@blatham,
blatham wrote:
I gather that the story coming out of the WH now on Trump's claims about phone tapping is that the WH will not speak about or answer questions on this matter until some investigation is done. But there won't be one, of course.
This was just a propaganda move (not well thought out) to toss out a "story" (truth quite irrelevant) that would hold media attention and divert it from Sessions and from the continuing Russia problem. It is particularly directed towards his base via the right wing media outlets like Fox that serve Trump's and the GOP's purposes.
This sort of deceitful manipulation of information is really doing serious damage to the US internally and internationally. It's not sustainable. Or at least it is not sustainable without the US moving far more away from a functioning democracy and towards a banana republic.
What, if any factual information do you have to back up this rather bold asertion?
So far nothing of substance has come out of the supposed Trump conspiracy with Russia. One can make a strong case for the interpretation of that tempest as a mere propaganda move by distraught Democrats (and their hapless candidate) to distract attention from their defeat in the election and their conspiracy to distort both the Democrat primary and the final election campaigns. Both of these conspiracies were revealed, in part, from alleged Russian sources -- along with implications of other national security information hacked from the e mail server in Hillary's basement.
The recent tempest over AG Sessions' Group meeting with Russian. and several other. foreign Ambassadors in company with his then Senate Intelligence Committee was itself nothing more than an effort to distract attention from Trump's successful SOU speech, and doesn't pass the laugh test in comparison with AG Lynch's "entirely appropriate" antics with the earlier Clinton investigation.
In short you are projecting the actual misdeeds of the politicians you favor on their opponents, and doing so without any factual basis for it.
In a similar vein you haven't yet responded to, or even acknowledged, the many environmental lapses of your own country, about which you have said nothing here, even as you have criticized our recent relaxation of truly silly and inconsequential rules for sport fishermen and hunters in wilderness areas in mine - issues that your government has never addressed at all.
You are merely a highly partisan propagandist who uses whatever material you can find to advance your views of optimal policy in another country, doing so without regard to very prominant differences between what you advocate for us and the reality in Canada, and doing all this without much apparent interest or understanding of either the substance of the issues you raise, or the situation in your own country.
You like to present yourself as some sort of political savant, expert in our politics and history. Apart from your evident close attention to various opinion blogs and magazines I'm not aware of any meaningful experience or education you might have as a basis for all that. Evidently you derive some satisfaction from the odd menagerie of followers who attend your word here. And you do indeed traffic in the self-serving, but rather nutty, moral outrage that Layman pointed out, above. It's OK all with me, but I find it a bit pathetic.
