A.M. Links: Trump White House 'Freaking Out' Over Mueller Investigation, Russian-Backed Facebook Content Viewed by 126 Million Americans, Happy Halloween

Damon Root | 10.31.2017 9:00 AM

Gage Skidmore / Flickr.com

"Everyone is freaking out." How the Trump White House reportedly reacted to yesterday's indictments of Paul Manafort and Rick Gates.
"Mr. Mueller almost certainly knows more than he is willing to reveal at this stage."
According to Facebook, Russian-backed content was viewed by an estimated 126 million Americans on Facebook during the 2016 election.
President Trump is expected to name Jerome Powell as the next chair of the Federal Reserve today.
Defense Secretary Jim Mattis says that "a new AUMF is not legally required to address the continuing threat" of terrorism.
Happy Halloween! Here's a selection of Reason's best writing on zombies, vampires, ghosts, and other eldritch horrors.

Follow us on Facebook and Twitter, and don't forget to sign up for Reason's daily updates for more content.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

NEXT: Corporations Are Not As Powerful As You Think

Hide Comments (134)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments 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 and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

Bee Tagger 7 years ago

"Everyone is freaking out."

How is that different looking?
1. Rufus The Monocled 7 years ago
  
  Hello.
  
  Freaking out is the new pink and norm pal.
2. Rhywun 7 years ago
  
  Whoever's running the site this morning should be freaking out.
  1. Domestic Dissident 7 years ago
    
    The DuPont Circle office is busy celebrating Halloween by pretending to be libertarians.
    
    Whoops, hold on a second, that's not Halloween, that's just a normal, regular day.
3. Don't look at me. 7 years ago
  
  Everyone is freaking out."
  To get back to the warning that I received. You may take it with however many grains of salt that you wish. That the brown acid that is circulating around us isn't too good. It is suggested that you stay away from that. Of course it's your own trip. So be my guest, but please be advised that there is a warning on that one, ok?"
Fist of Etiquette 7 years ago

"Everyone is freaking out." How the Trump White House reportedly reacted to yesterday's indictments of Paul Manafort and Rick Gates.

No Drama Trump finally becoming unglued???
Bee Tagger 7 years ago

Defense Secretary Jim Mattis says that "a new AUMF is not legally required to address the continuing threat" of terrorism.

It's unfortunately true when there's no functional congress.
Fist of Etiquette 7 years ago

I say we boycott Hit & Run until they fix the site once and for all. WHO'S WITH ME?
1. Chipper Morning Truthjammer 7 years ago
  
  Do you mean "go on a strike"?
Palin's Buttplug 7 years ago

According to Facebook, Russian-backed content was viewed by an estimated 126 million Americans on Facebook during the 2016 election.

PIZZAGATE IS PROOF CLINTONS CORRUPT!
1. loveconstitution1789 7 years ago
  
  Clinton admitted in public that she mishandled classified information and that should be enough to indict her with a grand jury just like Mueller did to Manafort.
  
  Trump is allowing this to proceed because he knows he's clean and this will lead to Hillary's crimes being exposed. This time no Comey to protect her nor Obama to pardon her.
  
  Its "n"th D Chess. I look forward to you finally just collecting your own tears. I cannot even imagine what you will do when Trump wins reelection in 2020.
Fist of Etiquette 7 years ago

According to Facebook, Russian-backed content was viewed by an estimated 126 million Americans on Facebook during the 2016 election.

The exact same amount of people who attended the inauguration. Coincidence?
1. Chipper Morning Truthjammer 7 years ago
  
  Do you know who else was obsessed with Russian-backed content?
  1. chemjeff 7 years ago
    
    Her?
  2. CE 7 years ago
    
    Hitler?
2. BYODB 7 years ago
  
  But how many sock puppets saw those ad's? Inquiring minds want to know!
  1. MarkLastname 7 years ago
    
    Jokes on them. It was just a hundred million Russian sock puppets viewing and repeating each other's propaganda to each other.
3. Austrian Anarchy 7 years ago
  
  According to Facebook, Russian-backed content was viewed by an estimated 126 million Americans on Facebook during the 2016 election.
  
  Advertise with Facebook. $100,000 will get your message to 126 million voters in exactly the right places. Imagine what you could do with a $1m buy?
  
  Yes media, keep this advertising campaign going.
Libertarian 7 years ago

126 million Americans saw Russian Facebook entries. Millions were so disgusted that they didn't even vote. Poor Hillary.
1. mashed potatoes 7 years ago
  
  yeah, i don't really get this. if these ads were so ubiquitous, show us one and we will obviously remember it to get a sense of what they are talking about. i also get rather suspicious with terms like russia-backed.
  1. Cyto 7 years ago
    
    I can guarantee that there is zero chance that Russia-backed advertising swayed the election.
    
    Clinton and the Democrats outspent Trump 2:1. Another million or two from Russia isn't even a drop in the bucket.
    
    Nobody voted for Hillary because 8 years of Obama was disappointing at best and Hillary is execrable as a candidate. So bad that even Donald Trump could defeat her. Even with a 2:1 money lead. Even with unanimous and unflinching support from the news media. Even with a big chunk of the Republican establishment pulling for her.
    
    That's how bad she was as a candidate, according to the American electorate. Big money donors backed Clinton. From USA Today
    
    [Trump's] long-shot bid also was fueled by small donors.Contributions of $200 or less accounted for about 64% of his total donations from others. By contrast, about 26% of Clinton's donations through Oct. 19 came in amounts that small.
    
    Why? Why did hedge fund magnate Tom Steyer spend $60 million of his own money to push voters to Clinton and the Democrats? Because these rich guys are so nice?
    
    Or maybe because the super-wealthy all thought they'd get more of their money's worth out of Clinton.
    1. NotAnotherSkippy 7 years ago
      
      Or maybe because the super-wealthy all thought they'd get more of their money's worth out of Clinton.
      
      Well the Russians sure did.
  2. Griffin3 7 years ago
    
    They all go like "I made $89381 last month working from my Mom's basement!"
2. CE 7 years ago
  
  I was exposed to one million times more pro-Hillary TV ads, yard signs, bumper stickers and radio ads than anything on Facebook for anyone. And still I avoided voting for her.
  1. Austrian Anarchy 7 years ago
    
    Ditto.
  2. Austrian Anarchy 7 years ago
    
    Where I work, looking at ANY internet site with any sort of advertising resulting in seeing a Clinton ad. I work in a leftie government building, so I suspect those IP addresses were tagged for her commie shit.
3. Austrian Anarchy 7 years ago
  
  Hey man, if Hillary said this is what lost her the election it must be. What are you, some sort of misogynist? If Hillary could have done it to Bernie it would have saved her a lot of money to do great things. /leftard retort
Fist of Etiquette 7 years ago

"Mr. Mueller almost certainly knows more than he is willing to reveal at this stage."

But fortunately he has plenty of leakers to handle that for him.
Bee Tagger 7 years ago

Happy Halloween! Here's a selection of Reason's best writing on zombies, vampires, ghosts, and other eldritch horrors.

Horrors like when Lucy left?
Citizen X - #6 7 years ago

According to Facebook, Russian-backed content was viewed by an estimated 126 million Americans on Facebook during the 2016 election.

Do mail-order bride and AK-47 purveyors count?
1. Chipper Morning Truthjammer 7 years ago
  
  Boy, there is a dilemma for a libertarian, huh?
  1. CE 7 years ago
    
    Which to order first?
Bee Tagger 7 years ago

According to Facebook, Russian-backed content was viewed by an estimated 126 million Americans on Facebook during the 2016 election.

Considering 139 million people voted, I'm more enraged that 13 million voters don't have facebook accounts.
1. Griffin3 7 years ago
  
  We are all Russian-backed bots down here on Facebook.
Libertarian 7 years ago

The "platforms" of Facebook and Twitter are more important than the platforms of the 2 major parties.
Citizen X - #6 7 years ago

According to Facebook, Russian-backed content was viewed by an estimated 126 million Americans on Facebook during the 2016 election.

People who believe this matters are actually revealing their own deep disdain for, and mistrust of, basically all other people. It's a pretty fucked up way to think about society.
1. Mitsima 7 years ago
  
  *shrugs* Sometimes, you've got to accept that sheople are going to sheep.
2. Ron 7 years ago
  
  considering Facebook also reported that the Russians only spent $100k in advertising I'd say Facebook has inflated the numbers greatly or you get great coverage for your money with Facebook.
3. Eek Barba Durkle 7 years ago
  
  People who believe it is true, as stated, are gullible as hell.
  
  I believe that there may have been 126 million total views of this content, in the same sense that ads are viewed trillions of times per day on Facebook.
  
  But there is NO way - zero, zip, zilch - that the ads from the Russians were viewed by 126 million Americans. Simply impossible.
  
  If Putin reached 126 million America with $100k of Facebook ads, he pulled off what is - by several orders of magnitude - the greatest advertising campaign in human history.
  1. BYODB 7 years ago
    
    If Putin reached 126 million America with $100k of Facebook ads, he pulled off what is - by several orders of magnitude - the greatest advertising campaign in human history.
    
    P.T. Barnum is indeed jealous.
Conchfritters 7 years ago

"Mr. Mueller almost certainly knows more than he is willing to reveal at this stage."

Is he aware that his former crime lab fucked up hair analysis in hundreds of capital murder cases over decades? Does he know that the FBI had a serial killer as an undercover agent on his watch? Oh, he certainly knows more.
1. Citizen X - #6 7 years ago
  
  Shady Government Agency Is Shady; Film At [is hauled into a windowless black van which then peels out]
  1. Chipper Morning Truthjammer 7 years ago
    
    Crusty got a new van!
2. Roger the Shrubber 7 years ago
  
  FBI had a serial killer as an undercover agent
  
  Link?
  1. Conchfritters 7 years ago
    
    Google: "Whitey Bulger" and you might find one or two links.
  2. Conchfritters 7 years ago
    
    Sorry, paid informant.
John 7 years ago

The voice of God himself says Hillary should be in jail.

http://yournewswire.com/morgan.....l-hillary/

When you have lost Morgan Freeman...
1. Palin's Buttplug 7 years ago
  
  fake wingnut news
  
  https://goo.gl/PBMQxx
  1. John 7 years ago
    
    You are the expert on lying. So I will defer to your expertise.
    1. Palin's Buttplug 7 years ago
      
      You are Mr Gullible. Fake news was made for you morons to disseminate.
      1. Sevo 7 years ago
        
        Turd, did you ever pay your bet? Still apologizing for rapists?
  2. Rhywun 7 years ago
    
    Cool. I can lose all respect for him again.
    1. John 7 years ago
      
      There is that.
  3. MarkLastname 7 years ago
    
    I got an ad from "Walmart" telling me I won an iPhone. Thanks.
Jerryskids 7 years ago

According to Facebook, Russian-backed content was viewed by an estimated 126 million Americans on Facebook during the 2016 election.

It would be nice to have some context here. Like for example, how many people viewed Canadian-backed content? And what's the conversion rate between Canadian and Russian and American? (I'm pretty sure Canada uses the metric system, do the Russians still use the potato system?)
1. John 7 years ago
  
  Yes. And just what was that content. If the content was true, then what difference does it make? To me, anyone, even a foreign power, propegating true information is not a problem. I want an informed electorate and I don't see why the source of truthful information matters. If a candidate is a crook, I want to know and the fact that the Russians or anyone else told me of this fact doesn't give the candidate a free pass. A problem only arises when a foreign power puts out disinformation for the purpose of affecting an election. I have yet to see any evidence the Russians or anyone else did that.
  1. Rhywun 7 years ago
    
    The English press for one are a lot more honest about American politics than the American press, that's for sure.
    1. John 7 years ago
      
      That is a good example. Is the fact that the Daily Fail will cover stories that are embarassing to Democrats that the mainstream US media won't cover the UK interfering with US elections? If not, then how is a Russian media outlet doing the same Russia interferring with our elections? I don't see how and I don't see how it being a state owned media outlet makes any difference. The information is the same in both cases.
      1. Hank Stamper 7 years ago
        
        I don't see how it being a state owned media outlet makes any difference.
        
        Yeah I love the BBC...oh wait sorry you were talking about Russian state owned media, they're evil.
        
        /sarc
        
        John 7 years ago
        
        Good point.
      2. Ron 7 years ago
        
        excellent point John does RT being on satalite TV mean that the Russians are interfering or just giving us a different viewpoint of the same info and if its all lies that some think should be outlawed then all news will have to be outlawed based on what I've seen from the main stream press.
        
        I only fear those who claim to know the Truth
      3. TrickyVic (old school) 7 years ago
        
        It's necessary to promote the narrative to make it sound like American's can't think for themselves. We are all brainless robots which Russia could easily sway with an social media ad campaign.
  2. Mike Laursen 7 years ago
    
    If the Russians helped leak embarrassing DNC emails, I consider that a legitimate act of journalism. If that's what we're talking about here, we should be thanking them for it.
    
    What I don't understand is why the Democratic Party wouldn't want to let that whole matter drop.
    1. Rhywun 7 years ago
      
      This. A lot of them seem to actually be under the delusion that they're "clean". Perhaps decades of cover from the press and the deep state have left them open to a surprise or two.
    2. TrickyVic (old school) 7 years ago
      
      ""What I don't understand is why the Democratic Party wouldn't want to let that whole matter drop."'
      
      When your God has been usurped, you must scream your injustice to the sky.
  3. mad.casual 7 years ago
    
    A problem only arises when a foreign power puts out disinformation for the purpose of affecting an election.
    
    Even then, IMO, there's a very big question (or a very emphatic "Nothing!") with regard to the question of "What should Congress and/or the DOJ do about it?"
    
    Lying about politics on Facebook is, arguably, protected free speech. You may have a point if the direct posters are agents of the Russian Government but there's plenty of proof for lots of these grassroots social movements that there were plenty of useful American Idiots involved. There may be a question of how knowing/culpable the idiots are of fraud/defamation.
    
    Unless the Russians have figured out how to use Facebook to rob people of their agency and take control of their motor functions, Congress needs to do little. If they have, they need to declare a state of emergency.
    1. BestUsedCarSales 7 years ago
      
      This is what we really need to focus on. A lot of us are thinking in terms of the Russian stuff affecting the elections. That was the narrative so far, but I think it's shifting. On the way to work this morning I listened to the radio and the entire argument about Russian meddling was about how this means we need to regulate Facebook/Google/Twitter.
      
      One of the guys made a comment about how he was thus advocating government regulation of free speech. The guy's response? "We are the government in America" and that "55% of Americans believe that Facebook should be censored in some way." I was disgusted. The first guy started just shitting down his throat but the second guy wouldn't budge.
      
      So we need to watch out. This isn't about Hillary, this is becoming about regulating the internet. And that is a bigger danger than the near 0 likelihood of her ascending at this point.
John 7 years ago

http://www.mediaite.com/column.....predators/

Virginia governor's race turns ugly with ad depicting Republicans as racist predators. Remember folks, Trump saying mean things on twitter demeaned the standards of public discourse in this country. The claim by the political and media elite that Trump was somehow more vulgar or represented some kind of degrading of the public discourse has to be the biggest piece of hypocrtical bullshit I have ever seen.
Tom Bombadil 7 years ago

"Mr. Mueller almost certainly knows more than he is willing to reveal at this stage."

No shit, Sherlock. There are 3 possibilities:
1. Mueller knows less than he is willing to reveal (either impossible or he is making shit up)
2. Mueller is revealing exactly everything he knows. (unlikely)
3. Mueller knows more than he is willing to reveal. (duh)
Domestic Dissident 7 years ago

The America-despising cultural Marxist Block Yomommatards who constantly claim there's no such thing as a slippery slope and they would never go after George Washington have now started going after George Washington.
1. Tom Bombadil 7 years ago
  
  The flag will be soon. The 13 stripes represent the original 13 states, many of which were "slave" states. Therefore it is a symbol celebrating slavery. Demands will be made to design a new flag with no reference to the nation's origins. I predict a rainbow with LGBTQRSTUVWXYZ stenciled at the bottom.
  1. Rhywun 7 years ago
    
    I think a plain white flag is what we'll get. And it will be apt.
    1. Chipper Morning Truthjammer 7 years ago
      
      Problematic!
    2. Tom Bombadil 7 years ago
      
      Good call.
    3. Don't look at me. 7 years ago
      
      It worked for the Beatles, but not today.
    4. lap83 7 years ago
      
      ooh, very European. I like it
    5. MarkLastname 7 years ago
      
      White?!! What are you a KKK member?
      
      No, it will be a plain transparent flag. Basically a sheet of Saran wrap.
  2. Citizen X - #6 7 years ago
    
    It can't be a rainbow flag, because that's cultural appropriation.
    1. Rhywun 7 years ago
      
      TL;DR - "We're not gay!"
  3. CE 7 years ago
    
    The flag will be soon. The 13 stripes represent the original 13 states, many of which were "slave" states. Therefore it is a symbol celebrating slavery.
    
    And secession. So the Stars and Stripes is basically the Stars and Bars.
  4. ace_m82 7 years ago
    
    My flag:
    
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBxn9MqMOcE
2. John 7 years ago
  
  It is funny how the ignorant idiots in the media slammed Trump for making the common sense observation that once this stuff starts, there is no stopping it. Iconoclasm is one of the most dangerous things that can get lose in a society. Once you start tearing down graven images, it is very difficult to stop because someone can find something wrong with any image. There are a couple of centuries worth of Byzantine art that is almost entirely lost to history because of the Eastern Church suffered a bout of iconoclasm. There are literally less than a dozen pieces of surviving Byzantine art from the seventh and eighth centuries, if I remember correctly.
  1. Rhywun 7 years ago
    
    Meanwhile we're renaming bridges with perfectly-good, neutral names after... this person I've never heard of. If I were more motivated, and if I thought it had a chance in hell of succeeding, I would consider digging up some dirt on the guy to stop it. Nobody is perfect, right?
    1. mad.casual 7 years ago
      
      this person I've never heard of.
      
      You should just call it the Henry Rollins bridge and be done with it.
      1. Rhywun 7 years ago
        
        That was my first thought. I'm sure his backstory is impeccable, too.
  2. chemjeff 7 years ago
    
    GOOD. The Founding Fathers were great men, but they were also MEN. As in, flawed human beings. Not gods. Not superheroes. We need less reverential worship of other human beings, not more. If we're going to erect statues and monuments, let's create them to celebrate ideas and values, not historical figures.
    1. John 7 years ago
      
      In other words, let's engage in iconoclasm and tear down all of the graven images. I am not sure I have ever seen a point go over someone's head quit as obvisouly as my point just went over yours.
      
      Jesus fucking Christ, you just argued for tearing down every statue of any historical figure and replacing them with "monuments to ideas" whatever the hell that means. That is called being dangerously stupid.
    2. Ron 7 years ago
      
      those historical figures enshrined those celebrated ideas in the forming of this country. something worth acknowledging.
    3. BestUsedCarSales 7 years ago
      
      We need less reverential worship of other human beings, not more
      
      I completely agree. One thing that is fueling this rage is an unfortunate belief that these people should be perfect, and when they are found to be less than certain people react with a berzerker's rage. We need to understand that all men are imperfect, and that greatness does not require perfection.
      
      If we're going to erect statues and monuments, let's create them to celebrate ideas and values, not historical figures.
      
      Ideas and values are as flawed as humans as they are made by us. One thing I might stand for is less government monument making period, leave it to individuals to do it. But they can be people and they can be ideas or whatever.
      1. Ron 7 years ago
        
        most monuments are privately funded and the governments give them permission to install them on government lands
        
        BestUsedCarSales 7 years ago
        
        Good, and we should also remove the government lands. That being said, I'm not particularly worked up about this. I express an ideal above, but my feelings on it are pretty unintense.
    4. CE 7 years ago
      
      How long before they tear down the statue of liberty then? Liberty means people are free to fail, and free to criticize each other. It's got to go.
  3. CE 7 years ago
    
    There are literally less than a dozen pieces of surviving Byzantine art from the seventh and eighth centuries, if I remember correctly.
    
    Just how old ARE you?
    1. BestUsedCarSales 7 years ago
      
      Old enough that he can just barely remember whispers of the fallen civilization that produced Hihn.
3. Palin's Buttplug 7 years ago
  
  Fake poutrage, Mikey.
  
  No one is going after Washington. You're making shit up again.
  
  (some retard on the street corner is like you Mikey. They don't count.)
  1. Sevo 7 years ago
    
    Pay your bet yet, turd? Still apologizing for rapists?
  2. John 7 years ago
    
    Which part of "take down this commemorative plaque" do you not understand? I know you are stupid and generally illiterate but I would think even someone with your low IQ could understand that sentence.
    1. Palin's Buttplug 7 years ago
      
      (some retard on the street corner is like you Mikey. They don't count.)
      
      You can't read.
      1. John 7 years ago
        
        They are taking down the plaque at his church. But go ahead and claim they are not. It makes for good comedy.
  3. Domestic Dissident 7 years ago
    
    Uhh, anyone who reads the story can see that you're lying as usual, douchebag Dave Weigel.
4. BYODB 7 years ago
  
  Uh, well, yeah. I think we all saw that one coming. As a matter of fact, that was the first thing most of us said when they started tearing down monuments.
5. CE 7 years ago
  
  They laughed when we said it was only a matter of time. It's been months not years.
Palin's Buttplug 7 years ago

GOP tax plan will explode deficit: Wharton study
BY NIV ELIS - 10/30/17 01:27 PM EDT

http://thehill.com/policy/fina.....rton-study
1. John 7 years ago
  
  If they are not careful, they will add more debt in 8 years than the country had previously in its entire history before that. Oh yeah, Obama already did that and you didn't give a shit and still suck his cock every day on here.
  
  Shut the fuck up Shreek. Stop pretending you care about running up debt.
  1. Palin's Buttplug 7 years ago
    
    Obama inherited a $1.2 trillion deficit and left with a $480 billion one. The Con Man will take us back to trillion dollar deficits.
    1. John 7 years ago
      
      No he didn't. We have had this conversation a million times. Obama could have stopped TARP and undid everything Bush did, and chose not to do so. He also was in the Senate and voted in favor of all of that debt.
      
      So either stop sucking his cock or admit you don't give a shit about the deficit.
      1. Tony 7 years ago
        
        Admit that you pretend to give a shit about the deficit but only when people with a certain letter after their names are in power.
        
        Fuck =><= sevo 7 years ago
        
        Why are you and the idiot rape denier talking about the deficit when john clearly typed "debt"?
        
        MarkLastname 7 years ago
        
        I'd love nothing more than for the GOP to finance their tax cuts with equivalent spending cuts, believevme. Would be even better if they cut spending by more than taxes.
      2. TrickyVic (old school) 7 years ago
        
        ""Obama inherited a $1.2 trillion deficit and left with a $480 billion one""
        
        Democrats were in control of the purse for the 1.2 Trillion deficit. Republicans were in control of the purse for 480 Billion.
        
        Not that either side is good when it comes to limited spending.
  2. jcw 7 years ago
    
    I guess as long as everybody is doing it, I'm okay with it.
    1. John 7 years ago
      
      No. If you had a problem with Obama doing it, then you should have a problem with the Republicans doing it. But if you cheered Obama doing it, you can't now came to care just becuase the wrong side is doing it. You completely miss the point.
2. Don't look at me. 7 years ago
  
  Pfft. Numbers on a piece of paper. No big.
3. guy who doesn't care 7 years ago
  
  "Wharton study"
  
  don't care
  1. CE 7 years ago
    
    Didn't Trump go to Wharton?
Rebel Scum 7 years ago

Team Blue quadruples down.
Rebel Scum 7 years ago

According to Facebook, Russian-backed content was viewed by an estimated 126 million Americans on Facebook during the 2016 election.

And?
1. Sevo 7 years ago
  
  "And?"
  And therefore, the hag lost!
  Jeeze...
Jerryskids 7 years ago

Defense Secretary Jim Mattis says that "a new AUMF is not legally required to address the continuing threat" of terrorism.

I saw Tim Kaine on CNN making the argument that the AUMF certainly does need re-visiting as it's basically a blank check for the president to wage endless war wherever and whenever he pleases and presidents simply shouldn't have that sort of power. I didn't bother doing a google search to see if he'd ever made this argument before with previous presidents. Or maybe just one of the previous two presidents.
1. John 7 years ago
  
  I think Article 2 and the President's duties as Commander and Chief are a blank check for the President to deal with immediate threats to the country's security wherever they are found. That is not a blank check to wage state on state war. But if there is some clown or group of clowns that are not affiliated with a nation state who are a threat to US citizens, the President has the power to whack them, provided that the country where said clowns are found is okay with the violation of its sovereignty of the US doing it or if the clowns are found in a place like Syria or parts of Yemen that are effectively stateless.
  1. BYODB 7 years ago
    
    ...provided that the country where said clowns are found is okay with the violation of its sovereignty of the US doing it or if the clowns are found in a place like Syria or parts of Yemen that are effectively stateless.
    
    The 'effectively stateless' exception would render the whole thing effectively moot as a limitation though.
    1. John 7 years ago
      
      I don't see how. Most of the world is under some kind of functioning and recognized government.
      1. BYODB 7 years ago
        
        Because the words 'effectively stateless' is a subjective statement.
        
        Just as a simple example one could point to virtually the entire continent of Africa as 'effectively stateless' by a lot of people's measure.
        
        I'm sure you had something more exact in mind, but as stated that would be a terrible metric.
Sevo 7 years ago

Maybe a book deal is falling apart?
"Inconsistencies Cast Doubt On Tale Of 2 Women Claiming They Were Lost At Sea"
[...]
"Two Hawaii women who say they were lost at sea never activated their emergency beacon, the U.S. Coast Guard said, adding to a growing list of inconsistencies that cast doubt on this harrowing tale of survival."
http://philadelphia.cbslocal.c.....ve-at-sea/
1. lap83 7 years ago
  
  It was the men with whom they started the journey who refused to activate it and accept help. So they ate them
2. Tom Bombadil 7 years ago
  
  Bro, do you even Hukilau?
3. Ron 7 years ago
  
  they did look fairly healthy for being at sea for four months
Ken Shultz 7 years ago

"We have to fight propaganda and crackpot conspiracy theories"

John McCain, October 30, 2017 in reference to Donald Trump.

----The Hill

https://tinyurl.com/ya5mv524

December 9, 2016: The date John McCain delivers the pissgate dossier to James Comey, head of the FBI.
Ron 7 years ago

Russian backed adds may have appeared on 126 million viewer accounts but that doesn't mean anyone paid attention to them
1. Ken Shultz 7 years ago
  
  I used to not pay attention, until I followed a link from this site that said so and so's wife makes $4,385 a day working from home.
  1. Ron 7 years ago
    
    well theres one, anecdotal though
  2. TrickyVic (old school) 7 years ago
    
    Is that in rubles?
  3. Ken Shultz 7 years ago
    
    Have you guys seriously never seen the spam here saying that you can earn $3,287 a week working from home?
    1. Ron 7 years ago
      
      do you not get our sarcasm to your sarcasm

Please log in to post comments

A.M. Links: Trump White House 'Freaking Out' Over Mueller Investigation, Russian-Backed Facebook Content Viewed by 126 Million Americans, Happy Halloween

Latest

Brickbat: Injustice Is Blind

The Government Threatened To Seize His Home Over Tall Grass

The Logical Contradictions of Trump's Case for Tariffs

Cops Called on Dad for Playing Catch with 14-Year-Old Son at Park

ICE Denies Reason Access to Immigration Court In Miami Detention Center

Recommended

Login Form