Yes I do and if you would have read both pieces you would have known which is which. The fact you can't comprehend what I am saying is just a reflection on your intelligence. I'll point this out again since you seem to have missed it the first few times, "The former first lady of the United States was withering in her opinions of Trump." Just because someone calls themselves a reporter and writes down Clinton's opinions, does not make it "an article reported with facts". It makes the person that jotted it down a stenographer, a stenographer that jotted down someone's opinions. It is right there in black and white for you, ""The former first lady of the United States was withering in her opinions of Trump."
As usual, you have fallen back on a gratuitous personal attack and juvenile name calling rather than dealing with the facts at hand, probably because you wouldn't know a fact if it bit you on your ass and you certainly don't know shit about journalism. I responded to Nakamoto, not you, not Pi, or anyone else. You jump in with your gender misidentification problems and tell me that I have a problem with my intelligence? Hardly. My post was specific to the cut and paste by Nakamoto; your attempt to redirect what I wrote was another big fail but you continue to make your own case for whatever, who knows? Since you have brought the piece linked by Pi into the mix, however, that also is an opinion piece, not a news article, so apparently you really have no idea of the difference. Who do you propose called himself a reporter? Do you even know what a stenographer does? It's not what you've said here. Bold some words, grow the fonts, but you're still not getting the message. Too bad; I can explain it to you but I can't understand it for you and apparently you can't either.
I guess even the Brits have had enough... http://www.nydailynews.com/news/pol...ed-outrage-far-right-tweets-article-1.3668804
So this was your usual, "I'll keep it vague enough so I can back out at any time", posts. The post you responded to was comparing two written pieces, since you chose to point out that you thought what NotSatosh posted was an opinion piece but did not make the same statement about the written piece he was comparing his to, a sensible person would be led to believe you did not also believe the other posted, to be an opinion piece. My post was hardly a redirect to anything, that you can not follow along is not my fault but you seem to have that problem all the time. When you respond to a post, some responses to you are not going to be limited to what you post but may also include the subject matter of what you responded to, how you fail to comprehend that again and again is on you. I brought up the original piece 3 or 4 times and it wasn't until the 5th time that you finally decided to say you weren't talking about that piece. I quoted from it 3 or 4 times so it would have been easy to see but as I said you kept your original post vague enough and after 4 more posts of me clearly pointing out what I was talking about you figured out your way to back out. If your original post was as you say it would have been easy enough when I first posted an excerpt from Ron's piece, to say that you were not comparing the 2 only focusing on the one. You could have also said something the 2nd, 3rd and 4th time I quoted from it but I guess it took you that long to figure out your back out strategy. Yes, I know you'll deny it but your post history is rife with similar posts, be vague, wait for replies and then decide what you want to say you were actually saying. As far as me not knowing what a stenographer does, a person employed chiefly to take and transcribe dictation, I know that is exactly what I said but yes I did use different words. Are you going to try and claim because I used my own words to describe what he did, jotting down Clinton's words and typing them up, that it is different from taking and transcribing dictation? As far as me calling you unintelligent, I will come right out and say things, instead of like you, trying to use snide innuendos to get to the same place. If I want to say you are a douche, I'll say you are a douche, I'm not going to try and hide it in a bunch of other words.
Disgraced Former General & Trump National Security Advisor Michael T. Flynn headed to jail this morning
something about false statements to the FBI regarding his interactions with the Russian ambassador while working behalf of the Trump campaign...? he's expected to plead guilty. the NY Times says that's a felony and could get him up to 5 years in prison
It's also likely a plea deal in exchange for testimony so probably little if any jail time I would think.
Flynn is clearly cooperating with the Moeller investigation and cut a deal in exchange for his testimony, which means there are more charges coming to those up the food chain from Flynn. That likely inculpates anyone with the last name Kushner or Trump. Perhaps this explains why the Orangutan in Chief has become especially unhinged this week. The noose is tightening. Drain the swamp. MAGA. Oh, and would now be a good time to play the hypocrisy card?
In anticipation of a response that this ends with Flynn and is a nothingburger, you might want to get fries and a shake with that order.
So, unlike the Manafort thing this one has some actual potential, obviously. It will be interesting to hear the testimony. If Trump ordered something we'll move on to Pence. Imagine a court room where it's one guys word vs. another and it's Flynn & Trump. They both seem to struggle with telling the truth.
It won't be one guy against Trump in the courtroom. It will be at least 3 guys, including Papadopulous and Flynn and whoever wants to save their ass of Manafort, Gates, Kushner, etc. Mueller understands that even with Trump's continual undermining of his own veracity by constant lying that the case is going to have to be very tight to get a sitting President. He's going to triangulate until he has an airtight case and based on the Papadopulous and Flynn guilty pleas he is pretty close at this point. Nixon resigned because most of the people close to him in the White House either faced serious charges or flipped outright. Trump will resign for the same reasons.
why do you say that? he is used to quitting and launching lawsuits. That's how everything he's ever led has ended. In this case he will just say he had to resign and sue due to the fake news media conspiring with law enforcement against him simply because he's so great.
Not that I am saying there is nothing there but every election cycle Dems and Reps alike are in contact with the Russians. Flynn testifying that Trump ordered him to contact the Russians is not important, what he asked the Russians to do or not do is what's important. It would be nice to see a massive douching of the entire Federal gov. though. I know I keep saying it but hopefully this all helps bring more power to 3rd and 4th parties, I doubt it though as there is too much money at stake.
Here's what Nakamoto wrote: "Another Hillary article from today." He also provided a link to the USA Today opinion piece. Here's what I wrote in return: "There is a significant difference between a newspaper article and an opinion piece. This is strictly one man's opinion." That is the sum total of what was written, unedited. There was nothing at all vague about pointing out the basic journalistic difference between fact and opinion. You still refuse to address that very simple concept which was the only reason for my post. It appears you have a very real problem discerning the difference. The post I responded to was not in any way "comparing two written pieces," there was no comparison made by anyone. If you felt there was a need to compare two opinion pieces, totally unrelated in topic but centered on the same person, why would you not address that with the people posting those links rather than me? I made no comment regarding the content of either. All your backtracking will not make the job of a stenographer and that of a reporter the same thing, so don't even attempt to justify that claim. If you really think that your middle school name calling tactics help to support your arguments, be advised that they do the precise opposite. Try to stay on topic but if you feel a need to stray take that up with the people posting the subject you're attempting to address.
