Red Mosquito

Strat wrote:

96583UP wrote:what if

and this is a big if

the CIA has a copy of the pee pee tape

just saying.

that would be significant

It would be hilarious but nothing more. Not shocking. Wouldn't turn his followers on him. And still not impeachable. Let's get one of him blowing putin

But would it turn them on, that's the question.

Simple Torture wrote:Boy, Marco Rubio loves standing next to those guys:

Our president is giving a thumbs up.

cutuphalfdead wrote:Paul Ryan might do it if there's dirt on both Trump and Pence.

Wait wait...isn't that a bit of having your cake and eating it too after you fuck the prom queen? I mean if he impeaches them both then he's President. How fortuitous.

bune wrote:

cutuphalfdead wrote:Paul Ryan might do it if there's dirt on both Trump and Pence.

Wait wait...isn't that a bit of having your cake and eating it too after you fuck the prom queen? I mean if he impeaches them both then he's President. How fortuitous.

The Senate still has to vote to remove them from office.

Yeah, but still.

bune wrote:

Simple Torture wrote:Boy, Marco Rubio loves standing next to those guys:

Our president is giving a thumbs up.

Only real men like W give the shocker.

FBI rushes to assert that Flynn is in the clear, and the spooks immediately league that he lied to the FBI.

Still sounds a lot like this stuff is coming from people in intelligence who feel like important information is being ignored or covered over.

WaPo: Flynn in FBI interview denied discussing sanctions with Russian ambassador

Former national security adviser Michael Flynn denied to FBI agents in an interview last month that he had discussed U.S. sanctions against Russia with that country’s ambassador to the United States before President Trump took office, contradicting the contents of intercepted communications collected by intelligence agencies, current and former U.S. officials said.

The Jan. 24 interview potentially puts Flynn in legal jeopardy. Lying to the FBI is a felony offense. But several officials said it is unclear whether prosecutors would attempt to bring a case, in part because Flynn may parse the definition of the word “sanctions.” He also followed his denial to the FBI by saying he couldn’t recall all of the conversation, officials said.

Another bang-up day at the White House.

McParadigm wrote:Another bang-up day at the White House.

A finely-tuned machine.

Spaghetti Americans

WSJ:

Jared Kushner, President Donald Trump’s son-in-law and close adviser, met with a senior Time Warner Inc. executive in recent weeks and expressed the administration’s deep concerns about CNN’s news coverage, according to a White House official and other people familiar with the matter.

In a meeting at the White House, Mr. Kushner complained to Gary Ginsberg, executive vice president of corporate marketing and communications at CNN’s parent Time Warner, about what Mr. Kushner feels is unfair coverage slanted against the president, the people said.

BurtReynolds wrote: He didn't need to expand beyond his base during the election. The middle came to him. That's something many on the Left can't understand. I think it's a deep psychological blind spot.

The Left seems to eternally overestimate it's support from the middle and relies on deeply flawed polling data. I wouldn't take anything as a given anymore.

edit: but yeah the dems can't do any worse than Clinton. Any other candidate will probably win.

I'd say the middle voted for him, I'm not entirely convinced they're happy with him. If they were, he'd probably have more support than he does among independents. I mean, he's 20 percentage points behind where most other presidents have been at this point; that's pretty far from the margin of error.

This isn't some breathtaking take, I just think the middle felt they had two shitty choices, and they went with the one they hated slightly less. Now, with Clinton gone, there's not much left to shield him. Trump's greatest advantage was that he was running against Clinton, an advantage that's not there now and is not going to be there next time.

Fox news is reporting it?!

tragabigzanda wrote:Just based on this simple article. R. Alexander Acosta doesn't seem like a bad guy:

http://heavy.com/news/2017/02/alexander ... niversity/

Anybody have a rebuttal?

this is the closest i have seen thus far:

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/ar ... ce/517002/

which by this administration's standards, makes him look like an evian snowflake

lock him up