Keep Screaming

U.S.—Many on the left are extremely concerned with the racist behavior of President Trump, especially with recent remarks telling non-white citizens to “go back” where they came from, and are trying to raise the alarm bells about how harmful that behavior is. The problem is, no one seems to be paying them any attention, despite the fact that they’re very experienced in warning people about racism, since they’ve done it about absolutely everything for decades straight.

“I don’t know what’s going on,” said left-wing activist Ryan Weber. “Every day for years and years we’ve been yelling about racist things, from words to symbols to holidays to breakfast cereals to every single Republican ever, and we just assumed everyone was carefully taking notes every time we spoke up, but it seems like no one was paying attention at all.”
This is very troubling to the left, because they think Trump is even more racist than the usual things they have labeled as racist, but they’re not sure how to express that. “I mean, we compared John McCain to George Wallace,” stated Democrat Maggie Wilkins, “and I’m not sure who to compare Trump to in order to show he’s an even more worser racist.”
Activists are considering coming up with other words to express that Trump is a worse kind of racist. They considered “white supremacist,” but they’ve been using that a lot lately, so it would only mean to most people that Trump is as bad as the Betsy Ross flag. So they tried to invent a new term — double plus racist — to express how extra racist Trump is, but then remembered they already used that on Mitt Romney.

 

Advertisements

Comments

  1. Since the Left wants to change our language and remove “man” from things, like manhole, how about changing Manhattan to Asshattan. 😀

  2. Dale A Albrecht says:

    “Animal House” Double secret probation.

    When one sees everything as racist they are actual the racists. When everything in life had to be bucketed in its little niche so as to get their fair share, everybody of all walks of life are racist and bigoted to some degree. But what blows me away is these screamers never see themselves as racist or bigoted in any way. Yet HATE anyone who disagrees. Call to have Israel wiped out. Ban Christmas and any display of faith unless it’s theirs

    Example Muslims practiced their faith 5 times a day in the office. Woe be tide if Christians did the same. Take it off the property if you must said management

    • Pelosi should not criticize WOC’s is the most racist thing I’ve heard all month. The lying Left wants to criticize Trump about the love it or leave it comment, but he NEVER once mentioned race, only the hate for America, yet, the LYING LEFT want’s to reframe it as racist.

  3. Dale A Albrecht says:

    I’m creating my list and why of how I’d FUNDEMENTALLY change America. I’ll post it later today.

  4. Col., in a retort to the argument that over 30% of the children are not with a biological parent, the comment was made that these are orphans. I would think that orphans would have papers saying so and the accompanying adult would state this up front instead of lying about parentage. Do you know what percentage of these children are orphans as opposed to rented get out of jail cards or simply kidnapped?

    • Great question….of the children that I have seen, there are no papers of any kind and no one has claimed orphan. Be very careful not to believe the media and reports….orphan is the new buzz word now to counter the DNA checks.

      But I do not have a percentage to report. I do not even know if one exists as we do not accept orphan as an excuse. It is very easy to ascertain a true orphan from the rent a kid by observation. When you work the border long enough, you can learn to spot things very quickly. Quirks and stuff.

      But, I will ask around and check. However, the left likes to split hairs on things….and I would be willing to bet that their definition of orphan is different……especially that of the media.

      We do not classify abandoned children as orphans….older kids have learned how to say that they parents have abandoned them and they can turn on the water works easily….Americans are really stupid when it comes to kids. Children really tug at out heart strings. But we have learned very quickly not to believe the stories at first…..they can be checked out. It takes awhile to do so….meanwhile we take care of them.

      I wish the media would post the real detention centers and not the interim ones.

    • T Ray….my response is in jail.

      • I’ll await your pardon.

        My view is strictly a guess but I do not think the percentage of orphans could be that high despite the high violence in the CA countries. Additionally most orphans would be in the custody of a family member thus would have a DNA link. Orphans should have paper work stating such and the accompanying adult would acknowledge this on crossing the border rather than lie about parentage. I think the argument is just another liberal deflection but I would like to speak from the facts rather than speculate.

  5. Dale A Albrecht says:

    Pure political theater in my opinion. House voted to hold Barr in contempt for not responding to a supeona over documents concerning the failed attempt by the administration to include the citizen ship question on the 2020 census. Supreme court said no, end of story. No crime or malfeanse to want it included.

    Nothing like Holder and gun running into Mexico where deaths occured in an attempt to get the 2nd ammendment changed. And that was after one year.not a couple weeks

  6. Dale A Albrecht says:

    And reported cases of Dengue Fever are popping up in northern Italian cities

  7. Dale A Albrecht says:

    https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/who-khalifa-hafta-whose-forces-are-attacking-tripoli-libya-n999421

    This is from April, but it looks like Hafta forces are gearing up for another attempt to seize the “legitimate” UN sanctioned government in Tripoli.

    The readings I just read out of Italy, it certainly looks like the US and CIA are playing both ends against the middle.

    Didn’t France, the UN NATO and the US create enough humanitarian crisis to last a lifetime in countries all over the middle East and Africa.

  8. Dale A Albrecht says:

    Driving up into town and I noticed the docks along Union Point are going back. The larger boat launching docks at Lawsons Creek park are all back in. Boat trailers all over the place. It not that It wouldn’t have been hard to replace the docks after Florence. It’s just the manufactures had to rebuild first.

    Great planning an coordination between the Feds and State and probable road money from Obama’s shovel ready work. Rte 70 is being redesignated as I-42. The other year they put barriers instead of a center turn lane through Havelock. The turn lanes are about a mile apart, with no place for a vehicle towing a boat to reverse travel and get to a marine or sporting goods store. Business dropped 45% with people just driving straight through. The Feds sprung the money but when the City was complaining about the impact the retort was, we’re in a year or so going to bypass you anyway when we build out I-42.

    But here, just the other month, the State used the funds from the other year and reworked miles of Rte 70 on Ramps off ramps shoulders ground down many inches of highway and relayed pavement. Today, they’re ripping it all up and widening the highway to interstate regulations. Spend millions earlier thus year, now spend even more millions.

    Several years ago a bypass was built in Goldsboro. Listed as a great place to live nationally. The bypass killed the downtown deader than a doornail. Businesses moved out to the bypass. Got firmly established, the downtown started attracting businesses that were kind of niche. The money from the recovery act in 09, built another bypass miles and miles out in the turkey and hog farms. No gas stops, even heading off an extension you will go 40 miles with no services. It’s not these bypasses are being built to anticipate growth like St Louis or Dallas etc. These are small rural cities and towns.

  9. Dale A Albrecht says:
  10. https://www.westernjournal.com/hypocrisy-democrats-fake-outrage-send-back-chants/

    The video is telling. Our education system is sending idiots into society.

    • Dale A Albrecht says:

      I saw yesterday a video that George Carlin did. It said that point exactly the educational system is deliberately creating idiots because the powers being the agencies and politicians do not want smart educated people out there jeopardizing their control

  11. SAN DIEGO, CA—While sailing off the La Jolla coast Friday, a man tragically drowned after falling off a boat and being lost at sea. He could have been saved, but the other passengers who witnessed him topple over the railing spent too long debating what to yell to inform the captain that he had fallen.

    “Human overboard? Person overboard? Generic sentient entity overboard?” one man mused as he sipped a strawberry daiquiri. “I don’t want to be offensive here. We’ve got to be careful.”
    The woman sitting nearby him agreed. “We could just, like, do jazz hands or something and hope the captain notices?” They tried that for a while but it didn’t work. “Hmmm.”
    For the next hour, as the boat sailed farther and farther away from the drowning man, the two worked brainstormed a comprehensive list of everything they could say that wouldn’t offend anyone.
    They came up with lots of ideas:
    Non-gender-conforming person overboard
    Another member of the patriarchy is perishing don’t save him
    Someone is dying but we’re not sure what xis pronouns are
    The sea is angry today, my diverse friends
    ARRRRR shiver me timbers thar be drownin thing in that thar water
    IT’S MA’AM OVERBOARD
    Thar xe blows
    Vaguely human-shaped object overboard
    The passengers eventually settled on “something happened to some person” but it was too late.

    • In the meantime, the rest of the passengers were pulling out their cell phones, taking pictures, and putting them on facebook.

      • Dale A Albrecht says:

        I can see that. Like the Disney fight. There’s more cameras and phones recording the event yet do nothing to stop it.

        Dad said years ago during WWII the order of punishment in a fight from least yo worst
        1) the guy who threw the first punch
        2) the guy who got hit because he probably provoked the guy who got him
        3) all the people standing around not taking any action to stop the fight. More than likely egging it on, and in today’s cases posting on Facebook or Twitter going viral

  12. Mathius says:
    July 19, 2019 at 3:57 pm (Edit)
    What does this mean in real terms…. “inclined to making significant changes to the government, economic markets, and culture of the Unites States:”?
    I’ve been here a decade. You should know (roughly) where I stand.
    The same holds true for imposing Socialism, Democratic or otherwise, on the US of A.
    You can say that all you want, but I will stand my ground in asserting that it’s already a socials country and has been since before you were born.
    What does this mean in real terms…. “inclined to making significant changes to the government, economic markets, and culture of the Unites States:”?
    Given my druthers… at a glance… off the top of my head.. in no particular order?
    1. universal health care (yes, this will increase taxes, but you won’t be paying for healthcare)
    This idea would destroy the actual healthcare industry, hospitals closing etc. This idea would be better served at the State level.
    2. more “progressive” taxation
    Can you explain this better?
    3. replace welfare with work-fare (or disability),
    OK, Finally we agree on something 🙂
    4. replace food stamps with food pantries,
    A big YES
    5. enormous wholesale destruction of corporate loopholes,
    A better explanation would help
    6. aggressive anti-trust enforcement,
    Wait, upholding laws now?
    7. Feed Donald Trump, his entire administration, the Clintons, and the entirety of congress to a sharks at Sea World as a fund raiser to pay off the national debt.
    This might work, but would rather a pay per view with public hangings, no need to cause sharks stomach problems
    8. refinance student loans at a lower rate (a la Canada),
    Get government OUT of the business totally.
    9. disband the Los Angeles Angles of Anaheim,
    OK
    10. legalize marijuana,
    OK
    11. legalize (with doctor certification) several other drugs,
    OK
    12. open up the border to anyone who isn’t a known threat, and then shoot anyone who tries to cross illegally thereafter.
    Solve our homeless problems first, then….NO
    13. Hand out work visa like pez.
    NO, put Americans to work first. When ALL able bodied Americans are employed and off assistance, then we can issue work visa’s as needed.
    14. Grant amnesty (not to be confused with citizenship) to everyone already here.
    Again, NO. Reagan got screwed by the Crats and that dog ain’t hunting again.
    15. Fire Betsy DeVos out of a cannon. Replace with my wife.
    OK, She might be able to fix some things.
    16. Spend significantly on infrastructure
    Depends on what that is.
    17. Decrease military spending
    Cap it for a few years and reevaluate.
    18. Fund NASA “bigly.” Get that moon base!
    Waste of money.
    19. Get a bunch of people who are smarter than me to figure out a transition plan for once the robots take all our jobs.
    Shoot the robots, problem solved.
    20. Bomb the state of Georgia. They know what they did.
    I like Georgia, except the chiggers.
    21. Audit the Fed.
    YES
    22. Top to bottom review of every law on the books at every level, and take a weed-wacker to the BS.
    YES
    23. Any “victimless crime” gets taken off the books, full pardons for all.
    This could work, but needs more discussion
    24. Promote our resident Colonel to General and task him bringing as many of our troops home as possible while also not destabilizing the world.
    YES
    25. Full transparency of money in politics.
    YES. Cap campaign spending
    26. Establish a net surplus kill the national debt. I don’t care what it does to us in the short-term. If we don’t kill it soon, compound interest is going to make it impossible to kill soon without default or hyper-inflation.
    This would be a good subject to talk about.
    27. beef up the CPB,
    Border Patrol needs it
    28. eliminate for-profit prisons
    YES
    29. constitutional amendment banning torture
    This must include politicians lying
    30. heavy investment in artificial womb technology, followed by a total ban on abortion once the technology is ready (“remove” don’t “abort”)
    Teach personal responsibility, it’s cheaper.
    31. heavy investment into artificial meat technology, followed by an eventual ban on any “unnecessary” killing of animals.. but only once we’ve guaranteed I can still get a t-bone that’s up to my standards.
    Hell NO
    32. Mandatory high school classes on minding your own business and letting other people just live their lives if it’s not hurting you. Anyone who fails the course will be shipped off to Elba.
    Include not forcing their BS on others too!
    #26 is the top priority as it’s the biggest existential threat out there.

    There, we do agree on some things 😀

    • Dale A Albrecht says:

      I’ll comment on #8 to keep it short.

      The government has been involved with student loans since 1958 in one way or another.

      The government dictated the terms of the loan rates by private banks and lenders.

      If we look at 1970 -1980 tuitions could be generally handled by family, part time jobs and scholarship with very low amount of loans involved.

      Same period a college tuition pretty well overlayed expected salary of a graduate.

      Dept of Education created with a cabinet level seat during Carter’s administration

      Expand the chart to present day. And in 1980 the cost of tuition starts diverging in a linear fashion away from expected income of a college graduate which has stayed flat. Making it extremely hard to find tuitions by the previous methods.

      Big time propaganda you need a college degree to make it in today’s modern world continuing, couple that with outsourcing overseas so in an ever increasing manner, we are creating a glut of graduates in an ever decreasing job market. Reducing the possibility of 1) working in your field of study 2) getting a good salary 3) making having a living standard like our parents on one income almost impossible without two incomes and assuming even larger debt.

      Come 1995 the government starts making college loans directly along with the private lenders who had to still abide by government lending dictates for those loans. With more and more private lenders dropping out of the market.all the government money is TAXPAYER funded

      2010 the government Takes over almost in its entirely college tuition loan business. Again TAXPAYER funded. Today 25% of the loans default covered again TAXPAYER money.

      Expected income still stsyed flat since the 70’s

      Now candidates want to GIVE through TAXPAYER funds free college tuition.

      In a way we already are, but to fund all 100% no way Jose. Most 4 year degrees there is no related or limited market for the degree, ergo wasted money.

      Most 4 year degrees could covered in two years if our secondary public school system hadn’t gone to hell in a hand basket over the same period of them. But that’s another story.

      Government intrusion really distorts markets of all types. Witness collapse of the recent housing market.

      Secondary schools, got conceded about our ability to compete with other countries enter The Dept of Education. Oh if we just had this or that, smaller classes, more pay, more integration, more diversity more pay, less homework

      End result the system spends exponentially more money with results only a fraction better in test scores and results. A business would have been out of business decades ago with those results.

      There are exception schools as there are in Mathius’s district in and around Armonk Bedford Village and Chappaqua NY, but cost of living is huge with requirements of large incomes. It’s a haven of 1%rs all hardworking individuals and families.

      I know because my parents lived there for almost two decades.

      • Dale A Albrecht says:

        I couldn’t download the chart I’ve been referencing.

        But I could have included a debt chart. Besides home mortgages, student loan debt is the second largest debt category. Cars, credit cards are far smaller.

  13. Throwback. The former Soviet author says socialists need capitalism to be the catalyst for socialism. A capitalist invents something…diapers…using their capital, then the socialists declare diapers a human right, then socialism hands out free diapers. This gets me thinking that the whole thing is a big mind game. We’re afraid of a socialist takeover, but it will never happen because socialists need capitalists to invent the next new human right. Why can’t anything be simple?
    http://thepeoplescube.com/peoples-blog/why-socialists-need-capitalism-best-explanation-so-far-t17696.html

  14. Dale A Albrecht says:

    https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/21/politics/mueller-investigation-nadler-says-evidence-trump-guilty-high-crimes-misdemeanors/index.html

    These guys don’t know when to quit. Further evidence mandatory drug testing should be required for Congress every quarter and term limits 12 years maximum in any combination can’t go over 12.
    6 2 year terms in the House
    2 6 year terms in the Senate
    3 4 year terms as President (if they survive)

  15. Dale A Albrecht says:

    This has been a big and increasingly bigger problem for smaller countries that small family businesses were prominent but are being driven to closure by EU mandated regulations. Creating massive unemployment in age groups of people school graduates between 18-30. In Italy 30% plus here our worst State or district is 14% and that’s DC

    If there is no trend reversal, 2019 will close with a -0.4% drop in sales, over € 1bn less than 2018: the worst result in the last 4 years. To estimate it is a note from Confesercenti which estimates that there are already 32,000 fewer shops than in 2011 . A “hemorrhage that has burned at least 3 billion euros of business investment” while in 2019 they are preparing to disappear another 5 thousand commercial activities, at the rate of 14 per day.

    To weigh, we read in the Report Confesercenti, is above all the failure to recover the expenditure of Italian families, who are now forced to spend 2,530 euros annually less than in 2011. This is a suffering not limited only to the poorest areas of the country : the Lombard families in fact, they reduced their consumption by 3.5%, Veneto’s by 4.4%, slightly less than in Calabria, where the contraction was 4.8%.

    The stop in spending has also led to the reorientation of consumption choices towards those channels, Confcommercio says, ” where price competition, such as web and outlet, is most exasperated. The impact on trade was devastating. By now, almost every third independent business closes its doors within three years of life “, he notes again.

    “The difficulties of trade, especially of children, seem to be structural. We need urgent action to address it: we will ask the government to open a crisis table, “explains Patrizia De Luise, president of Confesercenti. “If you think that, on average, every small shop that closes creates two unemployed people, it is clear that we are facing a very serious business crisis, even if no one seems to notice. Even trade in public areas is in difficulty, grounded by a regulatory chaos that has accelerated the marginalization of markets and the spread of illegal trade “.

    And it is not a problem only for traders : “the side effects of the crisis in the sector also extend to the social and urban dimension. The traditional sales network helps to give identity to a place and makes urban areas more attractive. For which trade is an economically significant sector, which contributes to producing local income and employment “, he adds. “Organic, broad-spectrum action is needed to restore spending power to families and to accompany the commercial network in the transition to digital, creating the conditions for fair competition with the Web channel,” continues De Luise. ADNK

  16. Dale A Albrecht says:

    Mattel Salvini the other day told Macron and Merkel, we are not your refugee camp. France and Germany have blocked all borders of migrants who have been dumped in Italy by NGO’s they also drug and return to Italy migrants who 1st were dumped in Italy, then were refused asylum or commited criminal offense in those other countries.

    I keep mentioning all these incidents because our dems and their liberal parties and courts are operating from the same playbook.

    Example. In Bologna, a Nigerian was convicted of having bomb making materials and instructions in making those devices. The State just wanted this illegal migrant deported back Nigeria. The judge not only refused to allow deportation but set him free to walk the streets

  17. Dale A Albrecht says:

    Family Guy goes millennial

  18. Just A Citizen says:

    Working in field this morning, pulling weeds and changing irrigation pipe. Beautiful clear day and blue sky.

    Heard the roar from about 8 miles away, then from the north came that B-17 that was here a couple weeks back. Then about 20 minutes later another distinctive rumbling/rolling kind of engine sound. Immediately knew it was not the B-17. Then as if by magic it appeared, climbing over the ridge to my north-headed straight at me. A B-25 Mitchell bomber. Flew right over the top of me. Nose glass and machine gun barrel, clearly visible. US Army Air Corp markings, including that lone white star.

    Yesterday saw a couple of bi-planes headed South as well. Looked like the old Navy trainers from WW II era. To far to get good look but seemed to modern in design for WW I replicas.

    Nice having Pappy Boyington field so close.

    Of course the rest of the day consisted of small retardant/water planes going and coming and the constant din of Corporate Jets, their occupants coming to gobble up more land and drive the housing prices even higher.

    • I go out every morning to look at the day and lately to watch the hummingbirds. This morning I looked up and the hummingbird was close enough to my face that I made a low sound of surprise. My dog was basking in the sun, but he heard me. It took about a second for him to be at my side trying to figure out what was wrong. Such a good dog!

      • At 3:30 this morning a bear pulled the motor off deer feeder. Windows are open so heard the corn run out. At 1 pm, 2 does and 2 fawns were enjoying the bears extra food fest. 🙂

  19. Dale A Albrecht says:

  20. Dale A Albrecht says:

  21. Dale A Albrecht says:

  22. After a few days of heat, humidity and some good thunderstorms, it’s cooler with light rain. A welcome break.

    Listening to Shifty Schiff and No brains Nadler, I think they both need seek professional help for delusions and compulsive lying. These two, along with a large number of current Crats make Trump look like the most honest man on the planet.

    • Glad I don’t live in California, wonder how many times I’ve had that thought. I actually had chills when I saw the words, to “provide appropriate interventions “, they weren’t good chills!

      • Control is what the crats want, total control. They would be the modern day Nazis if they ever actually got it.

  23. Moderation, please..

  24. (Gateway Pundit) – A recent study by University of Pennsylvania reseachers Danial J. Hopkins and Samantha Washington found that America is much less racist under President Trump than under race-baiting, whitey-bashing Democrat Barack Obama.
    The survey concluded that via most measures, white Americans’ expressed anti-Black and anti-Hispanic prejudice declined after the 2016 campaign and election, and we can rule out even small increases in the expression of prejudice.

    https://www.teaparty.org/university-study-finds-us-less-racist-under-president-trump-than-race-baiting-obama-374548/

    • I want to see a study on whether or not racism against white people has risen. I suppose that type of research doesn’t exist, so proving it has risen would be impossible. But someone should start the research.

  25. http://acecomments.mu.nu/?post=382420

    Welcome to the new America! He makes some good points but in order to prove his Right to do so, he first has to tell everyone how much of a victim he is. Can’t win is the truth.

    • I find that whole thing pretty disgusting . Because she’s black, she doesn’t have to tell him anything. Because he’s white and male , blah,blah, blah. Because he doesn’t identify as male blah blah blah. Because their both victims blah blah blah. There is always someone who’s a greater victim, so I guess we should all just stop talking. Communication under all these rules is impossible. I still have no idea why it’s not okay to visit a community and stay in a hotel supporting their businesses. Well, of course I don’t because the whole concept is stupid.

      • The singer was polite. That was a great thing to see in this day and age. Despite his “victimhood” status, he is pressing on, good for him.

        As far as the SJW and the subject of cultural appropriation. Screw them and their idiotic thinking. They are racist’s to the core, just like the black girl in the video. She’s a racist and stated so when she mentioned his color. This is the left and what they are. Not all mind you, but many are the true racist’s, and when they claim someone is a racist, despite ZERO actual evidence, it is always they who are the real bigots. Those who cry “white privilege” are bigots/racist’s/ dumb fu@#s. To me it’s real simple. The Left is loaded with racist pigs, anti-Semites, and they hate anyone who disagrees with them. These are NOT the average Democrat, these are the Progressives, aka, Communist’s. There is a difference. Our political side has it’s asshats too, but their asshats outnumber our asshats 1 million to one 🙂

  26. NEW YORK, NY—The New York Times was criticized late last week for praising the Soviet Union for its unprecedented gender equality at its brutal prison camps.

    The piece swooned over the way the Soviets provided forced labor opportunities for people of all races, genders, and orientations, pointing out that while the United States may have won the Cold War and the Space Race, the USSR won the victories that counted: imprisoning all people equally.
    “They even employed female guards, LGBTQ guards, and guards of color,” the piece read. “From prison guards to prisoners, the Soviets were years and years ahead of the U.S. when it came to equality. Our own country may not implement labor camps at all for another few decades, or until a socialist is elected president, whichever comes first.”
    Many people on social media pointed out that gender equality wasn’t really something to be praised when it comes to a totalitarian regime. But the Times simply doubled down, publishing pieces that praised the Soviet Union for various things:
    The wage gap: everybody made almost no money equally
    Immigration policy: anyone who sneaked into the Soviet Union would be kept there permanently
    Abortion: kill all the babies and also the political dissenters and most of everyone else
    Plastic straws: have no clean water so there are no straws
    Environmental policy: constant blackouts mean smaller carbon footprint
    The Times has also reportedly been considering moving its headquarters to Moscow.

  27. https://www.foxnews.com/us/new-york-police-pelted-objects-drenched-water-video-reprehensible

    Here we go again. This will happen all over now. Cops where these things are allowed by Crat Mayors should just stand down.

    • Absolutely disgusting! I agree 100% the cops should stand down. See how the people like living in anarchy. The majority of police in South Bend are contemplating quitting because of the loony liberal policies.

      • No, they shouldn’t but I couldn’t blame them if they did.

        • I can see a point because not all people support these idiotic policies. At the same time, it’s hard to ssk cops to serve an area where they are disrespected and assaulted while out numbered. This will only lead to further violence.

          • They should do their jobs the best they can. But no one should expect them to commit suicide by governmental decree.

          • Dale A Albrecht says:

            Interesting note on that subject years ago in Los Angeles. Watts, the area that blew up in 1964, specifically asked the Democrat mayor, Sam Yorty to STOP having black police officers patrolling their community. Reason the black officers tended to use a heavy hand with liberal use of their nightsticks on their fellow citizens. The white officers at the time were considered more professional.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      I fail to see how the “Crat Mayor” is ALLOWING this to happen. The Mayor condemned it, in no uncertain terms.

      • From what i have heard, xops in these areas are limited, by mayoral decree. They can condemn all they want, it’s still their fault for forcing the cops to put up with this BS. Buttigedge has mostly lost his whole force.

        This is just another example of the failure of the lefts ideology.

  28. Ok, T Ray…here are some stats for you directly from the work papers and not sanitized through the media.

    First, there have been 22,417 children pass through our control area from Feb 1, 2018 to Feb 28, 2019 (Texas/New Mexico).
    Second, of this number, 2,789 of them have been unaccompanied. ( Unaccompanied, for the left, means that they showed up without parent or guardian. The youngest of these children was 7.)
    Third, of the 22,417 children, none were considered orphans or abandoned.
    Fourth, until recently, there was no way to vett these children. Now, through DNA testing, there is a way to determine accompanied adult status.
    Fifth, none of the children claimed abandoned nor orphan status.

    Orphan status is defined as a child who has lost both parents and have no parents living.

    We do not recognize the left’s or the media’s definition of……a child alone. If a parent brings a child to the border and leaves them, this is not orphan status. IT is child abandonment and we treat it as such.

    Does this help any?

    • For clarification to the left…..”lost parents” means dead. Not living. Not breathing. Have departed from life itself.

      Lost parents does not mean those who have abandoned their children. It does not mean that those children have lost their parents and are. therefore, orphans.

    • The faint of heart down here are trying to push a “de facto” definition of orphan but so far the judges are not buying it.

    • Thanks Col. It is always nice to have actual facts thus they cannot blow me off as just blowing smoke. So far they have not responded.

      • You are welcome. I do not have very many internet reports to link you to as the internet is decidedly leftward bent and the msm sanitizes things the way they want. I can give you stats off the reports that I write and read. Obviously, I cannot give you classified information.

  29. Just A Citizen says:

    PELOSI and TRUMP, sitting in a tree, K..I..S..S..I..N..G!!!

    First comes the fit then comes the negotiation. Then comes WE the People pushing a shopping cart around picking up cans for cash when the whole thing blows up.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      What were Mr. Trump’s last time he signed off on the budget deal? Oh yeah, that’s right….
      NEVER AGAIN he proclaimed.

      • Shades of “read my lips”……………sigh……….and what is worse…there is no replacement worth their weight in donkey tulips.

        • Just A Citizen says:

          Colonel

          I am once again trying to convince Spousal Unit Leader that I should announce my candidacy for POTUS. She was mumbling something about me having to change my name so nobody could find her or the family. I told her she would not have made a very good “Founding Revolutionary” with that attitude. She asked me “what’s your point?”.

          I would say this formally announces the end of the Tea Party.

  30. Dale A Albrecht says:

    https://richardlangworth.com/worst-form-of-government

    This is an essay on Churchill’s famous speech given in 1947.

    We must not forget that all totalitarian governments it serms in the 20th century have all called themselves Democratic this or that, social democracy, people’s republic of….all they’ve shown is that they do not trust that little person entering that voting booth and can only hold power through the barrel of a gun.

  31. Dale A Albrecht says:

    This is how free speech is silenced.

    Ms. Zhu, a conservative activist who is a University of Michigan senior and the social media director for the national group Chinese Americans for Trump, shared on social media an email she had received on Thursday from the pageant’s state director, Laurie DeJac

    “It has been brought to the attention of Miss World America ‘MWA’ that your social media accounts contain offensive, insensitive and inappropriate content,” Ms. DeJack wrote.

    The first tweet that drew the scrutiny of the pageant came in response to criticism of police officers about the Black Lives Matter movement.

    “Did you know the majority of black deaths are caused by other blacks?” Ms. Zhu wrote on Twitter in October 2017. “Fix problems within your own community first before blaming others.”

    In February 2018, in a tweet that she has since deleted, Ms. Zhu criticized a World Hijab Day awareness event at the University of Central Florida, where she had been a student before transferring

    “There’s a ‘try a hijab on’ booth at my college campus,” Ms. Zhu wrote at the time. “So you’re telling me that it’s now just a fashion accessory and not a religious thing? Or are you just trying to get women used to being oppressed under Islam.”

  32. Dale A Albrecht says:

    A good editorial about how the State, not the parents own the children

    To save children and us – by Massimo Viglione

    The monstrous facts of the Val d’Enza, beyond the inhuman cruelty towards children, have occurred for a very specific reason. It is the same reason why the state can decide to take children away from their parents because they are old. Or because they are ignorant. Or for any other insipid imposture.
    It is the same reason why human sacrifices can be made for the sick, children, adults or the elderly.
    The reason lies in the fact that the owner of the children is the state . As well as our lives and our bodies.
    This is not an exaggeration or a “fanatical” interpretation. It is exactly the heart of the matter.

    In an article of mine in 2014, I reported these precise words:
    “While public opinion is concentrated on the contrasting news coming from politics and anti-politics, there are strong incisive reforms regarding private relations. It is a question of completing the New Family Law , launched in 1975, which a legislator defined then: ” A law of today that will become the morality of tomorrow ” ». This was the beginning of a short but dense and very important article by Silvia Vegetti Finzi (CdS, 15/12/2013, p. 37) entitled ” Goodbye by law to the father master. The children belong to those who grow them and educate them “.
    The article actually went quite unnoticed even in Catholic environments sensitive to family and bioethical problems. And instead it deserves the utmost attention, truly a kind of careful exegesis.

    The author reveals to us in a few lines one of the greatest, most devastating and profound revolutions underway before our eyes , destined to forever subvert the natural order of creation, in turn creating “the morality of tomorrow”, for the precisely. Nor is it any more a question of educating ourselves to “free sex” in itself, or to the taste of the relationship with the same sex, with children or perhaps with animals.
    Here we go further, something is at stake that goes beyond morality to directly affect the DNA of creation itself, if we can say so: the concept of parent and child, “parenting”, is at stake to use a term revolutionary.

    “Parenthood” will be based “on responsibility rather than on power” . And on the blood, we add. The children no longer belong to those who bring them into the world, but “to those who recognize them, grow them and educate them adequately”.

    For years, decades, the writer had always thought that behind the ever more numerous cases of expropriation by the State of children of violent or inhuman parents (or those presented) hid the will to destroy the family . Today we have arrived and the mask is about to be thrown: “everyone has the right to the same family relationships” and “because the family is a system, nothing will be as before” and finally we will arrive “to a new anthropological framework and, of consequently, to a new morality “.
    The author concludes by recalling that “both parents will be required to have an authority founded on mutual recognition, confirmed by the community”.

    I dwell only on this last statement. What does “community confirmed” mean? Is it that one is a father or mother only because and to the extent and to the extent that the “community” recognizes and concedes me? And who is the “community”? The state? The judiciary? The “popular meetings”? Or social services? And if a parent were not to be recognized as the father of the one who generated, or if one day he lost that recognition, who would be the father of the “generated”?
    To this last terrifying question, Vegetti Finzi answers in the conclusion of his unforgettable article: ” Every adult as such” will be “responsible for the well-being and growth of the new generations “.

    Here is the new morality , the last step of the anthropological revolution. We will all be children of all and all will be parents of all . Therefore, there will no longer be the figure of the father and the mother (and therefore here we go beyond the entrusting of children to homosexual couples), because, as they teach in Spain, when one is “todos caballeros” no one is a knight anymore. And therefore we will not even be children anymore, because we will no longer have parents.

    As I said, here we go far beyond the homosexualist, pedophile or bestialist follies. The cell on which human civilization is based is being “materially” destroyed. It is as if Aristotle wanted to replace Plato. But not Plato of the Politico or de Le Leggi, an old and then old man who was and will be the foundation of Western civilization, but the 40-year-old Plato of La Repubblica, the one who is studied banally on school desks.

    Time flies under our feet, the Gnostic and egalitarian Revolution is going towards its most extreme consequences: it is time that we realize it , all together, opening the eyes of the mind and the heart to reality as it is.

    I wrote this five years ago. Vegetti Finzi clearly told us that children no longer belong to natural parents, but to the State . The State, in concrete terms, means social workers, judges, lawyers and psychologists: all those who enter the game of taking their children from their parents, to entrust them to those who want them (“confirmed by the community”), in this case with absolute privilege to the homosexual couples.
    What was said by Vegetti Finzi, and denounced by me (I must say that I was invited by SAT2000 to talk about it), was not considered worthy of being propagated by the Catholic world linked to the values ​​of life and the family. Here we are.

    The State is the master of our children, like our bodies, of our lives . And the State is the Revolution. He can do this because over the centuries, and since the Second World War, we have become isolated monads enslaved by work to survive (for the less fortunate) or by the myth of the career (for the wealthy), or from football, from tv, from internet, from fashion, from all the immense paraphernalia used to cloud human minds and make us more and more monads. And slaves, unarmed, in every sense.

    And the State does what it wants: it takes away the children, imposes meaningless mass vaccinations, kills the sick, imposes gender in schools, imprisons those who understand and wants to oppose. All while invading millions of immigrants, to whom one day – rest assured – will give our homes. With all the support of political and social structures, clergy in the first place.

    Needless to trust parties. They are almost all on the side of the enemy. Who is not, does almost nothing, or very little, about it. At most, there are some good politicians who personally commit themselves: but they can be counted on the fingertips (in the literal and mathematical sense of the concept) and certainly they cannot change things on their own. But it is no longer time for conferences and proclamations. A mass reaction is needed.

    The only possibility we have is to return to the medieval spirit (even in this) of communitarianism, to break the trap of the monadism in which we have fallen. In the medieval city and municipal civilization, the highest form of political civilization ever reached, every man was a citizen in the true sense of the concept, precisely as a component of associations and brotherhoods (guilds) that prevented him from being alone. The guilds guaranteed not only help to the person and to the family, and in general help they supported the entire city community; but precisely because of their unitive strength they became bastions of freedom against the absolutist temptations of the powerful.

    Obviously in those days there was also the Church to defend the citizens, and these had the weapons to protect themselves. Today, we are without weapons and with the clergy largely spent with the enemy . But the possibility still exists, facilitated by the Internet, of associations.
    To associate means creating a reaction force, of protection, of support, of driving. It means creating a wall against the enemy who wants to destroy us , who wants to engulf our children and take over our lives, who wants to change us anthropologically.
    It means to collect, in the common effort, quotas of money suitable to allow common actions of resistance to evil.

    More than ever we need walls and we have to blow up bridges . We can do this by stopping to dream about political forces that protect us, and starting to create an association that unites all the forces of the “good”: human, legal, economic, media.
    We overcome divisions, grudges, distrust, vulgar and idiotic goodwill, suicidal “snobbism” and complicit moderation: we create a union of forces to defend the lives of children, of civilization, of all of us.
    It’s time. If not now, when?
    Val d’Enza is just the beginning. Indeed, not even the beginning, in the sense that for years the system has been running and the children are being removed. Just like the sick are killed . Just as minds are “re-educated” to subversion.
    We must unite and react, with us.
    Do you want to create this “guild”, this general association, a common defense?
    Does anyone listen to me?

    Massimo Viglione

  33. Dale A Albrecht says:

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/barr-mueller-asked-doj-to-send-him-letter-saying-testimony-must-remain-within-boundaries-of-report

    This ought to put a kink in the democrats questions. And maybe finally put a stop to Nadler’s grandstanding and just making stuff up

  34. https://thefederalist.com/2019/07/23/its-time-for-the-left-to-deal-with-the-excesses-of-the-trans-movement/

    It’s way past time for some common sense to be brought to this issue. Ignoring the differences between men and women isn’t possible because it isn’t based on reality.

  35. AOC has really stepped in it….as far as Texas is concerned. She thinks that the Alamo in San Antonio and the San Jacinto Park and monument about the Texas Independence is as racist as any Confederate statue and both should be destroyed.

    So, Mathius…..when may we expect you and your new Democratic Party?

  36. It’s Mueller time again. Here are the likely results:

    Crats: This proves collusion and obstruction, we must impeach. (Please do so)
    Repub’s: Complete exoneration of Trump, proves the whole investigation was illegal to begin with, time to investigate the investigator’s (already underway).
    Trump: No collusion, no obstruction. Nothing but an illegal political witch hunt.
    The average person: Who cares already, the Crats have lied and lied. May as well take CNN and MSNBC off the air, they are not credible. Trump 2020. Ivanka 2024 😀

    • Mathius says:

      Explain to me how the investigation proved no obstruction.

      Explain to me what is illegal about this political witch hunt?

      • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

        1. So, how do you prove that someone obstructed a non-crime?

        2. How do you prove a negative?

        3. Witch Hunts are ALWAYS legal. Glad you agree with old Tail Gunner Joe McCarthy.

        • 1. So, how do you prove that someone obstructed a non-crime?

          You don’t have to be guilty of the crime being investigated in order to be guilty of obstruction of justice.

          Let’s imagine you’re being investigated for murder. You’re innocent, but the police don’t know that. Nonetheless, there’s some evidence that might point to you anyway, so you destroy it. The police later decide not to charge you for murder. But did you commit obstruction of justice by interfering with the investigation? You sure did!

          The U.S. Attorneys’ Manual breaks down the three elements of an obstruction charge: “(1) there was a proceeding pending before a department or agency of the United States; (2) the defendant knew of or had a reasonably founded belief that the proceeding was pending; and (3) the defendant corruptly endeavored to influence, obstruct, or impede the due and proper administration of the law under which the proceeding was pending.”

          You’ll note that none of those three prongs are “is guilty of the underlying crime.”
          1) Was there a proceeding pending? Yes.
          2) Did Trump know about it? Yes.
          3) Did he “corruptly” endeavor to influence/obstruct/impeded it? He definitely endeavored to influence/obstruct/impeded it.. but did he do so in a “corrupt” manner? That I can’t answer. Maybe?

          What does it mean to act in a “corrupt” manner? That’s the $64,000 question.

          1. So, how do you prove that someone obstructed a non-crime?

          But ALSO, this is not my point.

          My point is that Trump and the Republicans are claiming that the Muller report proved no collusion (it didn’t… failing TO prove collusion does not PROVE “no collusion”) and that it proved no obstruction when it very definitely doesn’t. It was very clear that Muller felt he was not allowed to charge Trump, but found several instances which might rise to the level of obstruction.

          2. How do you prove a negative?

          You generally can’t.

          But TRUMP is claiming that the investigation proved no collusion (again, it didn’t) and no obstruction (again, it didn’t).

          He is claiming / acting like the report exonerated him of collusion (it did, to the maximal extent possible) and obstruction (it most certainly did not).

          I know this is a hard concept, but if I “can’t prove you did X,” that is not the same thing as “I therefore proved you did not do X.” And for you to claim the later is disingenuous as best and a LIE at worst.

          3. Witch Hunts are ALWAYS legal. Glad you agree with old Tail Gunner Joe McCarthy.

          This is completely false.

          There’s a phrase I throw around a lot which I think is very helpful: Lawful, but awful.

          Just because it was a witch hunt (it was!) does not make it illegal. There has to be a law against something to make it illegal. It can’t just be illegal “because I say so.”

          There is no law of which I am aware that makes it illegal for Congress to investigate someone for partisan reasons.

          Maybe there should be.

          But there isn’t.

          Something can be “bad” or “wrong” but still be perfectly legal.

          Lawful, but awful.

          • #3.

            I misread your sarcastic reply, so let me try that again.

            Previously: Nothing but an illegal political witch hunt.

            Mathius: Explain to me what is illegal about this political witch hunt?

            [presumably sarcastic] Witch Hunts are ALWAYS legal.

            It’s a fun game of “hide the ball” you’re playing, but it is total bullshit.

            I didn’t say “ALL witch hunts are illegal.”

            I asked what is illegal about this witch hunt.

            By coming back with the sarcastic response that all witch hunts must therefore be legal since I dare to ask about this one, you are basically arguing a strawman. As though I had been the one making the assertion of legality of all witch hunts when that is most emphatically not the case.

            So why don’t you take a step back and try this again.

            YOU (on behalf of the Republicans and Donald J. Trump) have made the assertion that the investigation was illegal.

            I am asking you to defend that assertion or retract it.

            • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

              Ahhhh mon ami, you presume I think the witch hunt is illegal. I do not. Witch hunts are always legal. American (and world) history is full of them From Socrates to the Templars to the Inquisition to Salem to Stalin’s show trials, everybody had the “right” to organize a witch hunt. It is our job to point out the fallacy.

      • Explain to me how the investigation proved no obstruction. The investigation neither proves nor disproves obstruction. It is silent.

        Explain to me what is illegal about this political witch hunt? There is nothing illegal about political witch hunts….yet. If the Dems do win, then they will become illegal.

        • Gman said: Repub’s: Complete exoneration of Trump, proves the whole investigation was illegal to begin with, time to investigate the investigator’s (already underway).
          Trump: No collusion, no obstruction. Nothing but an illegal political witch hunt.

          D13 said: The investigation neither proves nor disproves obstruction. It is silent. …. and … There is nothing illegal about political witch hunts

          Please square these two assertions.

      • Explain to me how the investigation proved no obstruction.

        No charges. Trump, like you and I, have the presumption of innocence.

        • Explain to me what is illegal about this political witch hunt?

          We will find out, it’s being investigated.

          • 1. Gman asserts the investigation was illegal.
            2. Mathius asks what made it illegal.
            3. Gman: I don’t know. But of course they’re guilty.
            4. Gman (previously): Trump, like you and I, have the presumption of innocence.

            So, Trump has the presumption of innocence. Failing to prove his guilt somehow “proves” his innocence. Failing to charge him “proves” his innocence. But those who investigated him are guilty. Likewise, H. Clinton, who was not charged with anything, is also guilty.

            Because the presumption of innocence only applies to Red Team.

            • My statement was a humorous guess on what would be said after the circus is over. it’s a fun prediction, not intended as an assertion (I am no lawyer).

        • Explain to me how the investigation proved no obstruction.

          No charges. Trump, like you and I, have the presumption of innocence.

          The presumption of innocence is not the same thing as proven innocent. You said he was “completely exonerated.” He most certainly was not.

          The fact that they did not find evidence of his collusion does is not the same as “proved he didn’t collude.” You need to go take a course on formal logic.

          Likewise, the fact that they found significant evidence of obstruction, but felt that they could not charge him because he’s the President, in no way “proves” that he didn’t obstruct. That’s preposterous.

          • Dale A Albrecht says:

            Objecting to being hung for something he didn’t do? Muellers team knew early on there was no collusion

            Yet never investigated in the least the roots of the collusion accusation. And the tangled web of deceit by the DOJ, State dept and other agencies. The expansion of Muellers investigation secretly by Rosenstein was only further attempts to get Trump.

            https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/rule-of-law/federal-judge-held-robert-mueller-had-no-evidence-to-support-russian-government-was-behind-2016-social-media-manipulation/

            This was a big portion of Mueller contention of Russian government involvement. His team leveled the indictments. Their defense said put up the evidence, Muellers team says they’re not ready. Lots of judge chamber wrangling. Judge unseals records confirming Mueller had no evidence.

            • Objecting to being hung for something he didn’t do? Muellers team knew early on there was no collusion

              Irrelevant.

              That did or did not “collude” has no bearing on his “right” to interfere with the investigation.

              Yet never investigated in the least the roots of the collusion accusation. And the tangled web of deceit by the DOJ, State dept and other agencies. The expansion of Muellers investigation secretly by Rosenstein was only further attempts to get Trump.

              Still irrelevant.

              If the investigation was or was not politically motivated or created on false pretenses or secretly expanded or set up just to get him… it doesn’t matter one iota with regards to his “right” to interfere with the investigation.

              This was a big portion of Mueller contention of Russian government involvement. His team leveled the indictments. Their defense said put up the evidence, Muellers team says they’re not ready. Lots of judge chamber wrangling. Judge unseals records confirming Mueller had no evidence.

              Even if I accepted your interpretation of events (I don’t), it would be irrelevant.

              Either Trump did or did not have a “right” to interfere as he did.

              Everything else you’re throwing out might also be a crime. Or it might not. But for the topic at hand, you’re just obfuscating.

              He either DID or DID NOT have a right to interfere as he did. The question seems to hinge on what it means to have done so “corruptly.”

              I would ask “did he do this for purposes of being the President to serve America” or “did he use his powers as President in a self-serving manner to serve himself”? I’m sure you, kool-aid chugger that you are, will argue the former, but I would suggest he abused his position as President to try to shut down an investigation of himself because he didn’t want to be investigated (regardless of innocence or guilt).

              I would argue that that’s an abuse of his position… a…. corruption… if you will.

              I would argue that, at least as far as I understand the relevant statues, that using your position for personal benefit is a corrupt practice. And that, therefore, his “interference” in the investigation is, in fact, “obstruction.”

              • He either DID or DID NOT have a right to interfere as he did. Nothing proven….a report, which Mueller is, at best, fuzzy on, prepared by a group of anti-Trump lawyers, alll hand picked by Weinstein (none by Mueller) saying that the facts presented are correct…..facts supported by people with plea deals…….

                Collusion is not proven….charge him and put it into court with cross examination….then maybe you have a case.

          • Square this one away from the hearing.

            Congressman (forgot name): You claim that you came to no conclusion on obstruction because you can’t indict a sitting President, is that correct?
            Mueller: Correct
            Congressman: Than why did you come to a conclusion that there was no conspiracy between Trump and the Russians, when you still can’t indict the same president?
            Mueller: …………..(crickets)

  37. Canine Weapon says:

  38. Mathius says:

    • Yeah, republicans have been pointing out for years that the majority of our representatives do not back up their words with their actions. On this issue, Trump is no different. But, yes but, you knew it was coming, he is supporting more of our platform than I’ve seen in a long time. So I’m gonna continue supporting him.

    • I agree with him, since Congress passes the budgets. So, if he vetoes and shuts down the government, what would that actually accomplish?

    • LOL…….then we will have no politicians…………………..errr…..perhaps it is not a bad law after all.

  39. Survey question:

    If you are investigated, but not charged, does this “prove that you are innocent”?

    Yes / No

    • One is always innocent UNTIL proven guilty by a trial by one’s peers. Investigations mean nothing.

      • One is always innocent UNTIL proven guilty by a trial by one’s peers.

        Then would you be kind enough to confirm for me that you believe Hillary Clinton it innocent.

        One is always innocent UNTIL proven guilty by a trial by one’s peers.

        Then would you be kind enough to confirm that the congressmen who ordered the Muller investigation are innocent.

        • Then would you be kind enough to confirm for me that you believe Hillary Clinton it innocent.

          She has the presumption as everyone else.

          Then would you be kind enough to confirm that the congressmen who ordered the Muller investigation are innocent.

          I have never accused any congressmen of any crime (nor have I heard of any) for ordering the investigation, because the DOJ was requested to have such investigation. Congress has no authority to order investigations by the DOJ, so where would the crime come from?

          • She has the presumption as everyone else.

            Would you please state that she is as innocent as Donald Trump.

            • You are being petulant, so NO!

              • I am trying to point out that you believe act as though the presumption of innocence only applies to your side.

                Trump is innocent.

                Clinton is guilty.

                Trump is innocent.

                The people investigating him are guilty.

              • Then would you be kind enough to confirm for me that you believe Hillary Clinton it innocent.
                She has the presumption as everyone else.

                Which part of this is so damn hard to comprehend?

              • Not the point Gman….the point is….all are innocent until proven guilty. That does not, however, stop personal opinion. You believe that Hillary is guilty…..He believes that Trump is guilty.

                One thing that surprised me…….Mueller was obviously disconnected from the investigation. It was obvious that he did not, and testified to the fact, that he did not put the report together. He struggled greatly and I find that interesting.

    • Stop with the nonsense questions. You know better than that.

      • It seems to be a point of confusion. I am seeking to clarify.

        Muller failed to find evidence of collusion. Yet Trump (and Gman) are asserting that he has been exonerated. I believe this to be a logical fallacy.

        • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

          I would merely point out that if you are not charged…..you are innocent by definition in the American System. Anything else is un-American.

          And yes, I know John Gotti was repeatedly found not guilty but was guilty but that does not matter in our system. hell, there is no evidence of any obstruction not to mention that there obviously was no obstruction.

          Riddle me this , did Nixon “obstruct” when he fired Cox?

          • there is no evidence of any obstruction not to mention that there obviously was no obstruction.

            There is plenty of evidence.

            Muller listed out several instances that might rise to the level of obstruction and even went so far as to be explicitly clear that he felt he was unable to charge a President.

            Riddle me this , did Nixon “obstruct” when he fired Cox?

            Maybe.

            I’d argue that it was obstruction of justice to fire someone in order to stop them from investigating you.

            Riddle me this: If B. Clinton had (somehow) fired Ken Starr, would that have been obstruction?

            • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

              Not if he had the authority as POTUS to do it. Firing an individual is different than shutting down an investigation, period.

              • Mathius says:

                Not if he had the authority as POTUS to do it

                I have the authority to fire people, too!

                If the accountant starts asking troubling questions about my expense reports that I don’t like, and I fire him for it, that might be “within my authority,” but it certainly wouldn’t be a correct exercise of my authority.

                Some might even say it’s a corrupt use of my powers. Even if it later turns up that there were no underlying issues with my expense reports.

                Firing an individual is different than shutting down an investigation, period.

                It is when you hope to replace the guy with someone who will shut down the investigation and you openly acknowledge that’s why you fired him.

                Firing an individual is different than shutting down an investigation, period.

                Then explain the Saturday Night Massacre as anything other than an effort to kill the Watergate investigation.

            • Muller listed out several instances that might rise…………….

              Might rise………Might.

              • Mathius says:

                Yes… might.

                So, the report says “maybe.”

                But Trump (and g-dude) take it upon themselves to interpret this as “totally exonerated” and “no collusion no obstruction.”

                And I think that’s intellectually dishonest.

        • Just A Citizen says:

          Per Mueller, he did not investigate collusion because there is not an illegal act of “collusion”.

          They investigated “criminal conspiracy”.

    • No, It does not prove your innocence, you do not have to prove your innocence. It simply means you can not be punished by legal authorities because you are presumed innocent. But we the people can rant all we want to. But sometimes people are guilty of the crime but pronounced not guilty by reason of. Like, Hillary did obvious things that were against the rules on handling classified information. It was not a matter of opinion. It was not he said, she said. It wasn’t based on someone’s interpretations of her wo rds. It was documented fact. She simply wasn’t prosecuted based on intent. Kinda like a person being guilty of murder but getting off based on insanity.

      • Mathius says:

        Hi V!

        There’s a bit to unpack here… sorry for the long reply…

        No, It does not prove your innocence,

        So would you say it’s intellectually dishonest to claim that you’ve been proven innocent or that it cleared you or that you’re totally exonerated, etc?

        No, It does not prove your innocence, you do not have to prove your innocence.

        Correct!

        It simply means you can not be punished by legal authorities because you are presumed innocent.

        Correct!

        But we the people can rant all we want to.

        God knows I do.

        But sometimes people are guilty of the crime but pronounced not guilty by reason of.

        Ehhh… I mean, I suppose this does happen, but generally a crime in this kind of circumstance will necessitate what’s called mens rea.

        That is a “criminal mind.”

        It’s why, for instance, it’s completely legal to have a car accident provided I wasn’t drunk/distracted/driving unsafely/speeding/etc. But it’s illegal to have that same crash if I meant to do it (say, road rage).

        The same exact act. I hit you with my car. But in one case it’s a crime and in the other it’s not.

        It’s not that it’s a crime and I just don’t get in trouble for it. It’s that it’s literally NOT a crime unless you meet all the necessary conditions. And one of those necessary conditions, in this case, is intent.

        Like, Hillary did obvious things that were against the rules on handling classified information. It was not a matter of opinion. It was not he said, she said. It wasn’t based on someone’s interpretations of her words. It was documented fact. She simply wasn’t prosecuted based on intent.

        So here, exactly is the point, and it feels like you got it, I just want to be sure we’re on the same page.

        ASSUMING, that there was no intent, and ASSUMING that intent is required, then yes, she mishandled classified information (yup!), but it’s not tat she wasn’t prosecuted because of intent per say, but because the lack of intent meant that it wasn’t a crime.

        If I pick up your phone, thinking its mine, and walk out with it, I have taken your phone (which is mishandling your property), but I won’t get charged because it was an honest mistake. It’s not that they “won’t charge me because of my intent” so much as that “because of my intent, it’s not a crime in the first place.”

        Kinda like a person being guilty of murder but getting off based on insanity.

        Murder requires intent.

        If you are insane, then you literally cannot be guilty of murder.

        It’s not that you “got off” based on insanity. It’s that you ARE INNOCENT based on a lack of intent.

        Does this make sense?

        • That is a “criminal mind.” El Toro Poo-poo.

          • Mathius says:

            Colonel,

            You trip and fall and, in the process, flail your arms and accidentally push me into traffic where I am subsequently run over by an eighteen wheeler.

            Did you commit a crime?

            I mean, you did shove me into traffic…

            • Gman would probably consider that a public service……

              However, does your example not point to the “criminal mind” theory? You did use the term “accidentally”……therefore, without criminal intent……no crime.

              Now…if I “accidentally on purpose” tripped and fell…and you were the only one I “accidentally” pushed….and it was timed perfectly to coincide with an 18 wheeler (nice choice but potentially messy) speeding by…….there might be a “criminal mind” argument.

        • “So would you say it’s intellectually dishonest to claim that you’ve been proven innocent or that it cleared you or that you’re totally exonerated, etc?”

          Intellectually dishonest, hmmm , if one is solely basing this claim on being exonerated by the legal system, I suppose so. Except, if I was to intellectually parse this question, I would have to say, on the one hand according to our legal system and principals you are telling the truth, on the other hand you aren’t telling the whole story. Whether someone was actually being dishonest would depend on the other facts in the individual case.

          As to the rest, I don’t, so much, readily disagree, as much as I think you’re leaving out the nuance in our laws and our phrases about principles. All cases are different. Our laws aren’t written in concrete, they are nuanced.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Mathius

      Legal standard, no.

      Normal human communications, YES. Andnot being charged after being accused is “exoneration”. This is not the same as proven innocent.

      I love the irony of the Dems making this hair splitting argument after declaring Hillary was “proven” innocent.

      I also notice that when you try to compare these cases you ignore that Comey listed HRC’s crimes but then concluded he could not prove “intent”. So this comparing of the two is not valid regarding the claims of onnocencevs. guilt.

      Now you tell me precisely how did Mr. Trump interfere with the investigation?????

  40. “Which DOJ policy or principal sets forth a legal standard that an investigated person is not exonerated if their innocence from criminal conduct is not conclusively determined?” Ratcliffe asked Mueller, referring back to Mueller’s opening remarks in which he said the special counsel’s office was guided by Justice Department policies in its investigation.

    When Mueller didn’t offer a clear answer, Ratcliffe pressed him to give an example of an instance of this other than the investigation of potential obstruction of justice by Trump.
    “I cannot, but this is a unique situation,” Mueller said before Ratcliffe cut him off.
    “You can’t find it because — I’ll tell you why — it doesn’t exist,” Ratcliffe said.
    “Respectfully, director, it was not the special counsel’s job to conclusively determine Donald Trump’s innocence or to exonerate him because the bedrock principal of our justice system is presumption of innocence. It exists for everyone,” Ratcliffe said, raising his voice. “Everyone is entitled to it — even sitting presidents.”

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/gop-lawmaker-tears-into-mueller-alleging-his-report-violates-doj-principles/ar-AAENqEt

  41. A witness to a heated grocery store encounter between state Rep. Erica Thomas and a man she accused of uttering racist comments told authorities she didn’t hear him make those remarks, according to a Cobb County police report.
    A Publix employee told a Cobb County officer that she witnessed part of the conversation and heard Thomas “continuously tell Eric Sparkes to ‘Go back where you came from!’” but did not hear Sparkes utter those words to Thomas.

    If anyone saw her crying video, it was clear that this was another leftist hoax.

  42. Dale A Albrecht says:

    One key element of the scenario the RUSSIANS did it started with the alleged DNC server hack. Julian Assange steadfastly denied that is who he got the information from. Experts also said, there is no way that volume of data that fast could gave been downloaded by any means other than an inside job directly to discs or tokens.

    Assange being arrest and charges by today’s DOJ for Mannings old and irrelevant release of information was all smoke and mirrors to get him to admit exactly where he got the information from the DNC server. Hes admitted it was Seth Rich. The investigators confronted the parents and they said they knew he did it

    Anyway, I guess OJ Simpson’s defense team should have been charged with obstruction for their defense of Simpson in his double murder trial. But as a friend of mine who was a criminal defense attorney in the Berkeley area. He said Simpson’s , .defense team would have been disbarred if they didn’t do the defense they did. The prosecution had no rebuttal.

    Mueller team had no rebuttal or evidence other than discussion between their client and themselves which in all cases is inadmissible except in trumps case.

  43. Stephen K. Trynosky says:

    Le joke! But mes amis, it must be spoken in le accent du France….

    A thief tried to steal impressionist paintings from the Louvre in Paris. He was apprehended two blocks away when he ran out of gas. he told ze police, “I had no Monet to buy Degas to make the VanGogh,” he said. “But I tried because I had nothing Toulouse”.

    • With Spanish this time…

      A Hispanic man walks into Walmart. He is overwhelmed, and begins roaming the aisles for the item he seeks.

      After a time, the overwhelmed man finds a clerk who takes pity on him, but she doesn’t speak any Spanish and he speaks no English. She takes him aisle to aisle, pointing at each item in turn and asking “this?” “this?” “this?”

      For hours, this kindly young lady takes the man through the entire store until, at last, they come upon the socks department. His eyes light up and a huge smile spreads across his face. “This?” she asks, already knowing the answer.

      “Eso si que es!” he cries out.

      She responds: “Well, if you knew how to spell it, why didn’t you just say so?!”

    • Now with French:

      After several rounds of competition, two cats make it to the finals of the cat swimming competition. Their names UnDuexTroix and OneTwoThree.

      Their owners gently lower them into the pool in their respective race-lanes. They point out the finish line. Both cats, well experienced, understand the goal, and struggle to begin.

      The whistle blows, and the two are off like a shot. UnDeuxTroix takes an early lead, but OneTwoThree stays close behind, keeping the pressure on.

      With a surge of energy, OneTwoThree passes UnDeuxTroix in the final stretch, then proceeds to reach the finish line in a new world record time.

      Unfortunately, UnDeuxTroix cat sank.

    • Mathius says:

      Now for sign language!

      The city of El Paso, Texas can be denoted in American Sign Language by the making of an L-shape in your left hand and an O-shape in your right, then moving them past each other.

      L… past.. O…. El Paso…

      ::groan::

      Ok, if you didn’t like that one, here’s another… the sign for pasteurized milk. One makes the sign for milk in one hand and then drags the symbol accross their face.

      Milke… past your eyes… past-your-eyes milk… pasteurized milk!

      ::groan::

  44. One question I would like answered. Mueller, and Mathius, you pointed this out….indicted and charged many of the POTUS circle with lying…

    But the person, who sgtarted the whole thing about Russia, Professor Joseph Mifsu, lied to the committee and the FBI three times…….and was not charged as all the others were……why?

    • Mathius says:

      No idea.

      But if he lied to investigators in the course of an investigation, then it sounds like he should be charged with Obstruction of Justice or something comparable (whatever applies).

      Now, I’ve never heard the name Professor Joseph Mifsu before, but I am curious: how do you know he “lied”?

    • It was outside the scope of his purview.

      • Mathius says:

        That may be, but if he committed a crime (and lying to federal investigators is almost certainly a crime), then even if it’s outside of Mueller’s purview, he would/could have referred the case to the appropriate authorities as he did for several of Trump’s inner circle.

  45. Dale A Albrecht says:

    Let’s step back to the Benghazi investigation and the ever changing lies the Obama administration including Hillary kept disseminating and one wouldn’t work, they’d just insert another. Leading to the discovery that HRC was operating so far out of Federal law by her private server shared with the Clinton foundation.

    Then the infamous tarmac meeting between Lynch and Bill, the husband of the party being investigated for serious crimes, real documented crimes. The investigation as to what really transpired was totally blacked out and redacted claiming the discussions as to what happened by the administration because it’s was just spitballing how to deal with this scandal. Only days before comey assumed powers he did not have and also changed well known laws in the espionage act who administrations including Obama’s prosecuted to the fullest extent for far less infractions than Hillary did.

  46. Mathius says:

    Colonel / G-Dude:

    He [Mathius] believes that Trump is guilty.

    I do?

    News to me.

    The best information I have is that he did not collude.

    That said, he has NOT been proven innocent. Muller did NOT prove that there was no collusion. Muller failed to prove that there WAS collusion, and that is NOT the same thing.

    If I fail to prove that you are white, that does not prove that you are black. Not only might you be Asian, but you might still be white and I just failed to prove it. My failure to prove your whiteness does not prove the contrary. That’s not how logic works.

    And, further, I find that, somehow, Trump being investigated and not charged translates to “proven innocent” and “totally exonerated” but Clinton being investigated and not charged translating to “lock her up” is indicative of a nasty little double-standard.

    Did he obstruct justice? I don’t know that either. But I do think it’s a strong possibility and I find assertions that he was cleared of the charge or that they proved he didn’t or so on.. I find that to be somewhere between misleading and an outright lie.

    The statue (again, to the best of my understanding) does not require the guilt in an underlying crime. Mueller listed out several possible instances where he may have committed obstruction. So that, while he was not charged due to rules preventing charging a sitting President, the report makes a convincing case that there “might” have been obstruction. And that is a far cry from Trump and Gman’s assertions that Trump didn’t obstruct justice.

    • Ahhh…. Mathius, you are crafty….and more slippery than a Dread Pirate, I know……

      I am a black and white person,……you may have pulled the trigger and everyone knows it….unless you are proven guilty…..you are innocent.

      Using terms of “might be”…a “possibility of”….”where there is smoke, there must be fire”…..means absolutely nothing.
      ””””””””””””””

      That said, I also do not believe you should be able to convict on circumstantial eveidence either….and it is done all the time.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      “And, further, I find that, somehow, Trump being investigated and not charged translates to “proven innocent” and “totally exonerated” but Clinton being investigated and not charged translating to “lock her up” is indicative of a nasty little double-standard.”WRONG. As I explained above, the two situations are significantly different. Hillary’s crimes were proven, and listed by Comey. Then he said because he could not prove intent neither he nor any reasonable prosecutor would try the case.

  47. Dale A Albrecht says:

    Change of subject

    Deutsche Bank announces a 2nd quarter net loss of €3.15 Billion

    • Mathius says:

      Yup… we use them… we’re freaking out a bit, but it’s probably not going to affect us negatively because of the way our group is structured. We have segregated assets in a custodian relationship.

      Still… eeeehhhhhh…..

  48. Dale A Albrecht says:

    Recommended films to watch with Henry Fonda
    “The Wrong Man” and “12 Angry Men”

    Even earlier the “The Oxbow Incident “

  49. Dale A Albrecht says:

    And Mueller says that getting to the root of the collusion accusation was not in his perview.
    Yet declares the DNC alleged hack was Russian and never had official forensic evidence. Just the word of those paid by the DNC

    Getting FISA warrants on unverified reports the Steele dossier and even Comey said the dosdier wad unverified and salacious. Yet sign extensions ad did successors and Rosenstein.
    And Assange affirms the information came from Rich.

    Weissmann has had lots of convictions overturned precisely for withholding evidence and also getting some one to express an opinion and turn that opinion against them. If anybody doesn’t think trumps attorneys didn’t know that you’re crazy. Sounded innocent the questions they wanted Trump to answer but in reality was a trick to hang him.

    • Dale A Albrecht says:

      Or like Muellers response about firing Strozk and Page. Claiming he fired them as soon as he knew about the text messages. That information was out months before he fired them. He was so out of touch with what was going on. But I believe his team was hoping against hope to find something on Trump and that animus of the FBI officials and DOJ would just blow over with an excuse, see they were right in their assessment. Unfortunately it didn’t turn out as the scriot was written nd they had no choice to remove Strozk and company to even begin to gain some credibility of being unbiased.

      Like Obama getting on the news and saying the first he heard about HRC’s use of an insecure server was when it hit the news. Uh huh, for someone who communicated with her her entire tenure ad SOS derailing countries and invading others and he’s so computer cool he never noticed No @State.gov on emails.

  50. Mueller made on thing perfectly clear today……he had no idea what was in the report he signed.

    • Dale A Albrecht says:

      People have gone to prison for signing forms like tax returns and not know what’s actually in it. Prepared by….as Truman’s sign on his desk said “The Buck Stops Here.”

  51. Dale A Albrecht says:

    https://mexiconewsdaily.com/news/mexico-stopped-43000-migrants-in-42-days/

    Even as a former official Homar said to Congress. There are laws pertaining claiming asylum. 1st request the country you enter, ie Mexico. 2nd you must come to an official port of entry, not enter illegally then claim asylum.

    The guys who did the Boston marathon bombing.the family came legally, but overstayed their visas. When hearing started for deportation They claimed asylum years after they entered the US. The Russians warned the FBI about the brothers and was ignored.

    Testing testing testing this is only a test to see how fast the military and security services can shut down a major city in the US.

  52. Dale A Albrecht says:

    No need to translate the picture tells the story. Karol Rackets German human trafficker when she met the prosecuting magistrates in Agrigento went BRALESS. To show solidarity for her women are going braless. Men are putting them on.

  53. Dale A Albrecht says:
  54. Dale A Albrecht says:

    Just to let people know the length countries will go to to overwhelm services and policy. Macron and France have been caught falsifying documents to justify deporting migrants they want deported to Italy, even though there’s no proof they actually were landed there illegally in the 1st place. This is in the thousands. France has for years now had a closed border between Italy and themselves. Searching all trains, planes and automobiles for migrants leaving Italy and trying to enter france. Yet they are the direct cause of the migrant crisis to begin with

    • Dale A Albrecht says:

      Try landing a boatload of migrants from an NGO ship in Marseille or Toulon or even in a super wealthy port in Monaco. It ain’t going to happen. They’d be arrested in a new York minute.

  55. Just A Citizen says:

    Mueller testimony………….PREDICTION…………..

    Within a few days the Dems will be claiming that Mr. Mueller was incompetent and his appointment was a set up to hide the Trump/Russia collusion. Therefore we need to immediately assign a NEW SPECIAL PROSECUTOR to do the job right this time.

    Tick, tick, tick, tick……………

    • I do not think that they need it…..the Dems are convinced that they have enough for and impeachment and will go forward…..they will impeach on obstruction and slap Trumps hands with an impeachment and they can say that they took up for the American people…..use it in 2020.

      Question…….I wonder if they have the impeachment vote numbers. I dont think they do.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Colonel

        If the Red Queen says YEA then they will have the votes. Then it will lose in the Senate and since a trial would have been held, Mr. Trump would ……………… how do they say……………be exonerated.

        Based on everything I have read the Obstruction charge is very flimsy. If they go forward, they may be ending any chance of future functioning Congress. This is so much more petty than the impeachment of Clinton it isn’t funny.

        • Hello JAC……I am confused as to what the Democrats hoped would come out of the Mueller hearings….what did they want? They had his report and the only thing that was clear….was that Mueller did not know what was in it…..shit, he had not even read it and that was obvious.

          I know the Dems, and Mathius, has set their hat on obstruction, which was not part of the investigation anyway, but the report and the facts therein are now questionable…..even from the obstruction point of view. It was a ONE SIDED report and the witnesses were not allowed council or cross examination. Can we say Kangaroo court.

          Much was made about making money…….Trump being questioned about making money from politicians making money in the same manner. We all know that politicians get rich…..you watch how rich AOC will be when she loses her re-election bid……a bartender to millionaire in two short years. And they want to question morals and ethics. One place Mathius is correct….napalm Washington DC and let my raptors clean up…..I have even developed a Raptzard……(Raptor/buzzard cross)….laser guided and with wings. Let them have a field day on the fresh road kill.

          • I know the Dems, and Mathius, has set their hat on obstruction,

            • YOU WANT THE TRUTH? YOU CAN’T HANDLE THE TRUTH!!!

              I also want the truth but I want the truth from a true investigation and not a one sided investigation. If Trump is wrong……IF HE IS WRONG….I want him punished. IF he is not wrong, I want the originators of this punished.

          • Just A Citizen says:

            Colonel

            I honestly think the Dems wanted Mueller to say two things so they could move on impeachment. One, that he did not reach conclusions because of the DOJ policy statement about not prosecuting a sitting POTUS. Two, that Mr. Trump did in fact obstruct the investigation. It is obvious that obstruction is their primary weapon, probably their only weapon.

            Based on many of their comments following the hearing it is also apparent they hoped Mueller would make a strong enough case to get the public’s attention and push the polling data against Trump, and in favor of impeacment.

            One of the most telling comments after the hearing was by a Dem who said that they cannot realistically move on impeachment until they can sway either a few Republicans to get on board or get the Public to support impeachment.

            Think about that for a moment. Impeachment is not based on the actual High Crimes and Misdemeanors, it is based on public opinion supporting the Dem effort. If the crimes really exist and are clear then make the case and the public would follow. Their problem is they muddied the waters, hell poisoned the waters before the fact.

            Here is another thought I had last night. I remember some Dems and especially the talking heads on the internet claiming Trump would be impeached on Obstruction soon after Mueller was appointed. So far nobody has remembered this and reminded everyone. At the time I remember thinking “how could they know that already?”.

            One last thought. If Mr. Trump were not such a jackass he could have put the D’s in a box and buried them in the Arctic on this issue by now. But his need to fight back and propensity to lie about anything has not helped him. In the end he may win this, but only because the D’s let the rabies infection run to long among them.

  56. Just A Citizen says:

    I have shared here many times how the Algorians, with Clinton approval, stacked the deck in the Greenies favor via appointments to many, many Govt. positions. Most importantly, lawyers assigned to DOJ or US attorneys who handled key agency matters. Such as this “person” who was with EPA. So please take in the very nature of the first paragraph where this “lawyer” explains how he knows a Dem POTUS could sidestep Congress and make things happen. Of course, this is posted with celebration by those who want this power, while on the other threads they are complaining about Mr. Trump doing the same thing. Declaring our democracy dead and Trump a lawless tyrant.

    https://thehill.com/opinion/energy-environment/454588-4-ways-the-next-president-can-fight-climate-change-starting-on-day

  57. Stephen K. Trynosky says:

    Pretty damn obvious Mueller was a “beard” for his 14 dwarfs. Poor guy, never thought I’d feel sorry for him. Maybe he was something once but not now and I suspect not for a long time. Alzheimers?

  58. Just A Citizen says:

    Let us review the full legal language ONE MORE TIME:

    18 U.S. Code § 1505. Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees
    U.S. Code

    Whoever, with intent to avoid, evade, prevent, or obstruct compliance, in whole or in part, with any civil investigative demand duly and properly made under the Antitrust Civil Process Act, willfully withholds, misrepresents, removes from any place, conceals, covers up, destroys, mutilates, alters, or by other means falsifies any documentary material, answers to written interrogatories, or oral testimony, which is the subject of such demand; or attempts to do so or solicits another to do so; or

    Whoever corruptly, or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication influences, obstructs, or impedes or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede the due and proper administration of the law under which any pending proceeding is being had before any department or agency of the United States, or the due and proper exercise of the power of inquiry under which any inquiry or investigation is being had by either House, or any committee of either House or any joint committee of the Congress—

    Shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years or, if the offense involves international or domestic terrorism (as defined in section 2331), imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both.

    NOTE: The 2nd paragraph appears to be the operative language. The first is specific to anti-trust investigations. The 2nd to any inquiry by any agency, House or committee.

    So I see the Trump Haters are primarily focused on Mr. Trump telling his attorney to fire Mueller, then the attorney says NO, and Mr. Trump then asks him to prepare documents claiming Mr. Trump never said to fire Mueller and the lawyer again says NO.

    On the surface this looks like an attempt to hide evidence of some Act. But what does the ACT itself have to do with the investigation by the Special Counsel? NOTHING near as I can tell. This is about Mr. Trump wanting to fire Mueller. His reasons are not included, although I do NOT think it is as straight forward as wanting to mess with the investigation. Let us not forget that Mr. Mueller’s crew were leaking false information like sieves and starting to go after people for things having nothing to do with the Russia investigation.

    Mr. Trump has full authority to fire Mueller for any reason at any time. The only thing standing in his way is POLITICAL FALLOUT. Not legal fallout. Except in the minds of the most ardent left wing law professors and State AG’s. When it was leaked that he said he wanted Mueller fired many people were screaming for his head. So he backed off. Now, WHY did he ask the lawyer to lie about his stated desire or instructions? I do not know, and I don’t think anyone knows except maybe him and the lawyer. Remember, Mr. Trump was changing legal advisers like they were dirty socks during this fiasco. Falling victim, in my opinion, to his insatiable desire to always fight back. And to do it HARD.

    I figured that his constant fighting back would eventually get him in hot water. We don’t expect the POTUS to go hard after his critics or to challenge Congress or agency heads directly, let alone the lying media. Every POTUS has had to deal with this. Mr. Obama’s “oh shit” moment was that beer summit. He spoke out and inferred that in his view one party was guilty. He had to back track some and after that he did not make such open attacks or express opinions on legal issues, guilt, etc. etc. Because to do so gives the “appearance” of POTUS trying to tip the scales.

    But as near as I can tell, there is no real legal standard in this regard. It is tradition, for good reason most of the time, enforced by Societal Norms including Political Pressure and fallout. Unfortunately, both parties are so polarized and partisan that this pressure compliance is being eroded. Both sides have to agree to use it equally and pretty fairly. Once they start letting their side slide, or going after the other with such vengeance, the Code is broken. And once the Pirate Code is meaningless only Anarchy can follow.

    Now as for impeaching Mr. Trump over this single issue, or evidence of obstruction I think the same rules apply. One piece of evidence that did not affect the investigation is going to support impeachment? Well if ACTUAL documented lying to a Grand Jury was not enough to impeach, then how can they say this qualifies?? They can’t. But then again, the “Code” has been destroyed, so normal constraints are meaningless.

    So as I said to the Colonel, above, it all comes down to the pressure on the Red Queen. If she says go for it, they will go for it. With a vengeance. The R’s will cheer them on because it will either help get Mr. Trump re-elected, or allow them to replace him in the primaries. So watch for the Dems to hold off long enough that the process won’t help the Never Trumper Republicans.

  59. Just A Citizen says:

    Wish I had found this first. Would have saved much typing over the Obstruction issue.

    Note to Mathius: This addresses your question about what constitutes corrupt intent. Well at least in part based on AG Barr’s thoughts.

    https://www.axios.com/mueller-report-obstruction-of-justice-barr-4781f6e6-d756-4e98-995c-ce4bd2031f35.html

  60. Just A Citizen says:

    OK, I have a real problem with this and many of you won’t like my point of view.

    The kid who shot up a school in Spokane, WA is going to trial. He is now 17. He did the shooting while he was 16. At least one person died, and others were injured.

    Per the LAW, he committed this crime while a “Minor”. But a Judge has rules he can be tried as an “Adult”. Primary reason is because he “planned the event” and “showed little remorse” afterwards. I do not understand why complex planning is limited to Adults? I thought we were teaching teenage children to do these kinds of things.

    If the LAW, which is written by the People’s Representatives, specifies a TIME when Adulthood is achieved, then why the hell are we allowing Judges to impose their personal views, or exercising their own judgment instead of the people.

    If the offense is so awful to even consider this change in status, then maybe it is the punishment for heinous crimes by Minors that needs to be revisited. Maybe Minor vs. Adult is not relevant at all when it comes to murder and such things.

    To counter Mathius’ argument this morning. In Idaho you are guilty of murder, regardless of your mental capacity. But your capability affects sentencing guidelines. For example, LIFE for Murder might be assigned to a mental institution………..for LIFE.

  61. Dale A Albrecht says:

    Liberal Harvard law professor Laurence Tribe – a sharp critic of President Trump – tweeted: “Much as I hate to say it, this morning’s hearing was a disaster. Far from breathing life into his damning report, the tired Robert Mueller sucked the life out of it. The effort to save democracy and the rule of law from this lawless president has been set back, not advanced.”

    Where had Trump violated the law as President and not stood upholding the law. Or destroying democracy.

    Several points were what about Cohan, his crime had nothing to do with Trump. Same with Manafort. Bad choice of friends and associates but I’d not associate with most politicians and especially lawyers and lobbyists. Most are whores for sale to the highest bidder

    Someone posted today on FB if Trump was not president he’d be in prison. That is a crock. Only because he ran for office and beat all comers who were members of the club did his troubles begin..

    Besides The dems do not get trumps sarcastic sense of humor. Like may be we should ask the Russians for Hillary’s lost emails. The NSA had them all and offered them to the FBI and they said no thanks

    • Mueller is only 3 years older than I am. I certainly hope I am more cogent when I get to that age.

      Dale, you are right. I have not seen this president break the law not like HRC or BHO. HRC violated the securities act, obstructed justice, lied under oath, and sold the State Dept. to the highest bidder; while BHO did the same to nearly every other agency, including DOJ, IRS, FBI, CIA and a few others. As far as I know DJT has not violated any court orders. BHO did so often and was reprimanded by the judges.

      It was telling above when Mathius did not know who Prof. Mifsud was or what his role in entrapment of Papadouplos was. This conspiracy must be exposed. There must be consequences.

      • T RAy,,,,,,not so sure it was senility. Mueller clearly did not know what was in the report and that is a travesty. The hand picked staff wrote sections of the report and, to me, that was clear…..When he asked the question…”Was that in the report” , Yes on page whatever, he just shakes his head and says ” I stand by the report “……

        AND……AND…..AND…………..everyone must remember that this report was one sided with no cross examination.

  62. Dale A Albrecht says:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/07/23/us-diplomats-brains-shrunk-sonic-attacks-cuban-embassy-scientific/

    If the Cubans deny any nefarious attack it must be the RUSSIANS. Diplomats in Russia probably have brains the size of peas by now😁

  63. Dale A Albrecht says:

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/07/23/bernie-sanders-runs-into-socialist-reality/

    The last paragraph is a killer conclusion. Obviously Bezos does not want Sanders to win

  64. Checking out the Liberal media’s response to Mueller time, they are not happy at all. Their hopes and dreams have been dashed by the very person they thought was their Santa Clause. Awe, I’m sad for them 😀

    Mueller was terrible actually. Got nailed in contradictions about why the second volume was even written, which has NEVER been done before (because it was a political hit job by his Trump hating Lawyers who wrote the thing).

    Let’s imagine for a moment what the left would be saying if all his Lawyers were Trump donors.

    (It was telling above when Mathius did not know who Prof. Mifsud was or what his role in entrapment of Papadouplos was.) Not really. Those on his side of the isle get their news from piss poor sources who lie by omission. Then again, those on his side of the isle also ignore things that don’t fit their agenda. Then again, Mathius can’t be expected to know everything about this sham investigation.

  65. Sigh,,,,,,,young black man in Fort Worth…..takes a hostage…..barricades himself in an apartment…..shoots at officers…..Officers break in, find man in closet with gun raised,….bang, man in closet dead. When questioned, the officer that was involved is, well…………here it is.

    An Army Ranger with four combat tours……simply tells the local news…..”not so hard”, he says, “one shot was all that was needed.”

    I have nothing to add.

  66. WASHINGTON, D.C.—Robert Mueller was being criticized for seemingly answering questions slowly, not recalling key details of his investigation, and appearing to be confused throughout his testimony Wednesday.

    After a brief recess, Mueller insisted he was entirely lucid.
    “I hear a few murmurs out there that I’ve lost it,” he said. “Well, I haven’t lost it. I’ve still got it. In fact, I’m still sharp as a tack.”
    Before testimony could resume, however, Mueller interrupted the proceedings, appearing to reach for his cell phone. “I really have to take this,” he said apologetically as he reached into his pocket and pulled out a banana. “Yeah, go for Bob.”
    Mueller proceeded to have what appeared to be a five-minute conversation on the fruit as bewildered congresspeople looked on. “Well, tell them I don’t want to be there this Friday. Matlock’s on, you know that. You know I don’t go out when Matlock is on.” He shrugged apologetically at those in the room, mouthing “sorry.”
    “Look, if the consulate has a problem with that, tell them they can call me themselves,” he concluded, slamming the banana back down on the table.
    At publishing time, Mueller was seen giving clear, concise, lucid testimony to a soap dispenser in the restroom.

  67. Pres. Trump claims he could win Afghan war “in a week. I just don’t want to kill 10 million people.”

    Well… yea… kinda hard to argue with that one…

    I do wonder, though, if a President gave an order to nuke an entire country out of existence like that.. not just Trump, but any President… would there be any checks in place to stop him? Can the Joint Chiefs do anything if they believe the order is unconscionable? (not just “unlawful,” but otherwise unacceptable – eg deciding to just nuke Afghanistan and kill 10mm people).

    If some cadet who is ordered to press the button says “I can’t in good conscience do that,” does he wind up in Leavenworth and some other cadet just presses the button instead? I know the Germans have a very explicit directive in their military (possibly stemming from an incident in that country’s past..?) which very clearly grants soldiers absolute immunity to refuse any order which they consider immoral (I forget the exact wording of the exception, but that’s the gist). So if that German soldier were given the order, he could just balk and he’d be fine (in theory, anyway).. but what about an American?

    • I can speak to this, Sir. First of all, the POTUS cannot just decide to wake up and press a nuke button. It does not work that way….The POTUS does not have access to the “football” nor does he know how to operate it. All he can do it give an order. However, the person carrying the football that accompanies him everywhere, cannot set it up and fire it. It takes three people to fire them up…..

      THere is a stop gap in place for all President’s…..Can the Joint Chiefs stop it? Yes. Is there a litmus test in place to prevent a POTUS from giving the order to fire? Yes.

      Unlike Russia…….Putin can walk in and push the button.

  68. Soliciting camping ideas for the girls for this weekend:

    Collecting firewood… helping set up the tent… roasting ‘mallows… maybe something to cook in/over the fire for dinner? what else? Thoughts / ideas?

    Obviously, no electronics other than an emergency phone.

    They’re still a bit young to give Bowie knives and tell them to kill something for dinner.

    • You gonna be by a lake or hiking trails to pretty views or sights, or just woods to explore or what?

      • Should be both… not that I have fishing poles (or know what to do with a fish if I catch one, or that the girls would eat the fish even if I did) or a canoe.

        https://parks.westchestergov.com/ward-pound-ridge-reservation

        We can hike, but the little one just turned 4 (two days ago), so it’s not like she has the stamina for anything too protracted.

        Also debating whether to bring the pooch. Shes a good girl, but dumb as a bag of hammers, and I’m not sure what it would entail to have her with us. But I want her there, sooo… ::shrug::

        The wife will not be joining us. She hates the great outdoors. I have booked her a massage instead.

        • Just A Citizen says:

          Mathius

          Take two books. One to identify birds and one for plants, including the trees. Both should be for the NE region if possible. You will get more detail that way. Kids kind of like identifying the things they see. Around the edge of water look for aquatic bugs, frogs and water snakes.

          Leave the dog if she cannot follow strict instructions. If she can then bring her along. Kids will love the dead stuff she finds and rolls in.

        • If You have all that it shouldn’t be hard to keep them entertained. I’d take water shoes, life ja ckets , couple floats. Maybe a board game or two, just in case. Some hot dogs, they can cook on a stick. Now the dog, I’d personally be very hesitant about taking my dog.

        • Looking through your “camp ground”……you do not have to dig a latrine or hang a “lister” bag……..and I see ice and potable water is readily available.

          Leave the dog unless the dog responds to voice command well….like JAC says, it would be interesting to see your dog tangle with a skunk or roll in dead areas or other animal feces…

          If you want to teach them about the outdoors, assuming that you do not know….JAC’s idea about the books on identification is great….I would add a book about foilage. How to recognize poison ivy, oak, or sumac.

          Birds, snakes, wildlife is always a good thing for kids to look for….and identification of ferns and such. If you do not know the cardinal directions without the sun, teach them how to tell the cardinal directions. Have them watch the progression of the sun during the day. Take a compass….teach them about a compass without GPS.

          Hot dogs, ‘mellows are fun things…hot chocolate is fun by boiling the water over open flame. Teaching them how to stay out of the smoke around the camp fire…

          Four years old is not too young for that. I understood a compass at that age…..and cardinal directions. Guns and knives can wait until 5 or 6…….

          But, teach them the outdoors. It is really interesting how complex the outdoors really is….what birds go with what sounds.

          NO CELL PHONES OR VIDEO GAMES….

          • Alright… so this is shaping up to be a LOT of stuff. And the kids can’t carry for squat.

            Went looking for a list online… had to cross off a few items.. I think I’ll be ok for a day without a French press coffee maker or a corkscrew.

            Looks like I have most of this stuff… I need to pick up the book on flora/fauna (I think I’ll call ahead and get an idea of the kinds of flora/fauna we’re likely to find, then make up bingo cards for the girls to stamp), a compass, decide what to do for actual food… just bought a folding cook-set from a site called Redneck Covenant, so you know you can trust it.

            My daily carry is a Swiss Army knife, but I have some more… intrepid knives I inherited from my great uncle that might be more suited to the great outdoors. Ooh, and I have a machete I recently restored…. O_o

            I need to ease the wife and kids into this, but at some point, I’ll get this up to a week, then we can start chipping away at the Appalachian Trail. Probably won’t be for another few years though.

            • Mathius…great idea about the cards and such….learning this stuff is very good and you never stop learning.

              Every year, the Texas Guard and the New York Guard have troop swaps…..we send a contingent to Fort Drum and we get a contingent from Fort Drum…..for a two week field exercise. THe very first thing we hand them are designed pamphlets on flora, insects, snakes, and such. And for 24 hours, we give classes on such and they can read….well, most of them can read. Anyway, teaching and learning about that is great stuff…..and kids love it.

              The biggest issue we have with the northern troops is reecognition of flora and what is poisonous and what is not…..we have other items here than poison ivy, oak, or sumac, that will render you incapacitated. However, the largest of things we have here that apparently you do not have many of up there are scorpions. All over down here.

              Anyway…..learning and teaching them about those things is really cool. We can teach camoflage, face paint, low crawling…..later.

              • Mathius says:

                Funny thing about poison oak/ivy/sumac… I seem to be nearly completely immune. I might get a bit of a red patch that itches somewhat, but that’s it. Meanwhile, the wife will be completely hived and nearly incapacitated with even the slightest incidental (or secondary!) contact.

                Meanwhile, for scorpions, I spent a year in Arizona and learned a few things about ’em. It’s the little scary ones you’ve got to watch out for.. it’s the little bastards that like to crawl into your boot that pack a wallop.

              • Yup…those pesky critters will also lay flat in your boot and wait until you lace it up before they get pissed….

                Poison Ivy…….starting a range fire that spreads to 100 acres quickly…butning through big patches of Poison ivy……fighting the fire and breathing in smoke laced with Ivy oil…..lungs with lesions……..ugh……..over 100 of us down for three weeks….not fun….and since then…have lost my immunity to it….I can look are a picture now and get it.

              • Mathius says:

                Yup…those pesky critters will also lay flat in your boot and wait until you lace it up before they get pissed….

                That’s why I set my boots on fire before putting them on each morning.

                I can look are a picture now and get it.

              • Damn rash…………….

    • Dale A Albrecht says:

      Backyard? 1st no Texas chainsaw stories you might find yourself alone. I grew up with the Rip van Winkle like Hudson river stories. Not to bad.

      Cooking KISS. 1-2 nites? Car camp? Cooler?

      • Still negotiating with the missus, but it’ll probably shake out to:

        6PM (after work) to 8PM (bedtime, though I would absolutely keep them up later)
        Sunrise to about 11AM (they have a swim lesson at noon).

        So not a whole lot of time..

        • A jar for each kid…poke holes in lid… for lightning bugs…so you gotta let them stay up til dark! Besides, what lame parent makes their kid go to bed when when it’s still light out while camping? Also …glow sticks for the tent!

          • Hobo dinners…potatoes, onions, sausage in tin foil over the fire… or just look up hobo dinners on Pinterest for more kid friendly recipes…matter of fact…time for me to do a hobo dinner this weekend

            • And BACON! For goodness sakes….dont go camping without bacon for breakfast!

              • Sigh…………………….rookies.

              • What? Don’t get me going…. We can start some camping wars if you want. I win already, because you don’t even have a shade tree to camp under.

              • Board games, bacon, hot dogs, marshmellows…….rookies. Next thing you will tell me is that you need ice and white gas fuel and stoves and such…..

                But….for an intro to camping for the kiddos and the wife who wants a massage…..a tent on a cleared area and swimming lessons is a good start. Teaching about the outdoor is a great feeling to kids who want to learn about it…..and if Mathius reads and teaches….good learning for him……

                However, just between just you and I…..you are correct. You do not want a camping war.

          • Alright, Anita.. bacon is on the list.. but god help me if the little one smells it. She nearly gave me a black eye a while back when she tackled me to steal my bacon. I had to count all my fingers to make sure they were still there.

            Meanwhile, the other seems to be a vegetarian… ugh… not sure what to do about that. I’m not bringing penne.

            Tatters in tin foil is always a good one… add some salt and butter, bits of bacon… now we’re talking… ::Mathius drools all over his keyboard::

            I’m thinking hobo-taters, dogs, corn, carrots.. that ought to get them through the night… plus hot chocolate and ‘mallows, of course.. I’m not a monster!

            Bacon in the morning with… could go with pancakes, meh… eggs and toast…? leftovers? MRE’s?

            Experience tells me if I run ’em hard, they’ll work up enough hunger that they won’t be too picky.. but they’re a little spoiled in the food department, and I still want them to enjoy themselves.

  69. Just A Citizen says:

    Interesting. There were several reports/comments late yesterday that Mueller’s performance in front of the Intelligence Committee was far stronger and “together”.

    Here is CNN’s panic attack over what was covered. Obviously they are trying to spin this in a way that accuses Mr. Trump of being complicit. Still misrepresenting his joke with Putin about not interfering.

    https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/24/politics/russia-trump-election-interference/index.html

    • Dale A Albrecht says:

      Like I said earlier, the Dems and MSM do not get trumps joking comments. Very wry. Like when the FBI couldn’t find anything, yet accusing the RUSSIANS of hacking everything, his sarcastic comment was maybe we should ask the Russians.

      The spin has been interesting trying to salvage their dream, even before Trump got elected

  70. Hmmmm….anti trust investigations of Amazon, et al….

  71. Investors……..keep an eye on Europe…..getting dicey over there.

    • Dale A Albrecht says:

      As noted before Deutsche bank losing euros big time. Lots of job cuts. University cutting thousands. EU changed rules with Swiss bonds. BEXIT. EU also names over 6000 stocks that can only be traded on certain exchanges even though the price may not be the optimum, EU trying to break Italy. New head of ECB is a convicted criminal. What more?

  72. Dale A Albrecht says:

    colonel; what’s up with closing a brand new facility used for “children” that came across the border illegally and unaccompanied plus those that got separated from the “adult” that also came in illegally. Though declared a nice new facility and only weeks old

    Now what?

    • First of all it was not a new facility…..you are talking about Carizzo Springs. It was a refurbished oil field workers camp……IT was a government run facility that they sub conracted out for a bunch of cash……it is not worth keeping open now becuase the number of kids crossing has dropped below the levels that it is not necessary to staff it.

      They are simply moving the kids that are left to different facilitites now that the levels have dropped so dramatically. It is a shock because it is actually saving money and still accomplishing the mission.

      But the facility was not brand new….simply refurbished.

      • Dale A Albrecht says:

        as the stupid article from England said nice facility but still a jail. Just what are people supposed to do wipe their face give them a bottle of water and send them on their way.

        What pisses me off with these politicians is they swore to uphold the constitution and many of these asswipes created the laws Trump swore to uphold and enforce, yet they’re willing to create a lawless nation to score points.. they call Trump a liar
        He’s a salesman.and exaggerates The Congress lies continually and it doesn’t phase them in the least

  73. https://www.thenewneo.com/2019/07/25/the-curious-case-of-robert-mueller/

    Of course he was, no conflict of interest here!

  74. “Suicide attempt.”

%d bloggers like this: