I like it. It's as if Varg Vikernes tried his hand at singing doom metal.

Finally a movie made for Brexit voters!

Needs more prog.

Trow me that viskey!

It's mindblowing that anyone still cites that Harvard Law Review bullshit as a presidential qualification. It was NEVER an impressive qualification, and become even less so after Obama ended up reversing himself on every consequential legal opinion he ever held prior to becoming POTUS and endorsing Bush legal…

I didn't say Obama's featherweight resume was the same as none at all, but it certainly took us a giant step in the wrong direction and set the stage for where we are now. Obama was a massive downgrade in qualification standards for POTUS, down to a level that was unthinkable before him. Back in 2008 I remember…

Not to endorse the Rock's qualifications, but Barack Obama had jack shit for presidential qualifications when he announced his candidacy in 2007. He'd been in the U.S. Senate for all of two years at that point, and before that he was an Illinois state legislator. If you want to talk about who's responsible for…

I will be mourning the early demise of Other Space for the rest of my life. It was too good for this world.

For many reasons, American Graffiti's 1973 release date was a unique and unrepeatable moment in history in which nostalgia for 11 years prior was perfectly appropriate. Not so for Dazed and Confused's release in 1993. That was a straightforward example of time moving at a different speed from today's.

I'm convinced that time has accelerated. In 1993 the audience of Dazed and Confused saw nothing odd about a nostalgia piece being set only 17 years prior to its release date. Time moves too fast for that anymore.

Is this any good? I remember seeing it on TV a few years after it came out. It's all so hazy now. I haven't seen it since.

No, it wasn't well-crafted. By Maddow's own admission it contained typos, scrambled fonts, spacing mistakes, printer thumbprints, visible creases, and dates and names that shouldn't have been there. It was just an amateur photoshop hack job. Buzzfeed reporter Chris McDaniel was sent the same document and he…

Ah, so Maddow's big scoop is "This could have been a random troll sending obvious baloney to a reporter's inbox, or it could be part of a sinister conspiracy. YOU DECIDE, VIEWERS."

Hello? Maddow had no story without the allegation that the forger must have had access to The Intercept document before it went online. You take that out, and the story becomes "Random doofus put some stupid bullshit in my inbox." That's not even newsworthy. Every news service gets sent tons of crap by random…

Read the article then. It's funny. Greenwald actually contacted Maddow before posting it and asked her to comment. She was forced to walk back the central point of her story, which is that the forger must have had access to The Intercept document before it went online. Her story was bullshit and she got called on…

Glenn Greenwald just posted an article at The Intercept addressing Maddow's story. Unsurprisingly, it makes Maddow look like a horse's ass.

The really funny thing is I could just as easily whip up a conspiracy theory in which Maddow herself or perhaps some loyal Democrat commissioned this shoddy and easily detected forgery and had it sent to Maddow's inbox to burnish her credentials as a skeptical reporter. She certainly has managed to exploit it for…

It's hilarious that for a whole year any left-leaning Russiagate skeptics were accused of being Putin stooges by the crowd that slurped up MSNBC's conspiracy-mongering. That might be coming to an end soon. Russiagate continues to flounder, so I expect we're about to witness a great flowering of skepticism from the…

You sure it was someone from the top? This wasn't anywhere near a professional-caliber forgery. Would a top spy not know about printer thumbprints? Would a top spy not notice a crease on a folded page? Would he forget to alter the metadata to hide the file date? This was an amateur job.

It's a simple point that you miss: Maddow is posturing like the presence of shoddy and intentionally deceptive evidence is a new phenomenon in Russiagate — like it's a revelation she just uncovered. It's not. The evidence has largely been dogshit right from the start. The phenomenon of the intelligence agencies…