Sapience, nice word...had to look that one up. 

 aflanigan wrote: 
And the inverse proportion is true for the hypersapient who said he would never be elected.  

 aflanigan wrote: 
may be delusional, but hasn't been proven false...yet.

 kurtster wrote: 

True, and the ratio of how willing one is to question the legitimacy of his presidency (or his competency/suitability for the job) is in direct proportion to one's sapience.

 kcar wrote: 
You can call him anything you like, he's still prez.  

On the other hand, you couldn't call Obama any names, cuz if you did, you are racist ...

Carry on ...

 I love trump I love tea I love getting thrush all over my knee!

 aflanigan wrote: 

If you cram in too many, a black hole appears over 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and we all get sucked into a cosmic cesspool aka Douchebag Don's Hot Tub*. 

I can't remember who pointed this out one of the RPF threads, but we truly have entered the Age of Idiocracy. 


*Now that we're 6+ months into Trump's presidency, is there anybody here besides kurtster who disagrees with my nickname for Trump? 

 black321 wrote: 
I didn't know that one could cram so many bizarre and delusional falsehoods into a single sentence!

 aflanigan wrote: 
I think that's the point the right is pushing: Russia hasn't set up any traps, and Trump has nothing to hide...it's all collusion by the left and trump wants nothing but to make america great. 

 black321 wrote: 
I thought we were talking about traps set by Russia. At least I was . . . 

 kurtster wrote: 
Bueller....Bueller???

 black321 wrote: 
I must be in the minority then... I care. I want every rock turned over and everything exposed. Trump prefers darkness... I prefer the light.

 aflanigan wrote: 
No, not that Russia directly manipulated the media.  Rather, the media chose to chase every story with a Russia/Trump angle, to the point where the public no longer cares.  Just liked they chased every story on Iraq and 9/11, and Clinton's sex scandals...

 Faithful_Fool wrote: 
Nothing really matters,
anyone can see,
nothing really matters, to me
(any way the toupee blows) 

 black321 wrote: 
It would have to be based on a completely nonsensical narrative. 

If Russia deliberately manipulated the US media into reporting on collusion between Russia and Trump's campaign and business interests, which resulted in Russia/USA relations rapidly deteriorating and tit for tat trades of accusations, sanctions, etc., this is politically beneficial for Putin and Russa, how??? 

LOL!!- to: Queen's Bohemian Rhapsody

 aflanigan wrote: 
Of course the right will reply to these types of articles noting it was not Trump but the inflamed liberal media, ever preoccupied with the possibility of any ties with Russia, that fell for the trap.

Welcome to the New Cold War
Very interesting article. As has been reported, Russia has for a long time (even when they were the USSR) had a fondness for the honey trap. This year, they learned it's limitations.

They should have sensed that Trump was really too easy a target for such a ploy. Not only that, but as the campaign went on and Trump's popularity with a portion of the GOP base improved despite his stepping on his own genitals repeatedly during the campaign (such as mocking a physically disabled reporter), Putin and his cohorts should have realized that the leverage they got from the honey trap they set up was not going to amount to much with respect to a politician who has no regard for his personal reputation.
It has to be assumed that at some point after Trump won the electoral college, he received the buff envelope with incriminating photos and an ominous warning that they were prints of the originals. It's the logical explanation not only for Trump's vociferous insistence that we needed closer relations with Russia, but his desperate, unprompted insistence to Comey over the phone that he had not been involved with "hookers" in Russia. The other thing that Putin did not count on, however, was that the utility of having leverage over a politician based on incriminating evidence (be it honey trap photos, knowledge of financial problems/wrongdoing/corruption, etc.)  is not very high if the politician is ineffectual and has little or no control over the government. It's like having dirt on the Poet Laureate of the US; it doesn't get you much. Sanger's article regarding the change in Russian tactics following the recent sanctions vote in Congress indicates that they are realizing they picked the wrong politician to set up. 

Some times, low hanging fruit doesn't offer much sustenance.