the whole issue of how our society, and this forum, should deal with propaganda and the repetition of falsehoods.

     I made the same point a few months ago in the context of confronting Ben Cole's repetition of Tucker Carlson's false "patriot purge" narrative about Trump's January 6th coup attempt-- another attempt to blame the Deep State for Trump's chicanery.

     

The only "intellectual dishonesty" going on here is coming from you William. The context of what John McCain was clear you are either misrepresenting it or are not smart enough to understand the context of what " a friend to Russia means".

I have cited an article which you William didn't read which says the Whistle Blower is CIA and is unnamed hence not Vindman. Rand Paul literally named the whistleblower as Eric Caramello. William will not acknowledge this fact that has a cititation because he is Intellectually dishonest.