M3M3M3, I agree with you 90%. I disagree with your comment that "the point of the special counsel was to indict Americans colluding with foreign powers". It was also to investigate how foreign powers attempted to influence the 2016 U.S. election. To not investigate that is to just shrug your shoulders and say, mehh... On that basis alone, your "nothing burger" becomes a "something burger", because it can allow U.S. officials to adjust the way elections are run so that the will of the American people is respected and is protected against foreign influence. If you think that this is a "nothing burger" issue, then that's fine, that's your opinion. Personally, as someone who respects democracy, I disagree.
5 ( +5 / -0 )
arrestpaul... you may be right. You may be wrong. Your comment is irrelevant to the issue as the investigation wasn't based on media reports.
2 ( +3 / -1 )
otherworldly... good thing these investigations aren't based on the media, otherwise you may have actually made a relevant point!
0 ( +1 / -1 )
clamenza: "alert Americans" - kinda like George Soros and the EU buying off British politicians to try and reverse Brexit?
If that's what floats your boat. Both clear examples of not being at all "alert"... So, your point was...?
2 ( +3 / -1 )
clamenza, lol. Funniest thing I've read today! Great political satire!
6 ( +7 / -1 )
bass4funk "We can say only the most anti-American of Americans the very disturbing behavior of the top officials of the FBI and DOJ as business as usual or even going so far as dismissing it."
Yes, how DARE the FBI and DOJ investigate even the potential of foreign interference in an election. Clearly that is treason... So un-American.
"So you're saying, the FBI can't walk and chew gum at the same time. That's very scary."
... that makes absolutely no sense at all. By shedding light on foreign interference... what on earth does that have to do with walking and gum. Clear logic fail.
"Only agents and supporters of the Russians that would give the FBI a pass on dismissing FBI rogue agents of conspiring to taking down a US President on US soil as nothing and trying to stop an investigation into it as a dud or nothing burger. Very disturbing."
So... you clearly see this investigation as nothing than a conspiracy to "take down a US President". Did you even read the findings? There was nothing against the president, so if it's a conspiracy, it's a terrible one. You are arguing against an investigation of the US election process on the basis of a conspiracy against a candidate who was elected when no findings have been found against said candidate and no attempt has been made to undermine his election. What has been found, though, is foreign individuals actively working to influence the result of the election, and yet you describe any attempt to investigate this as anti-American. No. Not now, not ever. In a democracy, we investigate, check, adjust as a result and use this process to stay strong. Your logic, your process is flawed.
3 ( +3 / -0 )
Blacklabel: It’s a farce. Let’s indict a bunch of Internet foreigner people we will never prosecute. How can anyone actively choose to collude with “ Russians” if it was made clear these people posed as Americans?
Ummm... just want to add some logic here... no one made it clear that these people were "Russians" until it was investigated. If the investigation was "a farce", then we wouldn't know they were Russians posing as Americans. By your logic, people needed to know in advance that they were colluding with foreigners pretending to be Americans that we didn't know were not American until the investigation that is a farce and shouldn't have been investigated... yep... you said that.
1 ( +2 / -1 )
"We just don't know, Trump didn't fire Mueller and even if he did, he has the constitutional authority to do so, even if that wouldn't be a wise decision."
For the 3rd time this thread, I was about to totally agree with bass... but then...
"What? No, it means this farce of an investigation can now wrap up"
Any investigation that shows clear foreign interference in a U.S. election is not a "farce of an investigation". The only people who are describing it in those words are those trying to discredit the investigation as a witch-hunt against Donald Trump and are not actually interesting in preserving the integrity of U.S. elections.
3 ( +4 / -1 )
bass4funk: "hey, they could have voted for the pantsuits lady, but didn't. Dodged that disastrous bullet."
Agreeing with bass 2 times within an hour... I must be ill... I agree that the U.S. "dodged a bullet" by not electing "pantsuits lady". They instead elected a "landmine" in Trump. It was an election that was always going to elect a dud. That's what you get with 2 dud candidates...
4 ( +4 / -0 )
Tokyo-Engr, again, excellent comments.
1) When talking about issues at national level, individual prosecutions mean little. I know this doesn't answer your question, but I guess this just re-enforces the whole complexity of the issue.
2) I personally don't think censorship is the solution, except in extreme cases. Education is the only real solution, but that is so hard when the media are in the best position to educate, but are so partisan.
3) I don't and never have thought that the Russian agenda was for a Trump presidency, that's why I've always tried to focus on the Russian interference rather than arguments of collusion. I, personally, think that Russia sees an advantage in destabilising the U.S's faith in democracy. As long as the U.S. is inwardly focused, then they aren't looking at what's happening on the global stage. They aren't interested in sanctions against Russia or interfering in Russian global activities such as the Ukraine or Syria.
1 ( +2 / -1 )
Tokyo-Engr - some great points.
"In the old days it was with the shortwave radio" - true, but in those days, you knew what you were getting when you listened in. The problem today is that people don't know who they are listening to. It's fine knowing that you're listening to "Radio Free Europe" and knowing where they're coming from, but when you're reading posts from a supposed local "partiot" group and they are far from local and far from patriots, then you're being led so far up the garden path that you're more likely to find Livingston than the truth.
As for the U.S. actions in Central America, totally agree. There is no excuse for that, and an argument can be mounted that the Russian interference was only online, and therefore less offensive. It doesn't take away from the fact that there was a deliberate attempt from a foreign power to influence the U.S. election.
And yes, "the hypocrisy of my nation of citizenship and birth is stunning". I don't think anyone can argue against that. A sad thought to end on. :(
2 ( +2 / -0 )
bass4funk: "McConnell responded with a denial that there is any proof of Russian interference, and said he would oppose any announcement as political interference by Obama in the election. He needs to be held accountable." - So what should happen? He should be flogged?
I kind of agree with bass on this one. The Russian interference investigation is still ongoing. If, in the end, the investigation does prove Russian interference in the election, then McConnell will need to be held accountable for his actions. Politicians often push issues away as a distraction with the aim that by the time they return, the public will have moved on. If this investigation does show that McConnell was in the wrong, then he should not be "flogged", but he should take responsibility for actions and act accordingly, which would probably be to step down from his current leadership role if his leadership has been proven to be poor.
4 ( +4 / -0 )
Alert to what? Clearly not alert to the potential of foreign interference...
6 ( +6 / -0 )
Burning Bush: The more Americans attack each other the easier it is for foreign interests to exploit the divide and manipulate them. Who's the cause of the all this. It's you, the person posting negative comments about your fellow Americans.
Yes, again, so true. And as has been clear by your past attacking posts on anything you disagree with, I look forward to more balanced positive comments in the future. I agree with you that endless negativity and political attacks lead to a downward spiral. I hope you don't mind if I save this comment by you to remind you of this in the future, and you are free to also remind me of mine here. Maybe, perhaps, we few people with computers can actually make a difference...
3 ( +5 / -2 )
Burning Bush: Who needs a million man Red Army when all it takes is 13 Russians with a computer to take over the US.
Burning Bush... so true. A sad indictment of the current state of U.S. politics. In days like these, we can only rely on the integrity of the gatekeepers enforcing the law and ignoring political/media interference. We need people like Mr. Mueller to ignore fake denials by politicians and get to the bottom of this thing, because, as you so rightly point out, in this day and age, a small number of people armed with "computers" can have devastating effects on a misinformed public.
10 ( +11 / -1 )
"These 7 States "Already Ban Assault Weapons, And SCOTUS Won't Change That" California. Connecticut. Maryland. Massachusetts. New Jersey. New York. - Why? I wish they these same States would ban sanctuary cities as well.
Thank you, bass4funk. Your post perfectly sums up the argument. Apparently, wanting to protect people who may not have been born in your country but yet positively contribute to it is worse than trying to protect those same people and others in the general populace from being murdered by mentally unstable individuals with assault weapons. A classic example of a strawman argument. The young man who committed this crime was NOT an immigrant and was NOT in a state with "sactuary cities"... To put it to the logic test, it is a clear FAIL.
1 ( +4 / -3 )
Thanks for the context and the research done. Much appreciated. That covers the "bear and (any?) gun that you want" part of the original post, but do you have anything in reference to the "just because you feel like it" part, as that really is the crux of the issue.
-3 ( +0 / -3 )
Every time there is a mass shooting in the U.S, it saddens me. I hate seeing tearful parents scream "why?" as they mourn the loss of their children. In part, Donald Trump is right... in that the issue of mental health needs to be addressed, but he ignores the elephant in the room. It's the fact that mentally unstable people can easily access weapons of mass killing - weapons highly restricted in other countries - that magnify the loss in events like these. While the idiocy of arguing that any gun control will lead to complete government tyranny exists, then nothing will change. It's you're choice, America. Democracy can work. Let your local politicians know EXACTLY what you think about this. Hold them accountable.
-1 ( +2 / -3 )
HonestDictator: Another thing that comes to mind is why are they trying so hard to undermine the entire federal justice system?
HD, don't you know that investigating a FORMER Trump staffer who has known links to an acknowledged Russian spy is clear evidence of leftist bias and an inability to form coherent thoughts...
2 ( +3 / -1 )
Yep... Comey was cheering Hillary so much that he announced a new investigation into Hillary's emails just before the election... Clearly an act of a devoted devotee... Sorry, black, but I'll vote for "making it up" over any actual evidence to show otherwise, unless you have some ACTUAL evidence to show otherwise...
3 ( +3 / -0 )
Oh, news reports. We all know that the news is always correct, that's why we know Trump is both the greatest president ever and also the worst... depending on the news you read, but clearly it's the news, so it's right... You don't need to make it up when there are others who'll do it for you...
1 ( +2 / -1 )
Blacklabel... wow... very interesting read. I was very entertained. Now, all we need is some sort of evidence that this isn't some teenage girl politico fan fic... I can't wait for chapter 2 where Comey and Hillary get funky together and lead the U.S. to a new socialist utopia...
1 ( +3 / -2 )
I'm guessing that the people who earn a living to know things don't actually know much at all... I'm all for accountability... and that includes unnamed people who probably said some things that maybe had words that showed things that proved you were right... right? I can respect that.
0 ( +1 / -1 )
... I ran out of "isms"... lol!
-1 ( +0 / -1 )
M3M3M3: Meija, I agree with you 110%. Also with your post at 10:59. The more evidence the better, even if it turns out to be a 'nothing burger'.
I'm all for investigating 'nothing burgers'. In a healthy democracy, we need to make sure that things are working as they should. Corruption is the enemy of democracy. Corruption should always be investigated, no matter what your own political beliefs... I'll never support attempts to shut down investigations into political machinations. Let the FBI investigate... if no wrong has been done, then that'll be shown. If we get to the point where we can no long trust the gatekeepers of democracy, then we fall into fascism, totalitarianism or some other very scary thing...
2 ( +3 / -1 )
M3M3M3: I certainly don't (but I'm not exactly a conservative). I think most open minded people are perfectly willing to entertain the possibility that the Trump campaign might have been colluding with Russia.
Most... but there are clearly some here whose minds are quite closed...
M3M3M3: while at the very same time some in the FBI and DOJ were obstructing justice to gather intelligence on a candidate they didn't want in the Whitehouse. Why can't both of these be true? One does not disprove the other. We live in a complex world full of scheming and wrongdoing.
Which is why we need to allow the appropriate authorities to investigate. I totally agree. We need accountability. What we also need is to make sure that the government disseminates correct information. There are a number of points in this memo that twist facts for political gain. Yes, we need to make sure the FBI are unbiased in their investigations, but we also need to be sure that governments don't abuse their power. As you say, we live in a complex world.
0 ( +2 / -2 )
bass4funk: (No, it's the truth. Look it up.) I did, but as I said, I go with the people that earn a living and know this, not what Wikipedia says.
Sigh... I agree that you can't trust Wikipedia. I haven't visited that site in a long, long time. "Look it up" means go to the source. Go to the Comey public testimony. I don't know who these "people" are you're reading, but I'm suspecting that they're feeding you some serious BS. If you need help (and I shouldn't have to point you anywhere as it would imply that all of your arguments thus far have been uninformed), but read this...
-1 ( +1 / -2 )
bass4funk: Ok, that’s one opinion.
No, it's the truth. Look it up.
0 ( +2 / -2 )
Look, this is the last thing that I'm going to say on this. I don't care if you vote Republican or Democrat. Everyone should stand up for what they believe and vote accordingly. The stupidity that really really really frustrates me is when people as so partisan that they can't see what is right in front of them, and comments on stories like this illustrate the problem. Serious accusations should be investigated. Hillary's emails should be investigated by the appropriate authorities. Accusations of Russian meddling in elections should also be investigated. Stupid partisan arguments and twisting of facts like we've seen in the Nune memo serve no purpose except to undermine democratic process. Personally, politically, I lean to the right, but I refuse to accept partisan untruths that serve no other purpose than to obstruct justice for political purposes. That's call corruption. I refuse to accept corruption in any for because it destroys democratic societies. Anyone of integrity, no matter what side of politics they stand for, should always speak up in regards to corruption. It is clear that there is, at least, issues that need to be investigated here. It is also clear that the Nunes memo and most of the arguments put forwards in support seem to be intended far more to shut down any investigation than to actually find the true. It's almost as if the those supporting this memo and demanding the investigation be shut down are so frightened of it because they know what it will uncover. If there is no wrong doing, then nothing will be uncovered. You and I can't judge that, it needs to be properly investigated.
2 ( +4 / -2 )
bass4funk: "The FBI had an issue with the memo being published because it is out of context, not because the FBI was worried about being exposed as corrupt. That is simply a conservative dream." -You mean the grammar correction, that was duly noted and verified.
No... simple concept... context isn't grammar. Examples of "out of context"... saying "Comey himself, under oath, admitted the dossier was 'salacious and unverified'" when Comey was referring to parts of the dossier that were indeed 'salacious and unverified'. "Out of context" is to take that statement about part of the dossier and assuming that it described the whole thing when Comey declined to comment on the actual criminal allegations. THAT is "out of context".
3 ( +4 / -1 )