Where do you stand on the enquiry? Cover up or was there no collusion between Russia and the US?
Iād like to stand on it. But being kind of skint at the moment and with the extortionate cost of HP Printer Cartridges I just canāt afford to waste some trees.
(ie #stitchup well played by one of Trump or Putin)
1 Like
I use HP monthly, saves a shit load.
The whole thing was a charade from the beginning. It was planned beforehand and used to divert attention from the crimes exposed in the email releases.
They kind of gave it away right from the start.
"We have 17 intelligence agencies, civilian and military, who have all concluded that these espionage attacks, these cyberattacks, come from the highest levels of the Kremlin, and they are designed to influence our election. (Hillary Clinton, 19 October 2016.)
That strategy had been set within twenty-four hours of her concession speech. [9 November 2016] Mook and Podesta assembled her communications team at the Brooklyn headquarters to engineer the case that the election wasnāt entirely on the up-and-up. For a couple of hours, with Shake Shack containers littering the room, they went over the script they would pitch to the press and the public. Already, Russian hacking was the centerpiece of the argument."
No the emails didnāt come from the Russians.
On a state level? Doubt it and only the most gullible would believe Putin controls Trump. Its no more than the usual narrative game to get people nodding along to the ridiculous. Has Meuller disclosed evidence to the IRA(thatās a piss take, surely) lawyers yet, or still trying to ignore them? Oops 
I think iāll refer to all of these bullshit narratives as āthe pig and itās lipstickā from now on. Seems appropriate 
Good reminder of how often they lie, be it newspapers or books.
1 Like
A long but interesting read (with further articles)
Confirms a lot about my thoughts on Murdoch.
Murdoch only publishes, and while he has been a corrosive influence on public life, there is a difference between the shit he prints and what people actually do about it.
I think he and his ilk had tremendous influence during the advent of the information age, but if you look at the saturation of smartphones, rising popularity of independent media sources, theyāll never be able to set the agenda in quite the same way again.
Circulations are a fraction of what they used to be.
But because of smartphones, is it not probable that more people read individual or random MSM articles?
Equally read them out of context with the OpEd of those publications in stand alone mode?
A Yank may read an Online Guardian article and be blissfully unaware. EG I have a mate on FB staunch Republican who posted an ironic dig at Trump saying it showed the respect Trump was held in abroad.
Total woosh BUT that was how it read to a believer
People can and do read MSM articles on the Internet. Doesnāt happen in the same vacuum as print media. Most folk wonāt read more than one newspaper per day, but itās quite possible to have an aggregated opinion with the panoply of sources and viewpoints.
Look at the France thing as an example and ask yourself how weād ever have known about that prior to the explosion of the web.
Imagine if the only information you received was from this cunt. How distorted would your views be?
I particularly hate the Guardian because of the way it presents itself. On a fundamental level, I think the Tory papers are probably more honest. At least you know what they are and what their agenda is.
Whatās particularly galling about the Guardian is that it presents itself as altruism in press form. Once, perhaps, maybe.
Today itās just a vessel for opinion pieces of those tied to the establishment. Cohen is sadly one cunt among many.
1 Like
Iād have to agree with this, the tories are bastards and always have been and will be, the liberal is a far more slippery eel, Iād have a tory who is a cunt all day long over a backstabbing fascist liberal all day long.
Iād welcome the approbation, but once again, your inability to grasp and express the basic meaning of things means Iām going to give it a miss.
Your grammar is shite, it should read I welcome and but with no comma.
Pleb.
Iād welcome = I would welcome. Commas are also very much a matter of personal preference. I use them for pauses and clarity.
Seek out this super complex manual for more information.
If youāre addressing me why would you use Iād?
I would welcome the approbation but once again your inability to grasp
Thatās correct mush, not your shite there, you donāt need a comma.
Good Lord. Barry the grammar Nazi. Iāve seen it all now.
2 Likes
Should probably use lower case n for nazi Goat.
I prefer not to.
As in small ācā Conservative?
Are you a small ānā Nazi, Barry? Up with the basic principles with Nazism, but not liking where the movement ended up? 
2 Likes