What's new
By:
Filters

Just in from CNN

https://www.wsj.com/articles/charle...t-like-gehrig-1528652464?mod=djcm_OBV1_092216

Charles Krauthammer is one of my heroes. For years my wife and I watched Fox News’s “Special Report With Bret Baier, ” where Charles softly delivered his insights on politics with impressive and often sardonic wit and intelligence. We grew to rely on his electronic companionship and his political navigational skills. He knew where true north pointed; and although he could bite, he seldom barked.

Now he has announced he has a few weeks to live. Our pain is sharp.

Charles is a serious baseball fan. His final declaration that “my fight is over” recalled for me the moving exit speech by Lou Gehrig, who—on July 4, 1939, dying of his eponymous disease—called himself “the luckiest man on the face of the earth.” It is important to play the game well, but it is also important how one leaves the arena.


For most of his life, Charles was a quiet daily witness that the Fates can be cruel. He surely endured untold suffering, and this latest medical report seems like piling on, to use a football term. He surely had a full dose of suffering when he broke his neck diving into a gym pool during his first year at Harvard Medical School. Despite that injury, which paralyzed his legs totally and his arms partly, he finished his medical training on time with the class of 1975. He became a psychiatrist and turned to journalism when editors noticed his talent for writing. His weekly column in the Washington Post became a Beltway staple.

Many admirers who watched Charles on Fox News did not know he was sitting in a wheelchair. I noticed because I also “ride” a chair and am limited. Charles never spoke of these issues, but I felt a special bond and wrote him a fan letter years ago to commend his remarkable political commentary and his courage. Like him, I had experienced a paralyzing injury—I broke my back in a fall while at college—though mine was less severe than his.

It turned out he knew of my history for the same reasons I knew of his. When he replied to my letter, he was gracious and shared his personal insight on our youthful misfortunes. He wrote that he and I were fortunate—sort of—to have suffered our injuries when we were so young. We might have had more difficulty recovering had we been hurt at an older age. His wise diagnosis had the ring of his psychiatric training.

Past great political pundits—Walter Lippmann, H.L. Mencken, Arthur Krock —were not the presence that Charles Krauthammer became with his daily Fox News appearances. He is the finest of our current political translators and commentators, well-suited for our age because of his contrast with it. The prevalence of bloviating, uncivilized screamers makes Charles’s self-effacing reserve especially refreshing. Slyly irreverent yet respectful and civil, he has a classic education and is literate when those attributes are being devalued. He is an inspiration: We wish we knew what Charles knows.

In his famous prayer, Cardinal John Henry Newman asked God to grant him each night “a safe lodging, and a holy rest and peace at the last.” It is that “peace at the last” we wish for our friend Charles Krauthammer. We saw him fight so well, and now he tells us his fight is over. May peace come to this fine man, who led his life in such a noble manner, and set such a shining example.
Click to expand...
 
https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/10/politics/democrats-republicans-mueller-report/index.html

No Democrats have read the less-redacted Mueller report. But five Republicans have.

Washington (CNN)None of the six Democrats who have been provided access to a less-redacted version of special counsel Robert Mueller's report have gone to the Justice Department to read it, according to a source familiar with the matter.

Republicans and the Justice Department have criticized Democrats for not at least reading the less-redacted version of the report released to lawmakers while they negotiate over access to the fully unredacted report and underlying materials.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Senate Intelligence Chairman Richard Burr and Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham have read it, along with House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy and Rep. Doug Collins, the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee, have seen it, according to the source, while House Intelligence ranking member Devin Nunes has not.
Click to expand...
 
Bulletproof said:
https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/10/politics/democrats-republicans-mueller-report/index.html

No Democrats have read the less-redacted Mueller report. But five Republicans have.
Click to expand...

This is supposed to prove that CNN doesnt hold a bias?

This article only served to get out Nadler's reasoning behind not choosing to review the material. Basically helping him get his excuses out. They aren't doing their typical attack like they would if this were about Republicans. They have to do this because they know the Democrats look stupid so they want to get out in front of it, so their fans dont grow a brain and realize the game the Democrats are playing. This is just more brain washing essentially.

But thanks for help proving Democrats are just playing stupid games and dont have anything on Trump.
 
NPC D4617 said:
This is supposed to prove that CNN doesnt hold a bias?

This article only served to get out Nadler's reasoning behind not choosing to review the material. Basically helping him get his excuses out. They aren't doing their typical attack like they would if this were about Republicans. They have to do this because they know the Democrats look stupid so they want to get out in front of it, so their fans dont grow a brain and realize the game the Democrats are playing. This is just more brain washing essentially.

But thanks for help proving Democrats are just playing stupid games and dont have anything on Trump.
Click to expand...
There's a whole thread here dumb ***.
 
Interesting how they are calling it the "less redacted version." Do you know what remains redacted? Two full lines and seven partial lines, all of it Grand Jury related (which can't be released by law). If you listen to mainstream media you would think that Barr is making this report all but impossible to read, and yet nearly the entire thing is available. The people crying about needing to see it, like Nadler, obviously don't really want to see it at all.
 
Joe Bagadonuts said:
Interesting how they are calling it the "less redacted version." Do you know what remains redacted? Two full lines and seven partial lines, all of it Grand Jury related (which can't be released by law). If you listen to mainstream media you would think that Barr is making this report all but impossible to read, and yet nearly the entire thing is available. The people crying about needing to see it, like Nadler, obviously don't really want to see it at all.
Click to expand...

Of course they dont want to read it. It does more damage to Trump if they sell the story that he is still hiding something, because if they actually had to report what's in there they would have nothing. They know how idiotic their base is so they know they can get away with this. Its just a game, and all the fools are being played.
 
Joe Bagadonuts said:
The people crying about needing to see it, like Nadler, obviously don't really want to see it at all.
Click to expand...

NPC D4617 said:
Of course they dont want to read it. It does more damage to Trump if they sell the story that he is still hiding something, because if they actually had to report what's in there they would have nothing. They know how idiotic their base is so they know they can get away with this. Its just a game, and all the fools are being played.
Click to expand...

At the time of Barr's offer to make accessible a less redacted report, part of the conditions were that only 12 members of Congress would be allowed to see it, and perhaps more important, and making it harder for Nadler and the Democrats to agree to the DOJ offer, is that only Nadler and one staffer of the House Judiciary Committee could view it and would not be allowed to discuss what they saw with other members of the committee.

What's the point of having Nadler read the less redacted version if he can't tell fellow Democrats on the Judiciary Committee what he read??

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/democrats-decline-barrs-offer-to-view-a-less-redacted-mueller-report/

Congressional Democrats have declined an offer by Attorney General William Barr to view a less redacted version of the report by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, as only 12 members of Congress would be able to read the report and could not discuss it with other members of Congress.

In a press conference Thursday morning, Barr made the offer to the House speaker, the Senate majority leader, the House and Senate minority leaders, the chairs and ranking members of the House and Senate Judiciary Committees, and the chairs and ranking members of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees. These members of Congress, as well as one staffer for each member, could review a less redacted version of the report in a reading room, but could not take the report out of that room or discuss it with other members of Congress.

"Unfortunately, your proposed accommodation—which among other things would prohibit discussion of the full report, even with other Committee Members—is not acceptable," congressional Democrats said in the letter to Barr. The letter was signed by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, and the ranking members of the Senate Judiciary and Intelligence Committees, Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Mark Warner.
 
Last edited:
Red said:
At the time of Barr's offer to make accessible a less redacted report, part of the conditions were that only 12 members of Congress would be allowed to see it, and perhaps more important, and making it harder for Nadler and the Democrats to agree to the DOJ offer, is that only Nadler and one staffer of the House Judiciary Committee could view it and would not be allowed to discuss what they saw with other members of the committee.

What's the point of having Nadler read the less redacted version if he can't tell fellow Democrats on the Judiciary Committee what he read??

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/democrats-decline-barrs-offer-to-view-a-less-redacted-mueller-report/

Congressional Democrats have declined an offer by Attorney General William Barr to view a less redacted version of the report by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, as only 12 members of Congress would be able to read the report and could not discuss it with other members of Congress.

In a press conference Thursday morning, Barr made the offer to the House speaker, the Senate majority leader, the House and Senate minority leaders, the chairs and ranking members of the House and Senate Judiciary Committees, and the chairs and ranking members of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees. These members of Congress, as well as one staffer for each member, could review a less redacted version of the report in a reading room, but could not take the report out of that room or discuss it with other members of Congress.

"Unfortunately, your proposed accommodation—which among other things would prohibit discussion of the full report, even with other Committee Members—is not acceptable," congressional Democrats said in the letter to Barr. The letter was signed by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, and the ranking members of the Senate Judiciary and Intelligence Committees, Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Mark Warner.
Click to expand...
You're telling me that if they came upon something in the report that warranted serious concern that their hands would be tied because of the way Barr offered it? I don't believe it. If Republicans were reacting in this way to an offer by an AG in a Dem administration would you feel the same way? It appears to me much more likely that they really don't want to read the report and instead want to use the fact that Barr is not publishing a completely redacted version in the New York Times as a political weapon. I wish politicians on both sides could be more honest and reasonable.
 
www.cnn.com

Twitter takes down 7,000 accounts linked to QAnon

Twitter has removed thousands of accounts linked to QAnon, a group known for spreading conspiracy theories and disinformation online.
www.cnn.com www.cnn.com

Just in case any Qanon believers are here and want to suggest that Twitter did this and none of the MSM is telling us about it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Red
Gameface said:
www.cnn.com

Twitter takes down 7,000 accounts linked to QAnon

Twitter has removed thousands of accounts linked to QAnon, a group known for spreading conspiracy theories and disinformation online.
www.cnn.com www.cnn.com

Just in case any Qanon believers are here and want to suggest that Twitter did this and none of the MSM is telling us about it.
Click to expand...

The growth of QAnon is pretty impressive, to the degree it has “infiltrated” the Republican Party, or the party that Trump heads, whatever it’s become. And quite the explosion of conspiracist thought in general, including many that are allying and merging these days. This was an interesting read, in that regard:

www.vice.com

The Conspiracy Singularity Has Arrived

With the pandemic and a global uprising against racial injustice to be explained away, conspiracy communities are bleeding into each other, merging into one gigantic mass of suspicion.
www.vice.com www.vice.com
 
This year could see the most joyless election campaign in generations
Joe Biden's official rollout on Wednesday of his vice presidential pick, Kamala Harris, could hardly have gone more smoothly: The presumptive Democratic nominee showed unusual energy as the pair debuted their ticket in his hometown in Delaware. The US senator from California delivered a moving speech that also hammered Trump's botched handling of the pandemic -- and her accomplished performance instantly made clear that Trump will struggle to make stick his racially suggestive claims she is "mad" and mean.
But the Harris-Biden appearance also exemplified the haunting emptiness of the most joyless election campaign in generations. When pro sports play before empty stadiums these days, TV channels pipe in crowd noise to viewers at home. But fake fans don't wash in politics, so Biden and Harris walked into the deafening silence of a school gym, before a group of socially distanced reporters.
It bore no resemblance to the moment that a beaming Biden, slapping palms, bounded onstage in Springfield, Illinois, to be introduced as Barack Obama's running mate 12 years ago. Signs in the huge crowd crammed together in the sunshine defined what now seems a quaint and distant age, when "hope and change" seemed in reach.


Click to expand...



CNN just rolling with Soros propaganda. So biased. Fake news.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top