Planet Rugby Forum

Fat Old Git wrote:

BillW wrote:

Fat Old Git wrote:"Impartial justice". Has the entire US Senate just lied under oath?

Almost certainly.

They should all be made to give their verdicts while connected to lie detectors. That would make good telly.

penguin wrote:So we now have the whistleblower's version, backed up by the career bureaucrats, Sondland, Parnas, and the transcript. The accountability office say it was illegal to withhold aid, and the administration have yet to provide an alternative reason why they did it in the first place (have I missed that - I've heard they were trying to form a counter-narrative but not sure what that is).

The only addition to this would be someone like Bolton testifying, but you have to say at this point, even if he points the finger firmly at Trump, would that actually swing some/all of the republicans?

Are his supporters going to say that he's the president and they don't care about pressuring Ukraine by fair means or foul?

piquant wrote:

penguin wrote:So we now have the whistleblower's version, backed up by the career bureaucrats, Sondland, Parnas, and the transcript. The accountability office say it was illegal to withhold aid, and the administration have yet to provide an alternative reason why they did it in the first place (have I missed that - I've heard they were trying to form a counter-narrative but not sure what that is).

The only addition to this would be someone like Bolton testifying, but you have to say at this point, even if he points the finger firmly at Trump, would that actually swing some/all of the republicans?

Are his supporters going to say that he's the president and they don't care about pressuring Ukraine by fair means or foul?

Nope, Mulvaney was in charge of OMB, and he's hiding behind Trump will not allow him to talk, and thus that because they can't talk to their illegal actions it's a witch hunt

Seneca of the Night wrote:

penguin wrote:The story doesn't seem to have broken through to the Fox viewership but you have to wonder how long they can hold back the tide on this. With Nixon, it took a long time for there to be a change in opinion, but when it happened, it happened fast. I'm wondering whether we see a similar shift in the next week or two, or does Mitch manage to force through a decision and keep the train careering down the track?

I presumed this post was by the lunatic piquant. But no.

Seneca of the Night wrote:

penguin wrote:

Seneca of the Night wrote:

penguin wrote:The story doesn't seem to have broken through to the Fox viewership but you have to wonder how long they can hold back the tide on this. With Nixon, it took a long time for there to be a change in opinion, but when it happened, it happened fast. I'm wondering whether we see a similar shift in the next week or two, or does Mitch manage to force through a decision and keep the train careering down the track?

I presumed this post was by the lunatic piquant. But no.

Any particular part that you think is lunacy? You seem to be phoning in your insults a bit these days.

Just pretty much every word.

Seneca of the Night wrote:

penguin wrote:The story doesn't seem to have broken through to the Fox viewership but you have to wonder how long they can hold back the tide on this. With Nixon, it took a long time for there to be a change in opinion, but when it happened, it happened fast. I'm wondering whether we see a similar shift in the next week or two, or does Mitch manage to force through a decision and keep the train careering down the track?

I presumed this post was by the lunatic piquant. But no.

Seneca of the Night wrote:

BokJock wrote:

Seneca of the Night wrote:

penguin wrote:The story doesn't seem to have broken through to the Fox viewership but you have to wonder how long they can hold back the tide on this. With Nixon, it took a long time for there to be a change in opinion, but when it happened, it happened fast. I'm wondering whether we see a similar shift in the next week or two, or does Mitch manage to force through a decision and keep the train careering down the track?

I presumed this post was by the lunatic piquant. But no.

Even you have to admit that the Parnas info is pretty damning stuff.

Rudy, at the very least, is f**ked by it.

Trump will of course try distance himself...but if Rudy pulls a Sammy the Bull, then the Orange Don is f**ked too...

...or maybe not - nothing f**king matters anymore.

It's been three years. You guys have got to wean yourself off this shit.

Seneca of the Night wrote: My posts on this here thread, whilst in the minor sub-category of internet addiction, are also in the major category of WINNING.

Seneca of the Night wrote:

penguin wrote:

Seneca of the Night wrote: My posts on this here thread, whilst in the minor sub-category of internet addiction, are also in the major category of WINNING.

In a race between a bag of cats and a dementia suffering donkey, you're cheering for the fact that your animal is still in the 'lead'. There is no winning going on here.

On the contrary, I have extremely satisfied with Trump's Presidency. I'm not some Richard Spencer type guy who expects political leaders to perform miracles, or to be a revolutionary. I believe in the merit of pointing the supertanker in a different direction. Eventually the slow but steady change in direction reaps genuine real results. And it's not just nudging, it's symbolism too. Trump has opened the Overton Window significantly. And as every day goes by, another globalist hits the eject button and retires or heads off to do something new, and another SJW type has a mental breakdown and heads off to the funny farm. The same pattern is happening in the UK and all across Europe too.

It has been a massive success.

Seneca of the Night wrote:

penguin wrote:

Seneca of the Night wrote: My posts on this here thread, whilst in the minor sub-category of internet addiction, are also in the major category of WINNING.

In a race between a bag of cats and a dementia suffering donkey, you're cheering for the fact that your animal is still in the 'lead'. There is no winning going on here.

On the contrary, I have extremely satisfied with Trump's Presidency. I'm not some Richard Spencer type guy who expects political leaders to perform miracles, or to be a revolutionary. I believe in the merit of pointing the supertanker in a different direction. Eventually the slow but steady change in direction reaps genuine real results. And it's not just nudging, it's symbolism too. Trump has opened the Overton Window significantly. And as every day goes by, another globalist hits the eject button and retires or heads off to do something new, and another SJW type has a mental breakdown and heads off to the funny farm. The same pattern is happening in the UK and all across Europe too.

It has been a massive success.

penguin wrote:

piquant wrote:

penguin wrote:So we now have the whistleblower's version, backed up by the career bureaucrats, Sondland, Parnas, and the transcript. The accountability office say it was illegal to withhold aid, and the administration have yet to provide an alternative reason why they did it in the first place (have I missed that - I've heard they were trying to form a counter-narrative but not sure what that is).

The only addition to this would be someone like Bolton testifying, but you have to say at this point, even if he points the finger firmly at Trump, would that actually swing some/all of the republicans?

Are his supporters going to say that he's the president and they don't care about pressuring Ukraine by fair means or foul?

Nope, Mulvaney was in charge of OMB, and he's hiding behind Trump will not allow him to talk, and thus that because they can't talk to their illegal actions it's a witch hunt

That feels like a pretty flimsy shield to try and hide behind at this point.

Seneca of the Night wrote:

6.Jones wrote:

Seneca of the Night wrote:

penguin wrote:

Seneca of the Night wrote: My posts on this here thread, whilst in the minor sub-category of internet addiction, are also in the major category of WINNING.

In a race between a bag of cats and a dementia suffering donkey, you're cheering for the fact that your animal is still in the 'lead'. There is no winning going on here.

On the contrary, I have extremely satisfied with Trump's Presidency. I'm not some Richard Spencer type guy who expects political leaders to perform miracles, or to be a revolutionary. I believe in the merit of pointing the supertanker in a different direction. Eventually the slow but steady change in direction reaps genuine real results. And it's not just nudging, it's symbolism too. Trump has opened the Overton Window significantly. And as every day goes by, another globalist hits the eject button and retires or heads off to do something new, and another SJW type has a mental breakdown and heads off to the funny farm. The same pattern is happening in the UK and all across Europe too.

It has been a massive success.

Seneca, do you really agree with the dismantling of environmental protections? Would you want it in New Zealand?

I do not know anything about environmental protections.

EDIT: what I will say is that I have a theory about 'globalist Washington Consensus Neo-Liberal' politics in its late advanced stage. So many of its denizens or products gravitated into international roles over the past quarter century (generation) and preoccupied themselves constructing an every more elaborate system of rules, that they were essentially in effect trying to run an economy while standing with their foot on the hose. What began in the 70s and 80s as free-wheeling Hayekian Freidmanite liberalism had become stultifying polish shipyard stuff, only no one saw it that way as the people clogging up the system were billionaires flying in on corporate jets to Davos - how could these people possibly not know how to run the global economy? They're billionaires... Of course most of them knew nothing about money being either corporate shills (Sandberg) or accidental rich (Bono, Leo, etc) or actual crooks (any 3rd worlder).

Trump comes in, takes his foot off the pipe (YOU'RE NOT MEANT TO DO THAT!), system is unblocked. Amazing.

6.Jones wrote: You see, the thing is I agree with almost all of that. The billionaire class are mainly rentiers who won a lottery [although there are some exceptions who built real businesses.]

The question is whether you can just throw a spanner in the works and it goes better. I know we've discussed this. You know I think Trump is a cunning media operator but not much else. Can you just take the foot off the pipe and everything works? It depends if economics is more like a bath or a space shuttle.

Like a motor taken apart by someone who doesn't know about details, a lot of the parts Trump is throwing away are there for a reason. Environmental protections gave the world clean skies and water to drink. There's more to progress than money. Otherwise why progress at all?

And in the meantime, he could involve us all in a war, by idiocy. I hope that gives you pause to wonder if Trump is as good as you want him to be. I hope he is too.

Backwoodsman1 wrote:
Well fortunately we have sites like the excellent Conservative Treehouse to deconstruct what the Dems and their deep state cronies are trying to do to save their skins.
It wont work of course , Ukraine has issued a warrant for the arrest of the former head of Bursima , who is currently on the run.

'' It is all coordinated. The “new evidence” relates to information turned over by Lev Parnas, an SDNY indicted former associate of Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani. The Lawfare purpose is to bolster their premise that President Trump was trying to force Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate Joe Biden’s corrupt activity around the Ukrainian company Burisma.

The Lawfare crew behind Schiff waited until the last minute to push the new “evidence” because they didn’t want republicans to deconstruct it during the impeachment evidence gathering phase. Aditionally, the Lawfare crew anticipate a Trump impeachment defense surrounding actual evidence of the Biden corruption, which makes the Trump request to Zelensky valid.''

Backwoodsman1 wrote: Well fortunately we have sites like the excellent Conservative Treehouse to deconstruct what the Dems and their deep state cronies are trying to do to save their skins.
It wont work of course , Ukraine has issued a warrant for the arrest of the former head of Bursima , who is currently on the run.

'' It is all coordinated. The “new evidence” relates to information turned over by Lev Parnas, an SDNY indicted former associate of Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani. The Lawfare purpose is to bolster their premise that President Trump was trying to force Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate Joe Biden’s corrupt activity around the Ukrainian company Burisma.

The Lawfare crew behind Schiff waited until the last minute to push the new “evidence” because they didn’t want republicans to deconstruct it during the impeachment evidence gathering phase. Aditionally, the Lawfare crew anticipate a Trump impeachment defense surrounding actual evidence of the Biden corruption, which makes the Trump request to Zelensky valid.''

Seneca of the Night wrote:

penguin wrote:

Seneca of the Night wrote: I find that I agree with some of what you say around the problems, and then you diverge off into 'and that's what Trump is doing well' territory and I can't agree. Time after time people close to him talk about his inability to handle complex subjects, short attention span, their concerns over his mental state - none of it tallies with a man who is pursuing an economic goal. I suppose it is possible that, in his attempts to get cheers from his supporters with tariffs and the like, some of it could work out well, but it will be by sheer luck. The way the farmers are being hit in the midwest I think that that sort of negative result is far more likely.

Trump has never been a 'proper' capitalist either, as far as I'm concerned. Proper capitalism is 'I have something of value to you, we agree a price, both parties are happy with the trade'. Trump's view is 'I pretend to have something of value, I sell it to you, you complain as the product is defective, I call my lawyer'. He is capitalism done wrong.

That's a very irritating post.

Seneca of the Night wrote:

penguin wrote:

Seneca of the Night wrote:

penguin wrote:

Seneca of the Night wrote: I find that I agree with some of what you say around the problems, and then you diverge off into 'and that's what Trump is doing well' territory and I can't agree. Time after time people close to him talk about his inability to handle complex subjects, short attention span, their concerns over his mental state - none of it tallies with a man who is pursuing an economic goal. I suppose it is possible that, in his attempts to get cheers from his supporters with tariffs and the like, some of it could work out well, but it will be by sheer luck. The way the farmers are being hit in the midwest I think that that sort of negative result is far more likely.

Trump has never been a 'proper' capitalist either, as far as I'm concerned. Proper capitalism is 'I have something of value to you, we agree a price, both parties are happy with the trade'. Trump's view is 'I pretend to have something of value, I sell it to you, you complain as the product is defective, I call my lawyer'. He is capitalism done wrong.

That's a very irritating post.

I'm sure you'll cope.

paddyor is sending me close to the edge. I'm not sure how much more exasperation I can take.

penguin wrote:

piquant wrote:

penguin wrote:So we now have the whistleblower's version, backed up by the career bureaucrats, Sondland, Parnas, and the transcript. The accountability office say it was illegal to withhold aid, and the administration have yet to provide an alternative reason why they did it in the first place (have I missed that - I've heard they were trying to form a counter-narrative but not sure what that is).

The only addition to this would be someone like Bolton testifying, but you have to say at this point, even if he points the finger firmly at Trump, would that actually swing some/all of the republicans?

Are his supporters going to say that he's the president and they don't care about pressuring Ukraine by fair means or foul?

Nope, Mulvaney was in charge of OMB, and he's hiding behind Trump will not allow him to talk, and thus that because they can't talk to their illegal actions it's a witch hunt

That feels like a pretty flimsy shield to try and hide behind at this point.

penguin wrote:We've all made it this far. I'm sure we can see out the election before we lose our collective minds.

Seneca of the Night wrote:

penguin wrote:

6.Jones wrote: You see, the thing is I agree with almost all of that. The billionaire class are mainly rentiers who won a lottery [although there are some exceptions who built real businesses.]

The question is whether you can just throw a spanner in the works and it goes better. I know we've discussed this. You know I think Trump is a cunning media operator but not much else. Can you just take the foot off the pipe and everything works? It depends if economics is more like a bath or a space shuttle.

Like a motor taken apart by someone who doesn't know about details, a lot of the parts Trump is throwing away are there for a reason. Environmental protections gave the world clean skies and water to drink. There's more to progress than money. Otherwise why progress at all?

And in the meantime, he could involve us all in a war, by idiocy. I hope that gives you pause to wonder if Trump is as good as you want him to be. I hope he is too.

Yes, to self serving billionaires jamming up the system in their own interests...I don't think you'd get much argument from the vast majority on that. I certainly disagree on the solution from Seneca. I feel economics is more like a rickety old space shuttle.

It's had lots of upgrades over time and now no one knows exactly how everything works, so we're desperate to find ways to fix one part without destroying the life support systems. There is no expert who has all the answers so instead we've apparently decided to throw a chimp into the mix to see whether he can debug it. The fact that the chimp was wearing a hat saying 'World class electrical engineer' seems to be enough to convince some people that he's up to the task, and the sound of hammering seems to be keeping them happy. So far the shuttle is still flying but I think we'd be better off jettisoning the chimp out the air lock before he chews through an important cable.

No one is meant to know how it all works. That's the point. But there's another old myth that is not really accurate, and that is that economists all disagree with each other: “According to legend, economists are supposed never to agree among themselves. If Parliament were to ask six economists for an opinion, seven answers would come back — two, no doubt, from the volatile Mr. Keynes!” (Paul Samuelson).

Economists, at least proper central bank ones, agree on an enormous amount, and that's why we have a prosperous global economic system. All this modern Davos stuff was just Boomer rent seeking - the Billionaire class were looking to lock themselves in for a 500 year stretch. Trump's instinct to hack away at all that is the right one. That's proper capitalism.

guy smiley wrote:Strikes me that fascination or admiration for a catalyst regardless of outcome is at best innocent or naive, at worst deluded in the way religious devoton can be deluded.

penguin wrote:The story doesn't seem to have broken through to the MSM viewership but you have to wonder how long they can hold back the tide on this. With Nixon, it took a long time for there to be a change in opinion, but when it happened, it happened fast. I'm wondering whether we see a similar shift in the next week or two, or does Schifty manage to force through a decision and keep the train careering down the track?

guy smiley wrote:Strikes me that fascination or admiration for a catalyst regardless of outcome is at best innocent or naive, at worst deluded in the way religious devoton can be deluded.

penguin wrote:We've all made it this far. I'm sure we can see out the election before we lose our collective minds.

Ukraine Is Investigating Whether Marie Yovanovitch Was Under Surveillance By Rudy Giuliani's Associates

“Ukraine cannot ignore such illegal activities on its territory,” an official from the country's interior ministry said.

KYIV — Ukrainian authorities said Thursday they had opened a criminal investigation into whether former US ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch was under surveillance by associates of Rudy Giuliani while in Kyiv last spring.

Officials from Ukraine’s interior ministry announced the investigation in a televised briefing, citing a trove of documents released by House Democrats on Tuesday that included several cryptic WhatsApp messages between Lev Parnas and Robert Hyde that discussed monitoring Yovanovitch’s physical movements and electronic devices.

“Ukraine’s position is to not interfere in the domestic affairs of the United States,” an interior ministry official said. “However, the published records contain the fact of a possible violation of the legislation of Ukraine and the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, which protects the rights of a diplomat on the territory of another country.

“Ukraine cannot ignore such illegal activities on its territory."

penguin wrote:

Backwoodsman1 wrote: Well fortunately we have sites like the excellent Conservative Treehouse to deconstruct what the Dems and their deep state cronies are trying to do to save their skins.
It wont work of course , Ukraine has issued a warrant for the arrest of the former head of Bursima , who is currently on the run.

'' It is all coordinated. The “new evidence” relates to information turned over by Lev Parnas, an SDNY indicted former associate of Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani. The Lawfare purpose is to bolster their premise that President Trump was trying to force Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate Joe Biden’s corrupt activity around the Ukrainian company Burisma.

The Lawfare crew behind Schiff waited until the last minute to push the new “evidence” because they didn’t want republicans to deconstruct it during the impeachment evidence gathering phase. Aditionally, the Lawfare crew anticipate a Trump impeachment defense surrounding actual evidence of the Biden corruption, which makes the Trump request to Zelensky valid.''

That's...one way of looking at things.

piquant wrote:

penguin wrote:

Backwoodsman1 wrote: Well fortunately we have sites like the excellent Conservative Treehouse to deconstruct what the Dems and their deep state cronies are trying to do to save their skins.
It wont work of course , Ukraine has issued a warrant for the arrest of the former head of Bursima , who is currently on the run.

'' It is all coordinated. The “new evidence” relates to information turned over by Lev Parnas, an SDNY indicted former associate of Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani. The Lawfare purpose is to bolster their premise that President Trump was trying to force Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate Joe Biden’s corrupt activity around the Ukrainian company Burisma.

The Lawfare crew behind Schiff waited until the last minute to push the new “evidence” because they didn’t want republicans to deconstruct it during the impeachment evidence gathering phase. Aditionally, the Lawfare crew anticipate a Trump impeachment defense surrounding actual evidence of the Biden corruption, which makes the Trump request to Zelensky valid.''

That's...one way of looking at things.

There might actually be a reason to look into the Bidens, but that doesn't make what Trump did legal or valid. It is also possible Trump does have an actual defence, I've no idea what that might be but we haven't heard from Pompeo and Mulvaney so it's possible

Fat Old Git wrote:Strange how Obama never so much as leaked a suggestion that Trump was under investigation prior to the election. It's almost as if.....

Rinkals wrote:

Fat Old Git wrote:Strange how Obama never so much as leaked a suggestion that Trump was under investigation prior to the election. It's almost as if.....

I think part of Seneca's problem is that he finds it impossible to believe that Trump is untruthful.

Thus, if Trump states that Obama was using the Intelligence infrastructure to undermine Trump's campaign, then it is an indisputable fact.

Most of us are not that gullible, though, and we would like to see evidence before we blindly buy into the veracity of Trump's version.

penguin wrote:

Rinkals wrote:

Fat Old Git wrote:Strange how Obama never so much as leaked a suggestion that Trump was under investigation prior to the election. It's almost as if.....

I think part of Seneca's problem is that he finds it impossible to believe that Trump is untruthful.

Thus, if Trump states that Obama was using the Intelligence infrastructure to undermine Trump's campaign, then it is an indisputable fact.

Most of us are not that gullible, though, and we would like to see evidence before we blindly buy into the veracity of Trump's version.

Surely he knows he lies but sees it as showmanship or media savviness, a tactic where the lies mask a truthful cutting to the core in his actions.

Seneca of the Night wrote:

6.Jones wrote:

piquant wrote:

penguin wrote:

Backwoodsman1 wrote: Well fortunately we have sites like the excellent Conservative Treehouse to deconstruct what the Dems and their deep state cronies are trying to do to save their skins.
It wont work of course , Ukraine has issued a warrant for the arrest of the former head of Bursima , who is currently on the run.

'' It is all coordinated. The “new evidence” relates to information turned over by Lev Parnas, an SDNY indicted former associate of Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani. The Lawfare purpose is to bolster their premise that President Trump was trying to force Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate Joe Biden’s corrupt activity around the Ukrainian company Burisma.

The Lawfare crew behind Schiff waited until the last minute to push the new “evidence” because they didn’t want republicans to deconstruct it during the impeachment evidence gathering phase. Aditionally, the Lawfare crew anticipate a Trump impeachment defense surrounding actual evidence of the Biden corruption, which makes the Trump request to Zelensky valid.''

That's...one way of looking at things.

There might actually be a reason to look into the Bidens, but that doesn't make what Trump did legal or valid. It is also possible Trump does have an actual defence, I've no idea what that might be but we haven't heard from Pompeo and Mulvaney so it's possible

If the Bidens broke the law they should be investigate by law enforcement, not the executive branch. There's a good reason why we don't give police powers to politicians.

That's right. You should use the police to investigate your political opponents. Like Obama.