Political Posts

[Sweet]

5 hours ago, Spekulatius said:

 

MAGA is big into conspiracies. Deep state, chemtrails, 5G vaccines.

 

Is it MAGA?

 

Deep state is hardly a conspiracy.  It’s basically a nod to civil servants, military, finance etc, and the quiet power they have.

 

 

[gfp]

7 hours ago, Parsad said:

Trump lies like a sociopath!  Here he tells a whopper of a story about his uncle teaching the Unibomber at MIT.  His uncle died in 1985, and Ted Kaszynski wasn't identified as the Unibomber until 1996...yet Trump says he talked to his uncle about teaching Kaszynski, the Unibomber.  His uncle also taught at MIT, while Kaszynski went to Harvard...never MIT.  Cheers!

 

 

 

 

Funny enough - and this is not a whopper - my Father went to high school and played in the marching band with the Unabomber Ted Kaczynski.  Evergreen Park, south side of Chicago.   My Dad certainly didn't know he was posing for photos next to a future domestic terrorist.

 

Edited July 18, 2025 by gfp

[changegonnacome]

10 hours ago, Spekulatius said:

The Epstein files fits right in and the more Trump tries to defuse this,  the more the Streisand effect plays out

 

For sure - Trump I'm almost certain never did anything wrong per se as regards Epstein (if he did we would have heard about it by now)..............but he gives the impression of guy desperately trying to distance himself from it all which looks like he's guilty as hell......the reality..........him and Epstein we're rich guy friends......I'm sure both recognized each other as creatures of the same ilk.....both striving to be recognized as richer than they were, more important and more successful than they we're......they had a lot in common.......Trump's desperate wish to downplay or make their decade long friendship disappear is an ego/reputation protection exercise.....

 

the problem is his conspiracy-fed base starts to look at that and wonder if there's something going on.......Trump is starting to find out that sometimes when you start fires its hard to put them out......as an outsider politician who put together a coalition of conspiracy....telling supporters their Government wasn't actually working for them but against them.....when you become the government it gets hard to put that genie back in the bottle.

 

I said it earlier - but this Epstein drama - is a prelude to how the MAGA coalition ultimately falls apart without the conspiracy theorist in-chief at its core and in the WH......which is to say that it turns on itself, implodes and where everybody, at the end, accuses everyone else and each other of being a paedophile or a deep state shill.

 

The GOP IMO has simply no idea and no plan on how to keep this raggle taggle political coalition together and so stay in power in a post-Donald era.......which is at the end of day three short years away.

 

Edited July 18, 2025 by changegonnacome

[cubsfan]

9 hours ago, dwy000 said:

The odds he actually sues them and risks going thru discovery are approximately zero. 

 

Sure thing @dwy000 - Just like ABC and CBS that ended up settling with Trump for millions!  What a joke!

[dwy000]

45 minutes ago, cubsfan said:

 

Sure thing @dwy000 - Just like ABC and CBS that ended up settling with Trump for millions!  What a joke!

ABC and CBS weren't reporting on Trumps friendship with convincted pedophiles. You can come back and call me out when he goes ahead with the lawsuit. 

 

If pedophilia isnt a red line for you, its truly a cult. 

Edited July 18, 2025 by dwy000

[Xerxes]

1 hour ago, TB said:

Interesting - isn't Carney one of the most educated head of state ever in Canada? I like the reporter; he or his producers are pretty even handed or appear so.

Hi TB

 

i am not sure if he is or not the most educated. I just like that he is himself, that he is self made, and not a politician like the rest of them (I.e Pierre or Justin).

Being educated is not a mark in of itself for me, what matters is that he went far, and certainly did well for someone born in the North West Territories. 
 

For clarification, he is the head of the Government.
 

Our head of state is Charles III. 

 

 

[whiskybravo]

1 hour ago, dwy000 said:

 

 

If pedophilia isnt a red line for you, its truly a cult. 

Wow straw man much?

 

Pedophilia is a different level of evil pathology.  Even Change said he is almost certain Trump didn’t do anything wrong with regards to Epstein or as he logically points out we definitely would have heard about.  No Trump was a just standard lewd philanderer.  That’s bad enough, but not this unsubstantiated stuff you’re tossing around.  Geez Louise!

Edited July 18, 2025 by whiskybravo

[changegonnacome]

35 minutes ago, whiskybravo said:

No Trump was a just standard lewd philanderer

 

Right - Donald now and in the past is not somebody you would leave your young daughter with alone for long - a low level creep....but absolutely Donald is not a peado....you really do have TDS if you think that.

Edited July 18, 2025 by changegonnacome

[cubsfan]

1 hour ago, dwy000 said:

ABC and CBS weren't reporting on Trumps friendship with convincted pedophiles. You can come back and call me out when he goes ahead with the lawsuit. 

 

If pedophilia isnt a red line for you, its truly a cult. 

 

Unlike Clinton - Trump dumped Epstein 20 years ago. Good old Bill just couldn't stay away from Epstein Island!

 

I definitely share your disgust for pedophiles.

[dwy000]

13 minutes ago, cubsfan said:

 

Unlike Clinton - Trump dumped Epstein 20 years ago. Good old Bill just couldn't stay away from Epstein Island!

 

I definitely share your disgust for pedophiles.

He could resolve this in a heartbeat by releasing all the Epstein files (exactly as he promised many times to do).  The fact that he is fighting so hard not to tells you almost everything you need to know.  

[changegonnacome]

 

a perfect meme.....but also go long Astronomer on the private markets......you can't buy publicity like this.

[Parsad]

13 hours ago, TB said:

Don't think the acquiring entity can layoff people before acquisition without facing lawsuits; and this deal hasn't closed yet. All these people use teleprompters for the most part anyways. A more likely answer is declining viewership. The viewership of broadcast television has been declining steadily. It is not the business it once was. Below clip has some stats on the decline and potential reason why the show was terminated.

 

Update:  @Parsadlooks like CBS was losing $40 million/year on the Colbert show with about 40-50% of the loss attributable to his salary

 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=52aEaxeuK4Y&pp=0gcJCcwJAYcqIYzv

 

They weren't losing money at 60 Minutes other than the $16M settlement...but heads fell.  They could have announced the cancellation next year, since the contract doesn't expire until mid-2026.  They could have shut down the show years ago, but late night was a cable staple and had significant historical context for CBS.  Colbert was also the hands-down winner when it came to viewership for the 8:30pm ET/11:30pm PT time slot.

 

https://latenighter.com/news/ratings/here-are-final-late-night-ratings-for-q1-2025/

 

He also makes the same as Kimmel and slightly less than Fallon:

 

https://lastnighton.com/posts/all-4-late-night-host-salaries-ranked-lowest-to-highest 

 

But no, they announced the closure of the show almost immediately after announcing the settlement.  Almost certainly this was an unannounced, unwritten part of the settlement.  Cheers!

 

 

[LC]

https://newrepublic.com/article/198120/stephen-colbert-cancellation-ellison-trump

 

Stephen Colbert’s Cancellation Is Exactly What It Looks Like

Mock a Trump bribe on Monday, get canceled by Thursday. The Late Show’s death reveals how billionaires and presidents are reshaping American media.

 

[Spekulatius]

A familiar pattern emerges. Trumps sues media outlets as a private person while also being president. At best it is an extortion racket to be enrich himself at worse it’s both an extortion for enrichment as well as attempt to control the press through lawfare by a sitting president 

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/07/18/trump-sues-epstein-murdoch-wsj.html

Edited July 19, 2025 by Spekulatius

[John Hjorth]

40 minutes ago, Spekulatius said:

A familiar pattern emerges. Trumps sues media outlets as a private person while also being president. At best it is an extortion racket to be enrich himself at worse it’s both an extortion for enrichment as well as attempt to control the press through lawfare by a sitting president 

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/07/18/trump-sues-epstein-murdoch-wsj.html

 

@Spekulatius,

 

For once, on this I'll take the POTUS' stance on this :

 

1. It's about events primarily related to his doings and activities releated to a person of at least questionable character in a time span before his first term as POTUS,
2. It's to me clearly attempts at defamation of incumbent POTUS, &
3. It's to me clearly attempts at character assasination of incumbent POTUS.
4. 2. & 3. make them personal, and not related to office the position as POTUS.

 

- - - o 0 o - - -

 

We all evolve, mature and develop over time in life,  and I would argue personal do's and don'ts later in life are assumed with larger weights to considerations to consequences and in the light of integrity demonstrated towards others by choices among options and decisions made.

 

- - - o 0 o - - -

 

Futhermore, I can't help to think about what I personally would feel, think and consider doing about it, if it was my self personally, who got this public treament by a news media.

Edited July 19, 2025 by John Hjorth

[73 Reds]

2 minutes ago, John Hjorth said:

 

@Spekulatius,

 

For once, on this I'll take the POTUS' stance on this :

 

1. It's about events primarily related to his doings and activities releated to a person of at least questionable character in a time span before his first term as POTUS,
2. It's to me clearly attempts at defamation of incumbent POTUS, &
3. It's to me clearly attempts at character assasination of incumbent POTUS.
4. 2. & 3. make them personal, and not related to office the position as POTUS.

 

- - - o 0 o - - -

 

We all evolve, mature and develop over time in life,  and I would argue personal do's and don'ts later in life are assumed with larger weights to considerations to consequences and in the light of integrity demonstrated towards others by choices among options and decisions made.

 

- - - o 0 o - - -

 

Futhermore, I can't help to think about what I personally would feel, think and consider doing about it, if it was my self personally, who got this public treament by a news media.

How refreshing it is to read a factual, objective perspective.  Lawfare works both ways and payback is a bitch.    

[Spekulatius]

Did anyone actually read the WSJ article? Looks fairly matter fact to me, it‘s not even just about Trump and mentioned several others involved Trump (Clinton):

https://archive.ph/KB2LC

 

Whether this occurred  before or after POTUS became president is totally irrelevant.

The problem, is a simple one : Trump, Patel and Bondi etc  all stated on numerous occasions before they were elected/appointed that they would release the files. 

After they were appointed, they the suddenly said no. What has changed?

Edited July 19, 2025 by Spekulatius

[changegonnacome]

1 hour ago, Spekulatius said:

After they were appointed, they the suddenly said no. What has changed?

 

Its so obvious whats changed - I'm not sure the guys here get it..........the WSJ article & the bawdy letter is but a tiny snippet of the actual EPSTEIN FILES.......and the problem for Trump is clear.......the files show a deeper, more intimate, more entwined relationship between the two men than has heretofore been known.......I dont think Trump is implicated in any crimes in the files, if he we're the democrats when they held the files would have brought charges......but what I would expect is the Epstein files contain ALOT of communication and interaction in the same genre as the bawdy birthday letter and spanning the Presidents other bawdy greatest hit which is the "grab them by p*ssy" tapes......

 

So the Epstein files IMO contain a tonne of communications like this (emails, texts, birthday cards, notes) between the President and a convicted paedophile that one might classify as highly sexual 'locker room' talk between two guys.......it is a terrible look but I'm convinced nothing illegal is in there by logical deduction..... just alot of tasteless stuff....my other guess is that Donald maintained a friendly, continuing likely bawdy private line of comms with Epstein AFTER his 2003 conviction and even after he'd publicly kicked him out of the Mar E Lago club membership....which again contradicts his public statements on the matter.

 

This is classic PR quandary for the President - the cover-up (not releasing the full files) is more serious than the crime, because no crime has actually been committed...... just an old man, getting caught out in a lie and where his communications with a paedo demonstrate again the true character of POTUS versus the myth. To which I'll add who actually believes the myth anymore anyway.....who doesn't know (even his supporters) that POTUS is no angel.....Trump is spending alot of political capital covering up these files, his political misjudgment is that he somehow has a sterling behavioral reputation to protect....though I will admit the Epstein case 'hits' different for his QAnon base.

 

Edited July 19, 2025 by changegonnacome

[73 Reds]

1 hour ago, Spekulatius said:

Did anyone actually read the WSJ article? Looks fairly matter fact to me, it‘s not even just about Trump and mentioned several others involved Trump (Clinton):

https://archive.ph/KB2LC

 

Whether this occurred  before or after POTUS became president is totally irrelevant.

The problem, is a simple one : Trump, Patel and Bondi etc  all stated on numerous occasions before they were elected/appointed that they would release the files. 

After they were appointed, they the suddenly said no. What has changed?

So if the letter is false as Trump claims, does TDS preclude you from seeing the damage and clear intent on the part of the WSJ to cause harm to a sitting President?  The story is only being reported all over the World.  And as for what was stated on numerous occasions by Trump and his officials, when have you known any politician to have made statements that were all acted on?  The only difference between Trump and the rest is that he does act on most of the statements and promises he made.

[changegonnacome]

14 minutes ago, 73 Reds said:

TDS preclude you from seeing the damage and clear intent on the part of the WSJ to cause harm to a sitting President? 

 

@73 Reds how likely do you think that the letter is false?.......put yourself in Rupert Murdoch's shoes...and WSJ's...do you think the clicks on this article & resulting web traffic would be worth the defamation charges that would follow if it were....its not like President is not known to be litigious.......I can assure you then that the letter and its authenticity we're checked to something beyond a reasonable doubt......Murdoch is not in the business of signing of on articles that would tank one of his prized properties.....don't forget this is guy with a recent defamation black eye to from the Dominion voting machines case.

 

Seems to me that if I were to assign a probability to it being real - it would be 90%/10%......of course the greatest source of all on the matter would be the only other person alive who would know for sure and thats Ghilaine Maxwell whom POTUS has always strangely had kind words for - 

 

 

Edited July 19, 2025 by changegonnacome

[73 Reds]

15 minutes ago, changegonnacome said:

 

@73 Reds how likely do you think that the letter is false?.......put yourself in Rupert Murdoch's shoes...and WSJ's...do you think the clicks on this article & resulting web traffic would be worth the defamation charges that would follow if it were....its not like President is not known to be litigious.......I can assure you then that the letter and its authenticity we're checked to something beyond a reasonable doubt......Murdoch is not in the business of signing of on articles that would tank one of his prized properties.....don't forget this is guy with a recent defamation black eye to from the Dominion voting machines case.

 

Seems to me that if I were to assign a probability to it being real - it would be 90%/10%......of course the greatest source of all on the matter would be the only other person alive who would know for sure and thats Ghilaine Maxwell whom POTUS has always strangely had kind words for - 

 

 

If the letter was real, why would Trump or anyone in his shoes make more of an issue of it?

[changegonnacome]

1 hour ago, 73 Reds said:

If the letter was real, why would Trump or anyone in his shoes make more of an issue of it?

 

Because Trump knows......as anyone might know......that if the WSJ has gotten access to the Epstein files (which it certainly sounds like they have).......this bawdy letter......is really just part one....in a multi-part release where other embarrassing morsels will be revealed over the coming days and weeks.

 

So you asked why make more of it if you we're in Trump's shoes........its because Trump knows this, as he knew this story was coming out over a week ago....and so has nothing to lose......except to see if large litigation might be enough to scare Murdoch & WSJ in to not releasing the rest of the dirt they have. It won't, cause the Journal has done their work.....read the article.....a journalist didn't write it, a lawyer did.

 

The reality is that the WSJ would not have released Part One of the Epstein files......if they weren't damn sure its real.....and so these legals threats are a laughable internally and they will continue with what they have collected and substantiated....which means Trump dream of scaring them into a pause wont come true....he'll have to be content with the booby prize which is at least this litigation is exactly what somebody who's innocent would do so he gets to carry on the the charade and so those most inclined to believe him i.e. his base might give him the benefit of the doubt.....so the optics are good, even if the chances of stopping Part 2, 3, 4 coming out are zero..... while everybody else who understands how much rigor would've been put into substantiating a high stakes story like this for Journal would realize there's a very very very high probability that it's real.

 

Timing is curious....wouldn't surprise me if the source isn't the lady who collected the letters for Jeffrey's birthday - she just happens to have an appeal at the Supreme court that Trump & Bondi's DOJ have urged the court to ignore - https://abcnews.go.com/US/doj-urges-supreme-court-turn-epstein-accomplice-ghislaine/story?id=123752067 - she has remained remarkably quiet & restrained over the years....but now might be waking up & giving heartburn to all the people who have reason to have heart burn....... as her dreams of freedom disappear. 

 

Edited July 19, 2025 by changegonnacome

[Sweet]

7 hours ago, Spekulatius said:

A familiar pattern emerges. Trumps sues media outlets as a private person while also being president. At best it is an extortion racket to be enrich himself at worse it’s both an extortion for enrichment as well as attempt to control the press through lawfare by a sitting president 

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/07/18/trump-sues-epstein-murdoch-wsj.html

There is a third option.  Maybe the report is BS, and Trump feels it is damaging to his reputation.  The media seem to think they can publish what they want - ok - but it better be true.  
 

A few years ago they were saying Trump liked golden showers, Russia collusion, neo-Nazis fine people, and he was Putin’s puppet.  There has to be a line somewhere, and if lawfare keeps the media honest that’s not a bad thing.

[dwy000]

19 minutes ago, Sweet said:

There is a third option.  Maybe the report is BS, and Trump feels it is damaging to his reputation.  The media seem to think they can publish what they want - ok - but it better be true.  
 

A few years ago they were saying Trump liked golden showers, Russia collusion, neo-Nazis fine people, and he was Putin’s puppet.  There has to be a line somewhere, and if lawfare keeps the media honest that’s not a bad thing.

The best way to counter that would be to release all the Epstein files. Exactly like he said he would do if elected. Why would he not?

[Sweet]

18 minutes ago, dwy000 said:

The best way to counter that would be to release all the Epstein files. Exactly like he said he would do if elected. Why would he not?

Different issue which I am unsighted off.  Commenting only in the media and suing.