JD - my definitive position on all things Russia

MegaPoke

Moderator
Moderator
May 29, 2001
56,445
47,021
113
51
Tulsa
www.shipmanphotos.com
I thought this might be interesting as it's own post. And the events of this morning tie into my answer.

Let's start with re-stating my basic position. Pre-election, I probably politically identified more closely with you than all but one or two other guys on this board. Libertarian leaning, social liberal, small government Constitutional conservative. I hate the democratic party. I hate the republican party. There are few things more corrosive than the current GOP establishment. They say some of the right things, but in reality are simply the neocon flip side to the neo-libs of the same globalist big government coin.

I was not a Trump guy. I was a Rand Paul guy. Then, I became briefly enamored with Fiorina. But by the time the primaries rolled around, it was Trump, Cruz and some other guys. I voted Cruz but planned to vote for Johnson in the general.

Johnson became very weird, and I became more and more concerned about the specter of a Hillary presidency. The closer the election got, the more unnerving it was to see the media openly carry her water and minimize her email server scandal.

In the end, on election day, I woke up not knowing if I would vote Trump or Johnson - but held my nose and went Trump in hopes that if nothing else he could:

1. Not be Hillary (i.e. an installed globalist shill with the full support of international corporations, Wall Street, uniparty establishment and the elite MSM media.

2. Actually draw form his list of judges and make Constitutional appointments.

3. Create havoc and move people's cheese in the swamp.

To that end, I'm satisfied with 1&2 but need more swamp draining to be happy with 3.

Everything else - including the wall and who pays for it is gravy.




I view him as an employee who I have hopes for but am not emotionally personally invested in. However.... My personality is such that I react to obvious bullshit by rooting for the target of that bullshit in most cases. And in this case, Trump Derangement Syndrome has made me root for the guy and defend the guy in situations where I would be more ambivalent or even critical - which I was during the missile attack on Syria.

I believe the immediate "resistance" narrative of marches, riots, etc was to some extent, orchestrated. And I think that the Trump/Russia story in general was and remains a plain attempt to brand him as a traitor and an illegitimate president. 93% of NYT stories on him are negative. 87% of CNN stories are. Half of democrats polled believe he personally colluded with Russia to hack the election.

The two terms used to this point almost interchangeably have been "Hacked" and "Collusion" by every talking head and useful idiot on the internet.

Interestingly, after Comey's testimony clarified that Trump was not under FBI investigation, I predicted accurately that a couple of board personalities were absent and likely finding new angles on the Russia thing before posting again.

Sure enough, @davidallen misquoted me yesterday saying I "denied Russian hacking and coordinated influence." And then wanted clarification that I still see no likelihood of Russian interference via disinformation, leaking information and active cyber attacks in the 2016 election.

He is distancing himself on cue from "collusion" while introducing new emphasis on previously underused terms like "influence" and "disinformation" Which I don't think ever even came up, and if they had, I would never have denied that Russia dealt in those things. Collusion is potentially treasonous. It should not be conflated with "Russia" floating fake clickbait garbage on social media.

So the longer this had gone on, the more concerned I've been about the whole "resistance" marketing the DNC is engaging in while the GOP congress sits with it's thumbs up it's collective ass.

My concern has been these ANTIFA riots, the fanning of the flames by the MSM and the top level leadership of the DNC searching for anything Russia related to attach an impeachment cloud to. Hillary Clinton claims to be part of the "resistance" which is a terrible insult to actual historical resistance movements but is purposeful language designed to view Trump as a fascist usurper.

It needs to be said that this Russian collusion BULLSHIT has played right into the mentality that triggered this idiot in Virginia to try to massacre the republican baseball team. It is not politics as normal and the republic will NOT survive the path we are on.

So, back to your original question. I want to make my Russia stance simple. These are my opinion and if I'm ever proven wrong, I'll own up to it.

1. The claims of Trump/Russia collusion are garbage and have always been garbage floated to undermine his legitimacy. Period.

2. I believe the goal is to keep the water muddy right into mid-terms as part of a strategy. Ends justify the means.

3. I believe Seth Rich was specifically the DNC leaker. I really want some answers on this instead of political posturing.

I believe Russia along with dozens of other countries (including us) tries to influence elections and spread disinformation. I find this completely unremarkable.

A recent story said Russia hacked voter registration records - THAT is a Russia story to look into. Beyond that, I've seen nothing offered up to show Russia has hacked or been involved in anything beyond "fake news" links. To that end, I fully support Mueller's investigation and think Trump is merely trolling when he leaks the idea he may dismiss him. I think that's dumb and would not support that at this point. But I don't understand how Meuller is not redundant to the FBI.

I think it would be very helpful if Meuller would make some kind of statements ASAP on the scope of what is being looked at and what is and is not of legitimate concern. And I would like to see him interview Kim Dotcom - whom I agree is a sketchy character but if he's got proof that the DNC leaker was not Russia, it would change everything about this entire story.

I'm open minded to any proof of Russian mischief, but if actual votes were not hacked, and Trump himself did not collude with or have knowledge of collusion with Russia - especially for the purpose of winning the election - then the hysteria over this story needs to GTFO.

Question - what legislation has been proposed by our esteemed congress to thwart future election "hacking" ? The focus has been almost exclusively on the Trump-Russia-"collusion" mythology. Comey put serious holes in that, and so the focus is now on conflating all things Russia. I reject that.


When you say "Trump collusion", are you referring to:

1. DJTJr....the individual...himself...colluding with Russia to influence the election on his behalf;

Or

2. Anyone in the Trump election and/or administration (with or without DJTJr knowledge) taking benefits from Russian reps/officials with either an implicit or explicit expectation/intention that they would attempt to influence DJTJr favorably towards Russia or Russian objectives/desires;

Or

3. Anyone in the Trump election and/or administration (with or without DJTJr knowledge) taking benefits from ANY foreign government (not just Russia...like Turkey) reps/officials with either an implicit or explicit expectation/intention that they would attempt to influence DJTJr favorably towards that foreign government's desires;

Or

4. Something else?

Personally, I find:

#1 Highly, HIGHLY unlikely....
#2 Possible (Manafort, Page, Flynn)....
#3 Very possible, bordering on likely (Flynn and Turkey).

Thanks in advance.

Sorry for the long reply. Hopefully it was worth posting.

I'm primarily referring to what has been the MSM and DNC inference which is #1. The idea that Donald Trump wouldn't be aware of anyone in his campaign working with the Russian government to help him win the presidential election is unlikely and it wouldn't matter if he didn't. he's the boss. So primarily the point I am addressing is the idea that Donald Trump colluded with Russia to hack the election. It's horse shit and I've called it such since Hillary and Podesta shat it out during her post-election hangover.

#2 I don't see this as likely, but would be open to this if Mueller finds evidence of it. I think it would need to be made clear this is a separate question from hacking a legitimate election, because delegitimizing his actual election is the point.

#3 Likely. Also likely is that if you crawled up every admin's ass with a microscope over the last 200 years, you would find all kinds of unsavory associations and influences. If they are going to investigate this, I would REALLY like to know more about the last two guys' admins and what their foreign influences were too, because F*CK those guys.
 
Last edited:

MegaPoke

Moderator
Moderator
May 29, 2001
56,445
47,021
113
51
Tulsa
www.shipmanphotos.com
One more thing - the recent Kathy Griffin and Julias Caesar in the park things are unlike anything else I've ever seen, and would not exist without the "resistance" environment that's been nourished and encouraged by DNC, hyperbolic celebrities and elite MSM. Madonna threatening to blow up the white house. DiNiro threatening to punch trump. Ashley Judd's whatever the F that was.... Unprecedented open top-down hate from people with influence over weak minded, mentally ill fans.

Free speech is the cornerstone of the republic so I am not for censoring those things - but to this point in our history, people have normally been better at not mainstreaming such things. The gloves are coming off and the blowback is not going to be good. I wonder if that's the point?
 
Last edited:

MegaPoke

Moderator
Moderator
May 29, 2001
56,445
47,021
113
51
Tulsa
www.shipmanphotos.com
ONE more thing - the reason I've been so vocal about this being made up bullshit is because it's self evidently so, for a clumsily obvious purpose.
Most such things fall away (pizza gate, birther gate etc.) but this has received full unconditional support from the MSM and elected officials and I expect them to own up to it at some point that they've wasted our time on a fairy tale.
 

windriverrange

Heisman Candidate
Gold Member
Jul 7, 2008
8,770
10,356
113
Catoosa
Mega with respect to the Shakspere thing and Kathy G. Remember when a rodeo clown in Missouri was fired (let go or whatever) for wearing a mask of the ex- resident of the WH?

The dems/lib will hang on to the Russian narrative until the mid-terms because the way things are going that is their only hope to unseat Trump, well unless the gutless GOP manages to do the dirty work for them.
 

Been Jammin

Moderator
Moderator
Jun 27, 2003
55,652
33,813
113
ONE more thing - the reason I've been so vocal about this being made up bullshit is because it's self evidently so, for a clumsily obvious purpose.
Most such things fall away (pizza gate, birther gate etc.) but this has received full unconditional support from the MSM and elected officials and I expect them to own up to it at some point that they've wasted our time on a fairy tale.

I'm going to say that "birther-gate" was around for significantly longer than Russia-gate has existed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: davidallen

MegaPoke

Moderator
Moderator
May 29, 2001
56,445
47,021
113
51
Tulsa
www.shipmanphotos.com
I'm going to say that "birther-gate" was around for significantly longer than Russia-gate has existed.

Google:

"Birther Obama" 464,000 results
"Russian Collusion" 2,790,000 results

Also, care to check some news content from ABC, CBS, CNN, FOX, NBC, NYT, WaPO over however long you want to define regarding both stories? It isn't in the same universe. Similar superficially, but the effort by the MSM and elected officials is in no way comparable.
 

CowboyJD

MegaPoke is insane
Gold Member
Dec 13, 2002
29,165
16,179
113
I'm primarily referring to what has been the MSM and DNC inference which is #1. The idea that Donald Trump wouldn't be aware of anyone in his campaign working with the Russian government to help him win the presidential election is unlikely and it wouldn't matter if he didn't. he's the boss. So primarily the point I am addressing is the idea that Donald Trump colluded with Russia to hack the election. It's horse shit and I've called it such since Hillary and Podesta shat it out during her post-election hangover.

#2 I don't see this as likely, but would be open to this if Mueller finds evidence of it. I think it would need to be made clear this is a separate question from hacking a legitimate election, because delegitimizing his actual election is the point.

#3 Likely. Also likely is that if you crawled up every admin's ass with a microscope over the last 200 years, you would find all kinds of unsavory associations and influences. If they are going to investigate this, I would REALLY like to know more about the last two guys' admins and what their foreign influences were too, because F*CK those guys.

Thanks for the response. I edited your response for brevity to the parts I'm primarily gonna respond to. The first part that I edited out was coherent, cogent, and reasonable. All I have to say about that would be is that we aren't that far apart in those matters. We are probably the furthest apart on our views of the "threat" globalism poses. Even that might be a definition thing where we are viewing what is meant by "globalism" differently.

Now on to #1-#3:

1. As I said previously I agree that Trump personally colluding with Russia to literally "hack" the election (changing votes, voter fraud, changing election results) is highly unlikely. The only thing I would disagree with is the likelihood of Trump being unaware of something high ups in his campaign doing something unethical or improper. I've been involved in quite a few official corruption investigations. IMO, it would not be all that unusual for the candidate (or the head of an organization/agency) truly being unaware of unethical/illegal conduct by underlings very high up the chain towards him. Sometimes that is by design. More often it is through no fault or gross negligence of the head. Nevertheless, I find a quid pro quo, Russia gets this if they are successful in altering the vote count deal between anyone in the election.

2. I view this as more "influence peddling" than "election hacking" so I agree there is a distinction.

#3. I agree....and you know I haven't ignored that issue or potential in prior administrations. I don't know if prior Presidential administrations were smoother at playing hide the ball than an admittedly blunt and ham handed Trump is, but that very well may be the case.
 

CowboyJD

MegaPoke is insane
Gold Member
Dec 13, 2002
29,165
16,179
113
Mega with respect to the Shakspere thing and Kathy G. Remember when a rodeo clown in Missouri was fired (let go or whatever) for wearing a mask of the ex- resident of the WH?

The dems/lib will hang on to the Russian narrative until the mid-terms because the way things are going that is their only hope to unseat Trump, well unless the gutless GOP manages to do the dirty work for them.

Trump is REALLY helping them hang on to the Russian narrative. The libs may have started the fire, but I believe Trump and his people have continually fanned the flames and then used the big fire to send out all kinds of mixed smoke signals.

iMO, a well crafted statement/message/narrative stating that it is all untrue, calling out Dems/libs as using this only as a mid-term tactic, agreeing to cooperate fully with Mueller, of an intent to try this in the court of law instead of on the unbalanced playing field of the MSM, and to focus on his policy agenda and argue those positions on the merits of those positions, and refuse to comment further until Mueller completes his investigation would go very far for me. I'm probably a bit naive in thinking it would do the same for much of our deeply divided country.
 

Medic007

MegaPoke is insane
Sep 25, 2006
27,221
37,541
113
Well, it was pretty ridiculous.
Yes it was, but it wasn't completely devoid of logic.

His literary agent listed his birth country as Kenya years ago. It's highly unlikely that he never previously saw his own info in the pamphlet done by the literary agency. You always proof that stuff for accuracy and get what isn't corrected. Well if you're smart you do.

His wife referred to Kenya as his home country in a speech. I got what she meant at the time, but choosing better wording would have kept that from being an issue for people who take everything they hear precisely as it's communicated. That's the reason I tell people their loved one is dead instead of they've passed, we've lost them, they're no longer with us, they've moved on, they've departed their earthly body, or any of the other unclear but we'll intentioned things people say to communicate death. Clear and concise speech leaves little margin for interpretation or error.
 

PDT816

Moderator
Moderator
May 29, 2001
11,472
3,405
113
Edmond, OK
I'm going to say that "birther-gate" was around for significantly longer than Russia-gate has existed.

The Obama camp is responsible for keeping the birther flames going.
  1. They refused to produce a birth certificate for an extended period of time.
  2. When they finally put one out, it had been manipulated in Photoshop.
 

Ostatedchi

MegaPoke is insane
Gold Member
Jan 5, 2002
28,255
19,772
113
I'm going to say that "birther-gate" was around for significantly longer than Russia-gate has existed.
That was your takeaway from Mega's post?
giphy.gif
 

windriverrange

Heisman Candidate
Gold Member
Jul 7, 2008
8,770
10,356
113
Catoosa
Trump is REALLY helping them hang on to the Russian narrative. The libs may have started the fire, but I believe Trump and his people have continually fanned the flames and then used the big fire to send out all kinds of mixed smoke signals.

iMO, a well crafted statement/message/narrative stating that it is all untrue, calling out Dems/libs as using this only as a mid-term tactic, agreeing to cooperate fully with Mueller, of an intent to try this in the court of law instead of on the unbalanced playing field of the MSM, and to focus on his policy agenda and argue those positions on the merits of those positions, and refuse to comment further until Mueller completes his investigation would go very far for me. I'm probably a bit naive in thinking it would do the same for much of our deeply divided country.

JD, I don't know what to think of Trumps actions now. I can see a positive for continuing to keep the hounds a baying and for him to shut up and give a definitive statement like you think would be helpful. No doubt the libs/dems want to hold onto this narrative until the mid-terms and they have said as much. But as long as Trump continues to fan the flames it does take the oxygen out of the room for any other "real" discussions. Maybe Trump doesn't want to give an official statement so the spineless GOP members can continue to hammer him and potentially face primary candidates.....just don't know. I'm comfortable saying though that there is some kind of plan associated with this, twisted or genius or twisted genius is where I'm trying to categorize it right now.

Even if he makes a statement I have a hard time believing this would die down. Since it isn't constructed around an attempt to find the truth, just don't see people deciding to suddenly lay off. I also don't think he can keep his mouth shut long enough for any statement to take hold even if all the other parties agreed with this tactic.

I think most people have made up their minds already and nothing short of an inquisition will sway them.
 

CowboyJD

MegaPoke is insane
Gold Member
Dec 13, 2002
29,165
16,179
113
JD, I don't know what to think of Trumps actions now. I can see a positive for continuing to keep the hounds a baying and for him to shut up and give a definitive statement like you think would be helpful. No doubt the libs/dems want to hold onto this narrative until the mid-terms and they have said as much. But as long as Trump continues to fan the flames it does take the oxygen out of the room for any other "real" discussions. Maybe Trump doesn't want to give an official statement so the spineless GOP members can continue to hammer him and potentially face primary candidates.....just don't know. I'm comfortable saying though that there is some kind of plan associated with this, twisted or genius or twisted genius is where I'm trying to categorize it right now.

Even if he makes a statement I have a hard time believing this would die down. Since it isn't constructed around an attempt to find the truth, just don't see people deciding to suddenly lay off. I also don't think he can keep his mouth shut long enough for any statement to take hold even if all the other parties agreed with this tactic.

I think most people have made up their minds already and nothing short of an inquisition will sway them.

I don't think it would shut the left down from continuing to comment on it, but it does give him a ready made disciplined response that would be quite effective in my opinion.

"We are cooperating fully with Mueller. It's time for all of us to do the work of improving America for Americans instead of sitting around only positioning themselves for 2018."

Repeated....over and over....to any question or comment about Russia.

I agree with you though....there is no way Trump is disciplined enough to take this route. He just isn't wired that way.
 

CowboyJD

MegaPoke is insane
Gold Member
Dec 13, 2002
29,165
16,179
113
New video - some great analysis:


I hesitate to even ask, but can you identify specifically what aspects of statements constituted "great analysis"?

I ask because I listened to the entire 11+ minutes and don't see any great analysis.

I did hear "I don't know what's going on...." and "Hard to tell at this point".

I also heard his summation/conclusion that Trump supporters aren't going to believe the findings and conclusions of any investigation into alleged Trump wrongdoing no matter how strong the actual evidence is. That a 1/3 of the GOP will align themselves with Trump NO MATTER what actual evidence may ultimately be disclosed.

That is more "Well, duh" than it is "great analysis".

So use your critical reasoning and analysis skills and identify for us what was "great" about his analysis.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Been Jammin

Been Jammin

Moderator
Moderator
Jun 27, 2003
55,652
33,813
113
Serious question. How can anybody watch this guy? The no shirt with leather jacket is just way too annoying for me. Maybe if he was covering Guns and Roses or something, but not for political monologues. No. Just no.

Agree. Really tough to take him seriously. Yet some rubes seem to put him on a pedestal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Medic007

NZ Poke

Heisman Candidate
Dec 16, 2007
6,088
7,047
113
Styx usually provides insightful analysis of complex situations, and he has a much higher recent record of accurate predictions than anyone in the corporate media.

I agree that he needs to put a shirt under his jacket, but I don't watch him for his appearance.


Here's an example of the type of predictions we get from the legacy media (and they don't even get fired -- who else besides corporate media workers can fail this often and publicly without getting fired?):





Does anyone want to publicly admit to still watching someone from this group below? (Some hilarious predictions)

 
Last edited:

Medic007

MegaPoke is insane
Sep 25, 2006
27,221
37,541
113
I agree that he needs to put a shirt under his jacket, but I don't watch him for his appearance.
I'm not judging you for liking him. Everybody has reasons why they value stuff.

I just can't take a dude who reminds me of an over the top World of Warcraft weirdo seriously. A T-shirt is easy and effective. Bare chests with leather jackets are good for metal bands and hot chicks with big boobs. I feel pretty old and prude admitting that my dislike of his attire is why I won't watch him. This hasn't been easy to come clean on.
 

Ponca Dan

Heisman Candidate
Gold Member
Dec 7, 2003
10,469
8,156
113
I can understand -- I've seen your reaction to Styx on another board I read (some like him, others can't get past his appearance), and I can also understand getting older and more prude.

I'm seeing pretty girls around with unshaven armpits -- and its apparently becoming significantly more common.

Wtf is up with that?

Also seeing some gender neutral bathrooms in the hippest areas of my city (single person size bathrooms only, haven't seen any large gender neutral bathrooms yet, but I bet they will be on their way if things keep going this direction).

I think women are rapidly going to come to regret that one --- divided bathrooms worked perfectly fine, and the silent majority want their privacy (and safety) when it comes to bodily functions.
In 1969 when I was in the Air Force stationed in Japan virtually every bar I went in used common (gender neutral) bathrooms. It was always disconcerting to me to be standing at a urinal doing my business as a girl walked past, headed to a toilet. Something I never got used to.
 

davidallen

MegaPoke is insane
Gold Member
Aug 15, 2006
20,689
8,108
113
56
Portland,OR
Everyone knows who she is. She's famous. Quite unlike the anonymous rednecks who hung Obama scarecrows.
Disingenuous to say this is the first you have seen this type of reaction... BHO faced a ton of crap and did so with dignity and aplomb. You honestly would not say the same for DJT would you?
 

davidallen

MegaPoke is insane
Gold Member
Aug 15, 2006
20,689
8,108
113
56
Portland,OR
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Been Jammin

Medic007

MegaPoke is insane
Sep 25, 2006
27,221
37,541
113
I'm seeing pretty girls around with unshaven armpits -- and its apparently becoming significantly more common.
Yeah, that's just gross. Thanks for the reply. I've decided I'll suck it up and just listen to a video or two of his. He doesn't offer anything visually like charts and stuff that I need to view to make sense of what he's talking about does he, like Gavin McInnes?
 

Medic007

MegaPoke is insane
Sep 25, 2006
27,221
37,541
113
Famous? Really you give her too much credit.... any assassination memes you recall for BHO?
Compared to redneck glue sniffers in Alabama, she's worldwide.

If you can find someone of similar fame (apparently doesn't have to be that famous according to you) that did something similar to Kathy Liberal Crybaby Dipshit Griffin's infantile photoshoot, you'd have some cred in your comparison. As is, it just looks like you're deflecting for some reason.
 

davidallen

MegaPoke is insane
Gold Member
Aug 15, 2006
20,689
8,108
113
56
Portland,OR
Compared to redneck glue sniffers in Alabama, she's worldwide.

If you can find someone of similar fame (apparently doesn't have to be that famous according to you) that did something similar to Kathy Liberal Crybaby Dipshit Griffin's infantile photoshoot, you'd have some cred in your comparison. As is, it just looks like you're deflecting for some reason.
Like maybe Ted Nugent?
 

Latest posts