Jump to content

sheeeit

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    701
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by sheeeit

  1. 7 hours ago, hpslugga said:

    That concept completely depends on what the congress thinks about it.

    You guys can really be a beating sometimes.  I am saying that I would fully support him being impeached if any of that stuff is proven.

  2. On 4/16/2018 at 9:56 PM, Anastasis said:

    So back to the Prague Cohen thing for a moment, has that gained any traction or confirmation by any other news agencies beside McClatchy Report?  Cause that's kind of a big deal that doesn't appear to be getting confirmation by additional sources. 

     

    15 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

    McClatchy has been reliable on their information thus far and has broken some serious bombshells no one else can confirm. 

    The way I read this:  Mueller could be using low profile McClatchy exclusively as an outlet for limited information they want to get out to the public without formally disclosing anything about the investigation.  

    In this case, they are actually doing Michael Cohen a favor by saying, "Hey, we know you were in Prague so the more you lie about it, the worse it's going to go for you."

     

     

    8 hours ago, wildcat09 said:

    McClatchy is typically very solid, and Cohen hasn't put forth an actual alibi ("here's a picture of the front of my passport" doesn't count), so I see no reason to doubt their story. 

     

    8 hours ago, triplehorn said:

    European source would be my guess, though there are other explanations as cited above.  The article's author was on msnbc last night and reported that they worked on this story for several months.  They had two different sources and felt very confident that the reporting on Michael Cohen being in Prague during the relevant time is accurate.

    What is conspicuous is Michael Cohen's inability to prove his whereabouts for the entire couple week window.  Tweeting a passport pic and going on Hannity with said passport in tow is a ruse.

     

    7 hours ago, Dertyberd said:

    The thing that blows my mind and brings the lulz is showing off his passport like that matters.  The Czech Republic is in the fucking EU travel zone.  Fly into Warsaw, Paris, Madrid, etc...and hope on a plane to Prague.  You don't get another stamp once you are inside the EU. "No Prague stamp, I believe him."  

     

    7 hours ago, Mojo Hand said:

    Plus he didn't even show any stamp pages — just the cover.  He might as well have a big fat Czech stamp inside, for all he's shown. 

     

    https://www.buzzfeed.com/anthonycormier/trumps-lawyer-showed-you-the-cover-of-his-passport-heres?utm_term=.hgwpQ5JEwK#.esNWgVXAoB

    I honestly do not know if buzzfeed is a conservative lean or not.  But Cohen, apparently, did give them his passport.

    https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/01/michael-cohen-it-is-fake-news-meant-to-malign-mr-trump/512762/

    I honestly do not know if the Atlantic is a conservative lean or not.  But he says he was at USC and the USC coaches verified it.

    This is so typical of this whole saga.  There will, of course, be phone records of Cohen's whereabouts everyday during the supposed time he was in Prague.  Just another example of you guys swallowing news without even thinking.

    From most accounts, Cohen is probably a scumbag.  This is not about Cohen.  It is about the 1000th or so time that you guys take unsourced/anonymous claims as gospel.  

    I will happily wager whatever any of you want on whether or not it is proved that Cohen was in Prague.  I will take the side that he wasn't.  

  3. 18 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

    Cohen thought it was enough.  So much so, he made that representation to a Federal judge.

    Good for Cohen.  I thought we were talking about Hannity here.  If it turns out that Hannity was using Cohen as an actual lawyer where he was paid and there was an actual thing involved, then I would agree that Hannity is a total liar and hypocrite.

    • Fuck You 1
  4. 3 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

    Hey, y'all ever noticed that Sheeit 1) has great concern, about a great many things, 2) says he has real-deal principles, thinks hypocrisy and such stuff is really bad, and he has no love for Trump or any Trumpkin, yet 3) not once has he actually concluded that Trump or any of the band of Trumpkins has ever done anything even remotely wrong?

    Yeah.  That's kinda funny.

    Pathetic-funny, but funny.

    If a "reporter" is covering a story that intimately involves THAT REPORTER'S OWN ATTORNEY, a relationship that is deemed, as a matter of law, a "special relationship," and doesn't reveal that relationship, then yes, that reporter is a bonafide piece of shit with zero candor, transparency, objectivity, or credibility.  Again, see the Texas Tribune, which openly discloses EVERY time one of its stories even touches on an entity that is a sponsor of the Tribune.  Shit, CNN discloses the ownership relationship every time it has a story on Time Warner.

    The open minded one is back.  I have ripped on Trump many times.  I ripped him for firing Tillerson.  I have called him juvenile and egotistical 100 times.  I have said I hate his tweets.  I have said the "wall" is stupid.  I think he is a person without morals.  He is likely hypocritical.  All I have ever done that you guys claim makes me a trumpkin is that I do not think he collaborated with russia in the election.  

    And, he was elected.  In our country, it is not an impeachable offense to be immoral and childish.  It is not an impeachable offense to exaggerate  about the size of crowds or how many times he was on Time magazine cover.

    If he colluded with Russia.  Impeach him.  If he obstructed justice.  Impeach him.  If he laundered money.  Impeach him.  If not, then vote him out swiftly when his term is up.  But for darn sure do not run a Hillary type again or he will win again.  I think Bloomberg would be great but maybe too old.

     

    • Fuck You 3
  5. 9 minutes ago, DanTheHorn said:

    Cohen a source no need to disclose relationship. Cohen happens to be your attorney. You must disclose. You can still have opinions on Cohen, Trump and everything else after disclosure.

    It sort of depends on your definition of "his attorney".  If a guy who never sent you a bill and that you never paid and has never represented you in any civil or criminal proceeding is considered "your lawyer" then maybe so.  But only maybe, I am not sure it is relevant for a talking head radio show guy.  Can no one in journalism not have sources that they are friendly with?

    People ask the lawyers on here to answer legal questions all of the time.  Does that make them "your lawyer"?

  6. 1 minute ago, Mojo Hand said:

    Hannity spent last week railing against the raid on Cohen's office.  Hannity had a personal interest tied up in that raid, which is precisely why his name ended up coming out in court.  You don't see a journalistic conflict that required disclosure? 

    I would say it depends.  There have been plenty of people that have railed against the raid.  You are purely speculating that Hannity had anything personal tied up in the raid.  If we take Hannity at his word that he and cohen had a few calls over the years about real estate stuff and there were never any bills or payments or anything else then how would Hannity be "tied" up in the raid other than his name was on Cohen's client list?

    Do you agree that Hannity railing on the radio had exactly zero impact on any of the legal proceedings?  What do you think the reaction would have been on this board and the general media if Hannity had said something like "I have known Cohen for years and have used him as an attorney a few times"?  The reaction would be exactly like it is today.  

    Like I said, IF Hannity is hiding something nefarious then he deserves scorn and ridicule and it would be the height of hypocrisy.  I think hypocrisy is about the worst trait a person can have.  I loathe it.  Hannity does not have any bearing on my life in any way as I do not listen or watch him.  If he is a hypocrite then fry his ass.  I do not see it here.

    • Fuck You 3
  7. 34 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

    Yeah but that's in the context of him hiding it and it being pried out of Cohen's lawyer.   If he'd have said months ago "by the way, full disclosure, I've known Michael Cohen personally for years and have occasionally asked his legal advice on real estate deals, but nothing related to the president," the stories today would be very different. 

    I dont think I have ever seen hannity's tv show and have heard his radio gig a few times and, like pretty much everyone else, it was a total beating to listen to.  

    I am having a hard time understanding the hoopla regarding transparency.  Did Hannity have cohen on his show a bunch and not tell people he was Trump's lawyer?  is it a problem that he may have used Cohen as a "source"?  Don't all media/journalists have sources that they do not disclose?  Are people making the jump to the conclusion that if hannnity knows cohen and used him for legal purposes that he, Hannity, can no longer have any opinions on Trump because cohen is trumps attorney?  Obviously it seems many, many people in the media have "sources" within the FBI and inside Mueller's team because they keep attributing stories to them.  Are they supposed to disclose them if they know them personally or have some sort of connection to them?  

    I do not get the deep state analogy.  Isnt the deep state stuff supposedly that people on the inside that have the ability to actually have a direct effect on things?  people that are somehow directly involved in investigations and so forth.  Hannity is just a blow hard tv and radio guy.  How can he actually affect anything regarding any of the investigations?  Do we think Mueller is affected in any way by what Hannity says?  

    As for why Hannity kept the relationship secret the only answer you need is what is going on right now.  

    Obviously this is a big deal if Hannity used Cohen to cover something up.   

     

  8. "I just don’t see how anyone can pass judgment on Comey during that whole fiasco when it’s very clear the public doesn’t have all the facts "  I chuckled.

    I also think it is hilarious that a guy that had, what, 2 meetings and a few phone calls with someone can form such an elaborate opinion on his character.  This is not to say Trump actually has any character, but Comey had less than 2 hours of interaction with him.

    Pure money grab coupled with an oversized ego and self aggrandization.  

    • Like 1
  9. 12 hours ago, bolverk said:

    As background, my father was raised Southern Baptist, and my mother was raised Church of Christ. When they got married my mom adopted the Southern Baptist tradition.

    My mom's mom (grandma) believed that her daughter (my mom) was going to hell for switching from Church of Christ to Southern Baptist, simply for accepting the use of musical instruments as part of a worship service. She even went so far as to condemn my older sister and me to hell for also being raised Southern Baptist and letting the Devil's instruments be a part of our church experience. This isn't a joke: she directly told me as much.

    The point is that, early on, I've been told by close family members that I was bound to an eternity of suffering and hell-fire.

    Growing up in the Southern Baptist church had its challenges. For one, I recall the fire and brimstone speeches. For another, I remember the rank hypocrisy associated with "just ask for forgiveness and you'll be saved" which led to the attitude of "do what you want and ask for forgiveness later." One of the most striking moments was when the Youth Minister demonstrated souls going to hell by turning a lit candle upside down to show that each wax drop was a soul going to hell.

    What shook me out of it was an evening when I went to a county fair with a few "weird" friends and being confronted by the most sanctimonious asshole you could ever imagine. He was a couple years older and was a Youth Minister wannabe. He put his arm around my shoulder and tried to lead me away from my friends when he asked me "I see the people you associate with. If you were to die tonight, would you know where you were headed?" Obviously, my friends didn't meet his specs and, therefore, my everlasting soul was at risk. I told him "no and neither do you." It should go without saying that I wanted to hit him (plus, his name was "Taft"), but the line of questioning was so unexpected and bizarre that I just walked away.

    So, yeah, that was the moment I decided that organized religion wasn't for me. Over time, the entire notion of God and religion became an anathema, which held, at most, a slight superstition over my actions. Today, I'm happy to report as "God free."

    Unfortunately, now, I have my two aging parents who both believe that I'm going directly to hell. While I obviously don't agree, it hurts to know that they believe themselves to be failures and to also think that I somehow deserve eternal condemnation. The craziest part of it is my stated beliefs and not my actions. I could go rob a bank tomorrow, kill a couple customers, and then have a deathbed conversion. Then, they'd think I was worthy of God's love. Instead, I'll go to work tomorrow, doing something that I believe helps our society, and will be promptly condemned to eternal damnation and suffering.

    So, how many people think you're going to hell?

    Wow.  That really sucks.  No wonder you have a harsh feeling for organized religion.  I absolutely loathe people that act like that.

    Like some above said, just try and let it go.  Try to remember that the religious stuff they say to you is about them and not you.  Their religion sort of makes them reach out to you.  And, of course, they love you.  

    If someone wants to find hypocrisy and illogicalness then religion is a freaking gold mine.  Religion can screw some people up and it can have a profound positive impact on others.  

  10. 7 hours ago, pearlandhorn said:

    I never have to worry about my wife's driving.  She was a Smith Driving Instructor? for her last job.  She's probably the safest person I know with regards to driving and knowing her way around.  I have to ask her for directions most of the time because I go to the same place every day (work) and she's out and about with the kid.

    Like I've said over on the shag, I feel bad for a lot of you guys.  My wife is intelligent, plays video games with me, drinks (not in excess), is a great mom, still has sex with me, is a good driver, takes care of her vehicle (has the oil changed or changes it herself someones), doesn't really bitch or nag at me.  I feel like I hit the jackpot.

    100 bucks shes a whale

    • Like 1
  11. 2 hours ago, Gut Wagon said:

    If we put a minimum on pitches thrown/batters faced by a reliever and then didn't let a manage pinch-hit for a pinch-hitter, we could shave what...a solid 2-3 minutes off game time? I'm sure that would matter to someone.  Not to me, though.

    I'm not sure.  But there are certainly games in the late innings where 2 or 3 pitchers are used in a single inning.  Those innings are brutal from a spectator standpoint.  

    I get the mound difference but at the major league level surely they can make the bullpen mounds the same as the game mound.  These guys pitch all the time.  I think that is a bad argument.

    I would like to see no extra warmup pitches for relievers and I would also like a limit on visits to the mound.  One only.

    I do love the general tempo of baseball.  But the spot relievers and coaching visits have harmed that rhythm imo.

  12. Love baseball but agree a few simple changes are needed.  The biggest one for me would be not letting relief pitchers throw warm up pitches from the game mound.  Warm up in the pen and then come right in and pitch.  Late innings get so tiresome sometimes.  

  13. 2 hours ago, Blotto said:

    Well if Sheeeit assures me that Kilimnik is not a spy or otherwise connected to Putin, I have to assume that is the case. He probably even checked Kili's LinkedIn page and everything. 

    Lulz.  Never said he was not a spy.  How would I know for sure.  I am saying the whole story revolving around Kili is specious to the point of being ridiculous.  I am saying the supposed "evidence" behind him being a spy is so thin it is ridiculous.

    Media- BREAKING!!!! Gates had contact with Russian spy in 2016.  Surly (I like the new name) usuals go nuts.  Well Gates and Manafort had been in contact/communications with this supposed spy for the past 11 years and were actively working with him to clean up past projects.  Gates and Manafort did not hide their contact with this guy in any way.  Mueller has had emails and correspondence (and so has the SIC and HIC) between them for many months.  The guy was on Manafort's payroll.  There is absolutely no "gotcha" here.  Of course they communicated with this guy.

    Also, the case for him being a spy is because he was enrolled in a military type school in Russia for a few years in his late teens.  Never had a job with the russian govt.  By that definition every single attendee of WestPoint, the Naval Academy, AirForce Academy  etc are all spies until proven otherwise.  That would mean we have put out some 30,000+ spies in the time Kili went to school.  So every single one of those guys that had any business dealing with any foreign country in the last 11 years could be called a spy by that foreign country's media and the usual suspects would believe it unquestionably.  How can you guys not see the ludicrousness of this?

    The media is running out of trump conspiracy stories.  They are just putting amy thing they can out there now hoping people will keep listening to them.  When this fiasco is finally over, no one will watch msnbc anymore or follow the random tweets of 100s of crazies.  The crazies will not get the clicks and retweets anymore and will get no income from it and will go back to doing whatever they did pre trump.  

    And for the 1000th time, I think trump is a blowhard, thin skinned, reprehensible person.  But the dems ran Hillary and Trump won so we have to live with it unless Mueller has the goods on him.  I do not think he will but we will see.

    • Like 1
  14. I have to say that the kilimnik angle is one of my favorites.  It has all facets of this charade.  It is perfect for the media to continue to keep you guys stirred up.  They get to throw out half truths and out of context innuendo and it is happily gobbled up.

    The accusations:

    1) Gates and Manafort talked to/emailed a "russian with suspected ties to russian intelligence" in 2016.   

    Shocking that they would communicate with someone that they have worked with for over 11 years and was actively trying to help them collect money from russians for work done years ago.  Especially since neither Gates nor Manafort speak russian and Kili is a russian linguist.  Very nefarious.

    2) Kili is a russian agent.  Well as Madow/Hugo pointed out he did go to school for a while at a russian military school.  Of course neither points out that he was only 17 at the time and he left when he was 20 when the USSR collapsed.  He never worked for any govt agency.  

    But lets assume this is the guy that will tie trump to russia and the grand conspiracy.  A guy that was planted with Manafort 11 years ago so that when trump ran for potus 10 years later they could get Manafort hired as campaign chairman and then, when Manafort left the campaign, the spy was able to continue his work through Gates (because of course gates and Manafort both were in on the conspiracy ((which makes perfect sense that Mueller let a confirmed conspiracy member off with little or no charges))) and use Gates to deliver the details of the conspiracy to trump.

    And then, to continue the mastery of this spy plant, even though the russians/putin knew that they had their man Kili inside working trump, they decided to have Kisilyak try to get close to trump through sessions, and then to get flynn corrupted, and then went to Papa through a London professor to get close, and then used carter page to get the message to trump about the conspiracy, and then used the russian lawyer to get the details of the conspiracy to trump, and then used Kushner to get the details to trump and, simultaneously, set up a back channel for russia, and then set up a shadowy meeting in the Seychelles to get Eric Prince in on the conspiracy and the back channel.  Masterful work in deception.  And to top it all off, they kept trump under their thumb with the obvious blackmail stuff that the russian mob has on him.  They have been busy.

     

    • Like 1
    • Fuck You 1
  15. I thought the show was terrible before and I think it is likely terrible now (did not watch).

    And of course little to no one knew about any political leanings the show might have before the first episode.  Dumb for so much political connection.  Dumb for trump to comment on it.

    My guess is that the next episode will have even bigger ratings because of the hype and then it will slowly decline and we wont be talking about it in a few weeks.

    Also, this is another example (like the 1000s before it) of the media using ANYTHING trump related to get ratings.  Who relly cares about roseanne?

  16. The first 2 that really hooked me on live music were U2 in about 1981 and then the absolute best concert experience I have had to this day was The Bus Boys (right after their break out in 48 hours) opening for the Stray Cats around 1984.  The venues were smaller but those guys just killed it.  It was so hot and they were sweating all over their instruments but were so locked in.  

    Guns N Roses, Rolling Stones (a few times), Mcartney, all classic.

    In the last year the 2 best were Head and the Heart and Cage the Elephant.

  17. https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4424912/3-27-18-Van-Der-Zwaan-Sentencing-Memo.pdf

     

    You guys can read about it yourselves.  This whole particular line has zero to do with trump or the campaign.  Maybe this is bad for Manafort and Gates and their work in the Ukraine, but what does this have to do with anything related to the mueller investigation of trump?  I can see why mueller wanted to interview the lawyer as he seems to be very thorough but there just is not anything there related to trump.  I really do not know why you guys keep falling for this stuff.  

  18. 2 minutes ago, VRHorn said:

    In sheeeit's mind, this makes it better.

    Jeez.  The article and subsequent posts insinuated that Gates had some new, unknown, nefarious contact with a Russian spy during the campaign.  The obvious implication was that it was some sort of campaign related contact, otherwise, why is it even relevant.  So pointing out that the guy in question (we can go with Hugo's 99%) had been "communicating" and working with Gates and Manafort for the past 11 years on their business that was completely unrelated to trump seems important.  

    I suppose it might look bad for Manafort and Gates, although I am not really sure how as there are thousands of former spies from all over the world that go into private business.  But there is zero evidence that this guy had any involvement whatsoever with the campaign.  The FBI and the HIC and SIC already have all of his emails.  

  19. 1 minute ago, Pig Bellmont said:

    You have 0 credible information on who Person A is. Stop trolling. 

    I am curious why you did not call this trolling.  It was in the post you replied to.

    " I’m 99% sure Konstantin Kilimnik was the contact who was known as “the GRU guy” to the campaign."

    You are correct that we do not know with 100% certainty.  But virtually every major news source is saying that it is.

  20. Hello all.  New site.  No name calling.

    This is not what you think it appears to me.  The supposed spy in question has been an employee of Manafort for like 11 years.  Of course Manafort and Gates talked to him and emailed him often.  He worked with them.  This is not some new player that turned up for the election.  For the record, the guy has said he is not part of the GRU and there is not any proof that he is any part of it.  He certainly could be some GRU plant but that is some deep cover since he has been employed bt Manafort for 11 years.

    3 minutes ago, Pig Bellmont said:

    Gates knew he was contacting Russian intelligence in September and October 2016. That sounds a hell of a lot like collusion. You expect me to believe the candidate wasn’t aware or approved?

    This plus Roger Stone coordinating with the Russian hacker is almost too much. 

     

×
×
  • Create New...