Yet Holder was held in contempt for lying and Obama invoked “executive privilege” cuz he ummm had nothing to hide.

I’ll address the differences between Bush operation and Holders.

Russia again? The bogus witch hunt by Mueller? Other than saying the word collusion what actual collusion has there been evidence of? Actual collusion now. Not just cuz CNN said. Money paid for a benefit received. Real collusion. Tied to Trump. Not something Manafort did prior to campaign.

And I suppose you’ve been ignoring the real story about what the DNC was doing on he campaign. More conspiracy right? It’s all just a “vast right wing conspiracy” huh? Just like the cum on Monica’s dress.

Funny how just the mention of collusion stirs up the left yet hard evidence of real crimes committed by your cherished & failed candidate are always dismissed.

https://www.google.com/amp/www.theblaze.com/news/2012/06/26/the-5-biggest-differences-between-operation-fast-and-furious-and-operation-wide-receiver/amp/

There are the differences between the Bush program and the one under Obama.

This info is also buried in the Wikipedia page I already linked but it’s buried in there.

And again, if nothing to hide, why invoke executive privilege to prevent the release or more docs?

You quoted me then talked about something different. What you quoted was for Stinger.

I suppose you believe Comey’s shameful “investigation” of the email issue was on the up & up too...

95 there are indictments and more coming and someone (papadopolous)plead guilty already to lying to the FBI about Russian entanglements. Whatever, believe what you (or Hannity) want to believe I actually feel kinda feel sorry for you.

Oh? Are you one of those crackpot ranchers out west who supposes that the federal government has no claim over land used in the United States?

By the way, any moron, can see that distributive justice requires that equals should get equal shares and that unequals should get unequal shares. The difficulty is not in pinning down a definition common to all forms of distributive justice. The difficulty is in deciding on which merit or matter is most relevant in deciding distribution. Probably those who are the fastest runners suppose the spoils should be divided up based on how fast you can run so that the fastest should get the best pieces of the pie.

We are all biased and would like to see distribution based on whatever merit or matter would have us benefit most.

What most people fail to see in politics is that there are competing, legitimate claims to political power.

Without wealth a nation cannot prosper and so those generative of the most wealth have a legitimate claim to more power than others less generative of wealth.
Without those willing to die to defend the nation, a nation cannot last and so those more willing to die (those with more courage) have a legitimate claim to more power than others with less courage.
Without the virtuous and prudent, a nation cannot do what is best for itself and so those with more virtue and intellectual ability to see what must be done have a legitimate claim to more power than those with less insight.
Without a nation of free born citizens who are able to rule themselves, a nation must devolve at best into a nanny state and at worst into a tyranny, and so those free born with reason have a legitimate claim that that they are owed as much power as everyone else.

This is not an exhaustive list, but only some obvious merits to power.

Now, you can go down the list of party talking points on both sides of the aisle and see different claims to power being championed over others. But the true high-level statesman or woman will have the insight to see how to make all these competing claims commensurate with one another.

One of the most brilliant aspects of our particular republican constitution is that it tries to make the different claims commensurate via the house, (before the 17th amendment), the senate, and the unelected judiciary.

Those on the far right (the Breitbart set) and on the far left (the HuffPo set) are morons incapable of recognizing a diverse competing set of legitimate claims to power. They think only the claims they champion are the appropriate merits or matters on which to distribute the various categories of goods. They are myopic and stupid, thus.

So I appreciate you telling me to look up the meaning of the word fair, Beth, but, perhaps, you will do me the credit of recognizing that I already have.

There are differences between "wide receiver" and "fast and furious." RFD chips in the guns, and the Mexican gov knew about Wide Receiver. However, both originated in AZ, and were directives of local offices. Holder didn't provide requested documents because it was an on going investigation, and was held in contempt by a republican congress. But look into the details. It's not completely what the conservative right wants you to think.

But back to the original topic :



From here : https://www.theatlantic.com/business/ar ... re/524922/

You know, if Papadoplus or Manafort did something illegal they should be punished. But here’s the thing with all this Russia stuff. It’s on record the FBI knew Russians were trying to meddle in our political system going back to I think 2015. Likely longer as that is what countries do to one another. We play those games as well around the world. Further, simply speaking to a Russian doesn’t constitute collusion. Look, both sides are lobbing shit at one another. So take a moment and see which shit passes the smell test.

These Russian allegations came out almost immediately after Trump’s victory. Like clockwork almost. She lost, he won, and in very short order there was immediate scandal and crying the Russians Russians Russians. So then ask yourself how is it possible that none of this gets mentioned oh I dunno, during the campaigns where it could have sealed victory for her? Why after?

It isn’t plausible on any level to believe they knew nothing of Russians before Nov. 8, 2016 but all of a sudden immediately after they have all this evidence of Russian collusion? Smells fishy to me.

Also, has anyone been able to show any actual collusion? I don’t mean someone talked to a Russian. What I am referring to is something along the lines of do this for us and we will do this for you after we win the election. And even then, did that have any play at the ballot box? Were Russian operatives forcing people to vote a certain way? Did they hack our system and change votes?

And back to those “indictments”. How can you not see (well I know) or smell the stench there? What leads you to believe that THIS investigation is really on the up & up?

Look no further than the previous high level “investigation” our “Justice Department” conducted. There you had a presidential candidate accused of being “grossly negligent” in her handling of classified information. A term changed (prior to actually interviewing her) to “extremely careless” by who should be referred to as “disgraced” former FBI directed James Comey. A director that wrote his exoneration months before actually interviewing the target of said “investigation”. Oh wait, it wasn’t an investigation at all. We know this because Comey himself has said that his boss (Loretta Lynch) told him to not publicly refer to it as an investigation and instead use the term “matter”.

So said candidate was (and there is mountains of eveidnce so let’s not debate this point) guilty of grossly mishandling classified information. Something that as the law is written constitutes treason. The law is VERY clear that intent matters not and the simple act of not safeguarding the info in and of itself is treasonous.

But it doesn’t stop there. Said candidate was also required, not by rule but by law, to maintain copies of ALL of her official correspondence while serving as Secretary if State. Not only did she fail to do so, she took the additional steps of deleting thousands and thousands of emails AND THEN had her IT guys wipe the server clean. And no, not with a “cloth” tee hee. Those acts constitute obstruction of justice.

Then to top it off there is the perjury. You know, the same crime her husband committed that led to articles of impeachment being drafted. Statements she made (under oath) in regards to the Benghazi investigation were later found to be false. This isn’t “conspiracy” as her own emails (the ones she didn’t get to delete & wipe clean) proved.

So we have a “Justice Department” that has mountains of strong evidence against a presidential candidate for treason, obstruction of justice, and perjury yet the freakin director of the FBI exonerates her before even one interview all the while the Attorney General directs her underlings to not even consider it an “investigation”. Are you kidding me???

All of that and yet you want me to believe that this Mueller probe is being conducted ethically and by the book?

If I see & smell dogshit I don’t need to first step in it to know what I’m looking at and smelling is dogshit.

And that is the difference between you and me. I don’t align myself so tightly to Dem or Repub that I’m not able to call a spade a spade. You cannot do that nor can very many other liberals. You are the guy that would smirk while laying down a royal flush in spades. Problem is, your ace of spades is really a club. Everyone else at the table sees it’s a club except you yet you sit there and cry how you should have won till you are blue in face.

In your world everything corrupt or against the law one of your precious liberals do is immediately dismissed as “right wing conspiracy” or “fake Fox News”. You take whatever you are given from CNN or wherever and treat it as gospel no matter how bogus. Herded in the direction they want you to go like mindless cattle.

And that makes you no better than common cattle. So you feel sorry for me? Oh no. That hardly hurts coming from someone who is either incredibly lazy, very naive, or frankly hovering but a few IQ points above a heffer.

You can flame away. I’ll let you have this one as this debate has become much what standing in a pasture debating with said heffer would feel like. I’d rather just have it for dinner and be on my way.

On a brighter note, today is November 8th. Anniversary of the day the Clinton Crime machine came to an end.

I’m no fan of some of the things Trump has done or said. However, he did accomplish one great thing. And that’s keeping one of the most corrupt politicians in history from having even more power.

I wonder how much Bill gets paid for speeches these days or how many foreign entitities are lining up to make massive “donations” to the Clinton Foundation now that they have nothing to offer in return.

This is a nice example of short term rather than long term outlook.

Profits declining is the entire point, and that's because their expenses are increasing faster than revenues. For 2016, ESPN was paying $4.7b for broadcasting rights. That number is going to jump to $5.8b in the near future. Meanwhile, they're facing increased competition from newcomers like Amazon and every league now has its own network. If ESPN loses broadcasting rights to the NBA, NFL, and/or MLB, they're completely screwed.

All the while, they're losing about 2 million subscribers/year. ESPN has been able to offset that with an increase in subscriber fees, which have jumped from $4 in 2010 to $7 in 2016 (5x higher than the 2nd most expensive channel). That can't continue indefinitely, and cable companies are starting to push back - look at the Altice cable fight in NY. I really don't see how ESPN can keep bumping up subscription costs at a time when people are cord cutting faster than ever. Some cable companies are even starting to offer lean packages that exclude ESPN.


So what does their overall payroll expense look like? If they cut 400 people averaging $100k/year and hired 500 people making $50k/year, then they've still dramatically cut their payroll. This is meaningless without numbers.

Huh??

July 25 2016 – The FBI confirms it has opened an investigation into the hacking of the DNC computer network. “The FBI is investigating a cyber intrusion involving the DNC and are working to determine the nature and scope of the matter. A compromise of this nature is something we take very seriously, and the FBI will continue to investigate and hold accountable those who pose a threat in cyberspace,” it says in a release.

(James Comey, the FBI director at the time, would later testify that the FBI in late July 2016 began investigating the Russian government’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election and whether Trump campaign associates were involved in those efforts. The New York Times would later report that Page’s speech in Moscow “was a catalyst for the F.B.I. investigation into connections between Russia and President Trump’s campaign.”)

So under oath, the FBI director testified that they began looking into whether the Trump associates were involved in Russia's interference with the election. So the Government and Intelligence agencies knew about it before the election day. It was not announced that it was occurring because officials ( i.e. Obama) did not want to seem to influence the election.

Meanwhile, Obama asked for a bi-partisan effort to expose the interferance and asked Mitch McConnell, republican majority leader, to make a joint public statement. He said "No."

Leaving out all the news about the DNC, Fushion GPS, and the Clinton ties to the “Russians”?

My point, which apparently is lost here is that if they had knoweledge prior to 11/8 that Trump was in cahoots with the Russians they would have used it during campaign. It would have been a huge thing.

As it turned out, the Russian stuff wasn’t made a huge issue until after the surprise victory. Then it was oh my god we’ve been invaded, hacked, and taken over by the Russians.

And I’m with Swiss in terms of politicians. They all stink. Difference here is that many of you here hold investigations into those on the right as the holy grail while dismissing everything on the left.

Do you really believe they are clean? At etc all the crap that’s comes out about Clinton, the DNC, the farce of an investigation the “Justice dept” conducted or actually failed to conduct?

How about this, explain away the farce that was Comey’s investigation. Humor me here. I need a laugh.

Explain away how all that evidence don’t and doesn’t warrant a massive investigation into Clinton, Comey, Lynch etc.??

Hillary should have been removed early on from the ticket and replaced.

How is “gross negligence” not so just because a Clinton that did it?

How is obstruction of justice not obstruction just because a Clinton did it?

How is perjury not a crime just because a Clinton did it.

You are looking for crimes elsewhere but willfully excuse all of those done that already has all the proof needed. Problem is the corrupt power the be in DC, the protected inner circle won’t do a thing about it. Instead they lead you to look elsewhere.

Hey, if Trump or anyone else in their team did commit crimes lock them up I say. Provided the same hand of “Justice” is applied to Clinton, Comey, Lynch etc.

And about the hacking of the DNC. So what? What came from that hack was how the DNC was colluding against Sanders.

Is that something as a voter you would like to know? Or is the hack itself the issue?

You said yourself and I posted Obama had been informed the Russians were trying to meddle. What did they do?

And maybe we can at the least all agree that nothing Comey says should hold any weight.

you all need to see that whole situation as disinformation warfare. Sun Tzu, all war is deception. Those sealed indictments are going to raise eyebrows.

you never replied to me on your attack a few pages back. How is that hate speech law coming up there? Talk about a mess

If you happened to see what the Saudi reformation effort the past 3 years until the other days (corruption arrests) is going to roll up all the FARA violations of all our senate and house members. Look at the one billionare who was funneling the money to many here. The rug is rolling up worldwide.

Oh I’m fully aware that does and has been taking place.

It’s the other stooges here that immediately dismiss anything negative about their precious flowers or immediately take the position that if Fox News said it then it is fake.

Shit, even a blind squirrel can find nuts.

Here are three questions for the loyal followers of CNN otherwise known as the Clinton News Network:

1) In your opinion, was Hillary grossly negligent in her (mis)handling of classified information? There is so much evidence she was I can’t even begin to imagine how you’d answer “no” and still maintain a shred of credibility.

2) In your opinion, did Hillary commit obstruction of justice when she deleted thousands upon thousands of emails AND had her IT people wipe the server clean? Please note these were not her emails to do as she pleases with. Those emails were yours and mine and she was required BY LAW to maintain records of. We could also toss in destruction of government property while we are at it. There is so much evidence she did these things I can’t even begin to imagine how you’d answer “no” and still maintain a shred of credibility.

3) In your opinion, did Hillary commit perjury when she lied under oath before Congress? There is ample evidence that shows statements made under oath proved to be false when recovered emails (you know, the ones she couldn’t delete) proved her statements were false. There is so much evidence she did I can’t even begin to imagine how you’d answer “no” and still maintain a shred of credibility.

Given that items 1, 2, & 3 are nearly impossible to refute, how is it then that our “justice department” was able to arrive at the conclusion that “no reasonable prosecutor” would bring charges?

Really? Hmmm, do reasonable investigators write their exoneration of a target before they’ve even interviewed them? Do reasonable (and non-corrupt) attorney generals inform their investigators to not even refer to the “matter” as an investigation? Is it not a conflict of interest when the target of the investigations husband meets with the top attorney privately (her former boss) before the no-charges debacle?

How can a reasonable person dismiss all of this and yet have such outrage over the stuff the very people covering up this scandal are slinging at the other side? How is any of that credible when such lengths have been taken to sweep all this under the rug?

I’m all for brining them all down. But that’s not the case here. You here on the left only want to believe the stuff that fits nicely into your own narrative.

On one side there is accusations that you believe simply because the accusations have been made yet on the other side there is HARD EVIDENCE of actual crimes and yet it’s all “fake news”.

So have at it Stinger, Cor-ten, Poltargyst. Tell me how what I posted above didn’t happen. Tell me how it was made up. Tell me how it’s a vast right wing conspiracy.

Treason, obstruction, destruction of gov. property, collusion, corruption, and perjury. Hard evidence supports that your precious Hillary has committed them all in spades.

But but but CNN said something about Manafort....

Ok, fry him up I say. But only after you cook the big fish that’s been swimming in the scum pond.

Somehow though the sheeple here will defend it and anyone else with a (D) next to their name.

That sealed doj indictment list grew from 8 to 14 and now 7 more today ....total of 31

https://mobile.twitter.com/LizCrokin/st ... 76/photo/1

Plot thickens

It wasn't the government. It was the Air Force, from what I understand. The military division of "government." I'm sorry it doesn't fit the narrative that the government is inherently bad.

I've not weighed in on this for awhile, and my responses will be more base, not nearly as reasoned as those of you asshats that are well-read on these topics. Few thoughts:

1. Stinger's last message to me: Yes and that 15% helps fund better health care, better education, better infrastructure, safer society, guaranteed pension (CPP and old age) and overall happier lifestyle for EVERYONE. The metrics dont lie (pesky things to contradict those metrics). You can look em up on the intraweb.

I can honestly say I have never heard a Canadian say "damn it makes me angry when an American gets $.20 cents more on the dollar here in Canada (or european, or Brit etc)????. What I can say is I hear Canadians say damn the fact our dollar is worth $.80 against the US dollar is GREAT for my business.

I think you misunderstood me, Stinger. Neither have I heard any Canadian begrudging Americans their currency conversion. I AM saying though, that I know plenty of people in PEI that are struggling to pay the prices they pay for commodities plus 15% tax. I'm good buying stuff in Canada due to the great mitigator, the US Dollar being worth $1.25 when up against the looney. True....many businesses, merchants, etc. do much worse when the looney is equal to the dollars. Few other things:

2. Donald Trump is a fuckin' douchebag. He's an absolute embarrassment to have that guy, whom his own Secretary of State reportedly referred to, quite legitimately, as a moron, as President of our country. It's a sad commentary on the electorate.

3. Hillary Clinton needs to Shut the FUCK Up and go the fuck away. She's a drag on the Democratic Party.

4. Much as it pains me to say it, the King of Mumbo-Jumbo, Ivory Tower Ike, Academia Artie, Still Lit is goddamn on the mark about guns. Hell....require every household to have a handgun so we can off any suspected intruder, lawn invader, or smirker. Throw in a rifle so we can shoot the squirrels in our yard, boil 'em up. But...we CAN to that, and still not sell military grade weapons, built to inflict maximum damage, to the very population of Americans most off their fuckin' rocker. Sure, sell these killing machines to crazy mother-fuckers, then say there's nothing we can do...they might have killed just as may by choking them to death.

5. FUCK Colin Kaepernick and all these so-called demonstrators. What a fuckin' stupid way to sway public opinion. Identify a cause...then alienate half the fuckin' country in pursuit of this cause. And all the outrage at police killings of so-called Unarmed Black Men? Seriously?? Sure....let's make heroes out of fuckin' idiots like Michael Brown. Let's canonize the mother-fucker who all he had to do was listen to the cop telling him to get the fuck out of the middle of the street, not strong-arm a cigar store owner. Now, I'm not a fan of Barney Frank, but he had one of the best lines of all times by a politico. When criticized for not opposing the death penalty strongly enough, the senator from Massachusetts, referring to those executed, said, "I won't miss 'em."

Apparently, the Armed Services do not have to enter crimes of domestic abuse in the criminal DB like everyone else. They are trying to pass a law now to do just that.

I believe I stated that the administration did not want to appear to influence the election by announcing that people in the Trump campaign were under investigation for possibly working with the Russians to interfere with the election. It became a big deal because after the election, when it could not longer be construed as attempting to influence the election, the administration announced it what had happened. Even then the Obama administration did not say that Trump or his campaign was being investigated. That news was broken in a tweet by Trump. Not long afterwards, the National Security Advisor was fired because he was found to be lying about his contacts with the Russians.

As to your other points. If the Justice department, under Trump, is not doing anything against Clinton it just might be because there is nothing to be done. You do realize that they can ignore Comey's recommendation and prosecute her. They are well within any statue of limitations. So if Trump's Justice department is not doing it you had better start asking why.

Ok, I'll do some reading and see what I come up with. In the meantime, riddle me this:

During the campaign, Trump promised to do many things on DAY ONE. One of those things was to prosecute Hillary. Trump stood on a debate stage with Hillary and promised to see her in prison if he won. It was one of the promises of his campaign.

Okay. Trump won. Republicans have all the power right now. The full power of the United States justice system can be brought to bear on Hillary now, and Trump promised to do it. So why is nothing happening? If she's so obviously so guilty, where's the prosecution?

Or, to turn around your earlier statement, now that Hillary/the Clintons are no longer a threat, there's no further need to throw crap charges at her in campaign speeches?

Mueller was appointed by a Republican Attorney General in a Republican administration, but I'm supposed to dismiss his investigation as some kind of farce? Let's see what he comes up with, shall we?

Wait, let me get this straight. You are saying the Obama Administration had knowledge (before elections) of people in the Trump campaign working with the Russians but sat on it because he “didn’t want to influence the elections”?

That is comedy gold.

They absolutely would have used it to oh I dunno, win the election....

Again leaving out the OTHER sides ties to the Russians that has been coming out.

Fake news though so it doesn’t count.

Yep, Obama new of this and sat on it.

How’s this for something more probable. He knew the Russians were trying to meddle, he didn’t have any real dirt on Trump & Russians together, he didn’t want it brought up as to not taint Hillary’s victory and give those on the right any fingers to point later. So lips are sealed.

Trump pulls the upset and all of a sudden it’s OMG the Russians interfered with our elections.

Here’s a fact, they would have used any and all info they had if it could have hurt Trump leading up to 11/8. To believe they sat on something of that caliber TO TRUMP’S BENEFIT is beyond crazy.

You essentially said Obama did Trump a solid.

Ummm ok...