The DON / redux

[Rich]

Actually, according to the same article, an "unknown republican" funded the Trump/Russia investigation first (probably one of Trump's primary opponents). And the DNC/Clinton campaign took over funding it during the general election campaign. Not sure why this is a surprise to anyone. Opposition research is standard practice.

I don't know enough about the Uranium deal to say much about it. But the timing of these multiple investigations sure seems suspect. I'm sure they'll be thorough though, unlike their investigation into Trump/Russia, which they have been stonewalling for months.

Ultimately, this is all a sideshow to distract the weak-minded. The only investigation that matters is the one being done by Mueller and I expect we will be seeing some results from that (one way or the other) within the next three to six months.

 

[Brad225]

At this point Rich, I'm not sure who I trust that's involved in the investigation to get to the truth.

On one side you have the one pack of wolves guarding the hen house and on the other the wolves in sheep clothing hanging around the hen house trying to look nonchalant while keeping an eye on things going on.

 

[twich54]

When i was working for Teton County, we received funds to build a "Teenage Crisis Shelter" in Jackson. A much needed facility that has helped numerous young folks with physiological / mental issues.

just another example of how dysfunctional we have become, putting more parenting responsibility where it doesn't belong. Also another example of how the 'family unit' in so many areas has gone to hell in this country.

On the positive side Gordon it's good to see that it has in fact helped !

 

[Rich]

At this point Rich, I'm not sure who I trust that's involved in the investigation to get to the truth.

On one side you have the one pack of wolves guarding the hen house and on the other the wolves in sheep clothing hanging around the hen house trying to look nonchalant while keeping an eye on things going on.

I disagree with your outlook, Brad. Solely because Mueller came into this probe with a sterling reputation. He was known as a nonpartisan, highly ethical, highly competent, and dogged career DOJ official. His appointment was lauded by both sides as an excellent choice and he appears to be ignoring the circus and just quietly going about his work. I will trust whatever result he comes up with, whether it is the result I expect or not.

Now, if you are just talking about the Congressional inquiries, then I would agree with you.

 

[Rich]

just another example of how dysfunctional we have become, putting more parenting responsibility where it doesn't belong. Also another example of how the 'family unit' in so many areas has gone to hell in this country.

Yeah, kind of like those shelters for the storm victims in Houston/Florida and wildfire victims in CA. Just another example of the mommy-state spoon feeding people instead of requiring some personal responsibility and expecting people to show some personal responsibility. What a waste of our tax dollars! /s

 

[Gordon Gray]

just another example of how dysfunctional we have become, putting more parenting responsibility where it doesn't belong. Also another example of how the 'family unit' in so many areas has gone to hell in this country.

On the positive side Gordon it's good to see that it has in fact helped !

Yes Dave. By all accounts, it has. It's a facility that teens can come to and receive counseling to try to resolve dysfunctional family environments and attempt to reunite parents with their kids. A good institution with a noble goal by any conceivable measure.

I ask parents when they give their child a cell phone. As some may know, I'm not a big fan of this device. The norm seems to be around ten years old. Talk about an immediate disconnect with child / parent relationships and the opportunity for abuse and lack of parental control. I see teenagers at lunch and they don't talk. They are obsessed with their cell phones and stare into the electronic abyss. Very sad.

Gordon

 

[RCHeliGuy]

It is interesting how our country has split into the absolute worst of humanity.

On one side we have a hardness in this country like I've never seen before and an attitude of sink or swim, every man for himself. Screw you if you can't make it on your own. You didn't earn my help and I'm not going to help.

On the other side we have people who want a nanny state where there are safety nets everywhere and no one is responsible for anything bad and there is always someone offended.

This is why society is failing.

Remember the saying everything is good in moderation. There used to be a healthy drive to try to get the best deal and then compromise for the benefit of the country.

Now we have the most unbelievably short sighted viewpoints battling for supremacy in what can only be classified as a civil war.

There is no sanity prevailing and we just keep getting further and further divided.

 

[timm]

Great points by all. Brad - I thought your analogy seemed spot on. Mueller I can only accept what people say about his integrity. However , if he is fed info that is politically motivated. I have to raise my eyebrows on that. Can he sift thru what the truth is?? again...'whose truth'?

To me - it feels like the foundation for the Russia piece came from the Clinton campaign before the election. And no wonder. So now you have evidence that seemed to be gathered for political gain. I couldn't say it was inaccurate - all I could say is it was paid for it seems by people that had something to gain. And that taints it. I'm sure you could make that argument in court Rich? .

 

[RCHeliGuy]

My "guess" is that Mueller is getting close to releasing something since the GOP is now launching an investigation on the investigation of Hillary and the email server.

 

[Gordon Gray]

We need another "Bengazi" investigation / hearings.

 

[timm]

We need another "Bengazi" investigation / hearings.

Maybe you are right there!! There is certifiable evidence - with no political affiliation that people died there.

 

[Bernard]

We need another "Bengazi" investigation / hearings.

Would someone please set me straight on Benghazi....my understanding was that Hillary asked for more funding to protect the embassies, but the Republicans turned down the request. Or maybe I have the facts wrong?

 

[Rich]

Great points by all. Brad - I thought your analogy seemed spot on. Mueller I can only accept what people say about his integrity. However , if he is fed info that is politically motivated. I have to raise my eyebrows on that. Can he sift thru what the truth is?? again...'whose truth'?

To me - it feels like the foundation for the Russia piece came from the Clinton campaign before the election. And no wonder. So now you have evidence that seemed to be gathered for political gain. I couldn't say it was inaccurate - all I could say is it was paid for it seems by people that had something to gain. And that taints it. I'm sure you could make that argument in court Rich? .

First of all, in relation to Mueller, if he is as experienced and competent of a career prosecutor as his reputation suggests, I can assure you he has been trained to sort facts from BS his entire adult life and is quite adept at separating politics from reality and applying facts to the law. That's what prosecutors do every day of their professional lives.

Second, you state "it feels like the foundation for the Russia piece came from the Clinton campaign before the election." What bothers me about that statement is that it ignores the statement in the article you posted that it was an unknown republican, during the republican primary, that hired this firm and started this investigation. Clinton merely took over the financing of the investigation after the primaries ended. So right off the bat, it feels like you are trying hard to find a reason to distrust this report by saying it came from Clinton while ignoring republican involvement in the genesis of the investigation. Still a political opponent, but suddenly much less partisan.

The bottom line is that campaigns look for dirt on each other. And if there is dirt to be found, they will usually find it. Your question is whether we can trust the dirt because the ones who funded it are rolling around in the mud. This ignores two things. One, the guy who headed the investigation is a former British spy who, by all accounts, was considered excellent at his job and very trustworthy. Second, any information from this dossier can be independently verified or not by competent investigators. My understanding is that a fair amount of the information has already been independently verified by the FBI, but not some of the more salacious allegations (i.e. golden showers). So while you may be reticent based on the funding of the report, if the FBI verifies the information and prosecutes someone based on their independent verification of facts, I don't think the source of original funding is going to sway a jury. The FBI tends to build air-tight cases before they bring a prosecution. Whether or not this will actually result in any prosecution is an open question depending on countless variables.

 

[Rich]

Would someone please set me straight on Benghazi....my understanding was that Hillary asked for more funding to protect the embassies, but the Republicans turned down the request. Or maybe I have the facts wrong?

No, you have the facts correct. Republicans just ignore that inconvenient truth in their zeal to pillory Hillary.

And I'm not saying Clinton or her subordinates didn't make mistakes related to Benghazi. I'm saying let's have an honest assessment of the real facts that led to this tragedy rather than a multi-million dollar witch hunt designed solely to smear Clinton in an election season, which is what we got. And if republicans refused requested additional money for embassy security (which they did) then it is not a stretch to say they share some of the blame. But they'll never admit that.

Republican congressmen are truly despicable. Money for welfare, food stamps, and school lunches for poor kids is an outrageous waste of taxpayer funds, but tens of millions spent on multiple investigations to skewer a political opponent (which resulted in NO criminal charges), well that is considered money well spent.

 

[timm]

First of all, in relation to Mueller, if he is as experienced and competent of a career prosecutor as his reputation suggests, I can assure you he has been trained to sort facts from BS his entire adult life and is quite adept at separating politics from reality and applying facts to the law. That's what prosecutors do every day of their professional lives.

Second, you state "it feels like the foundation for the Russia piece came from the Clinton campaign before the election." What bothers me about that statement is that it ignores the statement in the article you posted that it was an unknown republican, during the republican primary, that hired this firm and started this investigation. Clinton merely took over the financing of the investigation after the primaries ended. So right off the bat, it feels like you are trying hard to find a reason to distrust this report by saying it came from Clinton while ignoring republican involvement in the genesis of the investigation. Still a political opponent, but suddenly much less partisan.

The bottom line is that campaigns look for dirt on each other. And if there is dirt to be found, they will usually find it. Your question is whether we can trust the dirt because the ones who funded it are rolling around in the mud. This ignores two things. One, the guy who headed the investigation is a former British spy who, by all accounts, was considered excellent at his job and very trustworthy. Second, any information from this dossier can be independently verified or not by competent investigators. My understanding is that a fair amount of the information has already been independently verified by the FBI, but not some of the more salacious allegations (i.e. golden showers). So while you may be reticent based on the funding of the report, if the FBI verifies the information and prosecutes someone based on their independent verification of facts, I don't think the source of original funding is going to sway a jury. The FBI tends to build air-tight cases before they bring a prosecution. Whether or not this will actually result in any prosecution is an open question depending on countless variables.

I agree with you ... however - in regards to the republican who started it.... The Washington Post /NY Times are running articles on this with the headlines ... 'Clinton financed.... ' yada yada.... So, given their leanings - I find it amazing that they too wouldn't be all over the 'republican'... But they seem to be focused on the others as well.... Trump has a lot of enemies for sure - Democrats (all in) - Conservative mainstream republicans (all in) - I mean he trashed their platform for the most part - and people voted for it ... Not typical conservative views... I think the Rep party is GONE.... and is morphing as we speak - whether good or bad.... So now you have these old conservative republicans scrambling for their political lives.... But, you have a lot of angry people slinging mud around because this outsider has come in - and says 'your old policy is BS' ... Nobody likes that.... Time to find a new Caesar!! ... So - nobody wants to cooperate with him.... nobody wants his agenda .... the platform they used to trumpet has now been blown up because he just did it in the elections? Was it 9 from the party that couldn't stop his train? Then what appeared to be a shoe-in for Hillary was nothing but.... So - this election was people voting against the establishment.... Existing Congress = Existing Establisment = Anti-Trump..... They are making it their life's work to bring him down.... And he isn't very good at CYA.... and keeping his yapper shut....or taking advice it seems....

So this isn't just about Democrats being anti-republican... This is also about conservative republicans fighting for their political lives.... My opinion of course....

 

[Rich]

I agree with you, timm. This isn't without precedent, though. Many years ago there was a fight for the soul of the Republican Party between the traditional libertarian-style conservatives like William F. Buckley and the more extreme populist John Birchers. History repeats itself. Ultimately, both parties are trying to find their identity right now between the moderates and the more extreme wings.

 

[Gordon Gray]

So - nobody wants to cooperate with him.... nobody wants his agenda ....

Hi timm,

With all due respect and by all accounts, the man is a compulsive liar unlike anything this country has ever seen in my lifetime. He also goes into immediate "attack" mode if anyone disagrees with him. Don't you think that effects those that may want to cooperate with him and his agenda including an ever increasing number of Republicans?

Best,

Gordon

 

[timm]

Hi timm,

With all due respect and by all accounts, the man is a compulsive liar unlike anything this country has ever seen in my lifetime. He also goes into immediate "attack" mode if anyone disagrees with him. Don't you think that effects those that may want to cooperate with him and his agenda including an ever increasing number of Republicans?

Best,

Gordon

I'm not sure about that. I'll say we've had 'better' liars. And you are right. He isn't miss congeniality. He is completely atypical of anyone that has held that office. So why did he get in? I think it's because he is none of the above. People voted for 'none of the above'. Actually I think you should start referring to him as that instead of the numeric!! But given all of that - and his demonstrative , distasteful, narcissistic approach to human interaction. What does that say about the state of politics in general today? I'd say they are out of touch...rich...and well taken care of with our tax dollars. Their screaming has as much to do with policy as it does with protecting what they think is theirs and the possible struggles they face as people vote for change going forward. Does getting nothing done bode well for incumbents ? I would think not regardless of the circumstances. And trump applies pressure by getting tweets mentioned everywhere in regards to their ineffectiveness - both Dems and Reps... he doesn't seem to care either way. Do you know how many emails or texts I get where someone writes 'So sad...'?

 

[Gordon Gray]

Thanks timm,

I understand your position. You seem to be deflecting and don't agree with this basic issue / truth and that's fine.

We've reached the "wall" and no further discussion will be productive.

Respectfully,

Gordon

 

[Brad225]

I'm not sure about that. I'll say we've had 'better' liars. And you are right. He isn't miss congeniality. He is completely atypical of anyone that has held that office. So why did he get in? I think it's because he is none of the above. People voted for 'none of the above'. Actually I think you should start referring to him as that instead of the numeric!! But given all of that - and his demonstrative , distasteful, narcissistic approach to human interaction. What does that say about the state of politics in general today? I'd say they are out of touch...rich...and well taken care of with our tax dollars. Their screaming has as much to do with policy as it does with protecting what they think is theirs and the possible struggles they face as people vote for change going forward. Does getting nothing done bode well for incumbents ? I would think not regardless of the circumstances. And trump applies pressure by getting tweets mentioned everywhere in regards to their ineffectiveness - both Dems and Reps... he doesn't seem to care either way. Do you know how many emails or texts I get where someone writes 'So sad...'?

Timm, I'm not sure how anyone here can claim Trump is the biggest liar with everything that is coming out right now.

The Obama administration and the media are clearly head and shoulders above anything The Donald has done.

He has a rambling mouth but will continue because it drives all of the liberals and conservatives crazy. He knows what he is attempting to do.

Would I prefer he control himself, Yes. I think he might get more cooperation from people.