Holy shit, he brings up notorious far right Christian nutjob Rick Santorum in that conversation as an example of a "cuck response to porn" and Santorum ends up having the moral high ground. He made Rick "Palestinians aren't people" Santorum sound like a sane, reasonable human being.

Then again, being a Nazi basically means that you don't have anything even resembling a moral compass, so why should I be surprised? Jesus.

It seems that, without fail, prominent alt-righters, Nazis, and ultra-libertarians will eventually start defending child pornography or pedophilia in some way. I guess, if you want to be rigorous about it, "well actually kiddie porn is good" is probably an inevitable consequence of believing power to be the meaning of life and believing that the role of the weak is to be at the disposal of the mighty, but you'd think maybe it would occasionally cross their minds that they should probably not talk about something almost the entire human race hates in front of a camera?

Nazi's once again bringing truth to the stereotype of being basement-dwelling losers who can't get laid.

I personally think you owe basement-dwelling losers who can't get laid an apology for associating them with such terrible people.

I apologize on behalf of all people with the first name "Richard" for that piece of shit having our name.

Here is Richard Spencer getting punched in the face. Enjoy.

Custom tag is accurate.

I don't really understand what's so special or noteworthy about Spencer. Just your typical run of the mill Nazi fuckhead, the type for whom there will always be a voice for as long as the internet exists. Granted, he's a helluva lot more handsome and charismatic than your typical US WN pondscum (look up Gary Lauck if you feel like you ate too much for lunch today), but I don't really think he deserves much more attention than a passing mockery. Hatemongers gonna hatemonger, you know?

No, it's not. Just because you're butthurt about a neo-Nazi getting what he deserves doesn't make me an "idiot". Nice try, though.

The shit show is getting interesting. It will be amazing if FBI officials and people in the Trump administration end up in prison.

Sources: Mueller interested in questioning Trump on Comey, Flynn

Trump will declassify Nunes’ so-called ‘DOJ abuses’ memo — if the House approves its release

It's partially a self-fulfilling prophecy thing, as part of the reason he's so known now is because of him getting punched in the face. I call tell you that the first time I heard of him by name was that speech he gave after Trump got elected where he shouted "Hail Trump, hail our people, hail victory!" and the whole room starting giving Hitler salutes in response. He's also the one who popularized the term "alt-right" as it pertains to the populist white nationalism that fueled and continues to fuel Trump supporters.

Yeah, this "alt-right" label triggers the hell out of me; sorry but authoritarian fascism based on ethnonationalism is not a mere "alternative" to the Republican party. You could argue it's an extrapolation of right-wing ideology brought to its absolute, furthest extreme, but you could do that with almost any ideology. Though I will say that the Republican party actually having to finally acknowledge and address the actual, dyed-in-the-wool, no-two-ways-about-it Nazis in their party will possibly provide a stern wake-up call to... if not the congressmen themselves, at least many of their constituents.

And hey, at least it should finally shut up the idiots who proclaim that Hitler was a left-wing socialist, cuz National Socialism yall*

*except that, of course, they'll never fucking shut up about that, ever

You've got it almost backwards. Congressional staff read/listen to voters all day, and Members listen to their staff. It's predominantly the angriest and/or least informed voters who contact their legislators the most (this is true of both parties). Most legislators have few illusions about the worst of the constituents they were elected to represent.

So, in other breaking news, Trump attempted a Saturday Night Massacre in June but failed.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/25/us/p ... ussia.html

Say, before anyone accuses me of being a Shillary... I'll be the first to say it: fuck her for this
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/26/us/p ... -2008.html

Trump is asking Congress for $716-billion for "defense" budget. Because, you know, we need to be able to defend ourselves while we thrust ourselves into conflicts that we have no business being in in the first place.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... SKBN1FF2HU

#SmallGovernment #MAGA

how are the US forum Trump voters feeling about his weak dollar policy and the fact Euro import albums cost about 20% more in the last year ?

Something something Gorsuch something deep state something elites something make America great aga Сделаем Америку снова великой

Ken Starr (yes, the Monica Lewinsky Ken Starr) has said that if true, this could be grounds for impeachment. Then again, Clinton was impeached but nothing even happened lol.

I don't think the current Congress would impeach Trump for almost anything.

Honestly, I really hope they don't impeach him, because they'll never vote to remove him from office. If he gets impeached and wins the vote, he'll be more-or-less bulletproof. Meanwhile if the whole thing is allowed to simmer until after the midterms (hopefully) swing the majority back to the Democrats' favor, then an impeachment would go much differently.

I still have a hard time imagining Dems taking the Senate. The math just isn't there. And Trump's approval is actually higher now than it was a few months ago.

On the flip side, the House increasingly looks like it's play. Which is probably part of the reason the House intelligence chairman decided to careen towards a constitutional crisis today.

The press coverage of the Nunes memo is a great example of how the government owns the media. I don't even like Trump, but the "RELEASING IT WILL JEOPARDIZE NATIONAL SECURITY!!!!1" is pathetic.

considering that it is widely speculated that his reckless talk with Kislyak in the Oval Office got an Israeli intel agent killed already, I wouldn't trust his lackey Nunes or any other GOP stooges to properly redact anything from the "memo"

Considering your post count is 15, I wouldn't trust that you're not a "troll".

never heard of "quality, not quantity" eh?
http://www.newsweek.com/trump-russia-is ... ahu-610500
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/11 ... intel-slip

Deaths caused by the publishing of classified information is not a hypothetical situation.

Hopefully many nations will be able to protect themselves from subversion and destruction with the information released intentionally or accidentally by the Trump administration.

The Department of Justice/FBI is just using that as an excuse to cover this asses. They did something that will ultimately make them look bad, and now they're pulling the "But muh national security!" card. It's the oldest trick in the book.

That said, I still hope Trump is impeached when all is said and done. He just has the demeanor of someone who is guilty.

EDIT: I don't have a problem with names being redacted -- that is all that is necessary to protect the people involved in the investigation. Knowing the government, though, they would redact nearly the whole thing.

Redacting names alone is not necessarily sufficient. You don't need to say "my sources for X, Y, and Z were A, B, and C" to out someone as sources, as some people have learned recently.

By taking this route, the committee members themselves are doing more to politicize the FBI than anyone at DOJ did during Obama's tenure. "They fucked up the Clinton investigation and let her off the hook!" is not the same thing as "we're going to give a democratic leader a pass and unfairly target a republican leader." Especially since there's utterly nothing unfair about launching a counterintelligence investigation of someone who was already being investigated for his multi-decadal entanglement with Russian crime.

This has nothing to do with FBI abusing its FISA warrants, since if that was the case the committee members would not be taking the route they're taking---they would be recommending a special prosecutor, or possibly impeaching FBI/DOJ leaders. This has nothing to do with transparency either, since they are barring the minority members from publishing their findings. This isn't even a partisan witch hunt, since a decent chunk of the GOP natsec community is lambasting them. This is specifically devoted to protecting one person (Trump) from prosecution, and to hell with anything else. It's more cultish than partisan.

While I agree that the national security card can and has been pulled in some cases at least in part to cover shit up--and the USA is hardly the only country where that happens, there's cases I know of (because the info was eventually released) of that in the Netherlands as well and it probably happens in pretty much every country--that doesn't mean that "national security" is by definition a trick or *only* gets used to cover stuff up because it looks bad.

Because no, redacting names isn't enough if there's other info in there that still leads to the people involved or narrows the possible people down so much that the people who want to cause harm know where to look. Just because it no longer makes immediately clear to a casual reader who it is, doesn't mean the info is protected well enough to keep people actually trying to puzzle out a source's identity from finding out, and it's not always easy to tell where the line is between "this could be used to identify" vs. "this couldn't be used to identify", especially because information can be combined to reduce the number of potential people it could be.

Say someone leaves in the information that the person who sourced A did also source D and is the sole source of H because this is relevant to understanding how conclusion X was reached.
Now people looking for the identity of the sources won't have to be looking for "source A, source D and source H or potentially sources A-D and H or sources A-H and D or sources A and D-H or source A-D-H". The list of potential sources has immediately reduced from "everyone aware of A + everyone aware of D + everyone aware of H" to "everyone aware of A AND aware of D AND aware of H". Depending on the overlap between people in the know on the separate A, D and H lists, this reduction can be as little as no reduction at all (e.g. by nature of the knowledge, by coincidence or by events the people on these three lists are the exact same with not a single difference--everyone aware of one part is aware of all) to sufficient to immediately betray the identity of source A-D-H (only one person was aware of all parts). Let's presume it's somewhere in between.

Someone leaves in the information that the person who sourced A came by said knowledge during event X, secure in the knowledge that there were hundreds if not thousands of people at X and pretty much everyone at X was aware or potentially-aware of A (maybe it's a convention and someone misspoke at the microphone, letting slip some info) and thus this information is not in and of itself enough to reveal source A.
Unfortunately, just because everyone at X is (potentially) aware of A, this does not mean that X is the sole source of knowing A, and by earlier revelations it's already clear that source A is really source A-D-H. Everyone on the A-D-H list who came by their knowledge of A through a different means than event X can now be removed as potential source A-D-H.

Now, the report betrays that the FBI must have become aware of information H by a certain date at latest, as can be seen from their actions from that point on. This isn't even specific information about source A-D-H, it's just that they acted in some way on their knowledge and it shows through their deeds or knowledge in conversations with OTHER sources.

The list of potential sources has now been reduced from "everyone aware of A (which includes everyone at X by default) + everyone aware of D + everyone aware of H" to "everyone aware of A AND aware of D AND aware of H before date Y AND at event X", which is almost certainly a significantly smaller list and quite possibly as small as a single person.

So. How 'bout dat State of the Union Address? I'm surprised no one's commented on it yet.

That bit about "building our infrastructure" was nice, wasn't it?

It turns out that, under Trump's plan, pipelines will be constructed through national parks with only the approval of the secretary of interior.

The secret memo Trump decided to release is backfiring on Republicans in a hilarious variety of ways.

You can check out the details in the link, but here's the bullet-points:



The most crooked and worthless administration in U.S. history continues it's downward spiral unabated.

Yeah, my first thought when I saw what was actually in the memo was "if this is all they've got, these people are so fucked." Their central argument has been that the FBI should have never launched their investigation because it (according to them) started with the Steele information. The memo itself admits this is false. Truly an epic fail in the realm of facts.



But Trump is Trump, so he might still fire Rosenstein and cite the memo as evidence.

I find it ironic how Trump just renewed the FISA bill, which allows the NSA to continue warrant-less spying on American citizens, and is now criticizing the process that he allowed to happen. A total moron.

Nah I think Trump grasps the irony. He just doesn't mind when it's other people who are being unjustly surveilled.

Of course. It's a classic "us vs. them" mentality. Shit like "fairness" doesn't even come into it in their minds, because they're REAL Americans and the country belongs to them, so anything done to defend it or attack America's "enemies" is perfectly justified. It's almost a wartime mindset, except it's along racial and cultural and ideological lines. Note all the War on Drugs/Terror/etc. terminology coined by conservatives.

I just hate how neo-cons have taken over the Republican party. Real conservatives don't support the "War on Drugs" and the "War on Terror". The state of politics in this country is a fucking joke. Literally half of the population is too lazy to Google simple political issues and are devoid of critical thinking skills.

Rand Paul is a Republican and I quite like him.