MAINSTREAM vs MAGA COOLER - For those who want to challenge the other side.

[Paul Brancato]

Thanks to Bob and William for posting the relevant quotes 

[Jonathan Cohen]

6 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

You don't think abortion is an intentionally divisive issue? 

I truly hope you are joking with this statement. Otherwise, it would appear you believe people who support a woman's right to choose are purposefully being "divisive" for ... what reason, pray tell? Just to annoy those who believe it should be illegal?

[Benjamin Cole]

5 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

Here's today's meme for Benjamin "No Collusion" Cole.

Ben claimed this past week that he had finally read the Mueller Report, but he, obviously, didn't read it very carefully.

Let's recall that Trump unexpectedly won Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania by razor thin margins in 2016-- by a combined margin of only 80,000 votes-- despite trailing bigly in pre-election and exit polls.

And recall that Julian Assange Emailed Don Trump, Jr. on election advising Trump not to concede, even if it appeared that he was losing the election in those swing states.

 

The word "briefed" suggest that this was a formal session of some sort.

Manafort and Kilimnik both worked for the same Russian mogul, Deripaska. One story for public consumption is Manafort grifted $10 million from Deripaska. 

Kilimnik was almost certainly not an FSB officer, as they work under diplomatic immunity. He was a Russian citizen. 

Did Russian intel ask Kilimnik questions? Who knows? Chinese and Russian citizens, when abroad, are expected to answer questions from their governments regarding what they see and know. They wisely comply. 

Manafort told Kilimnik of internal polling data? So what? Then what? (Set aside that campaign polls were hilariously inaccurate in 2016). 

BTW, the mogul Manafort and Kilimnik worked for, Deripaska, must be one of the bravest men on the planet.

From Wiki:

Comments on Putin's invasion of Ukraine

On 27 February 2022, the third day of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Deripaska posted on Telegram: "Peace is very important! Negotiations need to start as soon as possible!" The following day, he addressed the economic situation posed by Western sanctions in a series of posts:^[121]

"I really want clarifications and intelligible comments on the economic policy for the next three months," Deripaska said, adding that the Russian central bank's decision to dramatically hike interest rates and force companies to sell foreign currency are the "first test of who will actually be paying for this banquet".^[121] "It is necessary to change the economic policy, [we] need to put an end to all this state capitalism," he added. Referring to Moscow's earlier annexation of Ukraine's Crimea peninsula and the subsequent introduction of Western sanctions, he warned that "unlike 2014, it will not be possible to sit this out now".^[122]

In February 2022 Deripaska said that the war in Ukraine would bring 200 years of damnation to Russia.^[123]

 

On 28 June in a press conference held for that purpose at a Moscow university Deripaska said repeatedly it would be a "colossal mistake" and a "colossal error" for Russia to destroy Ukraine with its military offensive and termed as "war", a word that is effectively banned in Russia in the context of the invasion of Ukraine.^[124][123] He thinks the war on Ukraine is completely mad, and said that the sanctions are of course more harmful for the Russian economy than the West: "The debt markets are closed, the capital markets are closed, foreign owners are expropriated; it is a major upheaval."^[123]

On 20 December 2022, the Financial Times published an article saying a Russian court had ordered the seizure of a luxury hotel complex in Sochi worth $1 billion owned by Oleg Deripaska. According to several cited sources the seizure of assets was triggered by Deripaska's criticism of the war.^[125]

---30---

So that is who Manafort worked for. And Kilimnik. A man willing to take a firm stand against Putin on Russia. 

As usual, a government investigation is something of a kangaroo court. The narrative is controlled, the evidence is sifted, the witnesses are curated.

See the Warren Commission. 

Has anyone in M$M highlighted what kind of man is Deripaska? And then said, "That is who Manafort worked for?" 

 

[Benjamin Cole]

3 hours ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

I truly hope you are joking with this statement. Otherwise, it would appear you believe people who support a woman's right to choose are purposefully being "divisive" for ... what reason, pray tell? Just to annoy those who believe it should be illegal?

I contend the two political parties intentionally use abortion as a wedge issue. 

Your language suggest you are "pro abortion."  A "woman's right to choose." 

How about abortion at eight months and 15 days? Does a woman have the "right to choose"? 

At one point in pregnancy does abortion become murder? 

You have a clear answer? 

Is your answer divine, or through human reasoning? 

If your answer is temporal...then it is just an opinion, no? 

On such a topic as abortion, what makes your answer/opinion the correct answer? 

You see how easily we can become divided...and who might wish to exploit that division? 

[Benjamin Cole]

7 hours ago, Bob Ness said:

I'm not mistaken. Here's the sentencing memo regarding the coffee boy. Read it and weep. If you can't read actual court documents maybe you should try to learn rather than posting garbage from news clowns that fits your bias. You say you respect the outcomes of court decisions so here's your chance:

gov.uscourts.dcd.189898.44.0_3.pdf (courtlistener.com)

And here's the coffee boy's own words:

gov.uscourts.dcd.189898.19.0_2.pdf (courtlistener.com)

You'll notice that neither of these is some random Googled headline that seems to be your primary source of information.

Have you read Papadopoulos' book? 

I do not think PBS is a "garbage" news site. Though obviously on the left side of the aisle, some good reporters there. 

[Bob Ness]

33 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Have you read Papadopoulos' book? 

I do not think PBS is a "garbage" news site. Though obviously on the left side of the aisle, some good reporters there. 

Did you read his declaration under oath?

[Bob Ness]

36 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

I do not think PBS is a "garbage" news site. Though obviously on the left side of the aisle, some good reporters there. 

The headline is garbage. Please read what Mueller said. I highlighted it for you. The reporter doesn't know what they're talking about and proved that with what was written. This is non-negotiable.

[Jeff Carter]

15 minutes ago, Bob Ness said:

Did you read his declaration under oath?

Bob - you're a bit obtuse here. Are you suggesting that Papadopoulos' experience revealed the "collusion" or are you demonstrating the predicate?

[Benjamin Cole]

48 minutes ago, Bob Ness said:

The headline is garbage. Please read what Mueller said. I highlighted it for you. The reporter doesn't know what they're talking about and proved that with what was written. This is non-negotiable.

Yes, Mueller said there was no conspiracy, and the word "collusion" is meaningless in a legal context. 

OK, there was no conspiracy, or so says Mueller.

Durham said the Russiagate Hoax case was so thin it should have never been opened, and was largely opened to torpedo Trump. 

As an aside, why does the government use such stilted language? 

The "Professor"? The "Female Russian National"? (their language and capitalizations). 

Sounds like Boris Badinov and Natasha from Rocky & Bullwinkle. 

BTW, a great cartoon series. 

 

[Bob Ness]

1 hour ago, Jeff Carter said:

Bob - you're a bit obtuse here. Are you suggesting that Papadopoulos' experience revealed the "collusion" or are you demonstrating the predicate?

There's nothing obtuse about it. I asked him if he read the declaration. How can that be obtuse? It's yes or no.

Papadopoulos lied to the FBI and Durham skipped the part (revealed in subsequent emails and phone data) about his own (GP) notes that Coffee Boy claimed not to able to read about a meeting in London with Putin reps arranged or proposed BEFORE the opening of Crossfire Hurricane. Just a slight oversight by Durham I'm sure.

Edited May 23, 2023 by Bob Ness

[Jeff Carter]

32 minutes ago, Bob Ness said:

There's nothing obtuse about it. I asked him if he read the declaration. How can that be obtuse? It's yes or no.

Papadopoulos lied to the FBI and Durham skipped the part (revealed in subsequent emails and phone data) about his own (GP) notes that Coffee Boy claimed not to able to read about a meeting in London with Putin reps arranged or proposed BEFORE the opening of Crossfire Hurricane. Just a slight oversight by Durham I'm sure.

The only lesson from the Papadopoulos indictments was to emphasize that one should never agree to an FBI interview without a lawyer. One count consisted of a determination that one’s non-paid consultancy began at the moment one was told they were “hired”, rather than the day one showed up in person for “work” (that sounds crazy but read the indictment). Another consisted of P’s determination that Mifsud was a “nobody”, instead of being a vitally important Russian contact as insisted by Mueller’s charge. But Mifsud was a nobody, as can be determined by the investigation’s absolute non-interest in speaking to him beyond a brief session ahead of P’s interview. It is also a fact that the Female Russian National was not Putin’s niece or cousin or whoever Mifsud represented  her to be I.e. there was no meeting in London with Putin reps other than Mifsud’s false representations - but why he did that was never determined.

[Bob Ness]

9 minutes ago, Jeff Carter said:

The only lesson from the Papadopoulos indictments was to emphasize that one should never agree to an FBI interview without a lawyer. One count consisted of a determination that one’s non-paid consultancy began at the moment one was told they were “hired”, rather than the day one showed up in person for “work” (that sounds crazy but read the indictment). Another consisted of P’s determination that Mifsud was a “nobody”, instead of being a vitally important Russian contact as insisted by Mueller’s charge. But Mifsud was a nobody, as can be determined by the investigation’s absolute non-interest in speaking to him beyond a brief session ahead of P’s interview. It is also a fact that the Female Russian National was not Putin’s niece or cousin or whoever Mifsud represented  her to be I.e. there was no meeting in London with Putin reps other than Mifsud’s false representations - but why he did that was never determined.

And why did Durham never bother to interview P? You'd think those conclusions would require explanation? Either way as a predicate the FBI was less informed prior to determining there was a vital need to open the investigation particularly under the circumstances surrounding the election.

[Bob Ness]

1 hour ago, Jeff Carter said:

The only lesson from the Papadopoulos indictments was to emphasize that one should never agree to an FBI interview without a lawyer.

This is always true of any LEO.

[W. Niederhut]

Geez... talk about beating a dead horse... 🤥

Ben "No Collusion" Cole has absolute brain lock when it comes to misinterpreting the Mueller Report.

These issues have been repeatedly explained to him-- on the 56 Years thread and elsewhere.

Ben persistently refused to read the Mueller Report, so I posted a summary of the Mueller Report findings for him (and Mathew Koch) on page 1103 of the 56 Years thread.

He still doesn't get it.

Ben's Russia-gate delusions are symptomatic of a more general problem in the U.S.-- alternate MAGA reality narratives about anything relating to Donald Trump.

[Benjamin Cole]

Robert Kennedy Jr., With Musk, Pushes Right-Wing Ideas and Misinformation---NYT 6/6/23

Mr. Kennedy, a long-shot Democratic presidential candidate with surprisingly high polling numbers, said he wanted to close the Mexican border and attributed the rise of mass shootings to pharmaceutical drugs.

•