Tonight the NYTimes reports that the FBI opened an inquiry shortly after Comey was fired into whether Trump was working secretly with Russia. This is a FIRST for the American presidency! Counter-intellligence investigating a sitting president.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Responding to the Times article, Tucker Carlson of right-wing FOX Cable suggests the FBI is a rogue, criminal organization.

So the FBI secretly investigates a sitting pres who fired their beloved (I suppose) director. They find nothing, and then manage to leak the news a year and a half later. This is the same FBI who investigated HC, found evidence of criminal behavior, but then circumvented the AG and decided not to prosecute.

Yeah, that FBI is a sterling bunch.

Haven't we been down this road, Mueller has worked for two years, if there was any evidence you would think it might be obvious by now

We have plenty of evidence with convictions of lying about the campaigns contacts with Russian intelligence and Manafort's direct connections to Russian oligarchs working under Putin, and MORE to come for sure, so why you ignore what's there already is a mystery to me even if you are aa stone to the bone dufus sycophant. Add some campaign payoff hijinks and the big bucks for his inauguration nobody can account for, you have to be smelling the stink of corruption even if you squeeze your nose so tight your eyes buck out.

Don't worry, it won't be long now.

Look, Trump is a businessman who wanted to establish his empire in Russia too, it doesn't prove collusion, it doesn't prove treason, what it proves is he had plans. There is so much corruption over there I don't know how you could tell one stench from another. Look, Tal, I really don't care who sits on the american throne as long as he doesn't ignite a war, we have had enough of wars, they have achieved nothing

There are wars everywhere, that's why masses of people are running all over the place. There will always be a war someplace, with masses of people running all over the place. Nothing new for humans. Of course the Dufus is a business man, if you want to call a con job business. Vlad is out of his league though, and it shows.

Haven't we been down this road, Mueller has worked for two years, if there was any evidence you would think it might be obvious by now


Trump either worked for the Kremlin, or he was an unwilling agent manipulated by the Russians. The evidence is there.

See "Proof of Collusion" by Seth Abramson.

https://www.vox.com/2018/6/11/17438386/trump-russia-collusion

Vox is rated as left-leaning but "highly factual". There's much in the link but it's nicely broken down into sections. Worth a read.

This is a good summary of the article: "I would not necessarily call any of this “evidence” of collusion, but it’s certainly grounds for suspicion."

If that article is all Mueller has, then it's time to shut down the investigation.

Another quote about the "evidence": "That Trumpworld was clearly open to both political collusion and financial dealmaking with the Russian government doesn’t demonstrate that either actually occurred. But it’s unquestionably evidence in favor of the possibility."

Really powerful stuff. "...evidence in favor of the possibility." That one made me laugh. Try that one is a court of law. "Your honor, we have evidence that favors the possibility that the accused is guilty!"

Here is how the federal government works. The government is partially shut down, and thousands of workers are not getting paid. The democrats are so concerned about this that they decide they need to meet and conference about it. Now where do you suppose they went? To someone's house, or to a hotel in Virginia, or an office building in the capital? No, they found it necessary to spend taxpayer borrowed money to go to Puerto Rico and meet in a no doubt expensive hotel, and eat no doubt expensive meals, so they could talk about the budget crisis. The amazing thing is, they do not see the irony in this. Why do these people continue to get elected??

This is a good summary of the article: "I would not necessarily call any of this “evidence” of collusion, but it’s certainly grounds for suspicion."

If that article is all Mueller has, then it's time to shut down the investigation.

Another quote about the "evidence": "That Trumpworld was clearly open to both political collusion and financial dealmaking with the Russian government doesn’t demonstrate that either actually occurred. But it’s unquestionably evidence in favor of the possibility."

Really powerful stuff. "...evidence in favor of the possibility." That one made me laugh. Try that one is a court of law. "Your honor, we have evidence that favors the possibility that the accused is guilty!"

Do you need a list of the Mueller indictments that have gone or will go before a court of law... so far? The media doesn't know what Mueller has and neither do you since he has said or leaked nothing, just continually brought criminals to justice. That's evidence he is a careful professional, doing a professional investigation and getting legal results. Go ahead, keep dismissing those outcomes all you want, but I bet those dufus flunkies and Vlad conspirators have not.

Even the dufus has enough sense to find as many lawyers as he can to defend him against the Mueller witch hunt!

https://www.politicususa.com/2019/01/09/panicked-white-house-just-hired-17-more-lawyers-as-mueller-closes-in-on-trump.html

We're going to get that lying cheating dufus!


Here is how the federal government works. The government is partially shut down, and thousands of workers are not getting paid. The democrats are so concerned about this that they decide they need to meet and conference about it. Now where do you suppose they went? To someone's house, or to a hotel in Virginia, or an office building in the capital? No, they found it necessary to spend taxpayer borrowed money to go to Puerto Rico and meet in a no doubt expensive hotel, and eat no doubt expensive meals, so they could talk about the budget crisis. The amazing thing is, they do not see the irony in this. Why do these people continue to get elected??

The dems have passed their bills already and now it's up to repubs in the senate to pass theirs. That's how the government works. The only one just talking is YOUR dufus.

The dems have passed their bills already and now it's up to repubs in the senate to pass theirs. That's how the government works. The only one just talking is YOUR dufus.

Takes 60 votes in the senate. That's how the government works, so it does require some democrat cooperation. Even if that was not the case, it does not justify the high and mighty going on a taxpayer funded spending spree to Puerto Rico simply because they want to. That's pathetic.


Do you need a list of the Mueller indictments that have gone or will go before a court of law... so far? The media doesn't know what Mueller has and neither do you since he has said or leaked nothing, just continually brought criminals to justice.

That's was a reply to the article linked by Athos. Did you bother to read it??

WHO in the FBI authorized a counter intelligence investigation of Trump ?
McCabe?
Strzok?Baker?Page? The whole group demonstrated political bias against Trump and have left the FBI in disgrace .
and who supervised at DOJ? Rosenstein?

They are all anti-Trump, so I'm sure it will be OK with many people. Now if that had been done with Mr. Obama, then it would have caused an uproar and heads would have rolled.

Takes 60 votes in the senate. That's how the government works, so it does require some democrat cooperation. Even if that was not the case, it does not justify the high and mighty going on a taxpayer funded spending spree to Puerto Rico simply because they want to. That's pathetic...That's was a reply to the article linked by Athos. Did you bother to read it??

So why doesn't Mitch put them to a vote? He knows he has the votes from the dems and probably enough to OVERRIDE a dufus veto. Shutdown over, and that's how the government should work. The real question would then be does NANCY have the votes in the house. That requires republican support. Roughly 65 repubs must join the dems.

Yes I read the article and a number of accounts besides and my point is if everybody indicted and convicted worked for the same guy then I would sure look at the guy closely wouldn't you? That's not evidence, but is some compelling PROBABLE CAUSE don't you agree?


Here is how the federal government works. The government is partially shut down, and thousands of workers are not getting paid. The democrats are so concerned about this that they decide they need to meet and conference about it. Now where do you suppose they went? To someone's house, or to a hotel in Virginia, or an office building in the capital? No, they found it necessary to spend taxpayer borrowed money to go to Puerto Rico and meet in a no doubt expensive hotel, and eat no doubt expensive meals, so they could talk about the budget crisis. The amazing thing is, they do not see the irony in this. Why do these people continue to get elected??

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/latino-house-democrats-make-show-new-strength-puerto-rico-n956426

That's not evidence, but is some compelling PROBABLE CAUSE don't you agree?

So we both agree there is no evidence.


So why doesn't Mitch put them to a vote? He knows he has the votes from the dems and probably enough to OVERRIDE a dufus veto.

There is only one bill sent to the senate and it involves spending on the wall. If you are saying that there are dems in the senate who will vote for it, I'd love to know who they are.

Joe Manchin is the only one I can think of .

There is an abundance of probable cause that warrants an investigation and we will have to wait for Mueller's report, or any number of the OTHER investigations to conclude. You really believe no repub will vote to open up the government, after they voted to keep it open in December with no wall money? Be interesting to see how this plays out as it goes on with people losing money on a freaking wall that won't get built anytime during this reign of stupidity and corruption.

Which reigh of stupidity and corruption was that?

BS . There was no probable cause . They ran a secret counter intelligence operation before the election and used the pretext of the Comey firing to formalize it .It was always a political banana republic attack on a political foe .

BS . There was no probable cause .


Trump gave every indication of colluding with Russia. Of course, they investigated him - that's their job. Mueller knows thing nobody else does.

We are back to smoke and mirrors again, I thorght I saw a puddy cat

Even if (and that's a huge "if") Trump's campaign colluded with the Russkies, that would not be a crime. There are no laws against collusion. When your beloved President Obama told the Russian ambassador he would have more flexibility after the election, was that collusion? It certainly was, but collusion is not a crime.

BS . There was no probable cause . They ran a secret counter intelligence operation before the election and used the pretext of the Comey firing to formalize it .It was always a political banana republic attack on a political foe .

Why wouldn't the dufus be held to the same standard you have subjected the Clintons too? Even you have documented his reputation over the years in New York, and now you look away? At best the dufus is a useful idiot for Vlad and the Saudis, at worst he is an unscrupulous businessman who will deal with anyone and puts his interest above the countries interest.

That does not preclude the fool is being set up and blackmailed by Vlad either, but his words and actions have certainly been suspicious from the beginning. That's enough probable cause for me, and obviously for a majority of Americans.

That does not preclude the fool is being set up and blackmailed by Vlad either, but his words and actions have certainly been suspicious from the beginning. That's enough probable cause for me,

Yes. That would certainly work in court. "Your honor, the accused has been acting in a suspicious manner, and that's enough probable cause for us." That case would be thrown out of court so fast it would make your head spin, just like your suspicions should be taken with a LARGE grain of salt.

The dufus has not been indicted at least not yet, just scrutinized, investigated, and blasted in the press, all assumptions and speculation to be fair, but if you find a bunch of rotten apples in the same barrel you don't just eat one without looking closer at it. I must add that believing anything a lying, cheating bully says is what you need your grain(S) of salt for.

You righty's would do well to stock up if you didn't have the foresight to do so two years ago.

The price of apples is high

but if you find a bunch of rotten apples in the same barrel you don't just eat one without looking closer at it

I'll take a wild guess that you did not apply the same standard to Mr. Obama. He had a boatload of scandals, but I don't recall hearing any libs call for legal action against him.

I'll take a wild guess that you did not apply the same standard to Mr. Obama. He had a boatload of scandals, but I don't recall hearing any libs call for legal action against him.

You didn't hear any repubs calling for legal action either, and they controlled the congress for 6 of the 8 years of the Obama administration.

You didn't hear any repubs calling for legal action either, and they controlled the congress for 6 of the 8 years of the Obama administration

Exactly! Just like they are not calling for legal action against Trump now. And why? Because in both cases, there is nothing to take legal action about. I'm glad you are finally beginning to understand that. Just because you hate Trump does not mean there is a legal case against him.

Exactly! Just like they are not calling for legal action against Trump now. And why? Because in both cases, there is nothing to take legal action about. I'm glad you are finally beginning to understand that. Just because you hate Trump does not mean there is a legal case against him.

I don't hate the dufus, but legal actions have been taken and it's ongoing and just because you love the dufus doesn't mean he isn't a lying cheating crook that won't be brought to justice IF he has committed a crime. Repubs aren't calling for legal actions because many are protecting him, and many are waiting for the Mueller report which may exonerate him, or indict him, as it has those around him already.

I get you are holding your nose but are your fingers crossed too?

doesn't mean he isn't a lying cheating crook that won't be brought to justice IF he has committed a crime

Same thing could be true of you. Same thing could be true of me. That little word IF is a difference maker.

Like the dems didn't protect Mr. Obama. Right.

Yeah, I think you hate him. That's why you are accusing him of criminal activity when there is no evidence on him. That's why you call him the dufus. Occam's razor.

The attorney general of New York has already made the dufus an unindicted co conspirator with Michael Cohen concerning campaign finance irregularities, and Mr Barr has said that the Mueller investigations is NOT a witch hunt as the dufus has been saying. The dufus lied about the payoffs, and he lied about knowing of the meeting with the Russians in his tower. He knew all right, as well as at least twice admitting Comey was fired because of the Russia thing.

Evidence is being gathered as assumptions are replaced with FACTS.

Just a reminder to all the Trump accusers. Want to talk about collusion with Russia? Here it is. Note especially the response of, "I understand". I post that because I know all of you who are so concerned about collusion will immediately begin a thread condemning Mr. Obama for this terrible violation. What better evidence could you want? He even put his hand on the other man's arm! "Don't worry, Mr. Medvedev. I'm on your side!"


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0mgQaFlo_p8

Never mind that all that changed when Putin came back to power, and have you heard of Medvedev since? Never mind that while the dufus and his stooge were declaring victory over ISIS, Americans were assassinated in Syria. Never mind we have heard NOTHING about those soldiers losing their lives in Syria, from either idiot. Never mind we have no clue what the dufus and Putin are talking about, its so secret his own advisors don't know.

Never mind the millions of folks going broke because the dufus can't let go of his stupid wall. Nobody in Texas wants a wall, so build one in Mississippi why don't you, or NY, or Australia why don't you!

DON'T MESS WITH TEXAS!!!

Never mind the millions of folks going broke because the dufus can't let go of his stupid wall. Nobody in Texas wants a wall, so build one in Mississippi why don't you, or NY, or Australia why don't you!

It's like saying the guards in the prison don't want a wall, so instead we'll build one around Walmart.

Nobody in Texas wants a wall? You must be talking about the people living in the city of Texas, New York. The people living in the state of Texas plainly want a wall as shown by the fact that they voted for Trump.

voted for Trump
The Texas people, especially the ones who live along the border, who go back and forth to Mexico for various reasons, and who own property and businesses near the border are quickly changing their minds.

Never mind the millions of folks going broke because the dufus can't let go of his stupid wall. Nobody in Texas wants a wall, so build one in Mississippi why don't you, or NY, or Australia why don't you!

From the Australian point of view we have something much better and just as effective, a deep ocean, but if we didn't have that we might build a wall. Our wall is legal, come here illegally by boat and you will never be allowed to settle. Perhaps if you had such a law, if you come illegally you will never be allowed to settle, you might not need a wall. I know you are for open borders so that will not sit well but consider

Sure we voted for the dufus, but that doesn't mean we fell for that wall, or Mexico paying for it BS. It sure didn't mean we were going to go for eminent domain either. You got reality and BS all mixed up.

Sure we voted for the dufus, but that doesn't mean we fell for that wall, or Mexico paying for it BS. It sure didn't mean we were going to go for eminent domain either. You got reality and BS all mixed up.

Tal, you admit you voted for him, and by default his policies. He is legally President pursuing a policy his predecessors pursued.
Therefore those who lost need to get over it and get on with it.

Why are you saying that Texans are now against the wall?

Ok let's go down this road

Who is for the wall, fence or whatever?

Who is against the wall waiting to be shot?

Who doesn't want the wall?

Tal, you admit you voted for him, and by default his policies. He is legally President pursuing a policy his predecessors pursued.
Therefore those who lost need to get over it and get on with it.

The dufus won Texas by 9 points in '16, but no American who didn't vote for him will just roll over and kiss his ring. Repubs didn't do that for Obama did they? Of course not, because that's just NOT how it's done here. There is no get over it, just get busy, and get after it.

https://ecp.yusercontent.com/mail?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.arcamax.com%2Fnewspics% 2F169%2F16926%2F1692668.gif&t=1547828639&ymreqid=acd6ec88-63d3-b076-1c8e-360001018800&sig=ZffoTYSABUPg6.Zdy5j..w--~C (https://www.arcamax.com/garyvarvel/s-2166586?ezine=641)


Why are you saying that Texans are now against the wall?

The border elected officials and landowners say NO WAY, and are gearing up for one helluva court battle if the dufus tries that crap. This was from last year,

https://www.star-telegram.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/bud-kennedy/article142164639.html

http://occupydemocrats.com/2017/04/03/10000-conservative-ranchers-just-came-trumps-wall/

And

https://riograndeguardian.com/south-texas-elected-officials-cut-out-the-border-is-violent-rhetoric/

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46815569

Plenty of embedded links from the locals to back up that a wall ain't happening.

They decided to open a counter intel investigation to cover the illegal one they had been conducting since the spring of 2016 .

It's not easy figuring out how to best investigate a known lying cheating dufus. He is surrounded by loyal sycophants. They better get the government open before Super Bowl Sunday, or they run out of donated food.

http://fortune.com/2019/01/18/how-the-government-shutdown-could-derail-super-bowl-travel/

Texas voted overwhelmingly for Trump who energetically advocated for the construction of a wall, but Texans oppose the building of the wall. Right. That's really believable.

It's not easy figuring out how to best investigate a known lying cheating dufus. It doesn't help them when their first impulse was to conduct an illegal investigation against a political opponent during an election contest

"Impeachment" was said more than 200 times on CNN & MSNBC even though they couldn't confirm the story.

Texas voted overwhelmingly for Trump who energetically advocated for the construction of a wall, but Texans oppose the building of the wall. Right. That's really believable.

Texas is a consistently overwhelmingly republican voting state any way. Wall or no wall, and we've been dealing with Mexicans a lot longer than most parts of the country, and they do work their illegal a$$es off. Even the dufus employs illegals at his golf courses, and other properties, has for decades, and doesn't care what country they are from. Look it up for yourself.

What you think illegals are just from Mexico, or central America? Or is it just those you object too?


It doesn't help them when their first impulse was to conduct an illegal investigation against a political opponent during an election contest

From my understanding it was predicated on words, deeds, behavior, and past history.



"Impeachment" was said more than 200 times on CNN & MSNBC even though they couldn't confirm the story.


So was the words "IF the story is true" as a clear disclaimer. Did get a lot of folks excited though. Can you blame them? Bet the dufus had a cow in the White House.

This is a sample of the iron-clad evidence put forth that Trump knowingly employs illegals. "You know, the truth is I have a lot of illegals working for me in Miami,” he told them, using the term for undocumented immigrants those in the meeting found offensive. “You know in Miami, my golf course is tended by all these Hispanics — if it wasn’t for them my lawn wouldn’t be the lawn it is; it’s the best lawn,” Pacheco recalled Trump saying.

It always seems to come down to what some lib "recalls" Trump saying. Never any real evidence, just innuendo.

When are you liberals ever going to understand the concept of "evidence"?

It doesn't have to be iron clad, just a preponderance of the facts. It's a matter of PUBLIC record, and HISTORY and you would acknowledge it if you stopped holding your nose since the election is over.

https://hillreporter.com/trumps-new-jersey-golf-resort-employs-illegal-immigrants-16923

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/feb/25/marco-rubio/marco-rubio-says-donald-trump-had-pay-1-million-hi/

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2016/08/donald-trump-s-history-of-using-undocumented-immigrant-workers.html

From my understanding it was predicated on words, deeds, behavior, and past history.




keep believing that . The emperor and Evita needed a pretext to spy on the Trump campaign . They paid to get salacious ,unverified and outright false information from Christopher Steele as opo research. With that info they enlisted cronies in the intel and justice dept to start a counter intel investigation under the code name 'Cross Fire Hurricane ' 100 days before election day . They needed a pretext to get FISA warrants to spy . So they used the fact that Carter page ;sometimes as an American asset had contact with Russians . The FISA court granted the warrants without so much as a proper hearing on them.

As my friend JL would say where's the evidence and since repubs are and were in power, how could they have dropped the ball on all those right wing hollering points? Hope we do better with the dufus!

It is long past time that the public was told exactly what the president is alleged to have done, and how strong the evidence is that he has done it. Over 2 years and Mueller has not even disclosed that Trump is the subject of an investigation . The only reason he even responded to the BuzzFeed story was because the leak was said to have come from his office .

just a preponderance of the facts.

You've got things mixed up. In civil cases, which these are not, the case is decided by a preponderance of the evidence. In criminal cases the prosecution must prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt, and that's a much higher standard. Considering the virtual absence of evidence that Trump was involved, I'm afraid your cherished hope will not come to pass.

Absence of evidence is not absence of guilt but reason for absence of prosecution. Trump cannot deny attempting to conduct business in Russia and that means cullision in something to get things done. However this process no doubt started before he became a political candidate and vulnerable. If you want to do business in Russia it is important to have backing of important people. Trump is an international businessman, he is guilty of stepping outside the US to do business

You've got things mixed up. In civil cases, which these are not, the case is decided by a preponderance of the evidence. In criminal cases the prosecution must prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt, and that's a much higher standard. Considering the virtual absence of evidence that Trump was involved, I'm afraid your cherished hope will not come to pass.

I stand corrected and the dufus is a crook well beyond a reasonable doubt. He has lost in court before and will lose again, because sooner or later we will find that Vlad has been loaning the dufus family money for decades after American banks refused him a penny after he stiffed them so many times.

There is no absence of evidence on that count.


Absence of evidence is not absence of guilt but reason for absence of prosecution. Trump cannot deny attempting to conduct business in Russia and that means cullision in something to get things done. However this process no doubt started before he became a political candidate and vulnerable. If you want to do business in Russia it is important to have backing of important people. Trump is an international businessman, he is guilty of stepping outside the US to do business

See above, but check Lincoln out in this pic.

https://www.arcamax.com/newspics/169/16930/1693058.gif

Tal, you are dreaming again, if there was evidence of a financial relationship it would have emerged by now. Money transfers are monitored and recorded and money laundering, the illegal transfer of money, is a crime and would have appeared on the horizon by now. Trump is guilty of being dumb but not that dumb

A simple Google search would inform you of the details of an ongoing investigations into the world of white collar crimes and the sleazy people that commit them.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/11/30/18120021/deutsche-bank-headquarters-raided-trump

It's not like they leave stuff out in the open for the law to find.

After nearly two years of investigating, on top of a 10-month FBI probe he inherited, Mueller needs to show his cards. 3 years is more than enough time. Put up or shut up .

After nearly two years of investigating, on top of a 10-month FBI probe he inherited, Mueller needs to show his cards. 3 years is more than enough time. Put up or shut up .

They need to put NCIS on it. They can get it solved in 50 minutes.

After nearly two years of investigating, on top of a 10-month FBI probe he inherited, Mueller needs to show his cards. 3 years is more than enough time. Put up or shut up .


How long did Watergate take? The right is impatient!


They need to put NCIS on it. They can get it solved in 50 minutes.

Excellent idea.

How long did Watergate take? The right is impatient!

Took about two years from the beginning of the investigation until Nixon resigned, but during much of that time there was information coming out that implicated Nixon in the crime, including the missing 40 minutes or so on a tape that was crucial. Kind of reminds me of the tens of thousands of missing emails from Clinton's server. Oops. I'm sorry. I keep forgetting that she has a "Get out of jail free" card.

Maybe this is a more modern comparison for you conservatives.

https://www.quora.com/How-long-did-the-Ken-Starr-investigation-last-as-compared-to-Robert-Mueller-s



The Clinton investigations lasted from January, 1994 when Special Prosecutor, Robert Fiske was hired until March, 2002 when Independent Counsel, Robert Ray concluded his work. In between Fiske and Ray was Ken Starr who was Independent Counsel from August, 1994 until September 1998.


AND


Mueller has been the independent counsel since May 17, 2017.

Two years in May for Mueller, so chill and quite crying.

Again, I just wonder if you read your articles since it would be helpful. That reference is to multiple investigations covering a variety of subjects.


The Clinton investigations covered Whitewater-Resolution Trust Company-Madison Guaranty-Rose Law Firm; Vince Foster's suicide, "Travelgate," (Firing of White House Travel Office staff)"Filegate," (White House staffer Craig Livingston in possession of FBI files) Paula Jones' sexual harrassment lawsuit and President Clinton's relationship with Monica Lewinsky. That's eight years worth of Clinton investigations.

Special counsel investigating a president. Similar enough for this discussion given there are also a variety of things being covered by Mueller and various jurisdictions of the justice department. Hey Clinton survived and got re elected, so maybe the dufus will repeat that history.

Yes I read my own links, glad you do too.

https://www.arcamax.com/newspics/cache/lw600/169/16927/1692741.jpg

https://www.arcamax.com/newspics/cache/lw600/169/16933/1693308.jpg

https://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/trumprussia-story-keeps-changing-as-lawyer-giuliani-speaks-again/news-story/f943db7396d474cc07f8f89acc656220

The damning evidence; Trump called for lifting of sanctions after having had business dealings In Russia, but he didn't pursue the deal and the sanctions haven't been lifted. So this is evidence of what? Surely it isn't illegal to have had business dealings in Russia as it might have been in the Cold War and it isn't illegal to have had dealings as a candidate, however unwise that might have been, and to have opinions on how international relations might be conducted.

So why lie about the business dealings and contacts? Why has his henchmen gone to jail for LYING and other crimes? Whose the next liar Mueller nabs?

So why lie about the business dealings and contacts? Why has his henchmen gone to jail for LYING and other crimes? Whose the next liar Mueller nabs?


Seriously I don't think Trump is all that smart, he is superficial, egotistical and surrounded by sycophants, so when he says I want to do this some idiot tries to make it happen without thinking of the consequences. It is obvious Trump doesn't listen to advice and can't stand a negative opinion

So why lie about the business dealings and contacts?

So interesting to see an Obama supporter suddenly sensitive about a politician lying.

https://ecp.yusercontent.com/mail?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.arcamax.com%2Fnewspics% 2F169%2F16935%2F1693579.gif&t=1548175388&ymreqid=acd6ec88-63d3-b076-1c85-9e0001015200&sig=yNv_WHFltXCjl7GY30cJUg--~C (https://www.arcamax.com/claybennett/s-2167883?ezine=641)

A picture is better than a thousand words!

I assume you are talking about the white high school kids from Kentucky who were raked over the coals by the liberal media until more video came out Sunday and Monday showing that they were basically innocent in the whole ugly situation??? They were accused of chanting, "Build the wall," but that has not been supported by the many videos of the incident and is evidently untrue. They were accused of starting the confrontation by approaching the group led by Nathan Philips, but that has been shown not to have been the case at all.

The black separatist group who were actually the ones shouting insults at the white kids have been scarcely mentioned despite the fact that video clearly shows them hurling racist insults as well as calling the boys faggots. So yes, we have not yet reached the point of being color-blind.

Might add that it now seems that Nathan Philips is not a Vietnam veteran, though that is still subject to some scrutiny and he has not yet commented on the issue. He says he was a marine, but at the age of 64, and with the marines having pulled out in 71, then he would have had to join at the age of 15 or 16 which seems unlikely.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/jan/21/nathan-phillips-vietnam-veteran-status-question/

Actually NO, I was not referring to the video that went viral, I was referring to the dufus, who has no character and should be dumped or deported to Russia with his buddy Vlad. Can you see him asking for asylum? Ironic that King Reagan wanted walls torn down and the dufus wants one built.

$25 billion bucks to slowdown women and kids. Absurd!

How many of those women and kids are you keeping in your house? If the answer is none, then why does it seem that libs always want to be charitable with someone else's money?

How many of those women and kids are you keeping in your house? If the answer is none, then why does it seem that libs always want to be charitable with someone else's money?

Oh their heart bleeds for the injustice that their wealth and prosperity inflicts on the world.

How many of those women and kids are you keeping in your house? If the answer is none, then why does it seem that libs always want to be charitable with someone else's money?

That's a dumb argument because it's not somebody else's money, it's OUR money and most of us are charitable and humane about maintaining a social safety net for ALL of us, even you heartless conservatives who go against the very principles of your lord and savior that you thump your bibles about.


Oh their heart bleeds for the injustice that their wealth and prosperity inflicts on the world.

Doing the right thing by your fellow humans (And citizens) is a bleeding heart? Or did I misunderstand your lack of specificity between the general population and corporate behavior?

That's a dumb argument because it's not somebody else's money, it's OUR money and most of us are charitable and humane about maintaining a social safety net ALL of us, even you heartless conservatives who go against the very principles of your lord and savior that you thump your bibles about.

No, it's a sensible argument. You liberals like to trumpet how compassionate and caring you are when it comes to spending the taxpayers' money, but when it comes to actually doing something yourself, you are oftentimes strangely inactive.

Show me where Jesus advocated for a taxpayer funded "safety net" and I'll go along with it. What Jesus advocated was for Tal, JL, WG, and the rest of us to help our neighbor, but He never proposed forcing others to engage in our own brand of charity. You live in Texas, so I'm waiting on you to tell me when you plan on heading down to the border to find ways to be helpful before you want to force everyone else to pay.

Conservatives have never liked the idea of helping real people in this country, and have tried to repeal the New Deal and make drastic cuts to social security and any "welfare program" they can, so your position is no surprise. Unfortunately those that feel as you do don't have the votes for such a plan, and really never had, and probably never will, as even the staunchest right winger on SS, and there are many, would not stand for a right winger to take the one thing they have between eating and not eating. You think the charity of man is enough? A bag of groceries is a great thing, but social services for the needy and poor are crucial to getting people back on their feet, and those that are too old or sick, or to young to work to not die in the streets.

Government takes that responsibility, because that's what most citizens want. If it was not so, then it wouldn't happen, or continue to happen, which leads me to believe your view on the matter is a minority one. A social safety net recognizes that the general welfare of it's citizens is an obligation, since we know that stuff happens to people like recessions, slowdowns, and just life that are beyond there control and a helping hand is just not the exclusive domain of churches or charity.

That's what makes this current extended shutdown over a wall especially egregious since very few think it worth the artificial disruption of peoples lives. I hardly think that Jesus would advocate such actions, nor be opposed to a government helping it's people and am confounded by the notion that since Jesus never said anything about a government helping it's citizens then it should not be done.

Comforting though is the reality that view is not more widespread.

1. We are both up mighty early to be retired.
2. I'm not a huge fan of SS, but it is not welfare. They are not the same thing.
3. The only way government has taken on the job of welfare is to borrow money like crazy. Otherwise, the tax rates would be much higher and no one would stand for it. So it's a song and dance they do with us.
4. No American has any right to take money from another American without their agreement. That is the welfare system pure and simple. It is liberals trying to appear to be caring and generous so long as they can be caring and generous with someone else's money.
5. Governments do not help "it's people". Government can only take money from one person by force and give it to another person, and then the members of that government can go about bragging that they care so much for humanity that they pour out help upon them with someone else's money. I despise that more than I can say. If a person helps with his/her own resources, then they are to be commended. If they insist on simply taking money from A to give to B, they are not to placed on a high plane.
6. But since you have properly identified me as a "Bible thumper", then let me propose a Bible solution. In the OT, everyone was required to pay in 10% of their produce every third year for the purpose of helping the poor. If we want to start a special "welfare tax" of 3.3% every year for the purpose of funding welfare, and with the understanding that only that money can be used for welfare, then I could be talked into that.

6. But since you have properly identified me as a "Bible thumper", then let me propose a Bible solution. In the OT, everyone was required to pay in 10% of their produce every third year for the purpose of helping the poor. If we want to start a special "welfare tax" of 3.3% every year for the purpose of funding welfare, and with the understanding that only that money can be used for welfare, then I could be talked into that.

So you would like to implement an Islamic solution, and yet you are a Christian. I think you are a little confused because you cannot go back to the OT and take on part of the law

No, I was suggesting an Old Testament solution, sort of like no murder and no theft. I'm not sure what you mean about not going "back to the OT and take on part of the law". Jesus did it constantly as did the NT writers, so I'm not sure what you mean.

Crud! I have to go to work today. You guys will have to sort this out without me, at least until tonight. Have a great day.

I must say JL your post intrigues me and a fair question that goes to not just accountability but reasonable transparency. So I submit this interest site I found for some background. It has a myriad of good links and history of the system that might provide some insights.

https://socialwelfare.library.vcu.edu/public-welfare/public-welfare-state-federal-welfare-relationships/


1. We are both up mighty early to be retired.

I'm always up early, I generally retire early too.

2. I'm not a huge fan of SS, but it is not welfare. They are not the same thing.

I love my SS! I feel I EARNED it, and more

3. The only way government has taken on the job of welfare is to borrow money like crazy. Otherwise, the tax rates would be much higher and no one would stand for it. So it's a song and dance they do with us.

I could find no reference to borrowing for welfare by feds or state governments, however the government adds to the deficit without pay fors when they cut taxes for rich guys, and to a vastly lesser extent for everyone else.

4. No American has any right to take money from another American without their agreement. That is the welfare system pure and simple. It is liberals trying to appear to be caring and generous so long as they can be caring and generous with someone else's money.

No American does, but we all pay the same taxes and a majority since the Great Depression wanted a Social Safety Net, I think I explained that already and clarified the distinction and note your disagreement to the whole thing. I sort of feel the same way about the military budget among other things.

5. Governments do not help "it's people". Government can only take money from one person by force and give it to another person, and then the members of that government can go about bragging that they care so much for humanity that they pour out help upon them with someone else's money. I despise that more than I can say. If a person helps with his/her own resources, then they are to be commended. If they insist on simply taking money from A to give to B, they are not to placed on a high plane.

History shows us that volunteers, churches, and private charity is woefully inadequate to meet the needs of the poor, children, and older folks, let alone those that are poor.

https://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-budget/policy-basics-where-do-our-federal-tax-dollars-go

https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/us_welfare_spending_40.html

https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2012/02/how-much-do-we-spend-nonworking-poor/

So I take issue with governments don't, nor should help people, or that people don't need help, or that churches and charities alone are enough.

6. But since you have properly identified me as a "Bible thumper", then let me propose a Bible solution. In the OT, everyone was required to pay in 10% of their produce every third year for the purpose of helping the poor. If we want to start a special "welfare tax" of 3.3% every year for the purpose of funding welfare, and with the understanding that only that money can be used for welfare, then I could be talked into that.

Whatever taxes you paid go for welfare and military, and other spending (A WALL?), but in what percentages, I don't know, but old testament figures would I suspect, be inadequate. I'm still looking to break it down for clarity and verification.

I suppose that solving poverty would help wouldn't it? Hmm, it occurred to me that maybe identifying the causes of poverty would be a start and eliminating those CAUSES would be GREAT. Thoughts?

So I take issue with governments don't, nor should help people, or that people don't need help, or that churches and charities alone are enough.
I agree. I had a bachelor uncle who worked hard all his life and saved his money so he could travel after he retired. Well, that didn't work out too well. He had a bypass and, after he retired, had cardiac problems that put him in a nursing home that he paid for over a five-year period with his entire savings of $250k+. The nursing home gave me POA and sent me (his only living relative within 600 miles) to the public aid office to apply for Medicaid for him. Medicaid was granted, and that paid for his care for the next year or so until he died.

What would have happened to him without Medicaid?

I could find no reference to borrowing for welfare by feds or state governments, however the government adds to the deficit without pay fors when they cut taxes for rich guys, and to a vastly lesser extent for everyone else.

Fantasy land. We've added over 14 trillion in debt in less than 20 years. There is absolutely no conceivable plan of taxing the rich that would make up that difference short of taking 100%, which no one with even half a brain has proposed, including the new dem darling, Ocasio-Cortez.


I suppose that solving poverty would help wouldn't it?

I cannot possibly say this too emphatically. There is no amount of giving of money that will solve the problem of poverty. The poverty is most often a poverty of soul. Ben Carson's mother is a great example of a person who discovered how to break the cycle of poverty, and it did not center around someone giving them a bunch of money. Carson is a doctor, and his brother is literally a rocket scientist.


I agree. I had a bachelor uncle who worked hard all his life and saved his money so he could travel after he retired. Well, that didn't work out too well. He had a bypass and, after he retired, had cardiac problems that put him in a nursing home that he paid for over a five-year period with his entire savings of $250k+. The nursing home gave me POA and sent me (his only living relative within 600 miles) to the public aid office to apply for Medicaid for him. Medicaid was granted, and that paid for his care for the next year or so until he died.

Medicaid is tied with SS, so that was NOT welfare at work. But if it had not been there, what would have been wrong with you and his other extended family members taking care of him? Worked that way for centuries. For that matter, what would have been done if he had not qualified for Medicare?

For that matter, what would have been done if he had not qualified for Medicare?
I don't know what we would have done. My husband and I worked FT, mostly paycheck to paycheck, and still lived in our tiny starter home. My uncle had one brother, my father, a Lutheran pastor who had the lowest salary in his congregation. All other relatives my age or older had died. What would we have done? I honestly don't know.

I suspect you would have done what many others have done. The family would have banded together and figured out a way. It would not have been easy, but it would have been honorable. Do I think the government should force others around you to contribute to the cause? No.

That's great if you have a family that can band together and care for the elders until they die to begin with, like they did when family was local, and somebody wasn't working to make ends meet, usually a female, but not always, and only if the elderly didn't have other conditions that required trained medical people. Solutions that worked centuries ago, or even a decade ago are not always solutions for everybody, nor is everyone capable to care for their elders. That's when you need more options. What if families have more than one elder?

What if you are poor and so is your elders?

woooohoo !! Mueller stormed Roger Stone's home like the Normandy invasion ;and invited CNN to be his personal Ernie Pyle. And …………...he is charging him with a process crime .

Stone will be given the Manafort treatment in the hope that he breaks and gives up the Trump campaign (no Stone was not part of the campaign) . He was in communication with WikiLeaks and was trying to find out what they knew .

What really surprises me is the lengths that people around Trump went to try and find out what was leaked . You would think that if they were "colluding " with the Ruskies that they would know what the Ruskies knew about Evita's campaign.

Vlad ain't that stupid, he can let the dufus and his sycophants take the fall. Glad you finally recovered from New Years.

8D

What if you are poor and so is your elders?

Then of course you need to send the government out to about fifty neighbors and require them to contribute to the cause at the risk of going to jail if they fail to pony up. This is also known as "taxation". Sounds a lot more vulgar when you get this kind of accurate picture of it.

Then of course you need to send the government out to about fifty neighbors and require them to contribute to the cause at the risk of going to jail if they fail to pony up. This is also known as "taxation". Sounds a lot more vulgar when you get this kind of accurate picture of it.
No, no! You go to your church family and present your case and humbly ask for financial help throughout the 18 months until Uncle dies. Oh, and he'll need a place to live and round-the-clock care, so ask them for that, too.

Better alternative than taking money from your neighbors against their will.

Better alternative than taking money from your neighbors against their will.
But they'd say No, we can't set a precedent.

woooohoo !! Mueller stormed Roger Stone's home like the Normandy invasion ;and invited CNN to be his personal Ernie Pyle. And …………...he is charging him with a process crime .

Stone will be given the Manafort treatment in the hope that he breaks and gives up the Trump campaign (no Stone was not part of the campaign) . He was in communication with WikiLeaks and was trying to find out what they knew .

What really surprises me is the lengths that people around Trump went to try and find out what was leaked . You would think that if they were "colluding " with the Ruskies that they would know what the Ruskies knew about Evita's campaign.

They do that to poor people all the time but at least Stone had bail money and a lawyer, as opposed to no bail money and a public defender. What's a process crime? Did you mean in the process of connecting Stone WikiLeaks and the dufus together?


Then of course you need to send the government out to about fifty neighbors and require them to contribute to the cause at the risk of going to jail if they fail to pony up. This is also known as "taxation". Sounds a lot more vulgar when you get this kind of accurate picture of it.

I feel the same way about the wall you and the dufus are so hyped about.

https://www.arcamax.com/newspics/169/16950/1695061.gif

https://www.arcamax.com/newspics/cache/lw600/169/16950/1695096.jpg

But they say No, we can't set a precedent.

I can't imagine a group of Christians saying such a thing. Perhaps you need to find new friends and a new church. Don't mean that ugly at all, but we have been told to love our neighbors as we love ourselves. Sad that your uncle had to endure such an end.

Maybe you should get out a bit more and see the rest of the world, or better yet stay grateful for your own blessings. I'm actually glad you live among such good people.

I can't imagine a group of Christians saying such a thing. Perhaps you need to find new friends and a new church. Don't mean that ugly at all, but we have been told to love our neighbors as we love ourselves. Sad that your uncle had to endure such an end.
He was very happy in the nursing home (with Medicaid paying the last 18 months) and died during a nap. Would that we all have such a peaceful end.

Maybe you should get out a bit more and see the rest of the world, or better yet stay grateful for your own blessings.

I don't really know what your point is, but I have been around a good bit. I do know that people in my state tend to take their Christian faith more seriously than in many other states, but I could be wrong about that. Still, if a church did not want to help someone lest it "set a precedent", then I wouldn't go back there.

My point is church and religion cannot minister to a persons body nor help him pay for it. Like I said if an elder has no family willing to help him through his physical needs, then what?

My point is church and religion cannot minister to a persons body nor help him pay for it.

Strange. I've seen it happen. I once attended a church where a man needed 140k for a lung transplant. They raised it, or at least most of it (Been a few years ago and I don't remember every detail). I've seen God heal people. Again, maybe you need to find a different church.

One way or the other, the answer is not to force one American to pay for the medical care of another, any more than it would be right to force you to pay for my car or my house.

While I am always grateful for the good news stories, I specifically reference repeatedly those that fall through the cracks and helping those would be my point. You have no sympathy for the ones you cannot help? A country that can make war but not take care of it's own citizens is not much of a country no matter how it hypes its greatness.

https://www.arcamax.com/newspics/169/16950/1695062.gif

TSA and air traffic control and probably all airport management should be privatized . When all the dust settles ;the real debate should be what functions SHOULD the Federal Government be doing ? 850,000 non-essential furloughed employees ? I have worked for my employer for 30 years and have held jobs every year since 1973 . The concept of a non-essential job is foreign to me . That is a cost of $86 billion annually for the taxpayers of the nation. Anyone except for those in favor of a top-down government owned economy should be appalled at the size of the Federal work force.

I think the greater lesson is you cannot run a government like a business, especially with the kind of business practices of the self serving, lying, cheating dufus at the helm. That's the root cause of the chaos.

850,000 non-essential furloughed employees ?

Great point. Almost a million employees that are "non-essential".


you cannot run a government like a business

Why not?

Great point. Almost a million employees that are "non-essential".
A misnomer. E.g., some of those are IRS employees. They can return to work but are now behind over a month. When will we get our tax returns?

"Monday is the start of federal tax filing season. But fewer than half of the furloughed IRS employees recalled during the shutdown to handle tax returns and send out refunds reported for work as of Tuesday, according to congressional and government aides. The employees had been told to work without pay." From today's Chicago Sun-Times.

https://reason.com/reasontv/2019/01/15/stossel-government-shutdown-shows-privat

I cannot get over the fact that these people have not worked for weeks and weeks, and yet will be full back pay. Just basically a paid vacation by the taxpayer. Why weren't they told, "If you want to get paid, show up everyday and do your job. if you do, you will get paid when funding resumes."

I cannot get over the fact that these people have not worked for weeks and weeks, and yet will be full back pay. Just basically a paid vacation by the taxpayer. Why weren't they told, "If you want to get paid, show up everyday and do your job. if you do, you will get paid when funding resumes."
What would you have done, JL, as one of those workers? Would you have shown up every day to work? You would have had enough money for fuel for your vehicle, perhaps a car payment and/or mortgage, grocery money, church tithe, utilities, insurance premiums, dental and doctor visits, etc.? And the furlough was said to be indefinite until Congress approved the Wall. And no, it wasn't a vacation. Remember, tRump had threatened an indefinite furlough -- until he got his Wall.

I cannot get over the fact that these people have not worked for weeks and weeks, and yet will be full back pay. Just basically a paid vacation by the taxpayer. Why weren't they told, "If you want to get paid, show up everyday and do your job. if you do, you will get paid when funding resumes."

Typical exploiter of labour, failing to recognise there are costs such as transport. Would you have demanded that the buses, trains, fuel outlets, car parks operate for free. All you are concerned about is whether they might get something for nothing when what you should be concerned about is the mechanism of government that could allow this to happen. The workers are considered non-essential, then why do they exist?

I cannot get over the fact that these people have not worked for weeks and weeks, and yet will be full back pay. Just basically a paid vacation by the taxpayer. Why weren't they told, "If you want to get paid, show up everyday and do your job. if you do, you will get paid when funding resumes."


Simply unbelievable. No comment needed.

You're all right. Just take the taxpayers' money and pay people to stay home and do nothing. That's a great plan. They could work overtime and weekends to make up the time, but just having a paid vacation is ridiculous. That's exactly why we are 22 trill in debt. The feds act like money grows on trees. In public education, if we stay home a day because of snow or ice, we had to make that day up by working a holiday. We didn't like it, but it was understandable. But the state of Mississippi, like many states, has to balance its budget. We don't have a money tree like the feds.

. We don't have a money tree like the feds.

You don't have a money tree, how disadvantaged you are, but they only grow in Washington if it be known. How can your country be great without money trees all over. I have a solution; grow them along the border instead of steel slats and the huddled masses will never need to cross the border

215 Democrats voted yesterday to NOT PAY federal workers as negotiating to secure our border & open the government continues . Every Republican voted YES. Democrats are so committed to their open border agenda that they've TWICE voted to deprive federal workers of their paychecks.

Democrats are so committed to their open border agenda that they've TWICE voted to deprive federal workers of their paychecks.

Just about right.

215 Democrats voted yesterday to NOT PAY federal workers as negotiating to secure our border & open the government continues . Every Republican voted YES. Democrats are so committed to their open border agenda that they've TWICE voted to deprive federal workers of their paychecks.


That was a procedural vote last week and I am aware the right wing noise machine squealed like stuck pigs but let me help you try and keep up.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-joint-resolution/28/all-actions?overview=closed#tabs

https://archives-democrats-rules.house.gov/archives/recommit_mot.htm

https://www.natlawreview.com/article/recovering-after-shutdown-proposed-legislation-to-guarantee-back-pay-government

Wanna make any changes to your misinformed propaganda?

https://ecp.yusercontent.com/mail?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.arcamax.com%2Fnewspics% 2Fcache%2Flw600%2F169%2F16950%2F1695098.jpg&t=1548606572&ymreqid=acd6ec88-63d3-b076-1c89-a70024018800&sig=c5_TiV89ne4BOp6988zaHw--~C (https://www.arcamax.com/marshallramsey/s-2169986?ezine=641)

I don't read your links. They invariably have nothing useful to say about the subject at hand. I frequently wonder if you even read them.

Of course I read them, and the links that come with them.