As usual, d2's willingness to laugh at himself is a saving point.

The Western world sorely needs a few more Jonathan Swifts. Much of the modern world deserves scathing satire.

It's the curse of being an INTP.

FWIW, which is not much in my opinion, I'm an INTJ.

Can't remember who said it, but it was something along the lines of "if you can laugh at yourself, you will never be unamused".

I have a sense that I am more objective and more concerned with the truth than most people. I've never claimed that stems from greater intelligence. Maybe you guys are all orders of magnitude smarter than me. Being plugged into the matrix and told what to think is not necessarily a stupid decision- it could definitely be wiser.

In theory it makes you happier. In practice, I don't know. One problem is the reward for volunteering your thought processes to authority is going to pay less and less as inequality increases. But I will say if you are working some crappy job and paying half you wages in rent and still sticking up for these neoliberal demons then I am definitely smarter than you. I hope you guys are, at least momentarily, reaping some gainful reward.

I'm pretty much always very amused

I also laugh at my own jokes because if you want something done properly ...

You know when I act obnoxious I'm mostly just affecting it, right? Feel free to not copy me.

So the fact that Julian Assange offered a cash reward for Seth Richs' murderers in no way dissuades you from the official narrative?

You're right, the internet is a depressing place.

AZ senate announces their audit publication date, MCBOS agrees to turn over the routers and Splunk logs (lets see if they are brave enough to scrub them...I reckon they'll be scrubbed but will leave traces), True the Vote sent their location data to the FBI, PA announces a watered down audit and Durham indicts one of the Clinton campaigns top lawyers from Perkins Coie in the same week for lying to them.

October should be interesting.

The most interesting thing about October in your little world will be how much you get pitched to believe how interesting November will be from those seeking to monetize you, as nothing of importance (within your belief system) actually happens in October. Repeat every month in the future for as long as you will contribute.

All the best.

I, for one, am eager to hear what you think this sentence means.

Quotes are to attribute an actual specific piece of speech to someone. You also quoted me and changed my words which, if there are such thing as bannable offenses, that should be one.

Your total dishonestly is on displace. It oozes out of every post you make. And if you had truth on your side there would be no need for your dishonesty.

Even Mike Lindell has now learned to move away from giving dates and just paint a 'future' where all will be revealed and Trump returned to power.

Mike eventually learned when looking to the betters in his sphere, notably one Alex Jones, who proved he was much smarter and understood this game, long before these clumsy and dumb usurpers entered the field.

If you say first "Let me paraphrase..." to indicate those are their words but made simpler by me, that is fine to do.

You want the person to know that was what the person DID say but just put in to simpler words for those who have difficulties with comprehension.

No person is being fooled when you say first "Let me paraphrase..."

Yea, you know someone is beat when they are reduced to terrible vacuum of content ad hominem posts like this.

Every post I have made has been entirely honest and in good faith with absolute adherence to the codes of intellectual honesty.

The irony of people making the kind of post you make above, is that it always applies more to the poster than anyone else.

1) Where did you show Russia had a preference for Trump. On this point, I'm not saying the didn't. I'm merely saying I don't see where it, or the magnitude of the preference if it did exist, was established.

Russians probably preferred Trump, who was probably the better foreign policy bet for the world at the time, given his rhetoric. But maybe Russia isn't led around by the nose like you are and knew the deep state would win out. Trump did go on to be just about as unfriendly to Russia as possible.

2) I'm not going to battle on the "hack" if it doesn't include the lifting and distribution of the emails. Foreign powers are constantly spying on each other. We had direct phone taps on the German chancellery for DECADES, and they are our friends. The "hack" you are referring to is just too standard to coerce into a legitimate complaint. By our own standards every bit of communication in the world is fair game.

The DNC e-mail publication, which Russia had nothing to do with, is called journalism.

How do you get to the point where someone gets you truthful information about your rulers and you start foaming at the mouth with anger towards them? I mean, it's one thing to be obedient to power. It's a sad thing in my view, but for all I know people like you, the good little doggies, are quite content and my only legitimate complaints are about the externalities you produce at master's request, not the pathetic submissive nature of you. But when you get into attacking people just giving you the truth it's like you are a slave fighting in the confederacy, not because you are compelled to but because you want to, and I find that difficult not to judge as contemptible.

Why are you still arguing this when i proved it definitively to be false with Putin himself saying clearly that Russia did.

At this point this is either you are trolling or purposely spreading a CT which, if you want to call on Mod's to censure, that would be it.

You started by saying Putin and Russia had said no such thing.

When I quoted in video Putin explicitly saying he did, you switched to 'well if he did you cannot prove he meant it'.

You need to stick to the latter and keep saying 'Yes Russia and Putin absolutely express a preference for Trump but I, Deuces, choose not to believe them', as that is your position now.

You already agreed he did express the preference so stop lying.

You guys can't tell me you don't see the parallels between the serial "just wait until this next bombshell drops then WE GOT EEMM" natures in both Russiagate and Riggiegate.

I know you see them. You cannot be so stupid as to not see them. It's the same thing.

Remember "The walls are closing in" on Trump? We heard that for years. And every time all you suckers were like "Yes. Yessssss. Finally!" and it never occurred to you that you were just being manipulated, even after claim after claim fell apart almost as quickly as it was made.

Should you even be criticizing Trumpers when you have never come to terms with your own derangement?

Its the same tired argument that you lose completely over the emails though.

Still employed government agency security experts say the Russians hacked the emails.

Self confessed Trump voting retired for years agents et al say it was not the Russians, based on being completely fooled by the persona of Guccifer 2.0.

If you watch Fox news predominantly you will have been mind wiped into not realising this is the actual chain of events.

That is the entire discussion, and it will be deeply tedious having to counter all your its a conspiwacy contributions which will get just as smashed as before but you will remain just as stubbornly ignorant as before.

Anyone who thought the Mueller investigation was ever going to amount to anything was really not paying attention.

Again you are trying to conflate things wrongly.

We are NOT talking about what people on the extremes on either side SAID or THOUGHT.

What we are talking about is the FOUNDATIONS and FACTS.

By FOUNDATION and FACT, the Russiagate investigation was well founded and came to very valid and undeniable conclusions. It DID happen and it was SERIOUS.


The RIggie stuff has proven to be garbage top to bottom. Not a fact to sustain them and in fact laughable info falsely presented as evidence.

You need to stick to what is real and demonstrable and get away from what the more extreme say on each side.

Interesting post. When I asked after Mueller was appointed what the reaction would be if the investigation did not do much with regard to Trump - that question (at the time) was taken as clueless trolling by the past squatters that were shown the door from here by the prior owners.

Is anybody denying your shallow parallels? I can see parallels between a guy who ends up in a wheel chair after a horrific skiing accident that had a 90%+ chance of killing him if not for a team of elite trauma surgeons and a guy who goes in for a routine procedure and ends up in a wheel chair because the surgeon was drunk. The question is whether you are capable of understanding the differences.

Pretty much this. Your argument is:

I can demonstrate parallels between allegations of election rigging in 2020 and allegations related to Russia and the 2016 election.

If you vigorously reject the former, then you must vigorously reject the latter. Otherwise, you are a sheep or hypocrite.

Purely as a matter of formal logic, that's a bad argument. And as others have noted, your parallels are shallow and mostly confined to comparing the dumbest and most extreme theories and statements about Russian interference in 2020 to the theories and views advanced repeatedly by the former POTUS about election rigging in 2020.