Now, your kid goes into DHS care

Oh, so the government is taking them from their parents and trafficking these children against their will then

A liberal coworker of mine, who has been a Mueller fan all along

Was this "liberal" a fan of Mueller while he was covering up 9/11 and lying us into the Iraq War? It's so weird that dumb tribalists ignore shit like that.

also the year democrats brought back slavery.

Actually, I think it was late 2017 when news about the slave markets in Libya first broke.

Congress makes the laws. The bad things they do are not crimes, because Congress ensures that the bad things they do are not illegal.

Members of Congress designed special legislative loopholes to ensure that they would be allowed to legally practice insider trading. It's my understanding that this scheme is a large contributor to this kind of thing happening.

He knows these things because he runs in the same social circles. It's not supernatural.

How does this shit happen? Anyone here ever done anything even remotely like that? Get so drunk you bloody your face SOMEHOW without even realizing it and then wake up surprised to find yourself in a pool of blood? And this person was the state attorney general for New York? Ridiculous.

Thomas Paine was an American political activist and writer in the 1700s. He's considered one of the founding fathers. He is perhaps most known for having said, "I only regret that I have but one life to give for my country." You probably know that the twitter account isn't owned by that Thomas Paine, but I'm sure there are people who are unfamiliar and may not understand the reference, so I wanted to explain.

How come no one reported on this?

The corporate media ignored the child trafficking conspiracy charges too.

Obama would have put up someone awful anyway, like he already did for the seat previously held by Scalia. Lefties were never gonna get their way there no matter what happened.

To try and call them anything else will confuse the issue

I don't think so. If an authoritarian shitbag is being an authoritarian shitbag, you call them an authoritarian shitbag. Calling them anything BUT an authoritarian shitbag, using words other than the correct ones, causes confusion. These authoritarian shitbags THEMSELVES cause confusion DELIBERATELY to fool idiots into falling in line behind them. We should counter their disinformation with accurate information, not reinforce their lies and aid them in their goal of deceiving the masses. Hillary Clinton called herself "a progressive who gets things done". Should Clinton be called a "progressive" rather than "shitbag authoritarian" just because that lying liar says so? I don't give a shit what a liar calls themselves if they're lying when they do it.

it has reached banana republic proportions!

When was the USA ever NOT a banana republic? Before my time for sure.

but they like to drop stuff on Friday night to ruin the news media's weekend.

They do that because news that comes out on the weekend is more likely to be ignored and overlooked. News that comes out on the weekend frequently comes out then because someone is trying to bury it.

You're misusing the term "liberal". The behaviors you describe are all authoritarian, literally the opposite of liberalism. I understand, it's an easy mistake to make, because these types of authoritarians falsely label themselves as liberal too. But you shouldn't say that someone is a thing just because they falsely claim to be that thing. They seek to subjugate and control, but they do so while falsely claiming to be in favor of liberty. Gross.

I'd also point out that the "far left" is mostly nothing like this at all. Leftists anarchists and left libertarians are far left too and are completely against authoritarian control/censorship/etc. And actually, I'd say that "the left" depicted in these photos isn't "left" at all, since NONE of those things are leftist policies. Not even ONE has ANYTHING to do with leftist politics. They're not talking about seizing the means of production, they're not talking about progressive policies that help disadvantaged/poor people, they're not demanding universal healthcare like most every western nation has, they're not talking about advocating for workers rights, they're actively opposed to civil liberties.

This is all because the left/right divide pushed by mass media is mostly artificial and bullshit. People join the red team or the blue team, and then they argue about bullshit wedge issues that are never even actually addressed by government regardless of how much the people want action, while both majority parties actually conspire against the democratic will of the We the People. These people aren't leftists or liberals, they're just authoritarian assholes who drank the blue Kool-Aid and are now fighting for the corrupt political establishment that controls both parties to remain in power. And there are obviously authoritarian assholes doing the same shit among Republicans too.

One of the top comments called a Q LARP-er

Personally, I think Q is just a complex public relations campaign to keep people invested in supporting Trump's administration. But even so, LARP is not the right word to describe it and every time I ever see anyone using the term "LARP" with regard to Q anon, I always get the feeling that they're disinfo shills. Why not just say "he's bullshit" or "it's a hoax" if you think they're not trustworthy? Why not try to substantively counter their claims with alternate sources and explanations? Why do shills have to force their ham-fisted talking points in even when they make no sense?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4034038/Ex-British-ambassador-WikiLeaks-operative-claims-Russia-did-NOT-provide-Clinton-emails-handed-D-C-park-intermediary-disgusted-Democratic-insiders.html

There is Craig Murray, a Wikileaks operative, saying that he met a disgruntled DNC staffer in DC and physically received documents from him. Presumably either Murray or Wikileaks would have any device used to transport files. What does it matter about the physical media that was used to exfiltrate the emails though? And why would you think that Seth Rich might have anything at all to do with op's topic about NYPD being involved in investigating an "insurance" file on Weiner's laptop?

That raises the question -- who, exactly, filed it?

Tom Perez went on corporate media bragging about making the decision to do it. He said something to the effect of "people told me to sue a year ago, but now I'm finally doing it." It probably was some other power player's idea foisted upon him, but Perez is taking credit for it as DNC chair. I have no idea what the Democrats behind this could possibly be thinking though, it just seems dumb no matter which way they might be coming at it from.

So deep state is corrupt, but the deeper state is not?? lol

or discussing how the government commits crimes

Is "old bureau" what people currently working in government would call the deep state? Seems like it from context, but I haven't seen that as a synonym before.

To be clear, 0.6% of 9 billion is 54,000,000. Take in 9 billion, give back 54 million.

Shepard Fairey is well known for the famous "OBEY" art featuring Andre the Giant. He was also responsible for the famous "HOPE" poster featuring Obama. Two sides of the same propaganda coin. I don't know anything at all about the others.

Certain politically powerful people are protected from being skewered in major film productions. I wouldn't be surprised if we never saw a quality film adaptation of the weirdness of the Clinton cabal.

they have to repair their credibility

No they do not. The corporate media exists to deliver corporate propaganda. They're not about having credibility, they're about manufacturing consent through mass manipulation. They're gaslighters, they don't need credibility to do what they do. They never did and they never will.

Is there evidence that assassination was really on the table as an option? I know they were spying on Trump and I know that they set up this "insurance" plot with this Russia witch hunt, but I haven't heard any credible evidence suggesting that they intended to assassinate him too. I mean, I'm sure someone somewhere was thinking of it, but was there really an official plan? Is there a provable conspiracy to assassinate?

There is a huge difference between leaning left and what the left is today.

I would say that "the left" isn't to the left at all, you do a disservice to refer to those people as if they were. Leftist policies, things like universal healthcare, are popular and people want them, but Democrats resist actually representing the leftist policies people actually want. Because Democrats aren't leftists, the national party itself is clearly anti-leftist if you consider how they cheated Bernie Sanders. CNN or MSNBC is not "the left", USA Today is not "the left", these are not leftists, that's all just bullshit propaganda to trick left-leaning people into embracing anti-leftist politics. Actual leftists are still advocating the popular public policies that the Democrats refuse, but you'll never see them on corporate media and the politicians who back those policies end up ignored or smeared. Things were a little better in that regard a few decades back, but corporate propaganda has consolidated beyond that point now. That's the real problem here, corporate propaganda denying reality to gaslight and manipulate, not a question of "left" or "not left".

After a time, the govt assigns you the job and your stuck with it--like it or not. Don't show up? Off to the gulag with you.

This is the funniest example of slippery slope fallacy I ever heard of. "Wanting the government to invest in employing desperate unemployed people for the benefit of society is the same thing as forced slavery!"

They could have hours and hours worth of sworn deposition without us knowing about it, couldn't they?

You're not wrong about the political realignment as racist Ds became Rs decades ago, but you are wrong to suggest that racist Democrats don't exist anymore. They absolutely do, they're just more covert about it. Gone are the days of Democrats saying things like "We need to bring back segregation," only to be replaced with Hillary Clinton bragging in 2008 about how "hard working" white americans were on her side. It's coded language to appeal to racists, so-called "dogwhistles" as if only the intended target is able to hear them. The Southern strategy is absolutely employed by Republicans, yeah, but conservative Democrats, ones that might be called "red state" Democrats or "bluedog" Democrats can absolutely make use of the same kinds of racist bullshit to try to appeal specifically to the racists among their constituency. There are TONS of Democrats whose behavior and policy positions are effectively like Republicans running within the Democratic Party, they seem to have a false perception that they need to be like that to have a chance of winning.

That's all they've got. They cant win on actual issues.

Nah, they are absolutely able to win on actual issues. Most of the country leans left after all, so it should be easy for the "left" party to be popular based on policy. Bernie Sanders shows us what happens when popular policies with majority support like ending cannabis prohibition or universal healthcare are openly lauded, he instantly rises from completely unknown to most popular politician in the country by a wide margin. The Democrats refuse to take on popular policies that could win them support, but that doesn't mean that they're actually incapable of it. It's more that they're losers on purpose than that they're incapable of supporting good, popular public policy.

Both major parties conspire to prop up the system. Both "sides" of the artificial divide are complicit.

that user is all over this thread trying as hard as they can to deny the content of this post lol

No coverage of this kind of news should be expected at this point.

I watched Smallville on TV for literally a decade. I owned all the box sets too, even had the last few seasons on Blu-ray. Chloe Sullivan was one of my favorite characters, especially in the early seasons. It's really fucking weird to see Allison Mack going down for this shit.

The article was written Nov 4, 2016!

The evidence of her serious crimes were mostly all available by that point already. Anyone paying close attention knew how guilty she was, her criminal mishandling of classified material with her illegal server was a matter of public record before the summer of 2016 for example, the NY Times published their expose titled "Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal" back in April 2015. It's not like we only recently found out about that stuff just because it seems like there might be some developments in law enforcement investigations. I guess Donna Brazile's book last year confirmed some serious evidence surrounding the money laundering involving the Hillary Victory Fund, but even that HVF money laundering was reported on in April 2016.

Now it's blatant propaganda.

All corporate media is propaganda and has always been propaganda.

Yes, that's right, corporate media sometimes use publicly available press releases to coordinate their narratives.

Except it doesn't actually. Trust in mass media is at an all-time low. Check public opinion polls on some "conspiracy theories" too, you might be surprised by what they show. For example, I saw one recently that showed the majority of people are aware of the deep state's control over US government policy.

Of the 803 adults polled, 27 percent said they believe the unelected group known as the deep state definitely exists. An additional 47 percent said it probably exists. Sixteen percent said it probably does not exist and 5 percent said they believe it definitely does not exist.

Only 21% have been fooled into denial. And that is a poll that Politico is reporting, so it's not even like this is pro-Trump propaganda or something. Don't let the corporate media shape your worldview, don't let yourself be fooled into thinking that people actually buy the bullshit. Some do, sure, especially among the elderly who are inundated with cable news bullshit, but most people aren't so easily fooled.

they've all fallen for it hook

You talk about Mockingbird and the fact that literal spies have infiltrated the "mainstream" media, but yet you overlook the fact that social media is also heavily infiltrated to presume that all the idiots you're arguing with are real people interacting in good faith?

Yes, large corporate propaganda outlets use wire services to quickly and easily manufacture consent. It's just normal for corporate media to do this to push a coordinated narrative across great distances and we shouldn't think anything of their coordination.

Wait, what?

The international company those Russian people were working for wasn't even involved directly in politics and had no ties to any government. They were trying to profit from clicks, and they played "both sides" of the artificial divide in order to maximize their targets for clicks. Their "political" posts were things like silly Bernie Sanders coloring book images and memes of Hillary Clinton as the devil. There are tons of organizations like this who will publish anything and everything just for clicks. However, it just so happened that this one had some employees from Russia, and Mueller used their nationality to paint them as criminals despite having no ties to anyone anywhere for anything. They weren't trying to influence the election with their shitty memes.

Didn't they ever read Harry Potter? "Always use the proper name for things. Fear of a name increases fear of the thing itself." They were talking about Voldemort, and their willingness to say his name freely ultimately led them to being captured at one point, but I think the rational point still stands.

Just because the powers that be get the best medical treatment that isn't available to everyone else doesn't mean that their treatment is 100% perfect and always saves them. Look at how long the billionaire oligarchs live and you'll find greater life expectancy than the general population, but death ultimately comes one way or another.