Politics Manafort could face ‘rest of life in prison,’ judge says

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Lanny said:
Love Hamlet.
Click to expand...

lol...Lanny, I was kinda paraphrasing...can't remember the exact quote...been awhile since I shook hands with WS. :bgrin:


Edit...I just had to check, the actual quote is; "The lady doth protest too much, methinks"
 
bodyman5000 and 1 said:
Save your misogynistic posts for someone else. Unless she likes them when they are aimed at conservatives? Wouldn't surprise me.
Click to expand...

I did save them for "someone else"... I saved them for the special people.

Bt FWIW, I don't take orders from you...or anyone else, for that matter....clear it up, any?
 
I loved them flowers in her hair, chicks of the 60's!
I remember mud tents, band the bra, pot in match boxes, free love, great music, how did I survive!
I remember, it was baseball!
 
crandc said:
I wish they acted more like ladies and that goes for you as well.
Click to expand...

Why in hell would you take offense to that?...seriously. It was CLEARLY a joke.

And why would I want to act like "a lady", when I'm not?
 
yankeesince59 said:
Why in hell would you take offense to that?...seriously. It was CLEARLY a joke.

And why would I want to act like "a lady", when I'm not?
Click to expand...
Why would someone say men are acting like ladies when they complain even though the complainers are men? Why would someone turn a light-hearted exchange between two Shakespeare fans into moronic sexist comment?
 
crandc said:
Except it's not the ladies who are complaining.
Click to expand...
It's a Shakespeare direct quote but it applies equally to men or women. I thought this was obvious.
 
crandc said:
Why would someone say men are acting like ladies when they complain even though the complainers are men? Why would someone turn a light-hearted exchange between two Shakespeare fans into moronic sexist comment?
Click to expand...
Why are we making a big deal out of this?
 
bodyman5000 and 1 said:
Hahahahahahahahahaha. Saw that one coming and yes I would have been surprised if you didn't take offense to that one.
Click to expand...

lol...pretty much your standard MO.
crandc said:
Why would someone say men are acting like ladies when they complain even though the complainers are men? Why would someone turn a light-hearted exchange between two Shakespeare fans into moronic sexist comment?
Click to expand...

My goodness !...go back and read it all again...the Shakespeare reference was in response to someone "protesting" about something and had absolutely nothing to do with being feminine or masculine, one way or another. The Shakespeare quote was pointing to someone making such a protest about something so trivial that the reader was to interpret it as a red herring, regardless of sex.

Why are you making such a big deal out of nothing?..there was nothing "sexist" implied or intended.
 
tgzgjcjgmla41.png
 
Indeed a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
 
crandc said:
Indeed a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
Click to expand...

What are you going on about now?...it was a purely fictional tale from Shakespeare written some 400 years ago.

Geeez...lighten up.
 
crandc said:
Why would someone say men are acting like ladies when they complain even though the complainers are men? Why would someone turn a light-hearted exchange between two Shakespeare fans into moronic sexist comment?
Click to expand...
Why? Because the difference between you and these guys is that you actually believe what you say.

It's why I like arguing with them so much. They virtue signal constantly yet somehow can't stand even watching a short clip from Rachel Maddow.

I can't stand her because I rarely agree with her. I can watch Ellen and laugh my ass off or cry when Kate from SNL introduces her at the Golden Globes.

And when I make a sexist comment I do it on purpose instead of pretend it wasn't.

You may not have any respect for me and I'm not asking for it but you have mine even though we are about as opposite as people can get.
 
Rachel Maddow is my secret crush.

She is "wonderful wonderful most wonderful and once again beyond all whooping."
 
crandc said:
Rachel Maddow is my secret crush.

She is "wonderful wonderful most wonderful and once again beyond all whooping."
Click to expand...

Talk about setting the bar low. You can do better. She's a liar-for-profit, making millions off people like you who are inflicted with TDS. When she's alone with her wifey in her mansion
4b5b53603ca36426912865917d12c995.png
she giggles at how she got rich off your gullibility.

Will Rachel Maddow face a reckoning over her Trump-Russia coverage?

Ross Barkan
With Trump has come two years of conspiracy-mongering about Russia – and at the top of the heap is none other than MSNBC’s Maddow

Thu 28 Mar 2019 08.12 EDT Last modified on Thu 28 Mar 2019 14.16 EDT

The worst-kept secret in the liberal media ecosystem is that Donald Trump is great for business. Rebranded for the resistance, liberal newspapers gobbled up thousands of new subscribers while local outlets die across America, unable to feast on the Trump manna. On television, left-leaning stations, at long last, competed with Fox in the ratings game, fueled by a never-ending Trump obsession.

  • With Trump has come Russia: two years of conspiracy-mongering about whether the president, a failed real estate mogul and reality TV star consumed with dubious deal-making, conspired with the Russian government to influence the outcome of the 2016 election. Robert Mueller’s determination that no evidence exists to prove Trump and Russian colluded to fix the election has exposed, once again, the venality of A-list political punditry. At the top of the heap is none other than MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow.

    Maddow, of course, was not alone. The New Yorker once ran a cover in Russian, a stunt that will age as terribly as all cold war-era red-baiting has to our 21st-century eyes. Last year, New York magazine’s Jonathan Chait baselessly posited (in another cover story) that Trump may have been a Russian “asset” since 1987. CNN was a daily carousel of Russiagate pundits.

    “We wrote a lot about Russia, and I have no regrets,” said the New York Times’ executive editor, Dean Baquet, in an interview after the Mueller report came in. “It’s not our job to determine whether or not there was illegality,” he added. Other news executives have also defended their coverage. CNN’s president, Jeff Zucker, said: “We are not investigators. We are journalists, and our role is to report the facts as we know them, which is exactly what we did.”

    Still, it’s abundantly clear now that many liberal outlets overdid it in their fervor. And Maddow, MSNBC’s ratings juggernaut of the Trump era, is the embodiment of this overzealousness. The Mueller investigation was covered more on MSBNC than any other television network, and was mentioned virtually every day in 2018. No twist was too minuscule or outlandish for Maddow; every night, seemingly, brought another nail in the coffin of the soon-to-be-dead Trump presidency.

    There was the time Maddow theorized that Trump was “curiously well-versed” in “specific Russian talking points”, strongly implying press briefings were dictated from the Kremlin. An American missile attack on Syria, Maddow concurred, could have been orchestrated by Putin himself. During a cold snap, the Russian government could shut down our power supply. Putin could blackmail Trump into pulling troops from Russia’s border.

    Maddow was not only certain that Russians had rigged the election. On air, she would talk about the “continuing operation” – the idea that the Kremlin was controlling the Trump presidency itself. In more sober times, this brand of analysis would barely cut it on a far-right podcast. In the Trump era, it was ratings gold.


    Maddow is much smarter than this.     But the siren song of ratings is too difficult for a TV personality ignore, especially when a television network is transformed from an also-ran into a top contender.

    The case of Russian collusion served as soma for the Democratic masses addicted to cable TV and prestige news outlets, where the story could never die. Focus enough on Trump’s “illegitimate” presidency – Russian agents installed him! – and forget the catastrophic failure of the Democratic party to elect Hillary Clinton and stop Trump’s shambolic candidacy.

    Forget too America’s structural inequities, its warped version of representative democracy, its original sins of slavery and Native American genocide, and its history, first and foremost, of elevating presidents who routinely flouted the constitution, whether it was Franklin Roosevelt imprisoning Japanese Americans, Abraham Lincoln suspending habeas corpus, or even George W Bush launching the Iraq war, a cataclysmic blunder that will reverberate across the Middle East for decades to come.

    All of this is easy to wave away with the Trump-Russia wand. In this mythos, America was an unsullied country until Kremlin power brokers dropped Trump in the White House to control from afar. It is the cold war paradigm reborn, Russia the dark nemesis that must be slayed. Just as conservatives once ranted about communist infiltrations into all facets of American life, it’s liberal Democrats who now see Russia in every Trump foible.

    Maddow surely understands this. There will be no deus ex Russia to save the American republic. Once Mueller’s name fades into history, she will have to find someone else to fill her primetime hours.
    • Ross Barkan is a freelance writer in New York City
 
crandc said:
Rachel Maddow is my secret crush.

She is "wonderful wonderful most wonderful and once again beyond all whooping."
Click to expand...
She is Bizarro Hannity. I figure you know the Superman reference. Hell, I might be a bit off in my analogy but I don't think she would ever agree with Hannity on anything.

Anyone who watches either of them is getting fed propaganda in my opinion.
 
MARIS61 said:
Talk about setting the bar low. You can do better. She's a liar-for-profit, making millions off people like you who are inflicted with TDS. When she's alone with her wifey in her mansion
4b5b53603ca36426912865917d12c995.png
she giggles at how she got rich off your gullibility.

Will Rachel Maddow face a reckoning over her Trump-Russia coverage?

Ross Barkan
With Trump has come two years of conspiracy-mongering about Russia – and at the top of the heap is none other than MSNBC’s Maddow

Thu 28 Mar 2019 08.12 EDT Last modified on Thu 28 Mar 2019 14.16 EDT

The worst-kept secret in the liberal media ecosystem is that Donald Trump is great for business. Rebranded for the resistance, liberal newspapers gobbled up thousands of new subscribers while local outlets die across America, unable to feast on the Trump manna. On television, left-leaning stations, at long last, competed with Fox in the ratings game, fueled by a never-ending Trump obsession.

  • With Trump has come Russia: two years of conspiracy-mongering about whether the president, a failed real estate mogul and reality TV star consumed with dubious deal-making, conspired with the Russian government to influence the outcome of the 2016 election. Robert Mueller’s determination that no evidence exists to prove Trump and Russian colluded to fix the election has exposed, once again, the venality of A-list political punditry. At the top of the heap is none other than MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow.

    Maddow, of course, was not alone. The New Yorker once ran a cover in Russian, a stunt that will age as terribly as all cold war-era red-baiting has to our 21st-century eyes. Last year, New York magazine’s Jonathan Chait baselessly posited (in another cover story) that Trump may have been a Russian “asset” since 1987. CNN was a daily carousel of Russiagate pundits.

    “We wrote a lot about Russia, and I have no regrets,” said the New York Times’ executive editor, Dean Baquet, in an interview after the Mueller report came in. “It’s not our job to determine whether or not there was illegality,” he added. Other news executives have also defended their coverage. CNN’s president, Jeff Zucker, said: “We are not investigators. We are journalists, and our role is to report the facts as we know them, which is exactly what we did.”

    Still, it’s abundantly clear now that many liberal outlets overdid it in their fervor. And Maddow, MSNBC’s ratings juggernaut of the Trump era, is the embodiment of this overzealousness. The Mueller investigation was covered more on MSBNC than any other television network, and was mentioned virtually every day in 2018. No twist was too minuscule or outlandish for Maddow; every night, seemingly, brought another nail in the coffin of the soon-to-be-dead Trump presidency.

    There was the time Maddow theorized that Trump was “curiously well-versed” in “specific Russian talking points”, strongly implying press briefings were dictated from the Kremlin. An American missile attack on Syria, Maddow concurred, could have been orchestrated by Putin himself. During a cold snap, the Russian government could shut down our power supply. Putin could blackmail Trump into pulling troops from Russia’s border.

    Maddow was not only certain that Russians had rigged the election. On air, she would talk about the “continuing operation” – the idea that the Kremlin was controlling the Trump presidency itself. In more sober times, this brand of analysis would barely cut it on a far-right podcast. In the Trump era, it was ratings gold.


    Maddow is much smarter than this.     But the siren song of ratings is too difficult for a TV personality ignore, especially when a television network is transformed from an also-ran into a top contender.

    The case of Russian collusion served as soma for the Democratic masses addicted to cable TV and prestige news outlets, where the story could never die. Focus enough on Trump’s “illegitimate” presidency – Russian agents installed him! – and forget the catastrophic failure of the Democratic party to elect Hillary Clinton and stop Trump’s shambolic candidacy.

    Forget too America’s structural inequities, its warped version of representative democracy, its original sins of slavery and Native American genocide, and its history, first and foremost, of elevating presidents who routinely flouted the constitution, whether it was Franklin Roosevelt imprisoning Japanese Americans, Abraham Lincoln suspending habeas corpus, or even George W Bush launching the Iraq war, a cataclysmic blunder that will reverberate across the Middle East for decades to come.

    All of this is easy to wave away with the Trump-Russia wand. In this mythos, America was an unsullied country until Kremlin power brokers dropped Trump in the White House to control from afar. It is the cold war paradigm reborn, Russia the dark nemesis that must be slayed. Just as conservatives once ranted about communist infiltrations into all facets of American life, it’s liberal Democrats who now see Russia in every Trump foible.

    Maddow surely understands this. There will be no deus ex Russia to save the American republic. Once Mueller’s name fades into history, she will have to find someone else to fill her primetime hours.
    • Ross Barkan is a freelance writer in New York City
Click to expand...
Doesn't look like much of a mansion unless that is the servant area.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top