nutbean

After so much more reading, Comey has got to go. Both sides of politics can shout that Comey's revelations about the FBI investigation into Clinton's mail server weeks before the election either cost her the election or had little impact - it didn't help her cause but cost her the election ? who would know. What is clear is Comey has said the investigation into Trump's (or his campaign) ties to Russia dates back to last July. That means there were two active FBI investigations involving Presidential candidates or their campaign staff during the electoral cycle and Comey went public on one of them only. Hmmm.

an intense and passionate dislike of anything Clinton.

But you know the FBI doesn't comment on ongoing investigations..... right..... Comey is definitely an ophthalmologist- he is an "I" specialist.

Amateur hour - does this clown even listen to what he is saying ? Sean Spicer after the head of the FBI, NSA and the heads of the house and senate intelligence committee plus the past National Security advisor all have stated that there is no evidence of Obama tapping Trumps phones - The press asking for comment “I get you guys want to know the end of the book right now. But we are on the first chapter of this process,” Spicer said. Then five minutes later Spicer also urged people to stop trying to find evidence of collusion between the Russian government and the Trump campaign, saying that you shouldn’t search for something that doesn’t exist. “There’s a point at which you continue to search for something that everybody who has been briefed hasn’t seen or found. ... So you can continue to look for something, but continuing to look for something that doesn’t exist, doesn’t matter,” Irony bypass.....

It depends on how he is measured. If they measure him from the top of his scalp he is 180cm. If they measure him from the top of his hair he is 216cm. (you knew that was coming didn't you, DC ?)

Again all speculation as to who would be more valuable in final... Who won the Norm Smith medal last year ? (which I didn't agree with) - I know that Johannisen plays HBF - but both are more outside players ( I think Parish actually gets more of his own hardball than Johannisen) - same height and almost the same weight. Both to a large extent both need the heavy lifters to get the ball out to them, or at least need space to be at their most destructive. All I know is we got an absolute pearler in Oliver and I believe that Essendon got a beauty as well. Both are valuable but in entirely different ways.

The one thing that I think Trump said which now resonates is Donald Trump Says He Will Win on Surge of Silent Supporters - WSJ I think that this absolutely happened. It's the "Benny Hill show syndrome" - I watch it but I sure as hell I don't tell anyone that I do...

American politics - no matter which side, which party, which candidate - the rat smell permeates... (actually all politics)

Two points - I haven't read anywhere where the Podesta's emails were labelled as fake news. Who was blaming it as fake news ? - whether you trust the intelligence community or not, drawing the comparison of no Russian hacking with no wiretapping ordered by Obama is a stretch. The intelligence agencies have apparently presented copious quantities of intelligence that does point to the Russians whereas the FBI director and the former head of national intelligence have both been reported as saying there is no evidence that Obama ordered the wiretapping of Trump.

I think most with a centered view of the US election would suggest that the primary reason the Democrats lost was people were sick of the Washington spin, Hillary Clinton had enough luggage to send a 747 into a nosedive. her strategy of saying little and letting Trump hang himself failed (even though Trump did give it his best shot to hang himself) and Trump himself, whose narrative appealed to a lot of Americans. I don't think there is a claim of Podesta's emails being fake news is there ? - rather the claim is of hacking of real news. I think the intelligence agencies, with oversight of congressional committees replete with Democrats and Republicans have established that the Russians indeed were involved in hacking. What effect it had is anybody's guess. Bottom line is that Hillary was a poor choice.

back away slowly nutbean......don't make eye contact

I am not well versed enough on The US to know but drawing a parallel to Australia, if any party or politician said that they/he/she was going to bring manufacturing back into this country it would get an almighty "pffft". The simple matter is any labor intensive large scale manufacturing is outpriced in this country because of our labor cost. Unless massive tariffs are introduced or massive cuts to labor costs to make "Australian made" competitive it won't happen. I will watch with interest how Trump intends to get manufacturing back to the US.

Let me widen the scope - anyone who starts a sentence with either of those phrases is usually telling fibs.

Whist the below is a quote from Sessions, my comment afterwards applies to all politicians "I do not recall any discussions with the Russian ambassador, or any other representative of the Russian government, regarding the political campaign on these occasions or any other occasion," he wrote in the letter. Once a politician says one of two phrases I figure they are lying 1/ I do not recall ( or to my recollection) 2/ To my knowledge/to the best of my knowledge

The interesting question for me is whether anyone thinks that Obama would wiretap Trump for political purposes ? I could half understand it if Obama was seeking re-election - aka Nixon. But does anyone believe the Obama would do something Wategate'esque some 2 months before he was going to leave office ?

I despair for the state of American Politics. I am not sure it would have been any better had Hillary got in - I think it would have been an entirely different sort of disfunction with continued "corruption" and "misdeed" type of allegations swirling around her. It's like going to the footy and knowing you have to eat but then seeing the choices before you. You are going to eat, but you know the food is all going to be crap. ( and for the record - Australian political choices are no better)

good thing you are not in the media or you could be accused of "embellishing, editorialising and prophecising". Presumably Trumps conversations were business related ? First - who would know what he talked about with Putin. But Trump has come out and said he never talked with Putin. Oh wait..yes he said talked with Putin. Oh wait... no he said he didn't talk with Putin.... Is there some suggestion he passed on state secrets? I haven't seen that written anywhere so your next comment is irrelevant about the Obama administration leaking. The inferences are surrounding the hacking and also not to retaliate against the expulsion of diplomats - not leaking state secrets. Journalists correctly pointed out that members of Trumps campaign had contact with Russian officials when there was denial that they had. As to your view that the sackings ( of which there has been one major sacking - Gen Flynn) were because of weakness - well that is one view - but another view is this - "I was disappointed to learn that ... the facts that had been conveyed to me by Gen. Flynn were inaccurate. But we honor Gen. Flynn's long service to the United States of America, and I fully support the President's decision to ask for his resignation," - VC Pence - he lied about his contact with Russian officials and it wasn't a about perceived weakness in dealing with the media - he lied and was a political liability - they had to cut him loose.

What really has me scratching my head is the intellectual rigor that goes into what Trump says and what Trump tweets. I read with interest what the likes of Biffen, Prodee and yourself write and as you are aware I don't lean the same way. But I have to take what is said and go and do homework and try and understand where assertions are coming from and how positions have been arrived at. At times it not all that easy and clearly there is no black and white - just lots of shades of gray. Two sides to every argument. With Trump he just says stuff that you know is just plain wrong, he has made up on the spot and plainly contradicts what he said in the past. Prime example - "I have no relationship with Putin" - I guess that I get that all Politicians lie - I just want it to take a little more work to catch them out than it does with Trump.

Some of the difficulties we have now is due to the media and the standards of journalism. My view is with the advent of social media/internet and instant gratification we have gone from reporting that had some substance behind it ( albeit some reporting/news outlets have always had some political bias or colour) to flat out - "lets get this story out there before someone else does as quickly as we can - facts or verification be damned"

Dont disagree with any of the above - it does make for interesting times. All I can say is..don't blame me - I voted for Frank Underwood..

I am totally perplexed. I read the article from top to bottom yet I could not find Susan Sarrandon's cleavage anywhere.

The irony has actually escaped you. If there is a legal wiretap authorised (and from my reading the Trump camp are not suggesting otherwise) it must be approved by a judge and there must be primie facie evidence of criminal/illegal activity. This quote from Lindsay Graham ( R - SC) I don’t know if it’s true or not, but if it is true, illegally, it would be the biggest political scandal since Watergate,” Graham said, referring to a scenario in which the Obama administration tapped Trump’s phones without a warrant. But then Graham, suggested that it would equally shocking if the eavesdropping had been done legally. “The other side of the story ― just be quiet for a second ― if the former president of the United States was able to obtain a warrant lawfully to monitor Trump’s campaign for violating a law, that would be the biggest scandal since Watergate,” he said. Graham made clear that the latter form of wiretapping would be aimed at investigating “Trump campaign activity with foreign governments.

Doesn't make it any less real because it's Breitbart ? yes... yes it does....

I'm not sure I get the rationale. Oliver rarely gets caught WITHOUT getting his hands free so he can dispose of the pill by handball. His handball is an absolute weapon. It just always gets to someone in a better position. Harking back to Williams - no one told him to handball less. It doesn't matter if he is predictable as long as he keeps getting those handballs away to advantage. Hunt predictably gets the ball and runs, Dustin Martin predictably fends players off with the don't argue and Josh Kennedy of the WCE is predictably one of the best hit up forwards in the game. It is one thing to be predictable, it is an entirely different story of trying to stop the predictability being successful. I expect that if the opposition cover all his handball exits then he will kick - pretty simple.

big call ! higher ceiling than Hogan and Petracca ?I hope the two I've mentioned become superstars and Clarry goes even past them.