Rand Paul

Rand Paul Reminds MSNBC That James Clapper Is a Liar and Can't Be Trusted About Russia Hacking

Trump derangement syndrome is causing MSNBC to tout John McCain and Lindsey Graham as the only sane Republicans. Gulp.

|

Rand Paul
Jeff Malet Photography/Newscom

We were always at war with Eastasia. MSNBC, a seemingly neoconservative news outlet, is enraged that Congressional Republicans won't accept—on blind faith—the intelligence community's view that Russia was the source of the Podesta email hack.

MSNBC commentator Joy Reid was particularly incensed that any Republican would dare question the honor of Director of National Security James Clapper, a man who lied about the NSA committing the most massive Fourth Amendment violation in history. Clapper told the Senate Armed Services Committee today that Russia had engaged in an unprecedented level of interference in the U.S. presidential election, for whatever his opinion is worth (not much, I hope).

Sen. John McCain lashed out at Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, who has claimed that Russia was not the source of the leaked information about Hillary Clinton. McCain asked Clapper, "Do you think there's any credibility we should attach to [Julian Assange], given his record?"

"Not in my view," said Clapper.

Perhaps McCain should have asked Clapper if the director himself deserves any credibility, in the eyes of the American people, given his past misstatements about his office's gross violation of their civil liberties.

But there was nary a mention of Clapper's past dishonesty during Reid's show on Thursday night. Filling in for the usual 8:00 p.m. anchor, Chris Hayes, Reid asked Republican Rep. Mo Brooks, a member of the House Armed Services and Foreign Affairs committees, whether he considered himself, "a Julian Assange Republican like Sean Hannity, or a John McCain Republican like DNI Clapper and others who say Russia was behind the hacking?"

Brooks replied that he thought a healthy degree of skepticism was warranted, particularly given how badly the intelligence community dropped the ball in the run up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

Reid fired back, "You didn't answer the question. Who do you believe?"

Later on the program, Reid mocked Republicans for not siding with anti-Russia hawks McCain and Sen. Lindsey Graham—the sane foreign policy Republicans, in her view.

Sorry to belabor this point, but McCain and Graham are radical interventionist neoconservatives. Why is a supposedly liberal network carrying water for them? This is a telltale symptom of Trump derangement syndrome.

Chris Matthews, to his credit, was much more reasonable, and invited Sen. Rand Paul onto his show to discuss the hacking from a less partisan point of view. Paul said that he didn't think the leaked information about Clinton mattered much in his home state of Kentucky. He also reminded viewers that Clapper misled the American people about whether the NSA was spying on them. (Paul has previously said that if Edward Snowden goes to jail, he should share a cell with Clapper.)

It seems like the libertarian-friendly Paul is offering one of the only principled, independent perspectives in politics these days. Everyone else asks whether a given development would help or undermine Trump, and then adjusts their opinions accordingly.

Meanwhile, intelligence officials are touting emails showing that Russian leaders were happy about Trump's victory as evidence they were involved in the hack. This prove nothing, of course, except that Russian leaders were indeed happy about Trump winning the election—something everyone already knew.

NEXT: President Obama Thinks He Did a Great Job With Criminal Justice Reform, But He Should Have Done More

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I don’t give a shit who hacked the DNC, and neither should you.

    1. I give a shit because I want to know where to send the bottle of scotch.

      1. Vodka, Paul. Obviously has to be vodka.

        1. Idaho makes some pretty good vodka these days.

          1. They’re the potato experts.

          2. In fact, I have a colleague in that business:

            https://www.facebook.com/printersdistillery/

  2. No less than Sean Hannity was calling Clapper a known perjurer who lied under oath on his radio program this afternoon (I was driving for most of the day).

    1. Hannity broke with the “national security conservatives” over Snowden’s FISA revelations back. He stopped trusting the national security state back in 2013 about the same time as James Sensenbrenner did. Rand Paul was a frequent guest during this period too.

      1. Ugh, Sean Hannity’s a Trumpist hypocrite. Him and Palin switched sides on Wikileaks when it became convenient. No better than the Leftist chicken hawks, who’ve stuffed socks in their pants and are now trying to act like they got balls and want a war with Russia, because they refuse to accept that they lost the election.

        1. I have to give this one to SIV. Hannity changed his mind on this before the Trump era, and isn’t afraid to mention it or explain why. Most of the other hypocrites pretend they’ve held their current position since Moses was in diapers.

          1. And whether anyone likes Hannity or not, he does regularly call out republicans for weaselly bullshit these days. Aggressively in some circumstances.

  3. Don’t you just love it when a plan comes together. 😉

  4. Chris Matthews, to his credit, was much more reasonable, and invited Sen. Rand Paul onto his show to discuss the hacking from a less partisan point of view.

    Christopher Matthews used to be a good politihack, and wrote some decent books even. Now that the tingles are gone from his mind, a semblance of sanity should soon follow.

    1. How about when he guest hosted for Limbaugh!

  5. Does MSNBC get tax breaks for hiring unhinged morons or something?

    Nice article Mr. Soave!

  6. Sorry to belabor this point, but McCain and Graham are radical interventionist neoconservatives. Why is a supposedly liberal network carrying water for them? This is a telltale symptom of Trump derangement syndrome.

    McCain and Graham have always been the progressives’ favorite “conservatives” in the Senate.

    1. + Gang of 8

    2. Neoconservative is a pretty dumb term. Interventionist foreign policy was, for the most of the 20th century, the progressive norm (despite their pinko leanings during the Cold War). Not until Bush did that role really start to switch for partisan reasons, and it took 9/11 to make that happen as Bush was nominated arguing the exact opposite of what he turned out to be. And after 8 years of Obama, we’ve seen progressives return to their roots over first Libya and then Syria.

      Progressives siding with ‘neoconservatives’ isn’t strange. Their bedfellows who are practically indistinguishable from one another.

      Robby’s surprise here shows his own ignorance. He’s a moron who grew up in the Bush era and watched the Daily Show and has no real god damn clue about anything before that.

      1. This is all correct.

      2. despite their pinko leanings during the Cold War

        During the CW they were generally fine with Soviet empire, wherever it wished to spread.

        1. There were plenty of Democrats that were happy to go fight the commies. Vietnam pretty much started under JFK nd was escalated by LBJ. Plus, there was that whole Bay of Pigs thing that made all the papers.

          The political party makeup of the 50s and 60s isn’t the same as today.

          1. There were plenty of Democrats that were happy to go fight the commies

            hence the term “neoconservative”

            Robby should thank you for that 1-sentence history lesson.

      3. ‘And after 8 years of Obama, we’ve seen progressives return to their roots over first Libya and then Syria.’

        You forgot their bleating over our lack of involvement in Sudan.

        1. For fun, go watch Three Kings, a nice mid 90s liberal movie about how George H.W Bush didn’t go far enough to help liberate the people of Iraq from Saddam’s deprivations.

      4. Interventionist foreign policy was, for the most of the 20th century, the progressive norm

        my same point below.

      5. “Neoconservative” (i.e. newly conservative) didn’t get that name for reasons of foreign affairs, but rather domestic ones. It involved their having been persuaded that since unrestrained redistributionism didn’t seem to help poverty, a more paternal helping-guiding-punishing hand was needed there.

  7. Here’s my worry about Paul in the coming term – while he demonstrates his ability to take principled positions against those even in his own party, I’m worried that he has an Achilles Heel with his support for the coal industry in Kentucky. That is, I’m afraid Trump will use his control of the EPA to make Paul bend to his will. After all, Paul backed way down from his non-intervention principles during the primary after the attacks in Paris. Would he keep up his defense of things like the Fourth Amendment when Trump dangles deregulation and subsidies?

    1. I don’t think Homies gonna play that. He’ll tell Trump to stuff it.

    2. Trump is going to be under attack from all sides. And Paul’s star will rise as one of the few sane and principled leaders in Congress. Meaning, Trump will do anything Paul asks. It will be delightful. 🙂

  8. Honeymoon just like every other night.

    http://hotair.com/archives/201…..-marriage/

    1. Ha ha.

      “Same-self marriage” was a cartoon in Kudzu before it became reality. RIP Doug Marlette, he tried so hard to be a good prog but couldn’t always keep up with the craziness. And he wasn’t able to lose his sense of humor like a proper prog needs to do.

    2. That’s not hopelessly pathetic…

      1. You know what would be even more pathetic? When she sues herself for divorce.

        1. I guess technically any sexual relationship would be infidelity, hmm…

          1. Time for Stephanie Coontz* to crank out another article about how marriage has always been evolving and anyone who opposes the latest progressive change is a pathetic troglodyte.

            *Please do not misspell her name.

            1. Coons? Cuntz? Now, I’m racist and sexist! Wait, I’m a straight white male, so ipso facto, was already sexist and racist.

              1. It’s gotten boring taking the reactionary position on the sexual revolution on H&R. It used to make me a near-pariah, now I’m just piling on as the commenters criticize the LGBLT revolution along with all the other parts of the prog agenda.

                1. You’re not a monster, you’re just ahead of the curve.

              2. So you haven’t really lost anything by being horrible just now. Funny how that works.

                1. What do you mean “just now”?

                  1. What do you mean “just now”?

                    It was a reply to Florida Hipster

                    /deadpan

  9. Perhaps McCain should have asked Clapper if the director himself deserves any credibility, in the eyes of the American people, given his past misstatements about his office’s gross violation of their civil liberties.

    Gas lighting.

    It’s such a bizarre kabuki dance to have the congressional perjurer Clapper show up to brief Congress as an authoritative source of truth. And even worse to have Congress play along with the farce instead of pelting him with rotting vegetables.

    That the Obama Adminstration would even send perjurer Clapper to Congress is simply pissing on our leg and asking us how we like the rain. They must have someone who isn’t a *known* congressional perjurer who could have testified.

    1. So I googled gaslighting because I was unfamiliar with the term and it turns out that white kid that got tortured was really just gas lighting to make black people think BLM is crazy.

      Link

      1. I just read the word salad you linked to and I still don’t know what gas lighting means. I’m usually pretty good with context clues, but there was no context there.

        Does gas lighting mean looking at an incident and seeing it for what it is. Best I can tell the author of the article was accusing his opponents of doing exactly that.

        P.S.
        I’m not very good at decoding proggie derp.

          1. Ok. I got it. The term as used by buybuyandDavis makes sense. In the article referenced by Mr. Hipster, the context it is used in still makes no sense. But, when the whole point of your article is that “Black people can’t be racist” it’s going to be difficult to put words together to defend this premise.

        1. Gaslighting is based on any of a number of films (based on a play)…….

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaslight_(1944_film)

      2. Favorite part:

        Let’s make one thing absolutely crystal: Reverse racism is not a thing.

        Of course it’s not a thing. It’s just racism.

        Racism is a power construct

        Lolwut!

        1. I’m pretty sure having someone bound and gagged, unable to escape or protect themselves is also a power construct.

        2. Isn’t the idea that black people can’t be racist, itself, pretty racist?

  10. Meanwhile, intelligence officials are touting emails showing that Russian leaders were happy about Trump’s victory as evidence they were involved in the hack. This prove nothing, of course, except that Russian leaders were indeed happy about Trump winning the election?something everyone already knew.

    It doesn’t even prove that as its nothing more than the word of some anonymous sources claiming that the US has secret exchanges between unnamed officials who, I’m going to take a wild hunch here, wouldn’t even know about any intelligence operations or hacking to begin with.

    1. It also begs the question, how did they get those e-mails? Could it be…HACKING? Did OUR noble and righteous intelligence services hack foreign government officials. Oh the HORROR.

      1. Yea, but it wasn’t election hacking do it was okay.

        And it was Obama, so it was double okay.

      2. that’s what I get for not refreshing before making a comment.

        ..great minds.

    2. Well it is possible that our intelligence sources (cough) HACKED those Russian leaders so we could read the e-mails directly.

      It’s possible, but I don’t give our Intelligence community that much credit.

    3. For the record, WINS News Radio in New York, One of those established news media outlets that would never, ever stoop to fake news, is reporting this story as evidence of the Russians celebrating Trump’s victory “and their role in it.”

      Thank God that only the Alt-Right dispenses fake news.

  11. “Meanwhile, intelligence officials are touting emails showing that Russian leaders were happy about Trump’s victory as evidence they were involved in the hack.”

    “Da, do we want to measure dicks with Hillary, or do we want to watch Trump measure dicks with China? Is obvious that choice is Trump.”

    1. As to measuring dicks. I have been informed of the proper way to do this:
      Start at the center of the anus and measure to just past the tip.

      1. “In that case, my dick is several thousand miles long.”

        /Veteran whose dick got shot off in Vietnam

        (It’s OK to laugh, I heard this joke from a veteran)

      2. Girth is more important than length.

        Sourced from Buzzfeed.

        1. Buzzfeed is wrong. All penises are tools of the oppressive patriarchy, and must be put in camps, where women can check them out like books from a library. Their length or girth means nothing if they aren’t properly locked up.

          Sourced from RadicalFeminism.

          1. RadicalFeminism is wrong. If you leave penises laying around, you can never find them again.

            Sourced from King Missile.

  12. Everyone else asks whether a given development would help or undermine Trump, and then adjusts their opinions accordingly.

    This is just plain wrong. Their opinions adjusted abruptly after the election of Obama, continued to evolve and were totally realigned well before the 2016 campaign had begun

    1. after the election of Obama

      Thanks Reason.

      1. Hey, they always wanted to vote for a black man for President. What is the point if not virtue signaling and feeling superior to other white people?

        1. I want to vote for a midget. Get Peter Dinklage on the phone.

          1. I have always wanted to vote for for a former porn star for President. Get Jenna Jameson on the phone.

            1. So you’re in favor of her policies on Israel?

              1. Are they similar to Telia Tequila’s?

                1. Is Telia Tequila similar to that pop singer who got in trouble for making fun of the fat guy at the doughnut shop a while back? Taco Grande or whatever her name was.

                    1. Oh yeah, second link is sexy but SFW.

                2. Pretty much the exact opposite. Jameson married a Jewish guy, and now she’s the distaff counterpart of Walter from The Big Lebowski.

                  1. So you are telling me Jenna doesn’t roll on Shabis?

                    1. Only through a hole in a sheet.

            2. Nina Hartley might also be a good choice. Or Veronica Hart. Seka maybe?

              1. I’m pretty sure Nina Hartley is still working. Although she’s probably more machine than man now. She could probably run on the Sith ticket.

  13. Tim Kaine complains about being a victim of these fake stories and says, “even 4th graders wouldn’t believe them”. OK so given that Gen Flynn is retweeting them and supposedly hundreds of thousands of people of voting age voted for Trump based on them – is it really fair to blame Russia? “Remove the mote from your own eye, bruv,” as a wise man once explained.

  14. Wow Robby, you pulled the blind squirrel with a broken watch trick today.

    1. You and John both read a gay magazine and post at the same time? Do you share an apartment? NTTAWWT…

      1. Yes as a matter of fact we do. And we share it with several lovely house cats and a handsome Scottish Terrier thank you very much.

        1. Please tell me the dog has an extensive doggie wardrobe.

          1. Some of the best plaid money can buy.

      2. Or we read sites like instapundit or breitbart that both have stories up about it.

        1. Well yeah, there is that. But the apartment with the cats and the Scotty sounds nice.

          1. No yappy dogs. Replace the Scotty with a Lab, and you’ve got yourself a deal.

            1. You got it. Or maybe a German Shepherd.

              1. Don’t trust him, Thrak. John keeps trying to change the deal after you say yes…typical chick.

  15. http://www.lgbtqnation.com/201…..r-readers/

    Milo Yiannopoulos named LGBTQ Nation’s 2016 ‘Person of the Year’ by readers

    Shackford must be devastated.

    1. Shackford must be devastated.

      Whom?

        1. *for the record, SS is my favorite Reason contributor, and i’m just meme-ing

          1. I like Rusty as well, but I’m a compulsive ball buster.

    2. “I want to thank all the wonderful student activists who made me the celebrity I am today, I wouldn’t have gotten this far without you!”

    3. Bwahahahahaha!

      Winning!

      The Left gets stomped in any open forum on the net.

  16. “Trump Derangement Syndrome.”

  17. The progs all got their marching orders and are continuing to hammer the “Russia is bad, mkay?” plot line so that we will continue to ignore what was actually exposed in the emails, that progs are lying mendacious fucks who could care less about things like integrity or honesty as long as they win elections.

  18. http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/253753/#respond

    So the guy who wrote the Post story about the handicapped white guy in Chicago being tortured looks like this.

    http://callumborchers.files.wo…..g_0826.jpg

    How is that these people seem to always live down to their worst stereotype. Jesus look at that dweeb. Where do they find these people?

    1. The jerk store, I suppose.

      1. At the jerk store in the douche isle. Beltway journalists and self appointed “wonk” are invariably creepy, socially maladjusted weirdos it seems.

        1. I think I can see how the jerk store keeps running out of these guys…the media just snap them up, the store can’t keep them on the shelves!

          1. Editors que up outside like East German housewives at the bread shop on the first day of the month

            1. Well done – this is the first time that someone actually took the “jerk store” concept and made it funny, instead of a Seinfeldian trope about something that isn’t funny.

    2. Was that story and opinion piece, or a real journalistic piece?

      1. It was in the A section not the opinion section. So it was pretending to be a real story

        1. This is why we need respectable publications like WaPo to protect us from fake news.

      2. It was shameful. Assange is no more credible than Clapper. Even Trump’s top adviser on national security (former CIA director, Woolsey) says nobody should listen to Assange. He’s a rabid Hillary hater, Trump endorser and former commentator on Russian Television. But McCain is a neoconservative! Tribal insanity. More shame to Reason..

        1. Assange may be a bad person, but he has been 100% correct in his Wikileaks publications. His statement about the emails was careful to say he had not gotten them from anyone associated with the Russian govt – so possibly through a cutout or non-govt Russian.

          Or is my sarc meter needing a tuneup?

          1. His statement about the emails was careful to say he had not gotten them from anyone associated with the Russian govt – so possibly through a cutout or non-govt Russian.

            Because a known employeee of the Russian government would NEVER lie about … the Russian government. And a blatant Hillary hater and Trump endorser would have no reason to boost his favored candidate. And the growing admiration of Trump and Putin is nothing to be concerned about, just two authoritarian buddies.

            Trump originally said he didn’t need any intelligence briefings because he’s so smart. So he — like his cult — makes judgments based on no evidence at all. Because they’re so smart? But he’s promised to tell us what only he knows about hacking ….2-3 days ago!
            /sarc

    3. He was assembled in a laboratory from the parts of lesser nerds.

      1. “That’s not true – nerds are smart!”

        /Milhouse from the Simpsons

        1. Good line. The Simpsons when they were actually good were the best comedy ever made and I never get tired of the quotes. Any post tenth season quotes though and I’ll have to reach through the computer monitor and strangle you.

          1. I don’t think I watched post-tenth season Simpson’s – at least not when “Paint Drying, the Documentary” was on instead.

      2. Is he an ubernerd or just a spare parts nerd?

        1. Yeah, hat tip to Triumph.

  19. Kudos to Rand Paul and to Robbie on a good article. Truly you are hair worthy (until the next article, of course).

  20. Good for Paul.

    On a related note, I hopped on over to the illustrious WaPo to check out the comments re the Russians being happy Trump won story. It’s wall to wall insanity. All you have to do is spend five minutes wading through that shitshow and you’ll have a firm grasp of why Trump won.

    1. I often read the WaPo and New York Times whenever I feel guilt for having begrudgingly voted for Trump. Reading that Leftist insanity reminds me how much better it is that those people are not in power.

      1. I’m in the same boat thanks to Weld going off the reservation at the end there and, yeah, it does make me feel better.

      2. All these shrill progtard assholes are going to make it so easy to justify bring back McCarthysim and starting a new Red Scare to get rid of the commies (democrats).

    2. I’ll take your word for that. Thanks for taking the bullet.

  21. McCain and Graham are radical interventionist neoconservatives. Why is a supposedly liberal network carrying water for them?

    Where do you think the Neoconservatives got their ideas from, you silly fop, you?

    1. Liberals have never objected to foreign intervention. They just spent four years pretending to when they thought doing so would hurt Bush.

      1. Because names like Wilson, FDR, Kennedy, Johnson, Carter, and Clinton are totally synonymous with “let’s stay out of other people’s shit if we can”

        oh wait

  22. This is actually not a bad article, but you should really research what a “neoconservative” is, rather than just using it as a vaguely sinister term for an interventionist

    .

    1. They were willing to go all the way with LBJ, but when the left-wing fanatics thought LBJ wasn’t enough of an insane lefty, the neocons were like, “OK, this is nuts.”

      So they stuck with the LBJ/Scoop Jackson, Cold War supporting, wing of the Democrats until that wing had dissolved and there was nowhere to go but into the conservative movement.

      The story of many members of the Republican coalition from the 1960s and 1970s – one day they look around and say, “wait, what happened to all the sane Democrats and progs”? And the progs were too busy planning the next Gay Palestinian Abortion Front rally that they at first didn’t notice the traditional New Deal base was leaving – when they *did* discover that much of the New Deal base had gone Republican they decided it was all a corporate plot, so they doubled down and rebuilt, and the success of Obama shows the left were able to rebound…but now, who knows.

      The left keeps going too far and driving out its saner members, but then it finds new members again.

      1. I’m fairly certain fomenting war with Russia and making fun of the slackjawed rubes in the flyover states will serve them well in 2018 and 2020.

      2. the liberal-authoritarians hardly have the market cornered on whackos and nut jobs. There are plenty of “conservatives” who are downright batshit crazy.

        1. An excellent rebuttal to everyone who said that no conservative is a whacko or nut job.

          1. So, true, but irrelevant.

  23. OMG
    Is Robby supporting Assange, or pissing on Clapper? When Assange and Clapper are BOTH corrupt, only only tribal loyalty would prefer EITHER. Oh wait, McCain is a radical interventionist neoconservative. True, but a radical ad hominem attack is not an honorable way to determine truth.

    No surprise that Hannity brainwashed his cult. But why does Reason keep sinking lower? Assange is a radical Hillary hater … and commentator for Russian Television … but a credible source ?. if he supports your tribe.

    Pick your own source. Google “Assange mocks Hillary.” One of MANY interviews attacklng Hllary and endorsing Trump. Or “Assange Hillary a Threat,” This is Forbes, but pick your own.

    For TOTAL bat-shit crazy, nobody should listen to Assange, according to a top Trump adviser! (OMG)

    Former CIA director James Woolsey, a top adviser to Trump on national security issues, weighed in on Trump using remarks from Assange ….

    “I don’t think there’s any point in listening to Julian Assange,” Woolsey said on “CNN Tonight.” “He’s quite a ne’er-do-well.”

    But Robby chose him.

    1. Woolsey left the Trump team as of yesterday.

      1. This is one of Hihn’s socks. You might as well go talk to your dog.

        1. Really? That seemed unusually sane for Hihn. He didn’t call out Barack Insane Yo-Mama or anything,

          1. He didn’t call out Barack Insane Yo-Mama or anything,

            Even wackier than Pat, which is VERY difficult to be.
            Do you have anything substantive … with links to proof?
            I didn’t think so.

            1. Yep, that’s Hihn.

              1. Calling out dumbasses?
                With perfect precision?

        2. This is one of Hihn’s socks. You might as well go talk to your dog.

          The fucker provides proof of what he says. He should forget all that and just hurl childish personal insults, and commit aggression like you.

      2. Woolsey left the Trump team as of yesterday.

        I just told you why. And Assange is still too biased to be a source.

        1. Yet, you haven’t bothered to argue that any of the info he spilled was false. You’re just going with a tu quoque fallacy. Good luck with that.

          1. Yet, you haven’t bothered to argue that any of the info he spilled was false.

            Ummm, why would I have to? You never learned that it’s impossible to prove a negative? And WHY that should be obvious, even to you?

            You’re just going with a tu quoque fallacy

            One comment. TWO massive fallacies,

            Pay attention.
            In your own private universe, you can proclaim the earth is flat ,,, and then sneer, “Prove me wrong.” ANYTHING you say is absolute truth …, unless somebody can prove you wrong. And you said it in public!!!

            1. P.S. THREE fuckups

              Yet, you haven’t bothered to argue that any of the info he spilled was false.

              Not the issue, chump. Is he believable on the SOURCE?
              When he’s a Hillary hater, a Trump endorser, and has worked for the Russian government.

              So … somebody who has been on the Russian government payroll … says his source of income did nothing wrong … he has strongly endorsed Trump and repeatedly attacked Hillary as a threat.
              So to YOU, that makes him credible. You just destroyed your own credibility.

              1. Watch out! There’s a Russian behind you and he’s not using your preferred pronoun!

                1. Like a pack of wild dogs. No matter how stupid they look. ATTACK, ATTACK, ATTACK.
                  Are your parents proud of how you turned out?

    2. John Galt,
      Explain why Rand and Ron Paul are 2 of the greatest Libertarians to ever live. You have 3 days to corpse fuck this thread for your answer. Your prize, if you win, will be a years supply of depends and cat liter. Chop chop. You have work to do.

      1. as DEMANDED by bacon, magic (snicker).

        Dumbass uses the phony corpse fuck line of his gang as an excuse for being publicly humiliated here. Typical of the Ron Paul cult. And just as nasty. (sneer)

        Let’s see. Ron lies about the 10th amendment, denies the 9th amendment, says states have powers that have never been delegated.

        Says “rogue judges” decided marriage equality, as his brainwashed bobbleheads nod ? proclaiming TOTAL their ignorance of
        1) balance of power,
        2) checks and balances and
        3) three co-equal branches.
        4) unalienable rights

        Thus, cult believes NOBODY can defend us from abuses of our unalienable rights by government. Calls itself ?. wait for it ?. the LIBERTY ty movement!!!

        Calls himself a strict constitutional conservative defending Federalism, but defends the State Rights doctrine invented by the Klan — an “intrusive” federal government is one that DARES to defend unalienable rights from abuse by state governments (which is WHY the bobbleheads deny the 9th Amendment).

        Sponsored a law — TOTAL FASCISM — to forbid the Supreme Court from even HEARING challenges to DOMA .. . rhe first group denial of rights since slavery. And the bobbleheads nod with glee.

        (continued)

        1. Part two requested by bacon magic

          In 1957, Arkansas Governor Faubus activated his state militia — armed force to keep 9 black kids from registering at Little Rock’s Central High School. President Eisenhower sent federal troops, authorized to use force, if necessary, to defend the rights of nine school kids. A MAJOR milestone in equal rights … opposed by the Paulista cult! (Faubus later defended his action as defending the voters of Arkansas from an intrusive and overbearing federal government …. same as Ron Paul’s bullshit)

          Libertarians stand with Eisenhower on equal rights, always have. The Paulista Cult stands with Orval Faubus, George Wallace and the KKK on equal rights, always will

          Ron would have voted for DOMA if in office — thus DEFENDING federal nullification of state laws. His crackpot son says OPENLY, on his Senate web page, that abortion is a state issue, ,…. BUT (laughing hysterically) brags of sponsoring a FEDERAL ban on abortion, and doing all he can to ban abortion as a FEDERAL senator.

          Since most of their cult are EAGER to be manipulated, they NEVER realize that Paulista-Federalism means using ANY and ALL levels of government to impose their bigoted denial of equal, unalienable and/or God-given rights.

          continued

          1. Part 3 requested by bacon-magic

            Rand Paul committed the ABSOLUTE most God-awful stupid fuckup in over a hundred years by speaking on non-intervention at Berkeley, to a standing ovation ….. THEN (OMG) …. less than a week later …. called for nationwide religious tent revivals to oppose the severe threat of marriage equality. PROVING the immense stupidity of the Paulista cult!

            What kind of drooling imbecile would believe … believe … that ANY coalition could include BOTH Berkeley liberals on nonintervention AND religious tent revivals for bigotry??? Answer: the entire Paulista cult, a/k/a the bobbleheads

            The Pauls use bullshit constitutionalism as enablers giving bigots plausible sounding excuses.
            And most of them are as mind-blowing stupid and nasty as bacon-magic

            if you win, will be a years supply of depends and cat liter. Chop chop. You have work to do.

            I won, chump.
            My prize was you asking for proof ? and opening the door,
            (walks away laughing)

            (my tone and boldface is a response to yet more aggression by bacon-magic. Not to deny my sheer joy at defending individual liberty. As always, they attack, get publicly humiliated , and continue the stalking and aggression …. for months … precisely that nasty and thuggish. The Paulistas –all authoritarians operate from sheer hatred )

  24. Craig Murray the former British ambassador to Uzbekistan has admitted he gave the documents to Assange and he got them from a DNC insider disgruntled about the treatment of Sanders.

    1. Scream that from the rooftops. It will make no difference.

      Hillary lost because people found out the truth. That wasn’t supposed to happen. Trump should abdicate to the Hildebeast.

      1. Suthenboy
        Scream that from the rooftops. It will make no difference.

        Screaming from rooftop (lol)….
        As proof of massive Trumpster dumbfuckery … for any who need it … goobers believe that a Sanders supporter would act intentionally to secure the election of Donald Trump!
        (pees my pants in laughter)

    2. Craig Murray the former British ambassador to Uzbekistan has admitted he gave the documents to Assange and he got them from a DNC insider disgruntled about the treatment of Sanders

      As proof of massive Trumpster dumbfuckery … for any who need it … goobers believe that a Sanders supporter would act intentionally to secure the election of Donald Trump!
      (pees my pants in laughter)

  25. “whether he considered himself, “a Julian Assange Republican like Sean Hannity, or a John McCain Republican like DNI Clapper and others who say Russia was behind the hacking?”‘

    the correct answer is to laugh hysterically and then say, that’s a deliciously unbiased question from an true journalist.

    then start laughing again. the laugh has to be just right though.

    1. This. It is a false dichotomy…why are those the only two choices?

    2. Josh
      the correct answer is to laugh hysterically

      You just made a fool of yourself!

      and then say, that’s a deliciously unbiased question from an true journalist.

      It is unbiased, chump. He showed NO bias toward EITHER possibility.
      YOUR bias was to assume he’s biased because ….. he dared to challenge YOUR preferred version!
      That’s wacky enough for me to assume you MAY be a Trumpster. (not certainty, just the odds)

  26. Good post, Robby. It is fucking hilarious to see MaximumSuckageNBC parrotting goddam McCain and his toady Graham. Cuz TRUMP.

  27. “Clapper told the Senate Armed Services Committee today that Russia had engaged in an unprecedented level of interference in the U.S. presidential election”

    In my entire life, I had never eaten more than three bananas in a single calendar month. Last July, I ate four bananas. I had engaged in an unprecedented level of banana eating. It was still an entirely insignificant amount and the increase was not even remotely worth noticing. Plus, eating more bananas (within a reasonable number) is actually healthy.

    1. It’s crackers to slip a rozzer, the dropsy in snide.

  28. re: CNN comment story linked to.
    Note that the ONLY evidence that the CIA leakers mention to implicate Russia is that they were happy Trump won. Logically if they had any better evidence they’d have mentioned it, or at least hinted at it. They can’t have been protecting sources and methods because of course they’ve already compromised those. So the best argument they have goes to motive only with no actual evidence they did anything.
    Of course the fact that CIA sources are leaking things for political purposes _as they complain about someone leaking things for political purposes_ should give you an idea of CIA credibility. Remember when people were saying that Trump couldn’t be trusted with the results of intelligence briefings? Well here we have Trump taking intelligence briefings and CIA staff is leaking what happened in them, not Trump.

    Trump has a clear course when dealing with the CIA, it’s two words “You’re fired.”.

    1. “Note that the ONLY evidence that the CIA leakers mention to implicate Russia is that they were happy Trump won.”

      You know what Trump heard in today’s briefing!!!

      “if they had any better evidence they’d have mentioned it, or at least hinted at it.”

      PUBLICLY???

      “They can’t have been protecting sources and methods because of course they’ve already compromised those.”

      Of course? When? How? Oh wait, you were at Trump’s security briefing. Never mind.

      Remember when people were saying that Trump couldn’t be trusted with the results of intelligence briefings?”

      When he said he was “too smart” to need any briefings.

      ” Well here we have Trump taking intelligence briefings and CIA staff is leaking what happened in them, not Trump”.

      Their comments were a few hours AFTER Trump’s. No leaks. And (lol) he kept attacking the briefings in advance.

      Trump’s own words insulted the intelligence of his supporters! He said he could shoot somebody to death in broad daylight, in Times Square, and they’d still adore him. So even if he totally and publicly insults his cult ? they don’t mind!

      And The Donald will give him a cookie.

  29. Progs are bloodthirsty warmongers gunning for a war with Russia.

  30. I have to wonder where Robby Soave got his political education. MSNBC a neoconservative news outlet? Robby, MSNBC is a leftist propaganda station peopled with Marxists, Fascists, and old-time Socialists—all leftists. There’s nothing neo- or conservative about it.

    1. I forgot to commend Robby for this: Clapper is indeed a liar.

  31. RT (Russia Today TV news) have shown a cut showing the US Ambassador to London saying that he met the whistle-blower and he’s an American… And Assange says the same.

    Personally, I believe Assange over Clapper – a man who lied UNDER OATH to Congress. Since Assange is backed up by the American Ambassador, the whole thing is simply more fake news perpetrated by the MSM, the Democratic politicians, and all the many RINOs who are upset at losing control of the White House.

  32. Then there’s the Libertarian candidate John McAfee – an expert in computers – who explored the hacking software used in the DNC hack and found it was an older version, over a year old. The idea that Russian state hackers would use an older version of software when there’s a newer one available simply makes no sense. He concluded that the Russians did it is a fake news story, that Clapper is still a liar, and that the US Ambassador and Assange are both telling the truth – it was someone who using purchased Russian hacking software…

    As many have concluded, this whole kerfuffle is simply more fake news perpetrated by the MSM, the Democratic politicians, and all the many RINOs who are upset at losing control of the White House.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.