What does a TRUMP presidency look like?

[Ed Anger]

I still wouldn't vote for Hillary.

*throws flaming bag of poop, runs off*

[CountDeMoney]

In any case, it appears that this was not the straw to break the camel's back and the GOP is still sticking with Trump. No biggie.

The strategy of reinforcing bad behavior has really worked wonders so far . . . the plan seems to be to keep a low profile and hope Mueller comes up with something that can take him out.

Better hurry the fuck up then.  They're running out of time.

One of the FBI's top investigators, tapped by special counsel Robert Mueller just weeks ago to help lead the probe of Russian meddling in last year's presidential election, has left Mueller's team, sources tell ABC News.

Special counsel's Russia probe loses top FBI investigator

It's unclear why Strzok stepped away from Mueller's team of nearly two dozen lawyers, investigators and administrative staff. Strzok, who has spent much of his law enforcement career working counterintelligence cases and has been unanimously praised by government officials who spoke with ABC News, is now working for the FBI's human resources division.

I want him manning a radar tower in Alaska by the end of the day. Just mail him his clothes.

[Ed Anger]

"Arctic Command gets new CO"

[CountDeMoney]

[Jacob]

Which is what?

What is a second baseman.

A Nazi-sympathizing second baseman?

Your words, not mine. But if you think people may see you as a Nazi sympathizer, you may want to reconsider your conduct.

[Jacob]

Long write-up on a bunch of faith leaders doing non-violent counter protesting at Charlottesville: https://thinkprogress.org/clergy-in-charlottesville-e95752415c3e/

Suckers. They ought to be physically assaulting the Nazzies.

Your clearly didn't read neither the article nor my posts if you think that's a clever comment.

If you do read the article you will get to the part where the non-violent clergy was attacked by white supremacists and the antifa intervened. Members if the non-violent protesters are quoted as saying the antifa saved their lives.

[derspiess]

Which is what?

What is a second baseman.

A Nazi-sympathizing second baseman?

Your words, not mine. But if you think people may see you as a Nazi sympathizer, you may want to reconsider your conduct.

Oh, I didn't know I was this second baseman

If people like you, DG or Berkut really want to believe I'm teh fashist, Nazzie sympathizer or whatever, go ahead. I don't really care what you think about me, though I would like for you guys to produce some evidence. Others' opinions I do care about, and thankfully AFAIK none of them seem to choose to believe such silliness.

[Jacob]

Oh, I didn't know I was this second baseman

If people like you, DG or Berkut really want to believe I'm teh fashist, Nazzie sympathizer or whatever, go ahead. I don't really care what you think about me, though I would like for you guys to produce some evidence. Others' opinions I do care about, and thankfully AFAIK none of them seem to choose to believe such silliness.

I don't have a strong opinion on the subject, but much of your trolling does match the stuff you find on alt right sites.

[grumbler]

And you simply cannot draw a line and stop this at Nazis.

I totally can.

For yourself, sure, I believe you.  But do you seriously think that if we allow mob rule and vigilante justice against Neo-Nazis, everyone else will stop there?

He said the line stopped at Nazis.  Neo-Nazis, the alt-right, the KKK, etc are all on the good side of the line.  It's all black and white.  Only actual Nazis are to be the victims.

[jimmy olsen]

Where does free speech enter the picture?

Maybe it doesn't?

I thought so.

Even American free speech laws don't allow you to call for imminent violence. Unfortunately, such laws have typically only been used against left wing targets, while hard right groups get a lot of leway. A black panther or islamic march with the same aesthetics of the Charlottesville march would have been crushed by the state.

[viper37]

If people like you, DG or Berkut really want to believe I'm teh fashist, Nazzie sympathizer or whatever, go ahead. [...] Others' opinions I do care about, and thankfully AFAIK none of them seem to choose to believe such silliness.

*cough* CountdeMoney *cough*

[Jacob]

Did you catch the reports that Brannon apparently calling Prospect Magazine and giving an unsolicited interview Mooch style?

Not sure how much is been corroborated https://www.vox.com/2017/8/16/16159668/steve-bannon-china-economic-war-north-korea-charlottesville-american-prospect

[Jacob]

I still wouldn't vote for Hillary.

*throws flaming bag of poop, runs off*

You're going to have to up your troll game because I don't think that line will get you many nibbles

[viper37]

But if you think people may see you as a Nazi sympathizer, you may want to reconsider your conduct.

If you think someone is threatening your way of life and the way of life of your fellow citizens, and you firmly believe the government is turning a blind eye to that mortal danger you and your companionship percieve and then decide to act on it, violently I mean, than what is the real different?

What is exactly is the difference between a radical leftist group who does not believe in democracy and free trade and a radical rightwing group who does not believe in democracy and free trade?  The stance on immigration?  That is reason enough to justify undermining the rule of law?

[sbr]

But if you think people may see you as a Nazi sympathizer, you may want to reconsider your conduct.

If you think someone is threatening your way of life and the way of life of your fellow citizens, and you firmly believe the government is turning a blind eye to that mortal danger you and your companionship percieve and then decide to act on it, violently I mean, than what is the real different?

What is exactly is the difference between a radical leftist group who does not believe in democracy and free trade and a radical rightwing group who does not believe in democracy and free trade?  The stance on immigration?  That is reason enough to justify undermining the rule of law?