Point taken, and thank you. The conscious lie was on the part of Blinken and Morrell, certainly, while the other signatories can claim plausible deniability.
My reply was intended more as following your post deeper than suggesting a mistake in it. Actually, I think your edit is too easy on the other fifty. They put the letter out hoping it would be misconstrued in headlines and soundbites.* When it was, they didn't come out and forcefully correct the record.
So whether the letter was technically a "lie" seems a distinction without a difference. All the people signing it intended to deceive.
---
* I think Biden himself misrepresenting the letter in the debate and speeches was probably a bonus, even though the letter was hatched by his campaign. Probably predictable though, given the big mouth and lack of concern for honesty of this guy.
I think I've heard this supposition before, but I'd forgotten about it, so maybe the plan is working (at least on me!).
Anyway, I'm a big believer in repeating things that I think need to be kept in mind, so that they don't slip down the old memory hole (where I'm sure a lot of people would like Hunter's antics, and what they might imply about his down, to go), so thanks again for your reply! I hope you have ample opportunity to discuss this further in future posts.
Thanks for the pull up and I wish I could. I don’t have any information about it but I remember watching the coverage on TV (before I cut the cable) and realizing that the coverage had the same “smell” as the Kennedy assassination coverage. And we all know who did that, even if they’ve buried the evidence for 50 years. The lying liars and the lying lies they tell always sound the same, whether it’s in Chile, Iraq or Ukraine. I bet you can just imagine what I think about Jeffery Epstein and the upper echelons of the Shitlib party! 🫢
As Literally Mussolini says, it was ALL a conscious lie by everyone who signed. The signatories merely had a built-in CYA mechanism. But they all knew it was a lie.
This is one reason I am always astounded - and disgusted - when someone who absolutely knows about the lies and corruption of the Dems asks me if I will vote for what they assume is a more palatable politician. It is the Democratic Party that is corrupt, IMO, and once a politician disappears into its money maw, they are no longer effective at anything except fleecing their supporters. Actually, those who ask brightly if I would vote for a "progressive" Dem are more venal than the outright vote for the blue no matter who contingent. Oh, and signing on to or co-sponsoring progressive bills that will never ever even reach the floor, much less be voted on, and much MUCH less be passed (and then make it past Biden's veto) makes a politician pragmatic and pretty much deceitful, not progressive. All just campaign and fund-raising material, really. What actually happens is the only thing that counts. Our government is now, IMO, pretty much insulated and separated from the lives of its citizens.
And no, I will not vote for the GOP, either. Much as some try and make "voting" some sort of binary mandate, it is not.
"There is only one party in the United States, the Property Party … and it has two right wings: Republican and Democrat. Republicans are a bit stupider, more rigid, more doctrinaire in their laissez-faire capitalism than the Democrats, who are cuter, prettier, a bit more corrupt — until recently … and more willing than the Republicans to make small adjustments when the poor, the black, the anti-imperialists get out of hand. But, essentially, there is no difference between the two parties."
Point taken, and thank you. The conscious lie was on the part of Blinken and Morrell, certainly, while the other signatories can claim plausible deniability.
Fair statement?
Oh, you're welcome.
My reply was intended more as following your post deeper than suggesting a mistake in it. Actually, I think your edit is too easy on the other fifty. They put the letter out hoping it would be misconstrued in headlines and soundbites.* When it was, they didn't come out and forcefully correct the record.
So whether the letter was technically a "lie" seems a distinction without a difference. All the people signing it intended to deceive.
---
* I think Biden himself misrepresenting the letter in the debate and speeches was probably a bonus, even though the letter was hatched by his campaign. Probably predictable though, given the big mouth and lack of concern for honesty of this guy.
I’m also convinced that the entire war in Ukraine is an attempt to cover up Hunter Bunter Biden’s nefarious (and stumble butt ) actions in Ukraine.
Thanks for pointing that out.
I think I've heard this supposition before, but I'd forgotten about it, so maybe the plan is working (at least on me!).
Anyway, I'm a big believer in repeating things that I think need to be kept in mind, so that they don't slip down the old memory hole (where I'm sure a lot of people would like Hunter's antics, and what they might imply about his down, to go), so thanks again for your reply! I hope you have ample opportunity to discuss this further in future posts.
Thanks for the pull up and I wish I could. I don’t have any information about it but I remember watching the coverage on TV (before I cut the cable) and realizing that the coverage had the same “smell” as the Kennedy assassination coverage. And we all know who did that, even if they’ve buried the evidence for 50 years. The lying liars and the lying lies they tell always sound the same, whether it’s in Chile, Iraq or Ukraine. I bet you can just imagine what I think about Jeffery Epstein and the upper echelons of the Shitlib party! 🫢
Well, I certainly do not want to give Security State nuthangers any cheap talking points, and I always seek to clarify and sharpen my own thoughts.
As Literally Mussolini says, it was ALL a conscious lie by everyone who signed. The signatories merely had a built-in CYA mechanism. But they all knew it was a lie.
This is one reason I am always astounded - and disgusted - when someone who absolutely knows about the lies and corruption of the Dems asks me if I will vote for what they assume is a more palatable politician. It is the Democratic Party that is corrupt, IMO, and once a politician disappears into its money maw, they are no longer effective at anything except fleecing their supporters. Actually, those who ask brightly if I would vote for a "progressive" Dem are more venal than the outright vote for the blue no matter who contingent. Oh, and signing on to or co-sponsoring progressive bills that will never ever even reach the floor, much less be voted on, and much MUCH less be passed (and then make it past Biden's veto) makes a politician pragmatic and pretty much deceitful, not progressive. All just campaign and fund-raising material, really. What actually happens is the only thing that counts. Our government is now, IMO, pretty much insulated and separated from the lives of its citizens.
And no, I will not vote for the GOP, either. Much as some try and make "voting" some sort of binary mandate, it is not.
"There is only one party in the United States, the Property Party … and it has two right wings: Republican and Democrat. Republicans are a bit stupider, more rigid, more doctrinaire in their laissez-faire capitalism than the Democrats, who are cuter, prettier, a bit more corrupt — until recently … and more willing than the Republicans to make small adjustments when the poor, the black, the anti-imperialists get out of hand. But, essentially, there is no difference between the two parties."
Gore Vidal