Reason Roundup

The Steele Dossier's Origin Story Gets Even More Suspect: Reason Roundup

Plus: The Chapo Guide to Revolution and how Republicans learned to love weed.

|

Patrick George IKON Images/Newscom

Damning testimony on dossier used to justify FBI wiretapping. Republican representatives grilled Department of Justice official Bruce Ohr yesterday on the origins of the infamous Christopher Steele dossier alleging Trump-Russia collusion. Ohr's wife Nellie worked for Fusion GPS, the public-relations firm funding Steele's work on the dossier, and Ohr "passed along Steele's information to the FBI, even after the bureau terminated its formal relationship with Steele over media leaks," notes Politico.

The interrogation was off the record, but some members of the GOP-led House committees that Ohr talked to have been talking themselves. Ohio Republican Rep. Jim Jordan told Fox News @ Night that the FBI omitted "important facts" about Steele's document when using it as justification for wiretapping Carter Page, then on the Trump campaign.

In seeking a FISA warrant, Jordan argued, the FBI failed to tell the secret court about the dossier's funding, how Ohr was tied to it, or Steele's alleged "extreme bias" against Trump. Jordan was one of at least seven Republican lawmakers—including Reps. Mark Meadows, Trey Gowdy, John Ratcliffe, Darrell Issa, Matt Gaetz, and Andy Biggs—who interviewed Ohr on Tuesday. ("No Democratic lawmakers were on hand, but staffers of both parties attended," reports Politico.)

Rep. Gaetz told reporters that Ohr had been cooperative but the dossier timeline he laid out didn't jibe with what had been claimed before Congress by Glenn Simpson, the co-founder of Fusion GPS, and by ex-FBI lawyer Lisa Page.

"Either Bruce Ohr's lying or Glenn Simpson's lying," said Gaetz.

According to Rep. Meadows' account of Ohr's testimony, the FBI feigned confidence in Steele's document when it came time to talk to the FISA court but was much less convinced internally. "Not only did the FBI know that the dossier was unverified," said Meadows, "but they also knew that there were real credibility issues where it would never end up in a courtroom."

Reporter John Solomon characterizes Ohr's testimony as (finally!) "evidence of collusion between Russians and Americans," albeit not the sort that folks have been fretting over. Ohr had been part of a Justice Department cabal that, in September 2015, met with Russian tycoon (and former Paul Manafort business associate) Oleg Deripaska— a meeting facilitated by Steele.

"The 2015 meeting between Ohr, the FBI and Deripaska is captured cryptically in some of Ohr's handwritten notes, recently turned over to Congress," writes Solomon. It was about cybersecurity broadly, not anything related to the upcoming election. However,

A year later, Deripaska would get another visit from his FBI friends in New York. But this time the questions were about possible collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. Specifically, the agents told Deripaska they believed Trump's former campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, was secretly coordinating the election with Moscow. Steele had planted that theory with the FBI.

Deripaska had been blocked from entering the U.S., but he was allowed back in after he started meeting with the FBI. "U.S. officials told me they assumed Deripaska let Putin's team know he was helping the U.S. government, and that his motive for helping was to keep visiting America," writes Solomon.

Today, Deripaska is banned anew from the United States, one of several Russians sanctioned in April by the Trump administration as a way to punish Putin for 2016 election meddling. But he wants to be clear about a few things, according to a statement provided by his team. First, he did collude with Americans in the form of voluntarily assisting and meeting with the FBI, the DOJ and people such as Ohr between 2009 and 2016. He also wants Americans to know he did not cooperate or assist with Steele's dossier, and he tried to dispel the FBI notion that Russia and the Trump campaign colluded during the 2016 election.

FREE MINDS

FREE MARKETS

"Against Logic, Facts, and Reason" indeed. Bill Scher reviews The Chapo Guide to Revolution: A Manifesto Against Logic, Facts and Reason, a new book by the hosts of the popular political podcast Chap Trap House. "By the end of the book, it's hard to escape the nagging feeling that Chapo—the podcast and the book—is, at bottom, an actual, unironic infomercial scheme," Scher writes. "They make bank by selling you a candy-coated version of socialism," one in which everyone will be freed by smart tech and smart government to work three hours a day and pursue their dreams:

The Chapo hosts' aversion to hard work extends to this book. Why suffer the details of how this nonworkers' paradise, free of paper pushing and ditch digging, is going to be realized, when you can take in more than $1 million a year by dressing up stale arguments and thin policy ideas with inside jokes?

The infomercial socialists of Chapo have exploited the free market expertly, and at least saved themselves from the 9-to-5 prison. There is always a market for easy solutions to complicated problems

QUICK HITS

• Republican Sen. Rand Paul has endorsed Libertarian Gary Johnson in his quest for a U.S. Senate seat, rather than the Republican candidate, Mick Rich.

• A Bernie-backed Tallahassee mayor won Democrats' vote for the party's gubernatorial candidate. Andrew Gillum "will face off against Rep. Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.) in … November, pitting a progressive against a hardline conservative backed by President Trump," reports The Hill. "A win in November would make Gillum the first black governor in Florida's history."

• The establishment conservative candidate in Arizona, U.S. Rep. Martha McSally, beat out Sheriff Joe Arpaio and Kelli Ward to be the GOP nominee in the race to take outgoing Sen. Jeff Flake's place in Congress. With more than half of precincts reporting, Arpaio only obtained 20 percent of the vote, Ward 28.6 percent, and McSally 51.4 percent.

• "Arizona Sen. John McCain's widow Cindy hasn't expressed any desire to serve out her late husband's term in Washington"—thank goodness—"but she will wield immense influence over the selection of his replacement," reports Politico.

• California has passed a lifetime ban on legal gun ownership for people with domestic violence convictions.

• Conor Friedersdorf picks "slightly more than 100 fantastic articles" from 2017, including four pieces from Reason.

• Tofurky is pushing back against a Missouri meat-labeling laws.

• Myrtle Beach police remind residents that public cussing could cost them $500.

• The Disordered Mind, a new book from the neuroscientist and Nobel laureate Eric Kandel, "catalogues the ways each type of brain disorder has allowed scientists to better understand our most complicated organ." Read a fascinating interview with Kandel here.

• Trump's "trade war is going so well that the Department of Agriculture is about to start bailing out farmers," writes Eric Boehm.

Advertisement

NEXT: A Black Male Student Says a White Woman Bit, Choked, and Pinned Him While They Were Kissing. Guess Who Got Suspended?

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. The establishment conservative candidate in Arizona, U.S. Rep. Martha McSally, beat out Sheriff Joe Arpaio and Kelli Ward to be the GOP nominee in the race to take outgoing Sen. Jeff Flake’s place in Congress.

    “I shot down the sheriff’s chances…”

    1. Hello.

      Can a swamp really truly be drained?

      1. You calling Trump a liar?

        You calling his fans hopeless rubes?

        1. Trump said he would drain the swamp. He didnt say he would empty the swamp, which is impossible.

          He drains a bit each year.

          1. Rufus asked if a swamp could be drained, not emptied. Kirkland said nothing useful. What question were you answering?

            1. It seems useful to understand that people who continue to fall for that ‘drain the swamp’ line are silly goobers and that the guy who advanced it was lying.

              Disaffected right-wingers, especially the faux libertarians, may be expected to take a contrary position.

              Carry on, clingers.

              1. It seems useful to understand that people who continue to fall for that ‘drain the swamp’ line are silly goobers and that the guy who advanced it was lying.

                Yeah, but you still lost to him, so that makes him even dumber than you claim them to be.

            2. Kirkland answered my setup question.

              Kirkland is stupid yet again.

        1. As does Walt Disney.

      2. A swamp can be drained, but not as easily as a marsh or a fen.

        1. Or a wetland. Those places are protective of the creatures that live there.

      3. It requires a lot of concrete.

  2. “Arizona Sen. John McCain’s widow Cindy hasn’t expressed any desire to serve out her late husband’s term in Washington”?thank goodness?”but she will wield immense influence over the selection of his replacement,” reports Politico.

    What a bizarre scenario.

    1. The “immense influence” probably consists of bribes from Daddy’s money.

    2. This is the woman who was caught forging prescriptions to get pain medication–a felony for you and I. But drug warrior McCain used HIS influence to make sure she was never charged.

    3. Because being the spouse of a dead Senator qualifies you as competent to choose a successor how? The Senate seat is not part of McCain’s estate, there is no reason she should have a in its disposal.

      1. You’re never going to enjoy an informal monarchy with that attitude, peon.

      2. Look, when Joe down at the airplane factory died, they gave his wife his position as a welder. Joe was a great welder, and beloved by his colleagues. Nobody could be a more fitting replacement for Joe in building aircraft than his loving wife….

        Never mind that she’s never welded anything in her life…. she knows what Joe would have done…

        1. Welding takes knowledge and skill. Being a lying shitbag politician doesn’t.

          1. Obviously you do not have appreciation for the knowledge and skill it takes to be a lying shitbag politician that keeps getting elected.

      3. The funny/sad part about this is that this attitude isn’t much different from that of the Roman senators during Caesar’s time.

  3. California has passed a lifetime ban on legal gun ownership for people with domestic violence convictions.

    And then summarily convicted every non-cop Californian of domestic violence. (Luckily cops’ wives aren’t allowed to report their husbands.)

    1. I smell a 2nd Amendment lawsuit.

      Domestic violence is a misdemeanor in California, so I doubt even the Lefty courts will allow this.

      It is funny that cops with domestic violence convictions will have to surrender their firearms.

      It is a war on cops afterall!

      1. Maybe, but they already have legal precedent with the Lautenberg Amendment.

        1. Of course, they justify all sorts of unconstitutional legislation.

          The Controlled Substances Act is unconstitutional. Even the Prohibitionists knew they needed a constitutional amendment to ban a product or service. This fact is ignored because the Prohibition was a hard fight to get ratified and went so badly for banning something.

          Arms have a specific protection and that protection was incorporated into state limitations via the 14th Amendment, if there was ever any doubt that the 2nd Amendment applied to all American citizens in any state from the start.

          Gun grabbers have tried incrementalism to get some gains in gun control. All this needs to be slapped down and laughed out of law books and courts. Its unconstitutional to infringe on the right of the People to keep and bear Arms. NO background checks, registration schemes, bans, exclusions….

      2. Domestic Violence misdemeanor already places someone on the prohibited buyers list at the federal level.

        1. Yeah but you can just private sale purchase a gun.

          If you’re banned, then any law enforcement that interacts with you while you have a gun, can arrest you.

          Its why banning gun possession is unconstitutional. It effectively permanently ends gun right for those people.

          1. A prohibited person buying a gun private party is illegal.

            In California, private party transfers must be performed at a licensed dealer with background checks.

            1. Which is in no way an infringement.

              *barf*

            2. Both of those things you mentioned are unconstitutional infringements, of the right of the People to keep and bear Arms, therefore legal.

              Therefore ignore California law all you want. The Constitution supremacy trumps California law. Much of California law doesnt even comply with California’s own state Constitution.

  4. Greg Abbott, via Twtter
    White Texas police officer found guilty of murder for fatally shooting black teen in car. This life should never have been lost.

  5. Conor Friedersdorf picks “slightly more than 100 fantastic articles” from 2017, including four pieces from Reason.

    Only four? Step up your kickback game, Reason.

    1. That mischievous Maverick would have *loved* it!

    2. If they’d discovered in their teens that they were really dolphins trapped in human bodies, no one would’ve batted an eye.

      1. I can’t believe the dolphin was running around without his top. That’s the scandal…

  6. the FBI failed to tell the secret court about the dossier’s funding, how Ohr was tied to it, or Steele’s alleged “extreme bias” against Trump

    Someone should investigate the FBI, or at least give this information to a secret court!

    1. Is there any reason to doubt that the Benghazi-birther brigade can give this investigation the attention it deserves?

    1. Progressives hate religion and Popes. But not Commie Pope. For obvious reasons. Them indirectly defending him is delicious in its degeneracy.

      1. Gullible, superstitious, backward people love organized religion. Bigots hate the current Pope. For obvious reasons.

        A Catholic offering pointers on degeneracy is charming. Penn State fan, too?

        1. Ah yes, could we expect any less from a progressive mind?

          Progressivism (socialism, Marxism whatever. All the same garbage): The Bubonic Plague of ideologies.

        2. Gullible, superstitious, backward people love organized religion

          Just look at hicklibs and Marxism.

      2. Many progressives are religious.

        It’s not the religion that they hate, it’s the use of religion for corrupt purposes.

        1. “”Many progressives are religious.””

          I’m not sure that’s true. Do you have any examples?

          One of the reasons for my doubt is that progressives think government should help the needy, where pretty much all religious people I’ve ever met think it’s our responsibility to help each other.

  7. Trump’s “trade war is going so well that the Department of Agriculture is about to start bailing out farmers,” writes Eric Boehm.

    Maybe if the Titanic had done a little more bailing it would still be afloat. Did you ever think of that?

    1. Ships don’t bail. People bail. Did you ever think of that?

      1. If your ship is sinking you might need to bail it. Or bail out.

        If your friend is arrested, you might need to bail him out. Or bail on them.

    1. So, “Molon labe”?

    2. Socialism 101.

      1) Get rid of guns.
      2) Murder all dissenters.

      1. You wouldn’t know it from Reason or any of the other media’s coverage, but my understanding is that they actually led with ‘Murder dissenters’.

        1. I thought so too.

          I thought this land theft and murder scheme happened in a day or two. I had no idea it is a timely process of theft and murder.

        2. Yes, but those dissenters have now gathered together in fortified compounds to avoid being murdered, so it’s now become necessary to take away their means of defense.

    3. Expropriation is a hell of a lot easier and safer when the honky can’t shoot your ass.

  8. If Trump had lost the election, nobody would be giving a shit about anything Russia did.

    1. Well, maybe a *radioactive* shit.

    2. If Trump had lost the election, nobody would be giving a shit about anything Russia did.

      The way Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation nakedly and self-admittedly broke the law several times over and nobody has yet to stood trial for any of it.

      1. Trump must be in on the con. Where’s the prosecutor he promised us????

        Can they name Peter Schweitzer as Special Prosecutor? He’s so good, the liberal NY Times gave him an exclusive deal to promote his research. I’m sure he could get her behind bars in no time at all!

        1. Trump is letting Lefties burn out and justify use of a special prosecutor.

          When Mueller is out of work in the next month or two, Trump will fire Sessions and Rosenstein. All the evidence against Hillary, Comey, Rosenstein, Lynch, etc can be laid out and a special prosecutor can be selected. The Lefties cannot say shit because they wanted a special prosecutor to investigate election tampering because of conflict of interest. The new special prosecutor will actually investigate that along with Hillary’s violation of federal law for mishandling classified information.

          None of them will get pardons from Trump.

          1. You ever think about writing fantasy novels?

            We’ve been hearing that Mueller is wrapping up since at least Thanksgiving. It’s been a few weeks from ending for nearly a year.

            Around that same time, Sessions started looking into Uranium One. No indictments coming.
            http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us…..al-n831436

            1. I write non-fiction.

              You Lefties are going to have a rough 2019 too. Election 2018 will lead to more lost Congressional seats for Lefties. Trump will have pardoned everyone who fought Mueller. Mueller will be fired. Sessions will be fired. Rosenstein will be fired.

              Then the new special investigator will be appointed.

        2. Of course he’s in on the con. He’s the fucking president. If u don’t think a president, any president in this day and age, isn’t the slimiest PoS in politics, you’re deluded.

          I know, you only think trump is slime, but he’s in good company with folks like Clinton, bush, gore, the fbi, cia, etc.

          The deep state lives still!

    1. Yeah, I’m sure all those “natural conservatives” will reject this outright.

  9. Myrtle Beach police remind residents that public cussing could cost them $500.

    The price of yelling fuck in a crowded theater.

    1. And this “public cussing” includes listening to much popular music, right? RIGHT?!

    2. I smell a 1st Amendment lawsuit coming to Myrtle Beach.

      Nothing like a vague law that cannot define what words are ‘cussing’, to get $500 for a city in the beginning, and a million dollar lawsuit in the end.

      1. My friends and I were discussing a fast food commercial whose tag-line is “Big Bucking Chicken”. Someone, um, misheard this, and hilarity ensued.

      2. fuckcuntshitpisscocksuckermotherfuckertits

        Of course none of that is really cursing, just profane. Do they really mean curse words like “Goddamn” or profanity. Pretty vague. And pretty contrary to the first amendment in any case.

    3. With all due respect, Myrtle Beach Police, go fuck yourselves.

    4. The ordinance lists several examples of the types of words which are unlawful. The penalty for conviction could include a fine and/or jail time. We encourage everyone to avoid violating this ordinance by speaking to others with the same respect and kindness he or she deserves.

      But… what if the respect and kindness I deserve is violent profanity? Does that free me to use it on others? 😀

  10. In New Mexico, where life off the grid is common, compound suspects struggled
    Many are quick to distance the state’s countercultural vibe from the compound and its inhabitants, who are accused of training the children to commit mass shootings. But they also fear that the publicity around a case infused with allegations of terrorism, child abuse and faith healing might contribute to a rise in racism and Islamophobia.

    1. The author of that piece is a typical shitlib urbanite.

      Never mind that they were trespassing on private property, were training people to execute mass shooting attacks and had specific targets mapped out, and were abusing the kids to the point that one actually died.

      People like Emanuella Grinberg are an active danger to a healthy society because their first instinct is to attack and subvert it.

    2. Maybe people should fear that flavor of Islam. But that’s really a rational concern and not a phobia.

    3. “allegations of terrorism, child abuse and faith healing might contribute to a rise in racism and Islamophobia.”

      That bs happens Every. Time. And it gets so old….OMG stop picking on the terrorists! Someone might become racist.

      1. And I like how they lump in “faith healing” with the other two. Like anyone gives a shit about that other than liberals, because it reminds them of Christians. The worst crime imaginable

    4. If they were Koresh-ish ‘Christians’ I’m sure the coverage would be somewhat different.

    1. If the Chinese people don’t like Google, they can create their own search engine, hosting services, and internet in the face of resistance of their communist government:

      Google is on the verge of making a huge mistake with China
      There is simply no way that Google can feign a neutral stance while developing a search platform designed to serve not the general public but a violent, coercive, authoritarian regime. Censorship, information blackouts and outright propaganda are prime tools in the CCP’s arsenal of control, as evidenced in incidents large and small, recent and historic. The ongoing crackdown on lawyers and human rights activists and the outrageous campaign against ethnic minorities in Xinjiang province ? all well documented by numerous media outlets, NGOs, the United Nations and the U.S. government ? are but two examples in a trove of evidence demonstrating the CCP’s intentions.

      1. And then came news about Google’s work on a censored search engine (code-named “Dragonfly”). After my initial shock wore off, I found myself wondering what had occurred to cause the company to shed its defining principle in such a blatant fashion. Does Google really want to become a tool of the dictatorial communist regime? What about the millions of disappointed Chinese fans? Without their support, and without the company’s moral bearings, how would Google survive in China? Google ? and all foreign companies ? should remember: The vessel containing a dictatorship’s desire is boundless, never filled, never satisfied. You give an inch, and they will take a mile in irrational demands.

        1. Careful. You might give people the idea that when a company does business in China, they aren’t doing business with the people of China as much as they’re doing business with the Chinese government and that, in doing business with the Chinese government, they aren’t contributing to a hostile enemy in a time of war, but that they are contributing to a hostile foreign power.

          OTOH, fuck that noise, open the borders!

          1. But let’s make sure we censor all that “fake news” in the United States. Don’t be throwing the baby out with the bathwater, boys!

      2. I take it you are not familiar with Jin Yiang

        1. Why would an actor playing a character in a sitcom be relevant?

          1. Its actually a funny subplot of Silicon Valley show on HBO.

            The Chinese character Jin Yiang, steals tech info to make Chinese versions of American tech companies and ideas in China.

            “New Reddit”
            “New internet”
            “New Facebook”

            1. The Chinese character Jin Yiang, steals tech info to make Chinese versions of American tech companies and ideas in China.

              So, just like real life?

              1. Yup.

              2. Turns out, all the Chinese needed for their Great Leap Forward (in technology) was American ingenuity and an American willingness to cede intellectual property and patents.

                1. ^BYODB gets it.

                2. Eh, some American companies recoup some of the costs by creating “joint venture” projects with Chinese “firms”, but basically, that’s correct.


                  1. Eh, some American companies recoup some of the costs by creating “joint venture” projects with Chinese “firms”, but basically, that’s correct.

                    Yes, which they are often required to do in order to do business in China at all. It’s not the American firms demanding that they be allowed to give away their patents and intellectual property, but rather they’re willing to do so in order to gain access to that sweet, sweet market share.

                    China will, of course, be ‘free’ to revoke that deal at any time. Say, after they feel they have enough American technology to put missiles through the middle of American aircraft carrier and take Japan over once and for all?

                    I know, I know. MAD theory says that can’t happen. It’s just grating that China gets away with such clearly bullshit trade deals.

            2. “copying existent companies isn’t sophisticated, it’s theft”
              “you make a new internet ”
              “that’s different “

    2. The Intelligence Community Inspector General (ICIG) found that virtually all of Clinton’s emails were sent to a “foreign entity,” Rep. Louie Gohmert, a Texas Republican, said at a July 12 House Committee on the Judiciary hearing. … Two officials with the ICIG, investigator Frank Rucker and attorney Janette McMillan, met repeatedly with FBI officials to warn them of the Chinese intrusion …. Among those FBI officials was Peter Strzok, who was then the bureau’s top counterintelligence official. … Strzok didn’t act on the information the ICIG provided him

      And nothing else happened!

      1. Well, Strzok was fired so at least they threw someone under the bus. That should appease the proles.

        /Deep State

      2. Of course, we already know Strzok was protecting Hillary.

    3. John Cardillo
      During Hillary’s tenure as SecState, while nefarious foreign actors were hacking her private server:

      – Our intel assets in China were assassinated en masse

      1. Not doubting you, just curious ? you have a cite for that? “En masse” sounds newsworthy…

          1. Thanks.

          2. Luckily, China will always have people willing to spy against it. Its a totalitarian regime.

            China has to send spies and threaten families of Chinese nationals in the USA to get spying done.

          3. But remember, Valerie Plame could have had her cover blown even though she blew her own cover in a magazine.

      2. So you think that someone from the CIA is sending lists of undercover agents to a non-secure email?
        There were a small handful of top-secret documents found in the email. Newspaper articles can be classified top-secret. Identities of agents seem unlikely to be in there.

        I’m surprised you’re not blaming Feinstein’s driver.

        1. I’m not surprised your defending Feinstein’s staff member that was a spy.

          1. I didn’t defend anybody.

            1. Yes you did.

    4. “SOURCES: CHINA HACKED HILLARY CLINTON’S PRIVATE EMAIL SERVER”

      I mentioned at the time that any intel unit would have had a nerd assigned to her, and as soon as she directed the first message to that thing, the intels of countries from Albania to Zimbabwe had the entire contents in hand.
      How she got off with the ‘Who, wittle me?’ defense is a mystery.

      1. How she got off with the ‘Who, wittle me?’ defense is a mystery.

        She is a Dem. Mystery solved.

        1. How she got off with the ‘Who, wittle me?’ defense is a mystery.

          Like, with a cloth?

      2. And that was always the thing about Hillary. You can only use the ‘I’m too dumb to know what I’m doing’ excuse so many times before people start to think that you don’t know what you’re doing.

        Gross incompetence will get you pretty far in politics (I mean, look at Trump) but eventually people start to notice that you routinely use the ‘I’m stupid’ card to get out of trouble and have to assume you either really are stupid, or you’re a liar and you think everyone else is stupid.

        Bernie was a terrible candidate, ironically for many of the same reasons that Trump is terrible, but he was better than Hillary. Consider how terrible that really is for a moment. (I mean, aside from the fact that an actual socialist was better than the establishment Democratic candidate that is.)

        1. Why not use it for them? No one holds them accountable. Almost every defense to an issue brought up during the Obama admin was “At no time did the Obama administration know what the Obama administration was doing.” Progs gleefully went along. The AG had no idea about fast and furious and AP wiretapping reporters. The head of the IRS had no idea about targeting of Conservatives. Brennan had no idea the CIA was spying on the Senate. Obama had no idea about any of it. Least that is the defense they played and got away with and continue to get away with.

          1. I don’t recall

          2. Well, one might say Hillary losing to Donald Trump is punishment enough for any politician although, obviously, some would prefer jail time for blatantly mishandling classified information based on her desire to evade FOIA (which, of course, is also a crime.)

    5. Hacked? Hell, she probably sold them the password.

  11. The establishment conservative candidate in Arizona, U.S. Rep. Martha McSally, beat out Sheriff Joe Arpaio and Kelli Ward to be the GOP nominee in the race to take outgoing Sen. Jeff Flake’s place in Congress.

    Well shoot. I was hoping one of the two nuts would make the race interesting.

    1. No Anarchy-land antics today.

      1. it’s early.

  12. If your police dept is “nearly wiped out” by abuse of power indictments, it should probably just be actually wiped out & rebooted from scratch. https://t.co/fzl3n8RM6h
    ? Julian Sanchez (@normative) August 29, 2018

    They can trade with the Mesa Police Department.

    1. If sports franchises can pull up stakes and move to a new city, why not police departments.

  13. Who will be the Sharron Angle, Christine O’Donnell, or Todd Aiken of this cycle?

    1. Is Todd Aiken the brother of Clay Aiken?

    2. Trump?

    3. Hillary?

  14. Tofurky is pushing back against a Missouri meat-labeling laws.

    I better read on the label they’ve injected it with tryptophan at least.

  15. In seeking a FISA warrant, Jordan argued, the FBI failed to tell the secret court about the dossier’s funding, how Ohr was tied to it, or Steele’s alleged “extreme bias” against Trump.

    As though the court would have cared.

    1. Jim Jordan knows all about the behind-the-scenes dossier, but knew nothing about the misconduct at Ohio State.

      #ShitWingnutsClaimToBelieve

      1. What the hell has Fibber McGee got to do with this?

    2. Did he not read the warrant application? The funding source was in there.

      1. With some lies and lies via omission sprinkled in.

      2. In all honesty, the funding source is less important than the fact that little of the information in the dossier was actually true and that the actual sources for the dossier itself were in fact Russians. If you wanted to point at foreign meddling in an election, one might rightfully point at the Hillary Campaign.

        And note that I don’t necessarily think that Hillary should be in jail for what appears to be mostly run of the mill opposition research, but what’s curious are people that think Hillary shouldn’t be in jail for the dossier but do believe that Trump should be in jail for far less. If you’re going to whip up fever dreams of Russian interference, be careful that you don’t look like you helped Russians interfere?

        Maybe Hillary should be in jail for other things, but that’s outside the context of this particular issue.

        1. You don’t know what was in the application that corroborated the claims in the dossier. It was presented as one piece of evidence, with statements that it came from political opposition research (a project started by a conservative organization) as well as information about Steele’s press leaks.

          Hillary hired Fusion GPS through a law firm. That’s a legit transaction. Fusion GPS hired Steele. Steele broke no laws. It’s not against the law to hire people to perform opposition research. It’s not against the law to share that info with the FBI. It is against the law to take gifts, including non-monetary gifts, from a foreign government. That’s why basically every member of the Trump campaign has lied to cover it up. How many times did they make blanket statements about no connections to Russians? Hiding, then lying about the Trump Tower meeting?

          1. Steele is a British spy. Hillary hired a British spy to try and rig election 2016.

            Trump is being accused of using spies to rig election 2016.

            Hey remember when I hired that hitman? I knew a guy and hired him and he hired another guy who hired the hitman. You Lefties and your deflection. Its not fooling anyone.


          2. You don’t know what was in the application that corroborated the claims in the dossier.

            Well, we know that at least some of the information in the dossier was definitely untrue. That calls into question the rest of it as well. I’m sure, though, that the Russian intelligence agents that Steele likely called upon sprinkled some truth in as well. That’s what a good intelligence agent would do.

            That isn’t the point though. You’re pretty literally stating that Hillary’s proven interactions with the Kremlin through a cut-out are legal because she used a cut-out. Yet Trump’s theoretical interactions with the Kremlin through a theoretical cut out are illegal because he used a theoretical cut-out.

            It does amuse me though that you put forward a lot of chaff such as ‘It’s not against the law to share that info with the FBI’ when I made no such claim though. Rather, the point is that if it wasn’t ‘illegal’ for the Clinton campaign to do those things, and as I said it likely isn’t, that it’s absurd to pretend that they are illegal for Trump.

            1. “”Rather, the point is that if it wasn’t ‘illegal’ for the Clinton campaign to do those things, and as I said it likely isn’t, that it’s absurd to pretend that they are illegal for Trump.””

              Yep, now watch the goalpost get moved.

          3. “You don’t know what was in the application that corroborated the claims in the dossier.”

            Okay so lets see what was used. Release every single piece paper submitted to the FISA court and every piece of paper that was connected too it. Drag every single individual including the FISA judges themselves to testify under oath what they presented, why they presented it, what they left out and for the Judges why they approved the warrant. Have you not gotten by now this wasn’t some basic counter intel op going after some disgruntled government contractor selling secrets to country x. This was the surveillance of a Presidential Campaign of the opposite party in power.

    3. Isn’t the secret court just a really expensive rubber stamp?

      1. Trump signed the extension of it. He must be okay with it.

        1. Why not. Trump will use the secret court to spy on Democrats now as they spied on him.

  16. I remain amazed at how fast marijuana reform is moving.

    More money to be made in legalization than prohibition now?

    1. Well, smoke a little more!

      *** ducks ***

      1. Ooh, smoked duck. Yum!

    2. Compare the drug war to immigration. If Reason treated drugs like refugees, their position would not be “people at least support loosening up on MJ, lets talk about that”, it would be “STFU about MJ, anyone who wants crack and crystal meth criminalized is a goddam fascist inhuman Nazi!!!!”

      Which tells me they want to virtue signal, not accomplish anything.

      1. “STFU about MJ, anyone who wants crack and crystal meth criminalized is a goddam fascist inhuman Nazi!!!!”

        “Forcing Americans to pay more for their cheap Chinese opium is worse than the conflict in Yemen and the South African mass democide combined!”

      2. Well, drugs aren’t actual human lives so I’m not so sure that a direct comparison is a great idea. Not that I agree with Reason’s take that all immigration controls are inherently illegitimate, though, since notably other countries continue to exist. Libertarians tend to forget that the rest of the world is a thing.

  17. The Steele Dossier’s Origin Story Gets Even More Suspect

    Cannot get more suspect than Hillary Clinton hiring a British spy to try to influence the 2016 election.

  18. California has passed a lifetime ban on legal gun ownership for people with domestic violence convictions.

    The lifetime ban applies to the other Amendments as well, one surmises.

    1. California is already a Constitution-Free Zone for most residents.

      1. And visitors.

        1. Only legal visitors, so that’s OK.

  19. Damning testimony on dossier used to justify FBI wiretapping.

    Why is Nolan Brown running interference for the Trumptards? The dossier was only one small part of the FISA warrant request and the joker was on the radar long before. Honestly expect better from Reason.

    1. Broke: “It’s absurd that the FBI is spying on Trump!”
      Woke: “Yeah, the FBI was spying on Trump, but it was to ensure his safety!”
      Wired: “The spying isn’t even relevant here!”

      1. You forgot step one –

        EveryMediaMan: “Trump makes crazy and unfounded allegations that his campaign is being spied on”

      2. It’s absurd that the FBI was spying, with a warrant, on a former coffee boy that Trump had hired, who had previously been recruited by Russian spies, who kept making trips back to Russia, and no longer worked for the campaign!

        Trump was not spied on. The campaign was not spied on. A former campaign worker was surveilled under a warrant.

        1. Its not absurd. That is what Lefties are so scared of.

          Trump caught them spying on him and trying to rig the election for Hillary. He is in charge now.

          1. Spying on him by getting a warrant on a guy who no longer worked for the campaign?

            How long after leaving a campaign should a campaign worker be immune from warrants?

            1. Unfortunately for Lefties, warrants are only legal when they are based on probable cause and supported via oath or affirmation and describing the persons and persons and things to be seized.

              Lying to a judge to get the warrant that would not otherwise be issued is a felony. Its called perjury. Its why the Founders included the “…and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”

        2. Thanks for reaffirming the exact progression of talking points I listed.

    2. “”The dossier was only one small part of the FISA warrant request and the joker was on the radar long before.”‘

      I would like to think that using any questionable material in a process closed to the public scrutiny would cause rebuke by anyone who believes in a honest judicial system.

      1. The purpose of a warrant is to verify information that does not come to the level of charging. The dossier was evidence that contributed to probable cause. Richard Burr, who has seen the unredacted application, has said there were sound reasons for it.

        1. “”The purpose of a warrant is to verify information that does not come to the level of charging.”‘

          The dossier was unverified, and questionable. It should have never been presented in any court.

          1. It is not sufficient for trial. The rules of evidence are different for warrants. It would not have been sufficient for a warrant. There is a lot more evidence that was redacted.
            Senator Burr has seen the whole warrant. He says it’s justified.

          2. It is not sufficient for trial. The rules of evidence are different for warrants. It would not have been sufficient for a warrant. There is a lot more evidence that was redacted.
            Senator Burr has seen the whole warrant. He says it’s justified.

          3. There is no justification for unverified and questionable information to be presented in a warrant application. Doesn’t matter what any Senator says.

  20. Fun with numbers:

    “Half of all gun deaths occur in just SIX countries – and they are all in North or South America”
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-
    6106287/Half-firearm-deaths-occur-just
    -SIX-countries-North-South-America.html

    Maybe we could to one about cities; Chicago prolly does well…

    1. I understand that if a few cities are dropped from the stats the U.S. is quite safe.

      1. And I’ll bet a per-capita result would be different too.
        That’s a bullshit ‘study’, with cherry-picked numbers to suit a pre-determined agenda.

      2. Black people should probably only count for 3/5ths of humans at most anyway.

        1. Black people should probably only count for 3/5ths of humans at most anyway.

          White hicklibs for even less than that, because unlike them, black people are actually human.

        2. you know people who think that?

          1. “If we just don’t count the black people being shot, our gun deaths aren’t so bad!”

            1. Clutching pearls just because the murderer happens to be black, and the victim happens to be black, is an interesting rhetorical choice.

        3. “Black people should probably only count for 3/5ths of humans at most anyway.”

          Yeah, that’s sort of germane. To a fucking idiot like you.

          1. Well, the irony obviously being that it was the North that wanted them counted as 3/5th’s of a person because they didn’t want the South to count non-citizens for purposes of representation. Oops. Historical context is important when discussing that particular issue. The Southern states ironically wanted their slaves counted as full persons for representation, and it was entirely because they wanted to insulate slavery.

            Go figure. It’s interesting that the very same issue is coming up again in terms of illegal immigration. What goes around, comes around.

        4. You do realize that the good guys in the debate that lead to the 3/5 compromise were the ones who wanted slaves to count as zero people for apportioning house seats, right?

          1. He probably does not.

        5. Tony|8.29.18 @ 10:42AM|#
          Black people should probably only count for 3/5ths of humans at most anyway.

          Ah, those Democrats always do love them some slavery, Jim Crowe, and dressing in white hoods.

          1. Yet Hillary called a former high ranking member of the KKK a mentor, but Trump is the racist one.

            1. The Media has earned its propagandist’s payment, that’s for sure.

        6. The 3/5s compromise wasn’t about black people.

          It was about slaves

          Free people, of any color, counted as a whole person for purposes of representation.

    2. Researchers say that, worldwide, deaths from gun surpassed deaths due to global conflict and terrorism deaths almost every year from 1990 to 2016

      Brazil topped the list with more than 43,200 gun deaths, either via homicide, suicide or accidental injury.

      The researchers did not include gun deaths attributed to execution, law enforcement or conflict/terrorism.

      So, drop a loaded gun and kill yourself? Gun death, see guns are a problem. Terrorists with the help of corrupt cops and backed by the government kick in your door, murder you and your whole family including the pets and livestock? Doesn’t count, the real problem is guns.

  21. You’ve got to really really hate people to charge them with 54 years worth of crime for activities which have since become legal. Must have a real boner for wasting court time, must really hate people. I guess it beats doing anything dangerous like investigating robberies and chasing speeders.

  22. The Weigelian scumbags in the JournoList are all fired up today because the dude who won the Florida democratic gubernatorial primary (in apparently something of a surprise) makes Barack Obama look like a Joe Lieberman.

    I would personally bet asswipe any amount of money he wants to bet that this schmuck gets the floor mopped up with him in the general election, but we already know from experience that asswipe never pays up the bets he loses, so there’s really no point.

    1. From what they are saying on the radio this morning, his campaign only spent like a half-million bucks.

      The one thing I noticed was that the other candidates were all running against Trump. The majority of their time and energy went into “I will fight Trump”.

      I only saw one of his commercials – and it came off like a music video showing just how cool he is. No message that I remember, no attack on Trump – just “I’m cool. And Progressive! Vote for me!”

      This alone may explain the victory.

      1. From his Twitter:

        Welcome back to Florida, @realDonaldTrump. My name is Andrew Gillum and I’m the only candidate for Governor who believes you deserve to be impeached. So does everyone else who RTs this.
        5:31 AM – 31 Jul 2018

        When I say I will stand up against @realDonaldTrump and his racist immigration crackdowns, I actually mean it.
        4:14 PM – 21 Aug 2018

        Andrew Gillum
        ?Verified account @AndrewGillum
        Aug 21

        Andrew Gillum Retweeted Josh Dawsey

        For the record, I am STILL the only Democrat running for Governor of Florida who thinks @realDonaldTrump should be impeached.

        RT if you’re with me.

        1. You’re not doing a very good job of appropriating OpenBordersLiberaltarian’s schtick.

          1. It disproves the theory, apparently based on seeing one commercial, that he won because he wasn’t campaigning against Trump.

            1. Theoretically…. but if the average voter saw 50 spots from the guys who spent 30 million bucks and only one from the guy who spent a half million, maybe they went with the guy with less negatives.

              Also, the other candidates pretty much ignored him… so there were no attack ads going after him.

            2. No one gives a shit about your disingenuous special pleading, shitlib.

        2. LOL, as if he’s the only person that thinks Trump ‘deserves’ to be impeached. And I notice that the guy committed one hell of a fallacy by conflating race and nationality, just like every other grandstanding schmuck politician.

          1. In many countries, race and nationality have a large impact. In fact, nationality is a decent proxy for race.

            1. Chanandler, Which race are Americans again?

          2. The governor’s race down here as well as many of the other Democrat primaries was predominantly characterized by “I hate Donald Trump”. The ads were everywhere… and completely failed to distinguish candidates since they all said the same, irrelevant thing.

            Since I don’t vote in the Democrat primary (being registered as a Libertarian), I didn’t follow their candidates all that closely.

  23. Americans rank Barack Obama as best president of their lifetimes: Poll
    By Adia Robinson

    A new Pew Research Center poll says more Americans rank former President Barack Obama higher than any other when asked which president has done the best job in their lifetimes.

    Obama was named the best or second best president by 44 percent of Americans in the survey that came out Wednesday. Thirty-one percent ranked him as the best president in their lifetimes.

    https://goo.gl/zSNuf1

    For the Trumptards here! Enjoy!

    1. Shriek pimping his boo again.

    2. President Donald Trump comes in fourth after President Bill Clinton and President Ronald Reagan, with 19 percent of Americans ranking him as the best or second best in their lifetimes.

      1. How many of the people surveyed were old enough to have voted for Reagan, compared to Obama?

      2. Fucking LOL that shriek undermines his onanistic shitlibbery in the follow-up.

        1. Bullshit. I quoted the article.

          I detest conservatives as much as I detest progressives. That pisses you wingnuts off – I get it.

          1. Bullshit. I quoted the article.

            Which doesn’t really say much other than Trump is fourth on a list of “best Presidents in our lifetime”, which means he actually beat out both Bushes, Carter, Ford, and Nixon.

            The only thing you’re stupid attempt at a “gotcha” demonstrated is that Americans have short memories.

            I detest conservatives as much as I detest progressives. That pisses you wingnuts off – I get it.

            But you always stick up for Democrats.

          2. You ARE a progressive, lying asswipe shitbag.

    3. Man am I enjoy to enjoy ruthlessly mocking your dumb ass when that guy in Florida you’re jerking yourself off over right now gets his ass kicked in the general election.

      Now go make that appointment to see the dermatologist already, fuckface.

      1. Are you going to bring your Tiki torch to the Florida march?

      2. I dunno. He got DeSantis. Not sure how exciting he is.

        If you can win on basically zero budget, maybe you have something.

    4. Obama was obviously the best President in at least a century, and anybody who disagrees is a white supremacist. It’s really that simple.

      He accomplished so much for world peace in his first year alone, that he was awarded a Nobel Peace Prize. How many US Presidents can say that? And of course, Obama looks even better compared to what would follow. Obama never put children in cages, like Drumpf is doing. And he would never use drones and bombs to blow up black and brown bodies in foreign countries.

      1. Obama deported 400,000 illegals a year – double the Bushpigs amount.

        How could you like Obama?

      2. Obama has been voted the Third Best President Ever. George Washington was #1, and the other 43 were tied for #2.

        1. All of us are dumber than any one of us.

      3. Just because Fat Limbaugh never says anything about Trump’s bombing of civilians doesn’t mean it’s not happening.

        1. The rage against the bombing of civilians died when Obama took office.

          It’s easy to be the best president in one’s lifetime when one ignores all the unsavory things they did in office.

        2. Dude, seriously, does anyone actually listen to Rush anymore?

          Honest question, because even among conservatives and RINO friends none of them actually admit to listening to him past the 90’s. As a matter of fact, most of the people I know only bother listening to Mark Levin, although time slots in Central Standard Time probably have something to do with it since, you know, most of them have jobs.

          1. What’s radio?

            1. If you listened to Rush you would know. You would also know it has spirit.

    5. What about Obama!

    6. Trump is the best president in over 100 years.

      Which as we know is longer than most people’s lifetimes.

      1. Nah. Coolidge was way better. Actually cared about small government and knew when to shut his damn mouth.

        1. Trump will get a lot of credit for rolling back government while Coolidge was able to keep government from growing.

          Its harder to keep government from growing too much and roll back bloated government at the same time.

          You might be right about Coolidge. I might have to adjust to: Trump’s the best President in 88 years. Coolidge seemed more Libertarian than Republican.

          I usually say that Trump is one of the best in over 100 years because I know how much Reagan did.

          1. How much spending has been cut under Trump?

            1. How many spending cuts have been proposed by Democrats? You’ll note that spending isn’t something either party is actually interested in reducing, and since you generally side with Democrats one might rightfully ask ‘do you even care about spending, because your party only wants more of it’.

              1. So the real choice is between “spend more and raise taxes to pay for it (and increase fairness)” or “spend more and cut taxes, hoping to starve the beast”.

                Which is more responsible?

            2. Trump proposed massive spending cuts in budget 2018 and 2019 and elimination of some agencies. Congress went a different route. Trump signed those crappy budgets which is bad.

              Trump has saved untold billions by firing bureaucrats and getting Lefties to flee their government jobs. Trump also has not massively expanded our military adventures, which has saved billions.

            3. Congress does control the purse.

    7. BEST PR*SIDENT EVAH!

    8. Is Shrike still pretending to be a libertarian?

      Did Shrike ever pay his bet?

      1. Would you trust that lying POS if he claimed he did?

  24. If your police dept is “nearly wiped out” by abuse of power indictments, it should probably just be actually wiped out & rebooted from scratch.

    Pretty fine line between having a law enforcement/peacekeeping agency and a protection racket.

    1. Why do you think the cops hate the mob so much? It’s because the mob does the same thing, only they’re more honest about it.

  25. Congratulations to ENB on her best Reason Roundup ever.

    1. Brought to you by Monsato.

  26. Even the Trump-hating Washington Post is reluctantly admitting that Trudeau’s Gambit failed miserably.

    1. Trump owns these Lefties. Lefties just have zero idea how negotiation or economic principles work.

      Trump set a precedent that the USA can pressure trading partners into lowering their trade restrictions within 90 days.

      1. I’m honestly not sure what got into Trudeau and his goofy little sidekick Freeland that they seriously believed they could play high stakes poker with Trump and win. It takes way more than a pretty face to pull that off!

        1. They are truly suffering from the “Well my Mommy thinks I am great so I am great and can do anything.” Not only Canadian press but the US press props him up. They cover him like they did Obama. They give him this hero status. They say he is the superior to Trump. They call him smarter, classier and nicer then Trump. The allegations of groping were hidden in the US press. After a while one believes that kind of press. No doubt he also believed that the American press would be his bully pulpit and he could win that way. Unfortunately for him the press in the US kept finding themselves blindsided by Trump’s use of social media and an American public that is tired of the BS from the media dinosaurs.


          1. Unfortunately for him the press in the US kept finding themselves blindsided by Trump’s use of social media and an American public that is tired of the BS from the media dinosaurs.

            Of course, just about everyone that recalls how ‘unpresidential’ FDR was for his use of radio to appeal to the electorate is dead. Coincidence?

            1. Pretty much. FDR did it for that exact reason.

    2. I don’t see how Canada could have “won” any kind of trade dispute with the US, short of abandoning trade with the US entirely and aligning themselves with the Chinese overlords who are currently on a property-buying spree in British Columbia.

      At least Mexico had a bit more leverage with how much American produce they buy and all the manufacturing that’s currently there, and was in a better position to negotiate a favorable deal. What kind of leverage does Canada have? None whatsoever.

        1. Shit, we already produce that in New England.

          1. But with global warming we’ll need New England for growing oranges. That’s when Canadian maple syrup really kicks in.

    3. The lead-in is great:

      Shortly after his election in late 2015, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau declared “Canada is back,” promising a renewed Canadian presence on the world stage.

      Dude, you’re the leader of a nation with about 33 million people. Your “presence on the world stage” is only considered relevant in terms of how far the US decides to indulge you as a partner.

      In terms of your place on the world stage, you’re a mid-market player, at best, and won’t be anything more than that as long as the US is still functioning as a superpower.

      1. Rufus could enlighten us a bit but last time I was in Canada in winter, a surprising number of businesses were shut down. You cannot have a strong well-rounded economy when winter is so harsh that people cannot get to work or business grinds to a halt for a few days from week-to-week.

        Even the USA has this problem from time to time in certain areas.

        The USA is just a fantastic place to have a great market for trade.

        1. http://globalnews.ca/news/4380…..ment-rate/

          Unemployment at a four decade low. Wage growth much faster than the US.

          Toronto’s weather is not much different than Boston. Vancouver is pretty mild. And, they know how to deal with snow. It takes a whole lot to shut down Edmonton or Calgary.

          1. Boston sucks. You made my point for me. Thanks.

          2. I’ll still wait for a comment from a Canadian.

      2. I think what he meant was that the Canadians were going to take all World Championships in Hockey. LOL

    4. That is some pretty hideous analysis.He claims that Trudeau is in trouble, before noting that he has 71% support for his trade policy. He cites an opposition party politician to show that there is dissent. Duh, the opposition is opposing!

      He doesn’t mention that the “deal” isn’t much of a deal and faces long odds in Congress. I don’t think Canada is sweating about Trudeau and Freeland’s tactics. They are sweating for the same reason the US Chamber of Commerce is sweating, because Trump is getting into issues he has no clue about and getting played.

      1. Canadians being happy about getting their ass kicked and shunted to the side in a trade deal would be the most Canadian thing ever.

  27. The GOP has no one to blame but themselves for the s#$tshow that is the Russia investigation and FISA abuses. They have had several opportunities over the years to reform that court but failed to do so. Hopefully Rand Paul and others start putting this issue back to the front. Start with ending the pass the buck mentality. Mandate that all future FISA requests be approved by the AG prior to submission to the court. Yearly audit of all FISA warrants approved that year by an independent Judiciary panel. Any warrants deemed inappropriate or granted due to fraudulent info result in the immediate removal of the approving judge and investigation of requesting agency. Statistics released to the general public and congress including the number of requests number of requests approved. The stats would be broken down by judge and requesting agency. Any contact between FISA judges and DOJ personnel outside the court environment results in the judges removal immediately. I am sure there are a host of other things to be added but that is just a start.

    1. ^^ This

    2. Secret courts are quite literally anathema to a free Republic. End the FISA court and replace it with nothing. Your idea’s are ok too, I guess, as a compromise.

      1. Agreed! We have come so incredibly far from what was unbelievable even 20 years ago. Go find the most ardent Democrat or Republican from 1978 and explain any of this to them and they would think you were crazy.

        Yet everyone seems to agree that it is totally fine now. It is absolutely nuts.

        In 1978 “give me your papers” was the standard movie and TV trope to illustrate a totalitarian society. In 2018 we barely complain about having our genitals fondled in order to board a short flight on a twin engine turboprop.

        1. No kidding. Back in the 70s the concept of citizens movements being tracked was hated. But now it’s just metadata.

    3. What is the problem you are trying to solve?

  28. >>>everyone will be freed by smart tech and smart government to work three hours a day and pursue their dreams

    my 20 y.o. nephew believes.

    1. Someone is going to be disappointed when they hit 30.

    2. That always cracks me up.

      People still have to design, build, and fix all the robots.

      It has taken centuries of hard work to get so modern humans have more free time on their hands to pursue more leisure activities.

  29. Is that the woman who was a newscaster and said, “Fuck this, I quit,” on air?

  30. I still can’t figure out the level of double-think with respect to Russia in the election.

    The only indisputable facts about 2016 and election interference or collusion are that:

    a) Clinton corrupted the DNC, making it functionally a part of her campaign
    b) Clinton and DNC officials conspired with members of the media to rig the primary
    c) The DNC paid a foreign intelligence operative to contact Russian intelligence sources in order to obtain dirt on Trump
    d) Clinton paid the same intelligence operative to get more dirt from Russia.
    e) The DNC worked with members of the media to meddle in the Republican primary, pushing Trump to the front because they had determined that he was the least likely to beat Hillary in a general election. Russia had also identified Trump as a useful rabble-rouser likely to cause chaos in the US election (along with Bernie Sanders).

    That’s a lot of Russian collusion, before we even get to the FBI spying on Trump’s campaign, feeding information to the White House and having that information leaked to the press.

    1. Indisputable. I don’t think that word means what you think it does.

      1. To YOU. To other rational humans, he makes great points about indisputable facts relating to election 2016.

        1. We know about the first two from Podesta’s emails, which was further confirmed by the firing of DWS as a response to the collusion to tank Sanders’ campaign.

          The next two are confirmed by multiple sources, including the Clinton campaign, FBI and Fusion GPS.

          The last item combines information that comes from the DNC and Podesta emails, FBI reports and other leaks about “Russian meddling” in the election.

          We even know the dollar figures for the DNC, Clinton and FBI payments to foreign intelligence agents. Nobody is pretending that none of this happened. They are just ignoring it.

          But at the same time, taking a meeting with a foreign lobbyist who may or may not have hinted at having dirt on your opponent is clear proof of criminal conspiracy.

          Hence, doublethink.

    2. I disagree with a). Because the willing is not corrupted.

      1. The Clintons have spent years building their empire.

    3. Even if true, there is nothing illegal here, just the usual politics. And calling it Russian collusion is a stretch, since no one that Steele talked to represented the Russian government as far as anyone knows.

  31. The Republicans want to pretend that the standards of evidence to obtain a warrant are the same as for the courtroom. They know that’s not true.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.