I am Tammi’s complete and utter lack of surprise, most days.
18 Likes
That is the scariest part of all this. In very very recent memory, any of this shit would be shocking, front page news, screams of outrage from all corners. Now it’s just a day ending in “y.” As much as we have raged against the normalization of Trump-level corruption, I think that ship has sailed. Not sure how we ever get back to where we were, or if that is even possible. Fuckfuckfuckfuck.
34 Likes
Him who? Trump or Assange? Why not both?
28 Likes
If this is real, then it really does need to kick off a new impeachment inquiry. Dangling pardons to stifle witnesses? Yeah, that’s something even GOP senators would consider impeachable.
15 Likes
Are you sure. They seem to be under the thumb of Trump now.
34 Likes
This is my take also
9 Likes
How many are up for reelection?
9 Likes
Some of them aren’t even running for reelection and they still stand up for corruption. Going against Trump probably cuts them off from numerous post-office self-enrichment activities.
I think that when Republicans send people to the senate, they are not sending their best people.
23 Likes
There is something sad about watching otherwise wonderful folks clinging to the hope that some right-winger will step forward and save the day. And every time they get their hopes up that some absolutely smarmy piece of corrupt shit will FINALLY be the one to take down the orange marmalade shitting in the oval office, we have to pick them back up when it all comes crashing down.
8 Likes
So as others are saying, yesterday’s pardon of 11 corrupt rich white men may have been a de-sensitizing, normalizing cleanse to prep the public for this bigger bombshell.
Trump is basically admitting, after 3 years of his ridiculous denials that it was, in fact, Russia that hacked the DNC. Not some fat guy in his basement.
7 Likes
Fair enough. But safe to say that the political careers of Collins, Gardner, and the other GOP senators up for elections in states with even a slightly purple tinge are done.
9 Likes
Not sure what the British laws are like for lawyers that lie to the court, but presumably his lawyer wouldn’t make such a statement to a court unless it were demonstrable.
3 Likes
Perhaps Assange is using Trump’s twitter playbook… in this case get the message out to Trump that he wants a pardon in exchange for saying the Russians weren’t involved in the hack. 
15 Likes
Assange has NEVER been charged in any rape and the allegations are manufactured. Here’s the U.N. Special Rapporteur on Torture, Nils Melzer:
You say that the Swedish authorities were never interested in testimony from Assange. But the media and government agencies have painted a completely different picture over the years: Julian Assange, they say, fled the Swedish judiciary in order to avoid being held accountable.
That’s what I always thought, until I started investigating. The opposite is true. Assange reported to the Swedish authorities on several occasions because he wanted to respond to the accusations. But the authorities stonewalled.
What do you mean by that: «The authorities stonewalled?»
Allow me to start at the beginning. I speak fluent Swedish and was thus able to read all of the original documents. I could hardly believe my eyes: According to the testimony of the woman in question, a rape had never even taken place at all. And not only that: The woman’s testimony was later changed by the Stockholm police without her involvement in order to somehow make it sound like a possible rape. I have all the documents in my possession, the emails, the text messages.
In summary: Julian Assange uncovered torture, has been tortured himself and could be tortured to death in the United States.
The full interview is essential reading to anyone who still believes the official narrative that Assange is some sort of rapist, traitor, Russian asset, or anything other than the courageous whistleblowing journalist that he is.
12 Likes
I’ll take that bet and give you 2:1 odds. How many GOP lawmakers said clearly, on the record, that Trump should be impeached if there was a quid pro quo that was impeachable, only to move the goalposts to three fields over when the qpq was both proven and admitted to?
Wait, are you…serious? Tell me–how much “whistleblowing” did Assange engage in re: Trump during 2016?
21 Likes
Cool story bro
18 Likes
7 Likes
Oh yeah, THIS is the evidence that would have convinced the Senate Republicans to convict. I’m sure of it!
The idea that there is any kind of evidence that would convince Senate Republicans to vote to convict is pretty hard to believe at this point. It is their job to look away and they are good at it.
9 Likes
I think there are levels of outright villainy that would have gotten the Senate Republicans to act, but they would be at the level where you get a mob gathering in front of the White House with torches and pitchforks.
3 Likes
Not even that. Their own reelection (primary) would have to be threatened. So long as Trump tweets carry more weight with the right wing electorate than the will of the voters, they will will remain cowed. He would have to do something that cost him the 40% that follow him regardless of right or wrong. Only way to do that is if he suddenly started doing the right thing, which, I mean, come on now…
12 Likes
