quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:

quote:

Originally posted by olfuzzy:

quote:

Originally posted by WaterburyBob:
This thread will probably hit 2 million views by the first of the year.
Pretty impressive - just like the President-Elect!

I think the 2 millionth post should be reserved for Para.

At the current rate of posting, this thread should reach its two millionth post sometime around August, 2054.

You'll only be what? 93 then?

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:

quote:

Originally posted by olfuzzy:

quote:

Originally posted by WaterburyBob:
This thread will probably hit 2 million views by the first of the year.
Pretty impressive - just like the President-Elect!

I think the 2 millionth post should be reserved for Para.

At the current rate of posting, this thread should reach its two millionth post sometime around August, 2054.

I will only be 101 years old...the thought of it gives me something to look forward to in my golden years ...

I raise a toast (probably prune juice) when that day comes

I love Trumps picks so far. When President Trump names the next supreme court justice that will be the icing on the cake!

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:
We know how much the God Damned Commies loath those Boy Scouts.

Pfft. Let the GDCs take a good long hike.

quote:

Originally posted by gw3971:
I love Trumps picks so far. When President Trump names the next supreme court justice that will be the icing on the cake!

Can Ginsberg just die already? You know she'll never retire while Trump is President.

quote:

Originally posted by bcereuss:

quote:

Originally posted by gw3971:
I love Trumps picks so far. When President Trump names the next supreme court justice that will be the icing on the cake!

Can Ginsberg just die already? You know she'll never retire while Trump is President.

I think she died some time ago. She looks like they soaked her in some taxidermy products and employed Disney engineers with access to used Pirates of the Caribbean animatronics to make her appear lifelike.



.

In an earlier post I write what the WH press secretary said:

"The President-elect has said one thing on Twitter. The 17 intelligence agencies have come forward with unanimous assessment about Russia's malicious cyberactivity . I'll let you and the American people judge who's in a better position to defend their argument,"


Now there is this report:

http://www.reuters.com/article...e-idUSKBN14204E?il=0

The overseers of the U.S. intelligence community have not embraced a CIA assessment that Russian cyber attacks were aimed at helping Republican President-elect Donald Trump win the 2016 election, three American officials said on Monday.

While the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) does not dispute the CIA's analysis of Russian hacking operations, it has not endorsed their assessment because of a lack of conclusive evidence that Moscow intended to boost Trump over Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton, said the officials, who declined to be named.

The position of the ODNI, which oversees the 17 agency-strong U.S. intelligence community, could give Trump fresh ammunition to dispute the CIA assessment, which he rejected as "ridiculous" in weekend remarks, and press his assertion that no evidence implicates Russia in the cyber attacks.

only materials filched from Democratic groups - such as emails stolen from John Podesta, the Clinton campaign chairman - were made public via WikiLeaks, the anti-secrecy organization, and other outlets, U.S. officials said.

The CIA conclusion was a "judgment based on the fact that Russian entities hacked both Democrats and Republicans and only the Democratic information was leaked," one of the three officials said on Monday.

*********************

pretty weak to attack so viciously. Reince Priebus has said the FBI reviewed the RNC computers and told Priebus the Russians had not hacked the RNC.

One more piece of info that this line about "17 intel agencies conclude" is typical obama / Clinton gross distortions to deceive the public

he he

quote:

Originally posted by feersum dreadnaught:

Or CNN. I like that David Burge guy. Too bad I don't twitter.



,

Self-reflection, self-criticism and self-correction are foreign concepts to Democrat leaders. They continue to throw out every possible excuse for why they lost the election — except the primary reason that many Americans just didn’t buy their rhetoric or prescription of continuing failed policies. The latest blame-game play for Democrats is to self-identify as the victims of a masterful Russian hacking plot designed to swing the election to Donald Trump. While there is no solid evidence to support this claim, the Leftmedia fakery machine quickly rushed to bolster the narrative with reports that unnamed U.S. intelligence sources have concluded that the Russians intervened and helped Trump’s campaign.

What is so disingenuous about this current charge is that those responsible for creating the climate for Russia’s aggression are Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Remember, it was Obama who chided Mitt Romney in 2012 for his “1980s” foreign policy concerns regarding the threat of Russia’s growing geopolitical power. And there was Secretary of State Clinton’s infamous “reset” with Russia, providing it with greater opportunity to continue exploiting the administration’s feckless foreign policy. Perhaps the greatest hypocrisy of all is Clinton deciding to break the law in using an unsecured personal server that undoubtedly was hacked, probably by the Russians. In other words, it is Democrat leaders, not Republicans or Trump, who are responsible for creating the mess in which they now find themselves.

But, again, the concerns over the integrity of the U.S. electoral system seem a rather hypocritical charge for the Democrats to make given their history. In the early 1990s, it was discovered through the release of Soviet-era documents that Sen. Ted Kennedy had secretly asked the Russians to interfere on behalf of the Democrat Party in the 1984 elections. And now after losing, Democrats are wringing their hands over the integrity of the U.S. electoral system? While they clearly are seeking to delegitimize Trump’s presidency and even the whole American electoral process, they are playing right into Putin’s hands.

Being frustrated over losing is understandable. Seeking to destroy the legitimacy of your opponent’s victory is vindictive.

https://patriotpost.us/posts/46390

quote:

Originally posted by 2012BOSS302:


Self-reflection, self-criticism and self-correction are foreign concepts to Democrat leaders...

That's a great article, but I have to wonder why the biggest, most immediate story isn't what the hacks revealed about the collusion between CNN/NYT, etc and the DNC/Clinton campaign. The fact that the press outlets are running with this attack of the messenger instead of cleaning the rats out of their newsrooms speaks of a hubris too massive to comprehend.



.

quote:

Originally posted by wishfull thinker:

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:

Uhhh, two million posts probably ain't gonna happen...

1,900,169 right this minute,

This thread is nowhere near 1,900,169 posts.

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:

quote:

Originally posted by wishfull thinker:

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:

Uhhh, two million posts probably ain't gonna happen...

1,900,169 right this minute,

This thread is nowhere near 1,900,169 posts.

Posts, views, at this point what difference does it make.

If I were Putin, Id want the US to have the most spineless idiot in charge, which in this case would clearly have been Clinton. I dont see any benefit to Russia having Trump around. It would be like Reagan vs Carter 2.0

^^^ I don't think the Russians had anything to do with our election, but I bet Putin is laughing his red ass off right now over the fact that the MSM is going wild over this.

Russia wanted Trump because Trump will negotiate a better deal ... and probably won't cause a war. War is bad for business. Russia is under sanctions imposed after they did their thing in Crimea and Ukraine. Clinton was going to double-down and poke the bear even more because she damn sure was going to win her feud with Putin.

REUTERS: TRUMP PICKS TILLERSON

quote:

President-elect Donald Trump will announce Exxon-Mobil Corp's Rex Tillerson as his choice for secretary of state on Tuesday, a senior transition official said, confident that the oil executive can get past questions about his ties to Russia.

Trump is to make the announcement on Tuesday morning, going with a business leader whose experience in diplomacy is from making deals with foreign countries for the world's largest energy company.

Trump picked Tillerson, 64, after the Texan was backed by several Republican establishment figures including former Secretary of State James Baker, former Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice and former Defense Secretary Robert Gates, the transition official said. [...]

Trump chose Tillerson over 2012 Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney, who had famously criticized Trump during the party's fight for a nominee this year. Trump called Romney to tell him he had decided to choose someone else for the job.

"It was an honor to have been considered for secretary of state of our great country," Romney said in a Facebook posting on Monday night.

See ya later, Mitt.


(photo from Nov 2016)

quote:

Originally posted by LS1 GTO:
Posts, views, at this point what difference does it make.

There's a big difference. Right now I'd guess that only about 25,000 actual postings have been made (I don't know how to obtain the real value), but we apparently are approaching the 2 million views mark. That would average out to around 80 viewings per post. OTOH, it may be that "Viewings" are counts of how many times the pages have been accessed, in which case an average of 1600 views of each page have occurred.

flashguy

quote:

Originally posted by flashguy:

quote:

Originally posted by LS1 GTO:
Posts, views, at this point what difference does it make.

There's a big difference. Right now I'd guess that only about 25,000 actual postings have been made (I don't know how to obtain the real value), but we apparently are approaching the 2 million views mark. That would average out to around 80 viewings per post. OTOH, it may be that "Viewings" are counts of how many times the pages have been accessed, in which case an average of 1600 views of each page have occurred.

flashguy

Thank You Congressman Trey "Flashguy" Gowdy. Humor much?