Desperate Democrats

thO2DLQA8KAll this stupid whistleblower stuff is backfiring bigtime as all the Crat’s calling for impeachment (again) over a phone call that Trump had with the leader of Ukraine.  The whistleblower, who remains unnamed, has a problem now, as it appears he/she didn’t hear the conversation personally, but is basing her/his actions on secondary information. But let’s be honest, this is just another attack on Trump by a desperate Left Wing who knows they have no chance to beat him in the next election.  They are grasping at thin air.  Maybe if they had anything good to offer besides bankrupting the country, they might do better.

Comments

  1. Happy first day of Autumn!

  2. The narrative appears to be shaping up that Trump withheld Ukrainian military aid. Then, by his own admission discussed Joe Biden and his son’s alleged corruption with the Ukraine president, then not only released the funds, but actually increased them by $140mm.

    Now, there’s some problems with the timeline here, and I’m not feeling great today, so I’m not going to expend the energy trying to nail everything down.

    But let’s just ask the question I’m more interested in: if – IF – this narrative were correct. That Trump was holding tax-payer-funded military aid hostage to pressure another country into investigating his political rival. If – IF – IF – IF – if this were true, what would y’all say about that? Would that be an abuse of his position? Would that be impeachable? Would that be “corruption”? Would you continue to vote for him?

    • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

      No, you might be mixing it up. Last evening I watched an old clip of Joe Biden actually saying HE held up the check until an evil person was fired. he never bothered to explain “evil” further. The clip can only be described as a “victory lap” by Biden to show what a “tough” guy he can be.

    • Biden has openly admitted doing exactly that. Should he be prosecuted? Will you still vote for him if he is the nominee?

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Mathius

      Not enough information to address your IF.

      Asking for the investigation into Biden’s Son and Biden’s blackmail of Ukraine needs information to know if the request was reasonable. For example, Ukraine dropped the investigation before and said, nothing wrong. But was this done due to the coercion of Biden/Obama/Clinton?? We do not know.

      IF they dropped it due to pressure then wouldn’t it be reasonable to ask them to reopen the case????

      Biden has conflict of interest problems all over the place with his Son. Just like Harry Reid had. Should these not be investigated just because Biden is running????

      Lets jump ahead with your IF and put in the missing parts. Assuming that Mr. Trump did in fact use the money to try and coerce Ukraine into investigating Joe Biden for the stated purpose of digging up campaign dirt, then YEAH I have a problem with that.

      But I think we all know there will be no actual evidence that is that clear cut. This will amount to another public hanging by innuendo.

    • First, the narrative is being pushed by the Left, so it’s likely false. Biden openly admitted to threatening to withhold aid if a prosecutor investigating his son’s company wasn’t fired. That is a law violation. If Trump threatened to withhold aid unless the Ukraine leadership doesn’t investigate this for the corruption that it is, then I don’t think it’s a problem. However, I don’t have the facts on what all this is about, until then, I will withhold judgement. My guess is that it’s a big nothing burger.

  3. Just A Citizen says:

    Goin fishing for a few days. Don’t burn down the house while I am gone.

  4. I wonder if any of this might have something to do with the latest dust up:

    “Former Ukrainian president Petro Poroshenko was terribly afraid of a Republican victory, believing Donald Trump would change Russia policy and lift sanctions, reducing support for Ukraine and robbing Poroshenko of his Western power base,” Prozorov writes. “Ukrainegate is a criminal conspiracy of representatives of Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the leadership of Ukraine in the person of Poroshenko, aimed at preventing Donald Trump from winning.”
    “At that time, I worked at SBU HQ in Kiev,“ says Prozorov. “I remember the panic that gripped the power structures in Ukraine after Donald Trump’s victory. They expected immediate retaliation from Washington for Ukraine’s participation in the attacks on Trump. Many politicians deleted their social media posts criticizing Trump.” However, as it turned out, the phony Russiagate witch hunt kept the Trump campaign from doing anything that could look like “collusion” or “obstruction” abroad. Now, however, the Ukrainegate conspiracy is starting to unravel.
    https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/09/exclusive-former-ukrainian-secret-service-official-leaks-info-on-how-ukraine-funded-clinton-campaign-with-stolen-imf-money/

  5. I wonder if I just heard something correctly………………the now “whislteblower” did not hear Trump at all but heard it from somebody else who heard it……it is third party now?

  6. Hey, Mathius…..did you have trouble getting to work today?

  7. https://www.dailywire.com/news/52122/greta-snaps-we-are-beginning-mass-extinction-how-ryan-saavedra

    WOW, SHE Is really angry, wonder how angry she’ll be in 12 years when the world is still standing.

    YEA, FINALLY FIGURED OUT HOW TO LOCK IN CAPITAL LETTERS ON THIS TABLET, ONLY HAD IT A COUPLE YEARS.

    • NEW YORK, NY—Climate activist and adolescent Greta Thunberg gave a passionate speech at the UN Climate Action Summit in New York, declaring, “How dare you? You have stolen my dreams and my childhood with your empty words, and yet I’m one of the lucky ones. People are suffering. People are dying. Entire ecosystems are collapsing.”

      “This is all wrong,” she declared, clearly on the verge of tears.
      Savvy viewers, however, noticed there were marionette strings attached to the 16-year-old throughout her speech.
      “Hey, wait a minute!” one attendee shouted. “Those are puppet strings, kinda like on Thunderbirds!” This caused some uproar, with everyone tracing the strings to see who had brainwashed this young girl into thinking the world was ending and pulling her strings. Some people got bored with the speech after that and just went and watched Thunderbirds, which had more interesting puppets and better acting.
      Security found the other end of the marionette strings hastily abandoned by whoever had been controlling her, and a man fitting the description of Al Gore diving off the fire escape into a private jet. Thunberg slumped down in her chair and shortly woke up out of her daze, angered and disappointed to find she had been exploited like this.

    • I thought she had some really good points…

      That said, I mean, “being really angry” is kind of more the rule than exception for 12 year olds, no?

      That said, wouldn’t you be really angry if you believed that older people were destroying the environment for their profit while you’ll be the one to suffer the consequences? Just assume the premise for a moment.. wouldn’t you be pissed? You have your whole life ahead of you and the older generation are squabbling and denying facts and science for political reasons and they’re destroying your future.. not their own.. yours. For their benefit. You wouldn’t be pissed? I think you’d probably grab the nearest pitchfork.

      THAT SAID, the article leads off with a heavy bias: “Far-left climate extremist Greta.” She’s not even American and has gone to great pains to be as non-partisan as humanly possible given the situation. And, for a 12 year old, she’s been absolutely remarkable.

      “No matter how political the background to this crisis may be, we must not allow this to continue to be a partisan political question. The climate and ecological crisis is beyond party politics. And our main enemy right now is not our political opponents. Our main enemy now is physics. And we can not make ‘deals’ with physics.”

      No One Seemed To Notice Greta Thunberg’s Critique Of The Green New Deal – Forbes

      • She’s 16 and brainwashed. One day she will realize what a fool she is/was.

        • She’s 16

          She’s 16, I stand corrected. Even so, that’s pretty impressive for a teenager. It’d be impressive for anyone, really.

          and brainwashed. One day she will realize what a fool she is/was.

          Orrrrr……………. she’s right and you’re wrong….? The scientists seem to agree with her, not you.

          • Many scientists do, in fact, agree with me. This is an example of why the whole thing is a joke. Folks like you keep claiming to have science on your side, when you don’t.

    • Disclaimer: I’m going to come at this from the angle of a person who believes climate change is real and a real imminent threat and one that isn’t being taken seriously by world governments. We shouldn’t discussing her speech within the context of a debate on whether it’s real. She believes it. The vast majority of her generation believes it. I (generally) believe it. She believes it’s real, so this is a speech given within the context of a person with a (widely accepted) view who believes that her future is being destroyed by willful ignorance, partisanship, laziness, and economic greed. So… with that in mind….

      Let’s break it down:

      My message is that we’ll be watching you.

      Meaningless platitude.

      This is all wrong, I shouldn’t be up here, I should be back in school on the other side of the ocean.

      Seems reasonable.

      She shouldn’t have to be there. She’s 12. Adults should be the responsible ones while she gets to play whatever it is that 12 year old Swedish girls play.

      Yet, you all come to us young people for hope, how dare you.

      Mostly meaningless.

      You have stolen my dreams and my childhood with your empty words

      Seems reasonable. She should have a full future in a stable world instead of facing impending climate disaster. And politicians have been promising action for years while delivering jack shit.

      and yet I’m one of the lucky ones. People are suffering, people are dying. Entire ecosystems are collapsing. We are in the beginning of a mass extinction

      Accurate.

      and all you can talk about is money and fairytales of eternal economic growth. How dare you.

      Totally fair.

      A lot of people (*cough Republicans *cough* China *cough* India *cough*) prioritize economics over climate. From the position of believing the scientists that climate change is real, this is a problem. “How dare you” seems perfectly reasonable.

      How dare you ignore science so you can make another point of GDP growth at the expense of her generation’s future?

      For more than 30 years the science has been crystal-clear.

      Ehhhhh……..

      …….

      …….

      …….

      No.

      How dare you continue to look away and come here saying that you’re doing enough when the politics and solutions needed are still nowhere in sight.

      Fair.

      You say you hear us and that you understand the urgency but no matter how sad and angry I am, I do not want to believe that because if you really understood the situation and still kept on failing to act then you would be evil and that I refuse to believe.

      Awkwardly phrased, but actually nice. She’s giving them the “out” that they don’t understand the issue rather than insisting that it’s because they’re evil and selfish and are happy to screw her generation to make a buck.

      This, of course, is negated by the rest of the speech where she presumes exactly that.

      The popular idea of cutting our emissions in half in 10 years only gives us a 50% chance of staying below 1.5 degrees and the risk of setting of irreversible chain reactions beyond human control.

      I’ll go ahead and assume she’s citing a real peer reviewed published paper.

      50% may be acceptable to you but those numbers do not include tipping points, most feedback loops, additional warming hidden by toxic air pollution, or the aspects of equity and climate justice,

      I’ll go ahead and assume she also knows what she’s talking about here.

      they also rely on my generation sucking hundreds of billions of tons of your CO2 out of the air with technologies that barely exist.

      Sounds about right, and the crux of her complaint… the current adults get to reap all this benefit and worry about their own “economic growth” while shunting all the problems and responsibility for cleanup off to her generation.

      Seems reasonable that she’d be upset.

      Sounds kind of like what the Boomers are doing to my generations… but I digress..

      So, a 50% risk is simply not acceptable to us, we who have to live with the consequences.

      Right.. again, assuming you accept the scientific consensus and aren’t a denier, if we accept that 50% number (which, for the record, I consider unsubstantiated), then “how dare you” flip a coin for her future just to ensure your own current economic prosperity. How selfish is that? Why should she and her generation ever be accepting of that?

      How dare you pretend that this can be solved with just business as usual and some technical solutions with today’s emissions levels that remaining CO2 budgets will be entirely gone within less than 8 and a half years.

      Translated: Stop being selfish short-sighted assholes and assuming that we’ll be able to clean up after you.

      There will not be any solutions or plans presented in line with these figures here today because these numbers are too uncomfortable and you are still not mature enough to tell it like it is.

      Yup.

      Also fantastic shot from a 12 year old calling out world-leaders for not being mature enough. I don’t care what else you take away from this, that was great.

      You are failing us

      Fair.

      but the young people are starting to understand your betrayal.

      Might be a platitude, but might also be at least partially true. Belief in climate change and support for “green” policies is dramatically higher amongst the young than the old.. one might argue that you don’t care because you’ll all be dead by the time it’s an issue (seemingly Greta’s point) or one might argue that you’re stuck in your ways or or or or or…

      But the fact remains that young people want action and are only receiving empty promises… it seems reasonable that they might start to understand the betrayal.

      The eyes of all future generations are upon you

      Platitude.

      and if you choose to fail us I say we will never forgive you.

      Seems reasonable to me.

      The articles I’ve been seeing seem hung up on this, as though it were some insane rage-fueled tirade. That’s a perfectly reasonable position from someone who believes in climate change… you’re fucking up my future, the future of my entire generation because you’re too selfish, and I’m not going to forgive you.

      Why should they?

      We will not let you get away with this.

      Ohh… sure they will… she might try, but the entrenched powers are going to do what they want no matter what. There’s too much money in the status quo, so the status quo is what they’ll get. Future generations will just get stuck with the bill, whatever that might be. Too bad, Greta.

      Right here, right now, is where we draw the line the world is waking up and change is coming whether you like it or not.

      Flimsy call to arms.
      Nothing will change.

      The line needs work.

      SPEECH WRITER Mathius dons his trusty Aaron Sorkin Hat.. ::cracks knuckles:: OK, let’s see what I can do with this without putting in any real time or effort…. “Right here, today, in this room, a line must be drawn. We draw it not for ourselves, not because of want, but because of the most dire need. That we cannot neglect the call to arms of our times, the great challenge to which we all must rise, not as nations or parties, not as races and religions, but as a single people. It is not merely the youthful of my home nation, but of each of your nations, each of your children, and your children’s children. We must do what is right, not what is easy. We must do what is needed, not what is expedient. We are the species which conquered the atom, set foot upon the moon, deciphered the human genome. There is no challenge beyond our grasp if only we can find within ourselves the collective will to strive for it. Join me, draw the line here, with me, today, here, now, in this room. Do not surrender another moment to lethargy and indifference. Stand up with me and make the hard choices for the benefit of all and the survival of our future.” ::raucuks applause:: ::montage of sweeping climate change bills being passed:: ::pictures of politicians picking up litter:: ::headline showing reversal of climate change trends:: ::celebrations:: ::giant meteor slams into the Earth, rendering the whole thing moot::

          • https://theresurgent.com/2019/08/30/the-lefts-abusive-use-of-greta-thunberg/

            3 articles, I just became aware of with different perspectives and additional information. Is using her as a spoke’s person a good thing or exploitative. And should we be listening to her, considering all the information laid out, in these articles.

            • I remember being 16 and I remember my kids being 16. NO, we should NOT be listening to her. 16 year olds know everything, just ask every parent that’s ever lived. This young lady is being used by those who want power. The planet isn’t dying, we are not killing it. It won’t be long and we’ll be heading towards another ice age, so they will say.

          • My daughter decided to be a vegetarian at age 5 give-or-take.

            Five years old, she decided that it was wrong to kill and eat animals and she stopped. And she hasn’t started again. She’s a few steps shy of vegan and most of that is only because she doesn’t always know what contains animal products.

            I’m not a vegetarian, nor is my wife. My younger daughter, as mentioned elsewhere, will tackle you to steal your bacon. None of our friends or family are vegetarian or vegan. And, while I do believe that she’s probably right, and I am a hypocrite for eating meat, I have never pushed her into this choice nor advocated for it. If anything, I am desperate to get her to eat some meat and put some protein in her body. But she won’t. Because she believes it’s wrong.

            It’s not hard for me to accept that some children take up a cause.

            It’s not hard for me to accept that a child who takes up a cause may become depressed at what she sees as horrific action against that cause. If I took my daughter to a slaughter house, she’d probably have a dramatic reaction to that, too. She’s probably try to free the animals and lecture the owners.

            Greta has Aspergers, sure, but as someone with some familiarity with the Autistic spectrum, I can say opine pretty clearly that she’s not too far gone on the spectrum to be cognizant of her own decisions and interests at the age of 16.

            Are her parents putting her out there as a show dog, like one of those horrific child-beauty-pageants? I can’t say. Maybe. Maybe not.

            I picture my daughter up there giving an animal rights speech… it would have to be with my blessing.. my help.. my consent.. my support… but the driving force would have to come from her.. that SHE wants to be there and deliver that message.

            But, of course, not all parents are the same. Nor all children. Maybe Greta is weak and malleable… sure doesn’t look like it.. but what do I know? Maybe her parents had an agenda and manipulated her and put her up to it and she’s just doing what she’s told… sure doesn’t look like it.. but what do I know?

            All this is to say that I don’t know what’s driving Greta. I watched her speech and either she’s sincere or a phenomenal actress (which is quite something for an Asperger’s child!). What I find is that this attempt to paint her as a victim of the left, as being abused and manipulated is a great way of distracting from her message.. her stated message.

            It says “don’t listen to what she says!” It’s not her stated cause that matters. Ignore the thing she’s standing up and saying we should care about… it’s actually the left which is evil and abusing her and manipulating her and trying to trick you.

            Pure ad hominem: undermine the messenger and you don’t have to contend with the message.

  8. Cuomo: “Did you ask the Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden?”

    Giuliani: “No, actually I didn’t. I asked the Ukraine to investigate the allegations that there was interference in the election of 2016 by the Ukrainians for the benefit of Hillary Clinton, for which there is already a court finding.”

    Cuomo: “You never asked anything about Hunter Biden? You never asked anything about Joe Biden and his role with the prosecutor?”

    Giuliani: “The only thing I asked about Joe Biden is to get to the bottom of how it was that Lutsenko, who was appointed, dismissed the case,” Giuliani said.

    Cuomo: “So you did ask Ukraine to look into Joe Biden?”

    Giuliani: “Of course, I did!”

    • And the problem with this….is exaclty what?

    • Nice place to cut the text. I watched the video. Cuomo’s next line was “you just said you didn’t”…Rudy says he corrected immediately by saying WHAT he was asked to investigate. That Hunter Biden ended up involved was a bonus, but not the reason he asked the Ukraine to investigate. Cuomo has a way of fast firing questions and not letting the person answer….I can see Rudy’s frustration. I’m sure you can give me a 1000 word essay on Rudy not admitting what you want him to admit.

      Next.

      • Giuliani: You want to cover some ridiculous charge that I urged the Ukrainian government to investigate corruption, well I did, and I’m proud of it.

        ::cross-talk::

        Cuomo: It’s not a ridiculous allegation then. You just admitted it!

        Giuliani: Ridiculous allegation! Ridiculous allegation!

        Cuomo: Just admit it!

        Giuliani: Ridiculous allegation!

        ——————

        Maybe they should stop letting Rudy go on TV..?

      • I think there is more to this than we are seeing. A whistleblower who didn’t actually hear the conversation (in June). At the time, Biden was way up in the polls and I would bet that Trump would rather face Biden than Warren. This smells like a duel attack by one of the Crats who need Biden gone to win the nomination. I speculate, with no actual proof, that this has been planned for some time to get rid of Biden. Attacking Trump is just some icing on the cake, but I think this will backfire once the whistleblower is identified and his/her story is told. Probably a Bernie supporter 😀

  9. This lass has a great speech writer and her acting classes have paid off handsomly.

    I wonder why the new NASA reports and Oceanic reports that show the opposite are not listed….but then you cant give money and grants to positive reports, can one?

    :::starts up his SUV for today’s errands:::

    :::would still fly his plane if he had one:::

    :::continues to drill for oil and fracking in West Texas:::

    :::understands that the left knows no bounds in how to influence young minds into the “sky is falling”:::

    :::continues to eat steak and raising horses and cattle:::

    :::Understands that child abuse is not just physical or mental but extends to the brainwashing side as well, remembering the same thing happened in the 50’s when I remember worrying about atom and hydrogen bombs falling and destroying the universe. I still have my letter written to Dwight Eisenhower when I was 10 and the response signed by him….and we are still here today:::

    :::Is wondering why this young lass is not in school where she belongs:::

    :::Understands that all these children that are out protesting do not know shit from crisco on climate issues:::

    :::wonders why these same children do not jump in a plane and go stand in front of Tanks where the largest polluter is:::

    ====================================================

    Is now going back to eat breakfast, take his meds, crack a Dr Pepper at 0800 Texas time…listen and watch all this stupid hyperbole of Ukraine and senseless shit from Biden to Trump…Still does not believe in man made climate change and knows for sure that Miami will not fall into the ocean, man will still be around, animals will still be alive, the butterflies will still be around if they can miss all these monuments to wind and solar power that is more guilty of wiping out species than all the C02 in the world.

    Has seen the evolution in Texas in becoming the largest producer of unused and more expensive wind power in the world…..But if Colorado, New Mexico and Oklahoma wish to continue to buy the more expensive power and pay the enormous prices, “CHA CHING”, I will close the cash register drawer. Texas towns are smart enough to see that the TOTALLY GREEN city of Gerogetown has finally given up after five years because it did not work and the residents got tired of no air conditioning, blackouts because of no wind nor sun, melting freezers, electricity prices three times the normal….but noticed that they all still had their computers, cell phones, and cars. The University at Georgetown using generators run on deisel fuel to hold green classes.

    So, seeing this, none of the Texas towns where the wind generators are located are tied into the wind power grid.

    Texas continues to have its own power grid separate from that of the United States and receives no power from the outdated electrical grids that dot the country. We still drill and sell oil, burn coal, and use natural gas and nuke power and enjoy very low gasoline and energy prices.

    Sees that the wind turbines have killed tens of millions……YES MILLIONS…of birds. The dove flight patterns in west Texas no longer exist. The Pheasant population has almost ceased to exist. The antelope herds are gone as their breeding grounds have disappeared due to “green energy”. The quail population of West Texas has ceased to exist because their breeding grounds have given way to wind turbines. The Monarch butterfly migratory flight pattern have been disrupted. The carrion eaters….buzzards and eagles have all disappeared…but no one sees or cares that this is now acceptable behaviour. No articles on the changes that are taking place with green energy that is decimating the species that the greenies are all worried about……

    Oh well……….More proof is needed for me and if that makes me a climate denier….then I wear the brand proudly with all the other names I have been called.

    • :::Understands that child abuse is not just physical or mental but extends to the brainwashing side:::

      Amen.

      ABSOLUTELY!

      Now support your implication that this is the case for this girl.

      As I just posted, my seven year old is a self-imposed vegetarian.. she’s a hop, skip, and a jump from being a full-blown animal rights activist.

      At seven… if she holds the course, by Greta’s age, she’ll be leading midnight raids to set your cattle free.

      I’m sure as hell not pushing this. My wife isn’t pushing it.

      But if my kid feels strongly enough, and manages to get herself an opportunity to make her case to the US general assembly, you can bet your ass that I’m going to support her and coach her on how to give the best speech she can give.

      I’ts POSSIBLE that Greta is being manipulated and used. It’s also POSSIBLE that a 16 year old has made up her own damned mind. Do you have any evidence to assert which is the case?

      She has Asperger’s and I’ve seen her speech… for someone on the spectrum to fake sincerity like that…? I’m going to go ahead and call it unlikely. She’s a true believer.

      That doesn’t negate the possibility that her parents manipulated her into being a true believer. That they’ve fed her this narrative since she was eight all in hopes of making her out to be an advocate at some point. That’s pretty good forward planning on their part.

      Or maybe they’re just opportunists.. they believe it, she believes it, and they just seized their moment to throw their child onto the world-stage? Maybe? Who knows? Not me. Not you. Would that change anything?

      What I do know is that attacking the speaker (and her parents) and their motivation is a great way of ignoring the message.

      • Now support your implication that this is the case for this girl I can’t. It appears to me that is the case. I understand that there are child prodigies out there….but she is not playing a piano…she is not strumming a guitar, and she is not belting out soprano notes that shatter glasses and drive Canine Weapon crazy. She is espousing things that (a) she has either read, or (b) she has been spoon fed. She could actually be scared to death, as I was about aromic bombs and boomb shelters, in the 50’s. That is all we heard on Tv and Radio back then and it turned out to be nothing.

        I’m sure as hell not pushing this. My wife isn’t pushing it.. Who is? School? Internet? Tv? Friends? My own son went through this….pure vegetarian to the point of not even drinking milk from a cow. He lost weight, turned yellow…..and, finally, after eating hamburgers in front of him, he saw the light.

        ….you can bet your ass that I’m going to support her and coach her on how to give the best speech she can give. ‘Nuff said…don’t forget the acting classes on how to turn the fear and tears on…

        I’ts POSSIBLE that Greta is being manipulated and used. It’s also POSSIBLE that a 16 year old has made up her own damned mind. Do you have any evidence to assert which is the case? Absolutely none what so ever just as there is no evidence th the contrary.

        She’s a true believer. Of this…I have no doubt.

        …..Would that change anything? Yep……

        What I do know is that attacking the speaker (and her parents) and their motivation is a great way of ignoring the message. That, unfortunately, seems to be the thing to do in this day and time. Shoot the messenger……sigh. Both sides of every equation seem to do that….and that, sir, is very unfortunate. Even you and I fall subject to this and we should know better…..Canine Weapon should no better…………….there is no hope for DPM, however.

        • Mathius: What I do know is that attacking the speaker (and her parents) and their motivation is a great way of ignoring the message.

          D13: That, unfortunately, seems to be the thing to do in this day and time. Shoot the messenger……sigh. Both sides of every equation seem to do that….and that, sir, is very unfortunate. Even you and I fall subject to this and we should know better

          —-

          I… I don’t think I do do this.

          I may attack a speaker, too, for being an ass-hat, but I think I generally do a pretty good job of considering statements on the merit. How many times – several now – have I said something along the lines of “Trump may be an asshole, but that doesn’t mean he’s wrong.” I think it was just the other day when I agreed with him re his asylum policy (that you had to seek in pass-through countries first). I’ve opined that I’d overturn Roe and Obgerfell. Hell, I’ve been listening to you lunatics for over a decade now and have the chip to prove it.

          Contrast that with a certain person here who says things like “First, the narrative is being pushed by the Left, so it’s likely false.”

          That said… what are you doing with this particular case? Greta is making an argument. And rather than consider what she’s saying, you’re dismissing her because she’s too young and/or being used/manipulated by her parents. V.H. is posting about her autism and posting articles which lead off by calling her a “Far-left climate extremist” and charge that she’s a puppet of her parents parading her around like a show dog.

          I don’t know about the specifics of her claim, but I agree with her general theme. And if she’s a bit… shrill… or hyperbolic, that’s forgivable in light of what she sees as an emergency situation that’s being ignored for partisan political reasons and economic greed by people who won’t be around to suffer the consequences and who expect her generation to shoulder the cleanup while they reap the benefits. It’s easy to see how a young person might be apoplectic about this.

          Gman asserts that scientists are divided on climate change. That’s true.. there are some who disagree. But the overwhelming majority of climate scientists seem to agree that humans are causing global warming / climate change.

          I’m not a scientist. I’m just a guy who knows a few things. But one of the things I know is that, while experts aren’t always right, your best bet is usually to listen to them. I can’t devote enough time from my day to fit in both SUFA and climatology, so I’m just going to have to rely on the fact that ~97% say we’re causing climate change to some degree or another.

          But what I’m not going to do is dismiss a girl trying to do something about that fact because of who she is or what her parents might have to do with anything. If she believes the scientific consensus – of even if she doesn’t – and wants to do something to remediate that harm and risk, then that’s a good thing. And her age and her autism and her parentage and her whatever are just beside the point.

          Attacking those things is just ad homenim … a way of attacking the speaker so that people don’t have deal with her point.

          So the question is… why are her age/autism/parents so important to the right?

        • Mathius: I’m sure as hell not pushing this. My wife isn’t pushing it..

          D13: Who is? School? Internet? Tv? Friends? My own son went through this….pure vegetarian to the point of not even drinking milk from a cow. He lost weight, turned yellow…..and, finally, after eating hamburgers in front of him, he saw the light.

          ——-

          So far as I know, no one is pushing this. If anything, I’m desperately trying to get her to eat some protein. (I can sometimes get her to eat a hot dog if she’s hungry enough).

          I’m sure school is teaching the usual “be kind to animals” stuff, but I am aware of no aggressive agenda. And, if there is one, it doesn’t seem to be manifesting in any of her classmates / friends. It hasn’t been my experience that my daughter is particularly susceptible to manipulation.

          She’s pretty light and hasn’t been gaining height or weight the way her doctor would like. She’s not sick or in danger (or we’d be force-feeding her), but we’ve added protein bars to her meals and switched her from skim to whole milk. Her sister (age 4) is almost the same height / weight.

          (she understands that the cows would be uncomfortable if we didn’t milk them, so it’s not mean to the cows, therefore it’s ok to drink milk)

          This is simply self-directed. She loves animals and doesn’t want to see them harmed or abused or killed and eaten. In general, on principle, I agree, but she’s given me enough lectures whenever she sees me eating meat that I’ve had to lay down the law about not being pushy about her beliefs.. but I can tell she’s not satisfied with holding her peace on what she feels is a moral imperative.

          As I’ve said, give her another few years to stew and she’ll probably be an eco-terrorist (and a damned good one). I may not agree with her quest, but I’ll be sure to give her all the tools I can to succeed in life. If that includes guerrilla tactics and small-arms training, well, I know a guy….

  10. I wonder…………………..” If all the government grants were dropped to these so called climate experts…..what would be the result?”

    • We’d start polluting more because “out of sight is out of mind” and polluting is more profitable than controlling your emissions.

      Then we could all be blindsided and surprised when shit the starts really hitting the fan.

      Too late, of course, but for that one bright, shining moment in time, we will have created a lot of value for stockholders.

      • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

        Before “climate change” we were well on our way to cleaning up. As a young teen in the late 50’s early 60’s I remember my folks talking about them. The famous killer fog in London and the burning river in the US were pivotal moments.

        Now I am still waiting to find out what we do about China who might talk the talk but based on every other agreement they have ever broken will never Walk the Walk!

      • Why are you conflating pollution with Climate Change? They are two very separate issues and pollution is heavily regulated in the US, not because of Climate Change. You should have been around in the early 70’s, you would realize how much cleaner we are as a nation.

        • Why are you conflating pollution with Climate Change?

          Should have been clearer… greenhouse emissions.

          You should have been around in the early 70’s, you would realize how much cleaner we are as a nation.

          Growing up in LA in the 80’s / 90’s, I’ve never had a snow-day. But there were a handful of times when the UV index got up so high they cancelled recess/gym or held it indoors.

          You should have been around in the early 70’s, you would realize how much cleaner we are as a nation.

          Yes… we’re better.

          No denying that.

          But (A) WHY are we better? Is it because people pulled their heads out of their collective asses or because of the EPA/etc? (B) Are we “better” enough?

          To (B), I used to kill ten hobos a week, but I’ve cut back to killing only one a week. So, clearly, there’s no problem now, right? Right? That’s how logic works? If I’m better than I was, then there is no problem now?

          • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

            Why did you NOT say anything about China. What are you a secret China lover? Getting kick-backs from China?

            • Why did you NOT say anything about China.

              Because I don’t live in China or have any say in what China does or does not do.

              Why did you NOT say anything about China.

              Well, maybe if I could get our government to take the issue seriously, they’d apply pressure with other nations to collectively force China and India to stop being assholes.

              What are you a secret China lover?

              Nope.

              Getting kick-backs from China?

              Nope… but I’d happily shill for them for 500k / yr. I’m very buyable.

              • I’m very buyable. Hells bells…..we are all buyable….it is a matter of price only.

              • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

                All of the “we are green”, crap in the world won’t matter worth a cow fart unless China and India get with the plan. Them first since we have been doing a cracker-Jack job so far on our own.

  11. (on Fox) Judge Napolitano: So this is probably the end of Joe Biden’s Presidency, and it ought to be the end of his dream for the Presidency, but it doesn’t diminish one iota what the current President is doing, which is an act of – if true, we haven’t seen the whistle-blower complaint, and under the law it has to be revealed – if true, this is an act of corruption.

  12. Trump supposedly wants to buy Greenland.

    Thoughts? I’d be on board…. but I do wonder how we’re supposed to pay for it..

    • I’m on board too. We can sell NYC to the UN to pay for it. Maybe throw in the South West of California and San Francisco for good measure. 🙂

      • I’m not sure that SoCal and San Fran would object to being sold to the Danish…

      • Capital assets such as land and infrastructure are properly bought on credit. Our problem is we have been buying groceries on credit hence no longer have a decent credit rating that could fund such an acquisition.

        Greenland would be a good place to colonize using illegal immigrants. After all it is “green” and will be farmable in another 50 years or so we are told.

        • Capital assets such as land and infrastructure are properly bought on credit. Our problem is we have been buying groceries on credit hence no longer have a decent credit rating that could fund such an acquisition.

          Simple… we just need to raise our own credit limit by fiat. Then we can default afterward, keep Greenland, and ask Denmark just what the hell they think they’re going to do about it.

          Greenland would be a good place to colonize using illegal immigrants.

          I…. I don’t know how I feel about this….

          After all it is “green” and will be farmable in another 50 years or so we are told.

          That’s not the only thing… the NW passage is opening up… if we controlled both Greenland and Alaska, we’d have a good claim to one of the most valuable shipping lines in the world.. possibly on par with the Panama Canal. Right now, Canada is claiming it’s theirs while the world asserts it’s international waters.. if we had the entry and exit points, I’m sure we’d suddenly realize that it’s US/Canadian territorial waters.

          And that’s to say nothing of the mineral rights that may be exploitable in the near-ish future.

          … which is why, of course, Denmark isn’t so quick to sell it, even though it’s costing them ~1/2 billion a year.

    • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

      Same way Jefferson did. Same deal Seward Made. Same deal Wilson did to buy the US Virgin Islands from Denmark!

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Mathius

      Easy man…………. Greenland is going to pay for it! Bahahahahahahaha

  13. SIGH>….moderation, please

  14. Canine Weapon says:

  15. So, Pelosi caves to AOC yet again….and says that there will be an official inquiry into whether or not to impeach. She pandered yet again and solved two issues (no one said that she is not shrewd)….she gets the hard left off her back….throws it to the Lieutenants in the House to decide…gets the infamous squad off her back…..and it appears that she is showing leadership to the minions.

    There is nothing new here……same old shit, same old story…..but now it is O F F I C I A L….and they all go yea…..

    To quote from “Scent of a Woman”…..this is a crock of shit.

  16. Pelosi blows smoke up the Left’s ass. Unless there is a vote, nothing will happen. She bloviates and Trump’s trap has been tripped, the phone call transcript, in full will be released today. This tells me that lots of eggs will be slapping faces.

    • EXCLUSIVE: A senior Trump administration official told Fox News late Tuesday that the administration will release a document showing the intelligence community inspector general found the whistleblower who leveled an explosive accusation against President Trump concerning his talks with Ukraine had “political bias” in favor of “a rival candidate” of the president.
      The official did not identify the name of the rival candidate. Separately, a senior administration official told Fox News the White House has been working as quickly as it can to release to Congress the whistleblower complaint involving President Trump’s conversations with the leader of Ukraine, as long as it’s legally possible.

  17. Mathius asked….Would you continue to vote for him?

    To quote Mathius: ” I would vote for an axe murderer of they were close to my beliefs.”

    • So, yes, I will vote for him because, to me, the alternatives are still far worse. Do I wish we had a better conservative challenger….yep.

      • Fair ‘nough.

        Same reason I voted for Clinton. A steaming shit-pile to be sure, and, like Trump, almost certainly a criminal in one way or another. But in a two party system, she was the only option.

        Do I wish we had a better progressive option? Yup.

  18. Stephen K. Trynosky says:
    • 404: The requested page was not found. 😟

    • No.

      Comedy is alive and well. Just because some people get pissy and prissy about “things you can’t joke about” doesn’t mean the rest of us can’t.

      How many cops does it take to push a black man down the stairs? None. He fell.

      How many potatoes does it take to kill an Irishman? Zero.

      Say what you will about pedophiles.. at least they slow down in a school zone.

      Why are there no Muslims on Star Trek? Because it takes place in the future.

      How many Jews can you fit in a car? One in the passenger seat and six million in the ash tray.

      Ok, that one might have been a bit much. Anne Frankly, I feel bad for having told it.

      What’s the difference between Jesus and a picture of Jesus? You can hang the picture with only one nail.

      Why are redneck murders so hard to solve? Everyone matches the DNA and there are no dental records.

      The PC police can go jump in a lake. Just because some people are sticks in the mud, and just because they get disproportionate attention doesn’t mean you can’t make a joke… in fact, you can be as offensive as you want if you’re funny enough.

      • 😀 😀 Some good ones !

      • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

        Neither Mel Brooks nor Don Rickles would succeed in Hollywood today. No ifs, ands, or buts there. Saw Rickles in Atlantic City a decade back. He used the same humor he always did but younger folk walked out! You may be immune to PC but many of your contemporaries are not. They think, note I said think they should be offended therefore they are! Cogito ergo stupidius.

  19. A few questions that I’d like to see answered:

    How does Biden’s son Hunter get a high paying position on a company’s board that he is not qualified for and around 6 months after being booted from the Navy for cocaine use?

    How does Hunter and Kerry’s step son pull 1.5 billion out of China?

    My speculation is that there is some serious corruption that occurred under Obama, including SELLING the Office of VP and SoS.

    What exactly can Trump be impeached for? Answer….NOTHING

    • G Man….come on, man. To single those guys out is folly……I bet you can find, in every Presidency, family members that sat on boards of directors for various countries and corporations since time was invented.

      In the business world, it is vary common to see someone’s wife or son being a member of the board of Directors for suppliers or banks or brokerages for a variety of reasons. Allow me an example……BANKS…..They are notorious for adding their largest depositors on the board of Directors….or very strong business men on the boards in hopes it would attrach business to ghe Bank…….so, very common.

      The rub, for me, comes when you treat one or the other different. If there is anyone on this blog that does not think for a minute that back channel threats are not used or requested as a common practice……step forward.

      Congress uses, all the time, the phrase…we are the watch dog against corruption. That is laughable.

      • I am well aware that relatives of the powerful are cultivated for their ability to influence. I am also aware that our foreign aid often comes with strings attached. However, what Biden bragged about was unilaterally sequestering foreign aid for personal and family gain. This should disqualify him for higher office if not put him in legal jeopardy.

        I am tired of the two tier justice system. It now has come to light that Durbin, Leahy, and Menendez sent a letter to the Ukraine in 2018 asking them to assist in the Mueller investigation. If this can be viewed as official business and not political, then the Presidents request is the same.

        • “It got almost no attention, but in May [2018], CNN reported that Sens. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) and Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) wrote a letter to Ukraine’s prosecutor general, Yuriy Lutsenko, expressing concern at the closing of four investigations they said were critical to the Mueller probe,” writes Marc Thiessen.
          “In the letter, they implied that their support for U.S. assistance to Ukraine was at stake. Describing themselves as “strong advocates for a robust and close relationship with Ukraine,” the Democratic senators declared, “We have supported [the] capacity-building process and are disappointed that some in Kyiv appear to have cast aside these [democratic] principles to avoid the ire of President Trump,” before demanding Lutsenko “reverse course and halt any efforts to impede cooperation with this important investigation.”

          Wait, isn’t this what the Crats are claiming Trump did, use our foreign aid as a weapon? So far, I see 4 Crats who are guilty of what they are claiming and the person they claim did it, didn’t.

      • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

        Now, if there were a Biden “foundation”…….

    • “Do you want a name for this world? A solution for all its riddles? A light for you, too, you best-concealed, strongest, most intrepid, most midnightly men?––This world is the will to power––and nothing besides! And you yourselves are also this will to power––and nothing besides!” – Nietzsche

  20. Sorta reminds me of the three men at the local brothel and by their moves, which nationality they are…….

    The man running down the stairs is Finnish…..The man running up the stairs is Russian….The man waiting at the bottom of the stairs is a Texas Aggie waiting for the red light to change. ( Ta Da Boom )

    And to Mathius…..a joke is a joke and the thin skins of today are too many and the hurt feelings are a bit much….which is why the term snowflake has a new meaning now. Everything seems to be hurtful these days. People are becoming afraid to talk to each other for fear of being insensitive.

    I do not care if I am called a honky, cracker, gringo, or any such name…it does not hurt me at all. It does not offend me….they are merely nouns to elicit a response. (From Road House). I am not offended by the color of my skin and I do not get offended with the common black man jokes of having bigger appendages.

    We call the Mexicans, greasers, pepper bellies, wetbacks, chili chompers and they call us gringos, gabachos, guero, Nacas, Fresa….the list goes on and no one cares.

    I do not understand the sensitivity. But you know us Longhorns…..tough hides.

    • I will say this… name calling is different than “humor.”

      It can be. But it isn’t always.

      Sometimes the purpose is to segregate (or self-segregate) or dehumanize the “other.” Sometime it is to paint a narrative of the other party (“lyin’ Hillary”).

      These, we should consider very carefully as it’s not about “being offended” but rather being manipulated.

      It’s far easier for people to kill “a bunch of kikes” than it is to kill Jewish people. Why?

      It’s far easier to hate “libtards” than it is to hate fellow Americans who happen to be more liberal. Why?

      • And there is a difference in the name calling by the left and Trump. The left liberally applies isms, phobias, etc. to those on the right. These are mean labels not just demeaning and often have not basis in truth. Trump uses crooked Hillary, Faucohantis (sp), etc. These are belittling, descriptive but not mean in the same sense as the labels used by the left.

        • The left liberally applies isms, phobias, etc. to those on the right.

          This is not unilateral.

          Cuck, snowflake, libtard, triggered, sjw, etc. They throw around “communist” and “socialist” with reckless abandon.

          These are also mean labels not just demeaning and often have no basis in truth.

          When gman is an asshole and calls me a snowflake or suggests that I’ve been triggered, is that not exactly the same kind of thing you’re complaining that the left does which is different?

          And that’s here on SUFA… amongst “us”.. and you guys have known me for a decade now… and he’s still lobbing that crap at me. You think that’s not going on “out there”? That the right isn’t smearing and attacking the left just as much as the left is smearing and attacking the right?

          It’s easy to see how “they” attack “you”.. because you’re the victim in that, you feel it more, your media picks it up and amplifies it more “see! They’re attacking us!” It’s far harder to see what your side does to “them.”

          You should only see what happens when I try to comment on other conservative sites (which I almost never do anymore). I get called every name in the book, and then some. Every “ism.” I get called a troll, an idiot, a liar. The right is every bit as bad as the left. They’re all a bunch of assholes.

      • I will say this… name calling is different than “humor.” No, it really is not. (smile when you say that). Sorry, but I do not see a difference.

        I see a friend of mine, whom is Hispanic, and I yell at him…”Hey, Paco, your clothes are dry! How did you get across the river this time?” (I have actually said that).

        I see a person that I do not know, whom is Hispanic, and I yell at him…”Hey, Paco, your clothes are dry! How did you get across the river this time?”

        Are you trying to tell me that it is all in the delivery?

  21. I got ticked off at the radio last night on the drive home. i listen to the local news channel which launched Tom Sullivan and Rush. The voices were reading the news on the whistle blower case and the House move to impeach. They flat out said that Trump has admitted to asking a foreign government for assistance to investigate a rival political candidate. They also stated that Trump and his team were accusing Biden of doing the same thing without evidence. Both are gross distortions of reality. Biden has admitted publicly that he extorted the Ukrainians to fire the prosecutor investigating his son. Trump, as president, has a responsibility to investigate such activity of former government officials.

    Tucker had a former spook on last night. The spook stated that he has no doubt that the Russians have all the dirty activity of Biden and his son in the Ukraine. So Biden is compromised just like Hilary was.

    I am tired of all these investigations with no proof of an actual crime. However, if we must go through another round, then I think it is only fair that we investigate both Trump and Biden.

  22. https://drudgereport.com/?responsive=off

    Not sure this will work, but if it takes you to Drudge, push read , if you want to read the actual transcript instead of people’s interpretations. If it doesn’t work, just go to Drudge. 😁

    • Read it, dont see a damn thing wrong with anything.

    • The alient part:

      President Zelenskyy: I also plan to surround myself with great people and in addition to that investigation, I guarantee as the President of Ukraine that all the investigations will be done openly and candidly.. That I can assure you..

      Trump: Good because I heard you had a prosecutor who was very good and he was shut down and that’s really unfair. A lot of people are talking about that, the way they shut your very good prosecutor down and you had some very bad people involved. Mr. Giuliani is a highly respected man. He was the mayor of New York City, a great mayor, and I would like him to call you. I will ask him to call you along with the Attorney General. Rudy very much knows what’s happening and he is a very capable guy. If you could speak to him that would be great. The former ambassador from the United States, the woman was bad news and the people she was dealing with in the Ukraine were bad news so I just want to let you now that. The other thing, there’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it… It sounds horrible to me.

      President Zelenskyy: I wanted to tell you about the prosecutor First of all, I understand and I’m knowledgeable about the situation. Since we have won the absolute majority in our Parliament, the next prosecutor general will be 100% my person, my candidate, who will be approved, by the parliament and will start as a new prosecutor in September. He or she will look into the situation, specifically to the company that you mentioned in this issue.

      ————–

      Leaving off my assessment of propriety here, why does the man talk like an eight year old? The prosecutor was “very good,” the investigation was “very good,” the people involved were “very bad people,” the former ambassador was “bad news.” What the hell is up with that? It’s bizarre!

      • Why do some people talk like they have a corn cob stuck up …………., well, hopefully you get the point.

        • Canine Weapon says:
        • Canine Weapon says:

          (3rd attempt)

          • “… A LIGHT WILL SHINE THROUGH THAT WINDOW, A BEAM OF LIGHT WILL COME DOWN UPON YOU, YOU WILL EXPERIENCE AN EPIPHANY … AND YOU WILL SUDDENLY REALIZE THAT YOU MUST GO TO THE POLLS AND VOTE FOR OBAMA” – BARACK OBAMA LEBANON, NEW HAMPSHIRE.
            JANUARY 7, 2008.

            • Now, that sounds like a man who has the best words!

            • Is that an actual quote? Obama said that? Or is it a parody from a comedian?

              Murf

              • Close.. it was clearly tongue in cheek.. the full quote says: “My job is to be so persuasive that if there’s anybody left out there who is still not sure whether they will vote, or is still not clear who they will vote for, that a light will shine through that window, a beam of light will come down upon you, you will experience an epiphany … and you will suddenly realize that you must go to the polls and vote for Obama”

                He wasn’t saying that he’s so messianic that this divine light would elucidate everyone… he was joking that his job was to be so persuasive that that would happen.

                It’s the difference between: “I’m so great” and “my job is to convince you that I’m so great.”

                It’s a conveniently truncated quote which strips off the context and changes it from a humorous line about how he is suppose to be superhumanly persuasive into one that looks like he’s saying he’s ordained from on high.

                I couldn’t find a video, but if you can find one, I’d love to give it a watch.

              • I hope so, I looked up Obama quotes and came across this one.

              • Mathius, I didn’t say it wasn’t funny, it is. I simply posted it as representative of how Obama uses words. Which were usually used to deliver a grandiose, sanctimonious lecture .

              • Mathius, I didn’t say it wasn’t funny,

                And I didn’t say that you didn’t say that it was funny. 😛

                I simply posted it as representative of how Obama uses words.

                He does have a way with them.

                One might even say he has… the best words.

                Which were usually used to deliver a grandiose, sanctimonious lecture .

                ::conclusion unsupported::

              • Mathius, just curious…why do you say it was “clearly tongue-in-cheek” and that he was joking? I haven’t seen the video either, but just from reading the full quote I can’t tell if the intent was humorous or not. Can you support that conclusion? It’s a genuine question, not an attempt at a gotcha.

                Murf

  23. President Zelenskyy: I would like to tell you that I also have quite a few Ukrainian friends that live in the United States. Actually last time I traveled to the United States, I stayed in New York near Central Park, and I stayed at the Trump Tower.

    I wonder how many foreign officials wind up staying at Trump Tower and then find a way to casually drop that information in conversation with Trump…

    • What is wrong with this? I see nothing wrong…….where am I missing the boat?

      • Nothing at all!

        You know, funny story, I was evaluating security vendors for my firm… it’s a pretty lucrative contract.. I was meeting with this one company and they just so happened to mention that they’d bought one of my custom wood tables online the other day… I’m, of course, sure that that’s a complete coincidence and they mentioned it in passing with no ulterior motive. Just like it’s a complete coincidence that, not only did I give him the contract, but actually more money than we’d previous discussed. Nothing to see here… move along..

      • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

        Let’s just get this nonsense out of the way Post Haste. The US government sponsored the overthrow of a legitimately elected Ukrainian government for alleged corruption and then replaced it with an even more corrupt one. An unintended consequence was raising the paranoia of Russia to the point where it invaded the Ukraine to protect its strategic assets in the Crimea.

        However, even the new government was not able to ignore the massive corruption with its own ranks and launched an investigation into the main suspects. Caught up was little Hunter Biden a fairly dumb progeny of a fairly dumb, lying deceitful, foulmouthed, braggart US politician. When the US got wind of the investigation, to protect Biden and probably others it blackmailed the Ukrainian government into ending the case and firing the investigator (s). Note I said blackmail, which Mr. dum-dum admitted on tape

        Contrary to popular opinion, the Ukrainian people are not as dumb as they might seem. Last year they threw out the corrupt US backed government and installed a less corrupt one. They apparently have been dusting off old cases and re-opening them. The President has apparently asked them to look into this and some other things which I think he believes are related to the coup attempt and electoral interference against him. There was apparently a meeting of the minds on this. The chips will fall at the man’s feet where they happen to belong. Joe Biden will go down. NOT holding him accountable is tantamount to saying he should get a pass because he is running for office. Now maybe some in the new United States of America, in the first quarter of the 21st Century think that this is somehow unfair. They can certainly point out to some extraordinary (note: I did not say special) treatment one Hillary Clinton received under the same circumstances but if the republic is to have any chance of surviving, the very same scrutiny must be applied to ALL.

        I would also note that the new President of the Ukraine is by trade a stand up comic. What better line to deliver than, “I stayed at a Trump hotel”. Bada-boom!

        • Just A Citizen says:

          New strategy if you have done bad things and think they are on to you.

          Announce you are running for POTUS. Then the Feds can’t investigate without the incumbent being charged with abuse of power.

          Ain’t it great???

        • Nice!

          Some good zingers coming from the SUFA crew today.

  24. Canine Weapon says:

    Happy 230th birthday to the Bill of Rights!

  25. https://hotair.com/archives/jazz-shaw/2019/09/25/get-ready-national-wealth-registry/

    Another one of those ideas that some people would think is great, until the consequences showed up.

    • It actually used to be this way a loooong time ago. It was nothing for a tax appraiser to knock on your door to evaluate your furnishings and paintings.

      So, here is my issue….forget the threshhold…..everybody gets apparaised from the homeless tent to the richest mansion.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Screw you and your FASCISM.

        What is in my house, and barn and that little shed over the underground bunker is none of your damn business.

  26. Please, Democrats, Impeach, Impeach, Impeach. Stop blowing smoke up your ilk’s ass and make your case. When you lose, sit down and STFU 😀

  27. In December, 2017, a man was pulled over in Arizona. He was seen leaving a strip mall parking lot adjacent to a bar. As he left, he was followed by a police car for two miles. During this time, he drove below the speed limit and committed no traffic violations or other clues of inebriation.

    After two miles, he was pulled over and tested for DUI. The justification was that his careful and non-criminal driving was suspicious.

    The breathalyzer test proved positive, he was over the legal limit. He was duly arrested and charged.

    The lower court accepted the cop’s assertion that his non-criminal driving was suspicious enough to warrant a stop and search. The defendant appealed to the Arizona Court of Appeals which overturned the decision and quashed all evidence obtained during the suspicionless stop (effectively killing the case).

    Kudos to some sane judges. Nice to see that we still have some rights under the 4th Amendment.

    It’s insane to me that we live in a world where not noticeably committing a crime is itself justification for suspicion of criminal activity. JUSTICE Mathius would have been rather aggressive in his ruling on this matter.

    Source.

    • Thank god the internet wasn’t what it is when I was that young and stupid. I pity any child growing up in the world of social media.

      Sucks.. he seems like a quality guy.

  28. Stephen K. Trynosky says:

    I guess it an interesting overlooked point that Trump is the Chief Executive and technically chief Law Enforcement Officer in the country. Contrary to Judge Napolitano (a non Trump supporter) he can in fact ask anyone, anywhere, anytime for pertinent information on a potential crime. Especially if that crime may involve co-conspirators as yet uncovered. I do seem to remember some of the DNC hacking originated in the Ukraine as well as some info on the faux Russia scandal.

  29. WASHINGTON, D.C.—Everyone in the nation has been enjoying themselves for the past three years—everyone, that is, except anti-fun Democrats, who are now seeking to end the most fun presidency of all time, sources confirmed this week.

    Democrats have become the party of no fun allowed and as such are seeking to stop all the fun. They can’t sit idly by and let everybody go on this crazy, enjoyable ride—they say the time has come to go back to serious times like when Obama was president and everybody was bored all the time.
    “People have been laughing and having fun as they watch Trump tweet and generally enjoy themselves, and this must end,” said Chuck Schumer with a dead serious look on his face, wagging his finger, clearly mad that everyone else is having so much fun. “Yes, his tweets are funny sometimes. Yes, he’s a big goofball. Yes, Americans are enjoying the spectacle. You know what, stuff like covfefe and Greenland even got a chuckle out of me, I’m ashamed to admit. But American politics is not supposed to be fun. It is supposed to be boring. No fun allowed!”
    “No fun! No fun! No fun!” he chanted, with other Democratic leaders and the press joining in.
    Trump responding to the impeachment inquiry by tweeting, “Another great day at the White House!” and everybody laughed at that, but Democrats did not. They said that was another example of unconstitutional, treasonous fun that should be stopped.

  30. https://townhall.com/tipsheet/cortneyobrien/2019/09/26/the-whistleblower-complaint-is-out-n2553748

    There’s a link in the article to the “Fake whistleblowers” complaint.

  31. The Colonel’s opinion of this impeachment move:

    1) I do not believe “whistle blowers” unless thay have the integrity to come forward in public and stand by their convictions.

    2) I do not believe “whistle blowers” that repeat things they heard from various parties and those various parties do not have the integrity to come forward and voice their complaint.

    3) I do not believe and I do not give credence to any investigation in which things are kept private and left to committee members and committee heads no matter the political party.

    4) I DO BELIEVE that there is a concerted effort to remove Trump from office via coup, soft or hard, and to rely on heresay without corroboration is an affront to justice.

    ==========================================================

    That said…….IF Trump used his office the same way that Obama and Clinton did……even though they were not impeached…..Trump is not above the law as Obama and Clinton were above the law.

    So, before Mathius jumps on the kool aid wagon….

    ANY source must be verified before I will give it credence. The transcripts of the phone call are NOT verification because they are transcripts not the actual phone call….which leaves doubts that the entire conversation was transcribed properly. Until officials come forward In PUBLIC and say…”President Trump came to me and told me to get rid of the tapes (a la Nixon)…..then they are not credible.

    Until a person comes forward and publicly says that ” I personally heard President Trump try to blackmail the President of the Ukraine”…. it will not be a credible source for me to consider. Asking for a favor, is not blackmail. It is unprofessional and should be called out and his hands slapped but it is not a high crime or misdemeanor as defined. You cannot speculate that defense funds or aid was held out and then paid unless I hear someone, PUBLICLY, say….I heard Trump tell the President of Ukraine that he would not give any money until Biden was investigated, then it is NOT CREDIBLE.

    So….show me the proof….undeniable proof…. that Trump has done what they are claiming, then I will be on board. Show me the proof, undeniable proof, of blackmail…then I will be on board. Not something that is IMPLIED…..because implied reasoning is not proof….it is bullshit.

    THEN…….you must show me…..not conjecture…..that, if true, this rises to the High Crimes and MIsdemeanors to warrant removal from office…then I will be on board.

    ==============================================

    SO……as we say in business………..show me the money. I do not want to see proforma’s…I do not want to see or hear what MIGHT happen…..show me the money.

    Thank you very kindly…..you may now go back to your regularly scheduled day.

    • This person is not a whistleblower, which I know you are aware, he is a conduit for people who are leaking classified information. Which is illegal!!!!

    • The whole thing is just another part of the whole Mueller investigation. Crowdstrike popped up again, and that was the trigger, not necessarily the Biden threats. Crowdstrike is the outfit that copied the DNC server which no one was able to see. That server and Hilliary’s server, one of them is what Seth Rich copied and somehow ended up in the hands of Assange and Wikileaks….or so the story goes.

      All this business about oh, just wait until the next report comes out…or Barr has something up his sleeve…or Horowitz, or whoever else is investigating….I don’t believe any of it anymore. The swamp is protecting itself.

      But now…Rudy is all kinds of pissed off. Between him and Trump…I have hope that some kind of justice will be served. The good thing is that an awful lot of corruption has been exposed. But so what, really. Because no matter what move Trump tries to make…they slap obstruction on him again. I don’t understand how the mess is going to get cleaned up.

    • I heard Trump tell the President of Ukraine that he would not give any money until Biden was investigated, then it is NOT CREDIBLE.

      Here’s the thing about this…

      Even Trump isn’t stupid enough to come out and explicitly SAY something like this. He’ll imply it. Ask about it repeatedly until they get the “hint.” Etc.

      But he’d never actually use the words outright. Especially on a call he knows is monitored.

      SO, with that in mind, what standard are you prepared to accept? Or is there no level to which his calls could rise so long as he didn’t utter the explicitly incriminating words?

      • Fair question, Sir Mathius……but when the President of the Ukraine says he felt no pressure….and that is an actual recipient of the phone call…then someone who says something about what he overheard….and they do not come forward or have corroboration….I do not believe them.

        The standard of “implied” meaning must have a higher bar and simply repeating something is not high enough for me….especially when the recipient of the call says it did not happen.

        What would Justice Mathius say:

        Trump says it was not implied. The President of the Ukraine says it did not happen……

        Some mole says, it was reported to me by several people……none of which will corroborate or be identified……

        Who do you belive?

        • JUSTICE Mathius believes this is a finding of fact, which is the role of the jury. But he would certainly want to see all the evidence, not just the hearsay, and have a full and frank consideration of the facts.

          JUROR Mathius wonders just how much a “suggestion” translates into “pressure” when it’s uttered by the President of the United States repeatedly while he’s holding up huge amounts of money your country relies on. JUROR Mathius doubts that the other side of that conversation would risk hamstringing the President by admitting to feeling pressure. JUROR Mathius also wonders about mens rea.. whether Trump might just be perseverating as he is wont to do, or whether he is bringing it up deliberately to cause action.. and he wonders how one might go about establishing which is the case. JUROR Mathius wonders how Trump’s active pushing of the president to meet with Rudy and the AG for the purpose of discussing the investigation fits in.

          CITIZEN Mathius suggests that, even if he meant no harm, even if he was within his power and authority, that it would be “lawful but awful” to actively encourage another country to investigate your (likely) political opponents. Even if it were the “right” thing to do, it’s… improprietous. As we have previously discussed, pretty much everyone is a criminal in higher level politics. This would amount to selective prosecution – sure everyone is a criminal, but I want to make sure that Biden goes down for it. And CITIZEN Mathius does not like that.

          • This would amount to selective prosecution – sure everyone is a criminal, but I want to make sure that Biden goes down for it. And CITIZEN Mathius does not like that.

            Objection to Citizen Mathius…….you have been in favour of selective prosecution several times in the past.

            • you have been in favour of selective prosecution several times in the past.

              Objection to your objection!

              Name one.

              you have been in favour of selective prosecution several times in the past.

              Further objection, we aren’t British. What is that extra u doing in “favour”?

              Could it be that our “favourite Texan” is actually a British spy? You lost the war, Red Coat, get over your sour grapes.

              • Hmmm….I cannot name one but I recall your conversation with Buck the Walla and I….I recall that you said (words to this effect)…you must be selective in the laws that are enforced because if you arrested every one for everything…no one would be left.”

                As to the British, I do not know how that creeped in there but I suddenly had a craving for tea and crumpets. Naw….we kicked their ass once and they have not been back….We kicked the Comanches and Apaches ass and they have not been back…we kicked Mexico out but they are coming back,…..

                Now, in relation to losing the war Red Coat, get over the sour grapes….I could not agree more if I were British…..however, you lost an election, boyo…..get over it.

                And I am sure that if I lose the next election, I will have to get over it as well….and put up with in incessant “MY TURN” attitude that certainly, and rightly so, will come.

              • you must be selective in the laws that are enforced because if you arrested every one for everything…no one would be left.”

                A) That sounds like a Buck position, not a Mathius one. Amazingly, we are not the same people.

                B) That does sound vaguely familiar.

                C) I would suggest, in reference to this, that this is a good reason for getting rid of a bunch of laws.

                Naw….we kicked their ass once and they have not been back

                Oh?

                Once?

                Is that so?

                we kicked Mexico out but they are coming back,…..

                Objection.

                As I seem to recall, they were wiping the floor with you and your puny forces holed up in some fort… I forget the name… until we stepping in an saved your behinds.

                At least, that’s the way -I- learned it.

                And I am sure that if I lose the next election, I will have to get over it as well….and put up with in incessant “MY TURN” attitude that certainly, and rightly so, will come.

                From your keyboard to God’s ears….

                Still, I’d rather President JAC than the current options.

              • Oh, and re selective enforcement, my wife got pulled over for speeding this morning.. 47 in a 30. Cop gave her a warning.

                Never ONCE in my entire life have I been pulled over and NOT gotten a ticket.

                What gives? Cute girls don’t get tickets?

              • Cute girls in short skirts that flutter their eyes……yep….that is the way it is.

              • until we stepping in an saved your behinds. Perhaps you should go back to school or pick a different school. The “fort” you are mentioning, I will assume, was the Alamo. It served its purpose…..but I want to know who the “we” is.

                Perhaps your school left out San Jacinto….

          • while he’s holding up huge amounts of money your country relies on.

            Objection to Juror Mathius. ( First, I would disqualify you from jury duty. I would disqualify you for exaclty the same reasons I have been rejected in the past…..I think and I readson. I do not want thinking people on my jury, I want people that I can sway).

            Now, to the objection….the time lines have yet to line up on the withholding of funds and the reason. It was discussed with the President of Ukraine that Trump wanted assurance that the corruption is under control before releasing funds for anything. This has been corroborated by the Ukranian President.

            • Objection to Juror Mathius. ( First, I would disqualify you from jury duty. I would disqualify you for exaclty the same reasons I have been rejected in the past…..I think and I readson. I do not want thinking people on my jury, I want people that I can sway).

              JUSTICE Mathius denies your motion to dismiss.

              Now, to the objection….the time lines have yet to line up

              I can’t speak to the timelines, but will opine when things clear up. Obviously, these are crucial to the argument being advanced by the left.

    • THEN…….you must show me…..not conjecture…..that, if true, this rises to the High Crimes and MIsdemeanors to warrant removal from office…then I will be on board.

      I can’t.

      Even if he has done exactly what he is alleged to have done, I’m not entirely convinced that – while awful – it’s beyond the scope of his lawful authority.

      This “impeachment” is absolutely an exercise in political theater with exactly 0.000% chance of removing him from office. It is designed for one thing and one thing only: to throw meat to the Democratic base and (ideally) embarrass/weaken Trump. The stretch goal is to hurt him enough that he loses the general election to whatever shit-pile Blue Team winds up running. (ok, I think that’s three things, actually).

      That’s not to say he hasn’t done anything “wrong.” I think it’s definitely “WRONG” for him to use his position to encourage foreign leaders to investigate his political rivals and enemies. Even if it’s within his power and authority, even if it doesn’t constitute foreign aid to his campaign.. it’s pretty messed up. I think even you’ll agree with that. He has a pretty well established record of trying to use the law as a cudgel, and I think that’s wrong.

      But that doesn’t necessarily make it a crime.

      • Anybody who uses the law as a weapon is wrong….ambulance chasers, etc.

        I especially despise Corporate raiders…..and venture capitalists that use money and the law for hostile takeovers just to raid assets.

      • And just how do go about investigating corruption by the opposition party without it be labeled as political? Does the president not have a responsibility to root out corruption anywhere it is found? When do we hold the Dems to the same standard? When do we investigate the links between the DNC, Hillary, Biden and the Ukraine wrt to corruption and election meddling?

        So Menendez et. al. can send a letter to the Ukraine threatening to withhold foreign aid if they do not investigate Trump and Manafort without repercussions. This is just normal government business and not extorting a foreign government to meddle in our politics. But when Trump asks for an investigation into admitted extortion using government funds by Biden, it is impeachable. The Left has lost their collective minds.

        • Amen!

        • And just how do go about investigating corruption by the opposition party without it be labeled as political?

          I’d say you have a point, but I’m having trouble thinking of times when he’s pushed for his allies to be investigated for their various scandals and corruptions? Or are we to believe that Red Team is pure as the driven snow?

          Does the president not have a responsibility to root out corruption anywhere it is found?

          I don’t know. Does he? Does that extend to corruption in foreign countries?

          Is that a reason to fixate on the son of your (likely) political rival?

          The Left has lost their collective minds.

          This implies their minds were ever intact, which is objectively false.

          • Does that extend to corruption in foreign countries? Is that a reason to fixate on the son of your (likely) political rival? Yes, to the first part, if it is believed that the foreign aid is not going what it is for……and Yes to part two, being a son of a rival has nothing to do with it.

            Keeping the argument within the framework of corruption using USA funds.

          • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

            Name them!

            It has become fairly obvious to any body without rocks in place of brains that the resources of eth US Government were turned unsuccessfully on both the Trump campaign and the Administration. If that was OK which it apparently was then all bets are off.

            The only significant difference I cans e is there was no cause in the former and in the latter, the parties involved seem to stand accused by their own words.

  32. Having read the phone call documents, I will repeat, I see NOTHING wrong at all. I see nothing wrong with asking for an investigating someone who, had he not shot his mouth off trying to be a tough guy, would not even have been mentioned. Ukraine was a mess BECAUSE of Obama. If I were Trump, I would withhold taxpayer funds UNTIL such time as they show that the corruption is being dealt with correctly.

    The good news is that this is pissing people off because they are tired of the lies coming from the Crats and the liberal media. Go ahead, impeach. If they do they will get slaughtered on election day. Schiff is a liar. The liberal media are liars. Liars always end up failing.

  33. Here is the whistleblowers complaint:
    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/photos/in-photos-the-trump-whistleblower-complaint/ss-AAHSWYj?ocid=spartanntp#image=17

    I still don’t see anything wrong, other than nameless people telling the whistleblower stuff and news reports telling him/her stuff and then using that stuff to invent a complaint.

    Should Trump push Ukraine to investigate the previous Ukraine administration coordinating with the DNC to interfere with the 2016 election? I think so.

    Should Trump want to know if Biden engaged in bribery (withholding a billion in guaranteed loans from the U.S.) to protect his son, as Biden has said himself? Damn right he should.

    Should Trump withhold taxpayer money until the corruption issue in Ukraine has been cleared up? Damn right he should and has the clear authority to do so.

    At least it’s something to chat about 😀

  34. Canine Weapon says:

  35. Messrs. Trump and Giuliani have suggested that Joe Biden pushed for the firing of Ukraine’s general prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, in March 2016 to stop an investigation into Burisma. In Ukraine, government officials and anticorruption advocates say that is a misrepresentation. Neither Mr. Biden nor his son have been accused of any wrongdoing.

    Mr. Biden had called for the ouster of Mr. Shokin because he and others thought that the prosecutor wasn’t aggressive enough.

    […]

    The owner of Burisma, Mykola Zlochevsky, has been under the scrutiny of prosecutors. A minister of natural resources until 2012, Mr. Zlochevsky was accused of improperly granting gas extraction licenses to firms affiliated with him, and at times was investigated for alleged abuse of power, illegal enrichment and money laundering. Mr. Zlochevsky was never convicted of any crimes and denied any wrongdoing. His lawyer also denied that Mr. Zlochevsky ever benefited from his position in government.

    Mr. Shokin had dragged his feet on those investigations, Western diplomats said, and effectively squashed one in London by failing to cooperate with U.K. authorities, who had frozen $23.5 million of Mr. Zlochevsky’s assets. In a speech in 2015, the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey Pyatt, called the Ukrainian prosecutor “an obstacle” to anticorruption efforts, and mentioned the U.K. case, which he said led to the escape of illicit assets.

    […]

    Anders Aslund, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council in Washington, D.C., said that Mr. Biden was making the same demands that other lenders to the Ukrainian government were making.

    “Everyone in the Western community wanted Shokin sacked,” he said. “The whole G-7, the IMF, the EBRD, everybody was united that Shokin must go, and the spokesman for this was Joe Biden.”

    ——-

    Source. (WSJ / paywall)

    • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

      I believed that they actually did not specify that. What they wanted to know was why Biden was so interested in the changing of prosecutors in one of thousands of possibly corrupt entities, It just accidentally so happened his son wa involved with this one. What an interesting coincidence. A one in a million!

      • I believed that they actually did not specify that. What they wanted to know was why Biden was so interested in the changing of prosecutors in one of thousands of possibly corrupt entities, It just accidentally so happened his son wa involved with this one. What an interesting coincidence. A one in a million!

        Yup… interesting, ain’t it..?

        That said, let me turn that around a bit and use your own words: Why is Trump so interested in investigating this one incident in thousands of possibly corrupt incidents, it just so happened that his political rival was involved in this one. What an interesting coincidence. A one-in-a-million!

        Interesting, ain’t it..?

        • If Biden wasn’t on video bragging about threatening to withhold money unless the prosecutor was fired (in 6 hours) then NONE of this would be a point of discussion. Interesting , ain’t it?

          • If he went on video bragging about how he got a shitty / do-nothing prosecutor fired, why should anyone care?

            In point of fact, it appears that the prosecutor WASN’T being proactive on the investigation of Hunter Biden’s company. He failed to comply with the UK and let the company’s president get away with 25mm. Replacing the prosecutor was probably bad for Hunter Biden’s company.

            The G7, the IMF, and the EBRD all wanted this guy fired. What? They were all out to shill for the Vice President’s son? Or is the more likely explanation that the guy was bad at his job or corrupt and it was the right thing to do to get rid of him?

            NONE of this would be a point of discussion if Trump weren’t trying to leverage it in order to taint his political opponent.

            • NONE of this would be a point of discussion if Trump weren’t trying to leverage it in order to taint his political opponent.

              • Glad you agree.

              • Whoops 🙂

                Sure he is because it’s coming from Bidens mouth and that makes it open for political leverage. Why was Biden interfering in another countries business that he has no authority to? I could care less about his drug addict kid, he still has NO RIGHT to interfere in Ukraines business, yet, he did. So YES, it is open for political discussion, Biden big mouth ensured that.

              • Why was Biden interfering in another countries business that he has no authority to?

                This was a matter of some international concern. The G7 and the IMF were involved and had preferences. Maybe Biden, on behalf of the US, had an interest in Ukrainian corruption since we’ve been giving them aid and he wanted to be sure it went where it was supposed to and not to the president of the company who the prosecutor refused to help the UK stop from laundering money?

                he still has NO RIGHT to interfere in Ukraines business, yet, he did.

                So why does TRUMP have the right to interfere in Ukraine’s business?

                So YES, it is open for political discussion, Biden big mouth ensured that.

                Sure.. it’s open for discussion.

                But the discussion should be that the international western powers all wanted this guy gone because he was either corrupt or a do-nothing. It’s not a question of Biden covering up for his son. To suggest the later is a conspiracy theory and a political hit job. And for Trump to push Ukraine (repeatedly) to investigate a conspiracy theory against his political rival is wildly inappropriate to say the least.

              • Biden doesn’t work for the G7 or the IMF, it’s not his fight.

                But seriously, your narrative is coming right from the Liberal media’s mouth, I’ve heard the reports too. They have zero cred, they are just another arm of the DNC. But you believe their bullshit if you want, just don’t expect to be taken seriously when you parrot them 😛

        • Stephen K. Trynosky says:

          Because that and the DNC hacking and the collusion narrative all seem to fall together in that particular piece of real estate. If you read the transcript, you will see it (Biden) was a small item. not an order not a request not even a favor (the favor was directed at something entirely different). It is also a very, very easy thing to prove (Hillary and Bill were much better at it).

          One might also add, that after the horrendous bullshit the Prez has been through these past three years maybe, just maybe it is time for some payback for some real sins. If el jefe wants to go that route, I will not give him the “turn the othetr cheek” advice. They would only slap you there too.

    • The corrupt prosecutor story is falling apart. John Solomon has documents proving that it was a sham. Biden is as dirty as Hillary and needs to drop out.

  36. You know, we are all having issues with threatening to withhold funds if something was not done……This is done in American politics on a routine basis…..holding Federal funds because of something……like California or Texas not following Washington edict……done all the time and still being done.

    • And still and always crap.

      Just a way for the feds to exercise powers they don’t control by leveraging the purse strings they do control.

      JUSTICE Mathius would have none of that shit. He would cut ALL the strings on, say, the federal highway funds, and the feds could either continue to pay or not, but may not condition it on compliance with tangential policies. Say, the national drinking age, mandatory highway speeds in Idaho/Montana, helmet laws, etc. Even if the laws are “good,” JUSTICE Mathius believes that the 10th Amendment is a thing that actually exists.

      • You now believe in state’s rights? You the one government person?

        • I believe in The Rules.

          I may think The Rules are stupid, but judges (note, the above is JUSTICE Mathius’ opinion) have to obey them. Don’t like it, too bad.

          Now, things are a bit more complicated for CITIZEN Mathius. He thinks that states are just administrative sub-divisions of the federal government who got a bit too big for their britches back in the 1860’s and had to learn a lesson the hard way. CITIZEN Mathius doesn’t care one iota for the 10th Amendment and would happily see it eliminated and all those powers given to the feds. (sorry if your head just exploded).

          CITIZEN Mathius is also a big believer, in general, in “the law is the law is the law is the law.” He, generally, believes that just because you don’t like the law doesn’t mean you get to ignore it. HOWEVER, he, unlike JUSTICE Mathius is willing to occasionally throw out the rulebook: (A) over issues of moral imperative such as in the case of illegal immigration; (B) in the case of blatant governmental overreach wherein the government is not serving a legitimate purpose but is rather pandering to a puritans (eg sex, drugs, and rock&roll); and (C) I drive too fast; and (D) wherein the law is too technical or unknowable or arcane or impractical to follow.

          THAT SAID, I’d much rather things be done the right way. If I disagree with the law and it doesn’t fall into one of special categories where I am willing to balk and break the law, I will obey the law. But in those circumstances, of which there are many, I will generally obey, but be pissed about it while wishing they would fix the rules.

          But, Mathius, I hear you say, doesn’t all this make you a raging hypocrite?

  37. moral imperative Hooeee!..Some more of that school learnin’?…….law school 101….FIrst thing I learned in Business Law…..there are no moral imperatives in law. To make law with moral application or emotional stress is a non-starter. The great justice Oliver Wendell Holmes once said, ” Morality has no place in the application of law. It is fine to talk of it over dinner, but justice is blind. The letter of the law shall stand.”

  38. Stephen……Adam Schiff is full of………Schiff.

  39. Hundreds of giant windmill blades are being shipped to a landfill in Wyoming to be buried because they simply can’t be recycled.
    Local media reports several wind farms in the state are sending over 900 un-reusable blades to the Casper Regional Landfill to be buried.
    While nearly 90 percent of old or decommissioned wind turbines, like the motor housing, can be refurbished or at least crushed, fiberglass windmill blades present a problem due to their size and strength.

    “Our crushing equipment is not big enough to crush them,” a landfill representative told NPR.
    Prior to burying the cumbersome, sometimes nearly 300-foot long blades, the landfill has to cut them up into smaller pieces onsite and stack them in order to save space during transportation.
    To make matters worse, the blades aren’t exactly compostable. The Casper Sold Waste Manager tells Wyoming News Now they’ll take hundreds of years to biodegrade.
    “So Casper happens to be, I think it is, the biggest landfill facility in the state of Wyoming. These blades are really big, and they take up a lot of airspace, and our unlined area is very, very large, and it’s going to last hundreds of years.”
    As if that’s not bad enough, NPR reports researchers estimate the US will soon have to grapple with over 720,000 tons of blades over the next 20 years, “a figure that doesn’t include newer, taller higher-capacity versions.”
    So much for saving the environment.

  40. OSLO, NORWAY—The Norwegian Nobel Committee was reportedly considering President Trump as a recipient of its prestigious Nobel Peace Prize, as the president had submitted his name for consideration to them over 67 times. But after reviewing his credentials, the committee concluded that he had not launched enough drone strikes against foreigners to qualify.

    “Yeah, you’ve dabbled in attacks, but what we’re really looking for is someone who’s really committed to a secret drone war,” said a spokesperson for the committee. “Look at previous winners like Barack Obama: now there’s a shining example of someone who achieved world peace not through lame diplomacy but by blowing up foreigners with impunity.”
    Obama also criticized Trump’s drone strike count, saying they were “rookie numbers” and he needs to “pump those numbers up.”
    “My fellow Americans, it represents a danger to democracy when we have a president who’s either unwilling or unable to bomb as many foreigners as I did,” Obama said, reading off a teleprompter. “During my scandal-free presidency, I was able to drop over 26,000 bombs some years.”
    “Those were the days,” he added, going off-script as his eyes glazed over and he recalled the feeling of dark, evil power that coursed through his veins when he ordered drone strikes on foreign nations we were not at war with, innocent civilians, and the occasional American citizen.
    The Nobel Prize committee said they would consider Trump again next year, provided he starts a war with Iran.

  41. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/rep-devin-nunes-left-everyone-baffled-by-claiming-democrats-wanted-nude-pictures-of-trump-during-a-house-intelligence-hearing/ar-AAHTcfG

    Lots of folks who don’t pay attention. He was talking about Schiff and a recording of a phone (prank by Russian comedians). It was funny and Schiff is a moron.

  42. Just A Citizen says:

    I have to give Mr. Trump some credit. This whole Ukraine thing would normally be handled by people outside the oval office. No direct requests, just the message given to the Ukraine President from someone he knew was Mr. Trump’s confidant.

    But not with Trump. Nope. He just steps up and tells the guy himself and even lets him know who he should meet with to get some ideas on what to do next.

  43. Just A Citizen says:

    So a US Senator is deliberately and brazenly using a not for profit group to gather dirt on here opponent for POTUS.

    “Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) is asking the State Department’s top watchdog to investigate if any department officials have worked with Rudy Giuliani following revelations that President Trump’s personal attorney urged Ukraine to open a probe into former Vice President Joe Biden.”

  44. Just A Citizen says:

    This may shock at least one here in particular but the biggest thing I have gotten out of the Ukraine IG transcript/testimony is this.

    What the hell is Mr.Trump doing???? How the hell could his administration still be invested with so many rats???? I mean good grief. Supposedly several people were concerned and contacted the IG with similar “interpretations” of the meaning of the call.

    What he hell were so many people doing listening to this call????????????

    Mr. Trump, I beg you……………clean up your damn Administration and put people in these positions that are more concerned with serving the people than undermining your goals.

    • I wouldn’t put it past Brennan to have been listening in from the Ukraine end.

    • A partisan CIA agent makes a whistleblower report, claiming that people in the administration told him X,Y,Z. Two important keys, partisan and CIA. Trump knows phone calls are being heard. The transcript is meaningless, possibly a test to see if Ukraine is still riddled with corruption. The Crats are making shit up on National TV (Schiff). The Liberal media lies incisively. This is a deep state political hit job. Our government is lost.

      • possibly a test to see if Ukraine is still riddled with corruption

        I love how everything Trump does is a (possible) secret master stroke of genius manipulation.

        The easy and obvious answer is that he messed up one way or another… but nooooo… it’s Dear Leader Trump, so it’s all part of his grand 13-dimensional chess game.

      • partisan and CIA

        I was given to understand that we didn’t know who the whistle-blower is… how are we determining that he’s partisan?

        Or is it just “he says something bad about Dear Leader Trump, therefore he has to be a Democrat shill”?

        • https://www.westernjournal.com/ig-found-whistleblower-signs-political-bias-rival-candidate-according-wh-doc-reported-fox-news/

          I tried to find this on a Liberal news site, but they don’t report truthfully and usually fail to report things that hurt their narrative. Nothing new, of course, but it’s sad that something reported several days ago that may be the undoing of the Crats down the road. We shall see.

          • However, the fact that the inspector general’s report made note of the fact that the whistleblower had a “political bias” for a “rival candidate” to Trump is a disturbing detail for at least two reasons.

            I always love such narrowly cropped quotes.

            This is absolutely meaningless.

            “We note that, while he may have a political bias in favor of a rival candidate in the Republican party, we believe this is unlikely to have influenced his actions and opinions.”

            Maybe that’s what the quote says? I don’t know. Do you?

            I find that YOUR “political bias” means that you are incapable of being objective about anyone on the other side, but I have nothing to support the implication that this is the case of this whistle-blower.

            • Except that we have several political hacks who couldn’t contain their liberalism to remain objective in the FBI and CIA and other agencies, including the IRS. There is a pattern and it is now on the radar and should ALWAYS be questioned now, thanks to the Stzrok’s of the world.

  45. Just A Citizen says:
    • This is quite common when the Liberal media is involved.

      “Fabricated Trump transcript”

      I have a favor I want from you though. And I’m going to say this only seven times, so you better listen good. I want you to make up dirt on my political opponent, understand, lots of it, on this and on that. I’m going to put you in touch with people, not just any people, I’m going to put you in touch the attorney general of the United States, my attorney general, Bill Barr. [Transition] And I’m going to put you in touch with Rudy, you’re going to love him, trust me.

      Jesus H. Christ, how could you NOT get that this is parody.

      Hell, I’m pretty sure I posted almost the exact thing myself here there other day (can’t seem to find it though, so maybe not).

      To act like clear and OBVIOUS parody is a “fabrication” is just bullshit. That’s the lie.

      “newsbusters” is a hack of a website no better than HuffPo.. maybe even worse.

      • If you think that the Chairman’s opening remarks at a House Intel Committee hearing should be using a parody, under such a serious committee hearing is OK, then your an asshat .
        😛

        • Generally, no, I do NOT think that they SHOULD be used this way.

          But they very clearly WERE used this way.

          So to call this a “Fabricated Trump transcript” is total bullshit.

          If the article read Adam Schiff is an asshole who made jokes instead of taking the matter seriously, I’d be on board with you.

          • Since you didn’t see the presentation (I did), you can have a partial pass. But Shchiff wasn’t smiling or laughing , he was speaking in a serious tone as if his little story was truth (his truth.) Regardless, it was a LIE that was entered into the Congressional record by the committee Chairman.

            Here’s the really funny part that no one seems to be saying. The whistleblower complaint is useless. If Trump is impeached and it goes to SCOTUS, they will throw the report out because hearsay is not allowed as evidence in a court proceeding. The Crats will choke on this, but it’s long from over.

            I do wonder how people will react if Trump is actually impeached.

            • Gman,

              But Shchiff wasn’t smiling or laughing , he was speaking in a serious tone as if his little story was truth (his truth.) Regardless, it was a LIE that was entered into the Congressional record by the committee Chairman.

              No.

              You can deliver parody in deadpan. This is not a lie. No one on the committee actually thought those were his words. Everyone understood the point he was trying to make. It’s not a LIE and you damned well know it. You’re just so committed to the ideology that Democrats are evil liars that everything they ever say or do is automatically interpreted in the most nefarious light possible.

              Am I a liar when I say that the colonel is a Texas Longhorn?

              If Trump is impeached and it goes to SCOTUS, they will throw the report out because hearsay is not allowed as evidence in a court proceeding. The Crats will choke on this, but it’s long from over.

              Firstly, it’s a bold assertion, and almost certainly wrong, to suggest that SCOTUS can throw out an impeachment. This isn’t a trial by the judiciary. I would be flabbergasted if you could point me at a single competent legal authority who would make this claim. This is a Constitutional power explicitly vested in the legislative branch – for judicial to override them like that… ? No way.

              Secondly, hearsay can be admitted in court under certain circumstance, but I don’t know the details of that. So your blanket assertion that this wouldn’t be allowed is not something I’m confident in.

              • Adam Schiff is a damned compulsive liar and you know it. He was speaking HIS interpretation of the phone call, it was NOT comedy, or parody, it was Adam Schiff being a freaking asshole Democrat, whish he has been his whole political life. How many times did this asshole get in front of cameras and claim the there is collusion in plain site? Until there wasn’t any at all. No Sir, he was deadly serious with his version of the call. He has no business on any committee in Congress…actually, he has no business in Congress (of course, this could also be said about 99% of those in DC, to be fair).

                Schiff makes Trump look like an Angel 😛

              • He was speaking HIS interpretation of the phone call

                If you want to make this argument I won’t fight you.

                But even then, to state HIS OPINION of the phone call is not a lie.

                It is not “fabricating” a transcript.

                He was conveying HIS INTERPRETATION of what the call meant.

                Now, you could try to make the case that he doesn’t believe what he’s saying, but I think that’s unprovable.

              • He did not preface the statement that it was his interpretation. He just launched into it as if it were true. The purpose was to create a sound bite that could be aired by the MSM and thus mislead the public. Had not the R’s challenged the statement, it would have stood as the truth. Mathius, for one who is quick to label the president as a liar, you are quite slow at seeing the same on your side.

              • Mathius, for one who is quick to label the president as a liar, you are quite slow at seeing the same on your side.

                I disagree.

                I think I call “my side” liars on a more or less constant basis.

              • Just A Citizen says:

                Mathius

                One of Schiff’s own party and fellow committee members chastised him and said this was serious business and “making stuff up” wasn’t going to help.

                Then a news outlet publishes Schiff’s BS “reading of the transcript” as though it were truth.

                Gman is correct on the point that the goal here is to get the narrative out there first. You only have to go to all the supposedly moderate websites and read the comments to see how quickly this garbage sticks to the populace.

              • One of Schiff’s own party and fellow committee members chastised him and said this was serious business and “making stuff up” wasn’t going to help.

                Yea, well, that’s like his opinion, man.

                Schiff was trying to make a point. Maybe bad form, but not a LIE.

                Did he “make stuff up”..? Sure. But he wasn’t conveying a literal truth.. he was conveying his parody interpretation of what Trump was doing.

                This is no more a lie than when I post as an alter ego.. I mean.. not that I would do that.. but if I did…

                Then a news outlet publishes Schiff’s BS “reading of the transcript” as though it were truth.

                Then they messed up or lied.

                If I tell an obvious joke and you report it as literal truth, YOU made the mistake.

                Gman is correct on the point that the goal here is to get the narrative out there first.

                NOW.. here’s where I will cede some ground…. it is possible, though unprovable, that Schiff deliberately wanted to get this soundbite out there with intent of having it get misunderstood. I cannot say this is true, nor can I reject the idea. If – IF – the later is the case, if – IF – he deliberately hoped to mislead people while using parody as “cover,” then… well, I still don’t think it’s a “lie” per say.. maybe it is… I’m not sure.. but it would definitely be unethical whatever it is.

                You only have to go to all the supposedly moderate websites and read the comments to see how quickly this garbage sticks to the populace.

                I said something. Someone else interpreted, reported it badly. Then someone else read that and came to the wrong conclusion. Thus I must have lied in the first place with the deliberate intention of setting this chain of event in motion.

                Maybe he did. Maybe he didn’t. But readers’ reactions aren’t proof of his intent.

  46. Mathius……a suggestion, no political side inteneded (honestly). You seem to want to think that parody and comedy are ok. That they have “license”. I am beginning to think that they are openly hostile and have an agenda away from comedy. I think you are incorrect in trying to claim parody and comedy have “license”…..and I do not care which side it comes from.

    Can you imagine what is going to happen if the Dems do take the White House? It will be Trump redeux….only the names will change. I do not think the Dems have a chance of turning the Senate…and I am not on board with them having the numbers in the house. I do not think that the Dems lose the house but I am predicting a 2 seat gain in the Senate for Republicans……all this means is………………….more investigations. This time from the Senate side.

    • I think there’s a difference between a “joke” and a “lie.” The later is intended to deceive.

      Trump makes jokes… sometimes good ones. By many accounts, he is actually a very funny guy in person.

      Trump also lies. A lot.

      These two things are not the same.

      Schiff was reading into the record a parody version of Trump’s call intended to make his point… to communicate the spirit rather than the literal word… the connotation rather than the denotation. What he was NOT doing is trying to trick the committee into believing that this is what Trump actually said.

      Did he have an “agenda”? You bet your ass.

      Was it particularly “funny”? Nope.

      But was it a “lie”? Did he “fabricate” the transcript? Also no.

      • If Schiffs version is patently different in a negative way than the actual phone call, then it’s a LIE, period.

        • Wow, you’re out to lunch.

          • LMAO! I can’t even deal with your commentary today Mathius. Pass the Trump Aid.

          • Note: Because I used the idiomatic expression “out to lunch” and you are not literally out eating lunch right now, this statement is a LIE. I apologize for LYING and FABRICATING information regarding your lunch schedule. In the future, I will try to more accurate and simply call you crazy.

    • Can you imagine what is going to happen if the Dems do take the White House?

      ::gazes into crystal ball::

      You don’t have to worry about that until 2024.

  47. https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/463307-solomon-these-once-secret-memos-cast-doubt-on-joe-bidens-ukraine-story#.XY02ewYDEV8.twitter

    I doesn’t take much time to prove just how bad the Liberal media actually is. These documents are damning, Biden is likely done.

    • 1.) If the Ukraine prosecutor’s firing involved only his alleged corruption and ineptitude, why did Burisma’s American legal team refer to those allegations as “false information?”

      Because Burisma’s American legal team was benefiting from the corrupt/inept prosecutor. His firing was bad for them.

      2.) If the firing had nothing to do with the Burisma case, as Biden has adamantly claimed, why would Burisma’s American lawyers contact the replacement prosecutor within hours of the termination and urgently seek a meeting in Ukraine to discuss the case?

      Because the new prosecutor was potentially going to investigate them more aggressively and they wanted to do their jobs to protect the company.

      ———

      This article acts like it’s shocking and relevatory that the company’s US-based legal team took actions to protect the company. Biden wasn’t part of this legal team.

      Hundreds of pages of never-released memos and documents — many from inside the American team helping Burisma to stave off its legal troubles — conflict with Biden’s narrative.

      It’s shocking – SHOCKING – that the people whose job it is to serve the corrupt company might conflict with parties whose job it is to eliminate corruption!

      • Just A Citizen says:

        And WHO was placed on the BOD of this CORRUPT COMPANY. A person who had ZERO experience in the business of this company????? A person who’s father just happened to be the Vice President of the United States. The same person placed on the Board of a Chinese company where he also had ZERO experience. Oh, and was paid something like 50,000 per week by the Ukrainian company.

        Here is a better one. WHO replaced this person when the shit hit the fan and the first person quit or was asked to leave?

        • And WHO was placed on the BOD of this CORRUPT COMPANY.

          Yea……

          I don’t know the specifics here, but I would hardly find it surprising in the least if the purpose in putting him on the board was to curry favor with Biden and, by proxy, the US.

          But that’s not the allegation being made.

          If you want to debate THAT charge, I think you’ll find me far more receptive.

          Oh, and was paid something like 50,000 per week by the Ukrainian company.

          I think it was 50k / mo, but that’s still a lot of dough for someone with no pertinent skills / expertise.

          I don’t even make that and, when I’m not SUFA-ing, I’m amazing at my job.

          Here is a better one. WHO replaced this person when the shit hit the fan and the first person quit or was asked to leave?

          You’re right! That is a “better one.” So much better, in fact, that I can’t even figure out what you’re actually asking me.

          ::takes another swig of Red Bull::

          • Just A Citizen says:

            Mathius

            “But that’s not the allegation being made.” Actually Sir, that is the allegation that was first made. That was the allegation, along with reported Ukraine involvement with DNC operatives to scuttle Trump’s candidacy. Which by the way, was supported at the time by testimony of a Ukrainian official.

            That was the allegations and the point creating all the questions surrounding Ukraine, Biden, etc. And it was going on before he announced he was running.

            Read the supposed transcript of the Trump call to Ukraine. He points out that there are a lot of questions going on over “here” and they need to be investigated and cleared up.

            It was only later when Biden bragged about the blackmail he pulled on Ukraine that the accusations of potential conflict of interest cropped up.

            I do have one other point. You keep posting the claims of what all this was about and how the Ukrainians cleared Biden’s son. But these are the same Ukraine folks who were later dismissed as corrupt, just not as bad as the first guys. We are now on the third govt. and its cronies since this all started.

            Claims come out of Ukraine then they are walked back then they crop up again, then they change, then they change back. Meanwhile the US media jumps on any tid bit that fits the narrative they are hoping for. The left to hang Trump. The right to hang people in the Obama administration and those in the Deep State.

            What gripes me about your defense of this via disputing everything from the right media is that you have to ignore the recent past history of FAILURE by the media to get anything right about the Russia story. Let alone its failure to connect the dots over the Dem involvement in the same mess and doing the very thing they were accusing Trump of doing.

            Oh and it bothers me that you seem to just ignore the Deep State issue, which has clearly been exposed, as though it is just some crazy conspiracy theory and attempt to create a hard cover for Mr. Trump.

            P.S. Point of fact. A sitting Congress person cannot be prosecuted for false testimony given on the floor of the house or senate. It is even questionable whether they could be prosecuted for lying about others in a public arena, as long as they are in office.

            • Actually Sir, that is the allegation that was first made.

              Maybe “first,” I don’t know.

              But what I do know is that in the transcript summary of his call, Trump was talking about the firing of the “very good” prosecutor by some “very bad” people and how “unfair” it was.

              So whatever original complaints there might have been, and however legitimate they might be, the CURRENT item is Trump trying to get Biden investigated for the ouster of the prosecutor and, by extension, covering up corruption involving his son.

              As to the “original” complaint of Hunter Biden getting a massive paycheck to sit on a corrupt board for a company he had no expertise in..? Well, the colonel calls this politics as usual, and he may well be right.. but I still think it’s Grade A bullshit and out to be called out. I’m not sure what anyone can do about it.. it is selling access/influence… but it’s not like you can say “relatives of the VP can’t get new jobs.” Not sure where to go with that thread…

              You keep posting the claims of what all this was about and how the Ukrainians cleared Biden’s son.

              I don’t think I’ve ever said any such thing…

              Meanwhile the US media jumps on any tid bit that fits the narrative they are hoping for. The left to hang Trump. The right to hang people in the Obama administration and those in the Deep State.

              I don’t believe in this “Deep State,” but I certainly agree with what you’re saying.

              It sucks.

              And, again, I’m unsure what to do about it.

              Oh, and to add.. the right also want to paint Trump et al as the victim of the left. He does, after all, have to bear all those entirely unwarranted attacks, which he does, lovingly, beneficently, for us. For he so loves America, that he sacrifices himself upon the slings and arrows of the evil socialist left.

              What gripes me about your defense of this via disputing everything from the right media is that you have to ignore the recent past history of FAILURE by the media to get anything right about the Russia story.

              The media sucks.

              The incentive structure sucks.

              Bad incentives breed bad results.

              Let alone its failure to connect the dots over the Dem involvement in the same mess and doing the very thing they were accusing Trump of doing.

              I’m not asserting that the Dems are innocent.

              Though, by the preponderance of evidence which I have seen, Biden did nothing wrong in pressuring the ouster of the corrupt / do-nothing prosecutor. HOWEVER, as mentioned, I do think there’s something fishy with Hunter Biden getting on that board.

              What I AM asserting is that Trump is politically motivated in pushing Ukraine to investigate his political rival. That, even if it’s technically within scope of his power and authority, that he is deliberately and maliciously seeking to pressure a foreign country to investigate his rival in advance of the election. How much corruption do you think there is and has been in Ukraine over the last few years? How much of it involved the US in some way? But he brings up Biden seven or eight times? Come on. This is political hit.

              Oh and it bothers me that you seem to just ignore the Deep State issue, which has clearly been exposed, as though it is just some crazy conspiracy theory and attempt to create a hard cover for Mr. Trump.

              It has?!

              Oh, my.. I must have missed that…

              I will admit that, perhaps, I have a misunderstanding of the Deep State conspiracy theory. I tried to write out my understanding of it a few weeks back and the only feedback I got was Gman being dismissive of it. So, if you can restate the actual theory and support thereof, I reserve the right to revise my opinion(s).

              https://standupforamerica.wordpress.com/2019/04/11/enough-is-enough/#comment-245647

          • Just A Citizen says:

            Here ya go. A nice slow change up, hanging waist high………..

            “”I did read the transcript. It remains troubling in the extreme. It’s deeply troubling,” said Romney to reporters on Wednesday. “Clearly what we’ve seen from the transcript itself is deeply troubling.”

            “If the President asked or pressured Ukraine’s president to investigate his political rival, either directly or through his personal attorney, it would be troubling in the extreme,” Romney tweeted, adding that it’s “Critical for the facts to come out.”

            Interestingly, however – Romney’s 2012 national security adviser sits on the board of Burisma.”

            from Zerohedge

            • Sounds like Burisma is pretty well connected. What’s your point?

              • Just A Citizen says:

                The guy was ex CIA………his replacement that he groomed was Brennan.

                So while he is sitting on the board of a Ukrainian company in the middle of this corruption crappola, he has a personal friend heading the CIA, who just happens to “apparently” be the source of leaks about Ukrainian and Russian connection to Manafort and Trump.

                My point………………… The corruption runs on both sides of the Atlantic and it runs through the past administration as well among many of the ELITES who have been whining about Trump. It is not a Swamp but a CESS POOL

  48. I do not get the idea of the taxes that the left wants to do…….now a tax on all transactions from wall street. I looked up Biden’s Wall Street tax on his website….and it is being “weighed”. So, guess who’s expenses go up with a wall street tax? If you think only traders and the wealthy, you would be wrong. The middle class will be slammed. Their 401(k) and all trade related savings programs will be hit…..the cost will pass onto the plan itself. Unbelievable…and those of you with 401s……another administrative cost to you.

    I do understand and believe it will get nowhere but the thought of it is chilling.

  49. Sir MAthius………………a question…………………..being the lefty resident here……………………

    Something I want to understand…. IF the Dems think that President trump is so guilty….why is there not a straight vote right now of the Hose? Why an inquiry…..take the vote right now. If the POTUS is guilty of malfeasance or guilty of some crime……take the vite right this minute. What do they have to lose other than an election if the house vote fails.

    • It’s political theater. They don’t have enough to win the fight right now, so they’ll go fishing until they can either win or damage him enough to win the election. Straight out of the Starr playbook.

      Trump is very good at maintaining plausible deniability. He is very good at doing the most borderline / questionable and awful-but-lawful things while staying juuuust this side of being convictable. And he has a cult-following of rabid supporters who provide near impenetrable political cover so that he can say or do anything and it will a problem for him.

      It’s that last point that the Democrats are working on (and failing miserably at). They seem to believe that if they can taint him enough.. that if they can just score a direct enough hit.. that the political cover will dissipate. That’s no way to take him down while the Red Team is lined up behind him, but if the Red Team’s support is shaken, then maybe there’s a change.

      What they don’t seem to be able to get through their heads is that Red Team has the biggest persecution complex in the history of the human race. Attacking Red Leader, especially in combination with his martyrdom act, only serves to entrench them further.

      Nothing anyone on Red Team could ever do will ensure Red Base support and turnout like feeding into their persecution / victim complex.

      • I suppose…..God, I hate to think that I am a part of a “cult” following…..but I need another more qualified candidate from anywhere to be exorcised.

        Why don’t you just save us and run for Pres…..I need something to do…something to conquer.

        • I suppose…..God, I hate to think that I am a part of a “cult” following…..

          You are.. on his side.. more than I think is truly “fair” or “balanced,” but you’re not “in the tank” for him. You’re not like someone else I could name who has drunk a near-fatal quantity of the kool-aid.

          Why don’t you just save us and run for Pres…..I need something to do…something to conquer.

          Helllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll no.

          And, anyway, you would not like President Mathius. He’s a raging liberal, you know.

      • *And he has a cult-following of rabid supporters who provide near impenetrable political cover so that he can say or do anything and it will never be a problem for him.

  50. Interesting….according to Alan Dershowitz, reading into the Congressional record a “parody” is, in fact, a lie. He just said that 3 minutes ago on TV.

    • I don’t care if the Pope says it. It’s a parody. It’s not intended to deceive. It’s intended to make a point. That’s not a lie.

      • His point was/is……………………..20 years from now, who knows it is a Parody.

        My thought is, 20 years from now, who cares.

        • Now, admittedly, Schiff is a parody himself…..he pretends to be human. And I am terribly biased against him more than I was against Obama………………

          I would rather give Canine Weapon a fully functional M16.

        • His point was/is……………………..20 years from now, who knows it is a Parody.

          Anyone reading 20 year old congressional testimony probably has a frame of reference.

          My thought is, 20 years from now, who cares.

          No one. We’ll all be dead by then.

  51. Just A Citizen says:

    Mathius

    NOW.. here’s where I will cede some ground…. it is possible, though unprovable, that Schiff deliberately wanted to get this soundbite out there with intent of having it get misunderstood. I cannot say this is true, nor can I reject the idea. If – IF – the later is the case, if – IF – he deliberately hoped to mislead people while using parody as “cover,” then… well, I still don’t think it’s a “lie” per say.. maybe it is… I’m not sure.. but it would definitely be unethical whatever it is.

    Remember when Schiff claimed to personally have documents proving Mr. Trump had colluded with Russians and then later had proof of obstruction??? He did not have any such documents……..but what got printed in the NYTimes and WaPo and how did the major news networks cover his accusations?

    Remember when Schiff claimed his fellow Congressman Nunes was conspiring to cover up Trump crimes then after independent investigation Nunes was cleared?????????

    See a pattern here Mathius?????????????????????????????????

    • Remember when Schiff claimed to personally have documents proving Mr. Trump had colluded with Russians and then later had proof of obstruction??? He did not have any such documents……..but what got printed in the NYTimes and WaPo and how did the major news networks cover his accusations?

      No, I don’t remember this.. there have been so many “scandals” and “revelations” and such claims.. who can keep it all straight anymore? It’s like drinking from a fire hose.

      But, as presented, this would be a LIE.

      Remember when Schiff claimed his fellow Congressman Nunes was conspiring to cover up Trump crimes then after independent investigation Nunes was cleared?????????

      Again, no, I don’t remember. Shockingly, Adam Schiff is relatively low on my life of priorities. (it’s worth noting, however, that it is my firm belief that, with one notable exception, everyone named “Adam” is an asshole).

      Without further information, I cannot opine whether he was “wrong” or whether he “lied.”

  52. Just A Citizen says:

    Everyone should take a deep breath on this Biden and Trump issue. EVERYONE.

    There is and will be no evidence of actual conflict of interest or wrong doing by Biden. Given the noise and questions raised here in the USA, Mr. Trump was completely justified in asking Ukraine to look into the matter more closely. But of course, ONLY because people in the administration created a narrative of Trump using his office for personal gain are we all tied in knots. Not based on Trump’s actual words, but on their feelings about what he was doing.

    Anyway, here is a good summary of the whole story………. well not the whole story but at least the Biden part.

    https://www.businessinsider.com/ukraine-gas-company-burisma-holdings-joe-bidens-son-hunter-explained-2019-9

    I do question how anyone could claim the investigation of Burisma had gone dormant when the prosecutor was on the job for only a year before he was pushed out.

  53. Just A Citizen says:

    Mathius

    I urge you to read this. It contains Solomon’s claims and the back up for them. As I said, anything coming from Ukraine contains tainted smells.

    https://www.redstate.com/elizabeth-vaughn/2019/09/27/newly-obtained-documents-burismas-legal-team-state-dept-ukrainian-government-torpedo-joe-bidens-story/

    • We do not call them illegal aliens down here….we call them for what they are…..wet backs, skimmers, or runners. Unless granted some sort of status, just showing up at the border does not make them a legal immigrant…..it simply makes them….illegal immigrants if they try to swim (wetbacks) the border, climb a barrier (skimmers) or cross the border on dry ground (runners). We use wetback in place of swimmer because over a radio, swimmer is too close to skimmer.

      Wet back is not derogatory..they actually have wet backs. Skimmers is not derogatory because they “skim” to the top of the fence. Runners is not derogatory because they are, in fact, running…..and we do not say it in “hate”.

      Just like in Vietnam…we did not get on the radio and say, ” We have North Vietnamese Regulars in the wire.”………takes too much time…..we have zips in the wire. We did not care if they were NVA, Vietcong, Pathet Lao or whatever…they were in the wire and we did not have time to identify.

      Like wise, on the border, we do not take the time to say, ” Illegal immigrant at coordinates x-y-z. There is no identification. We simply assign the name to the type of illegal entry we are looking for….Wetback, skimmer, runner……very simple and quick.

  54. Interesting just on the news….Yes, Mathius, it was Fox News…but I will report it anyway…..

    Just out…….they seem pretty sure that they have nailed down the “leaker”, which is not NOT a whistle blower because they posted the COngressional rules on what constitutes a whistle blower……it explicity states in those rules that second hand information is not allowed in a formal whistle blower complaint. In addition, the complaint was writted in very concise legal terms, which casts a lot of doubt…but the main issue now is that the Congressonal Rules, according to what was posted, say that any second hand or third party evidence does not rise to the whistle blower protections.

    If this is the case, then, it is not a whistle blower issue…the man becomes a leaker. If this is the case, and since a Mexico phone call and an England phone call were leaked before….The PResident has ordered that all phone calls now be classified and stored elsewhere to prevent leaks.

    Interesting turn……If true, this is falling apart. And now, the POTUS can claim he is indeed looking out for National Security because of previous leaks.

    • I have always wondered how one can share classified info with lawyers who are not cleared to receive such. Hillary did it. It appears it was done here as well. Sharing such with a lawyer who does not have a security clearance is a leak in and of itself.

    • Congressonal Rules, according to what was posted, say that any second hand or third party evidence does not rise to the whistle blower protections.

      Not particularly relevant to THIS case, but that sounds like a stupid rule.

      The PResident has ordered that all phone calls now be classified and stored elsewhere to prevent leaks.

      Yea, nothing bad can come of that.. maybe he can record everything on tapes?

      T-Ray: I have always wondered how one can share classified info with lawyers who are not cleared to receive such. Hillary did it. It appears it was done here as well. Sharing such with a lawyer who does not have a security clearance is a leak in and of itself.

      I wonder this myself… but then again, how does one “report” illegal / malfeasant activity to relevant legal authorities or seek legal advice on classified matters otherwise? Seems a bit of a damned if you do, damned if you don’t.

      No answers here.. just an observation.

      • Not particularly relevant to THIS case, but that sounds like a stupid rule Of course it is relevant….anything said does not rise to whistle blower status….it reverts to a he said she said. If I understand correctly, the whistle blower complaint is 100% heresay.

        I have always wondered how one can share classified info with lawyers who are not cleared to receive such… Yes…and Mathius is also correct. Might as well not have classified…..however, all this goes away with one jail sentence of 20 years. And any leaker of classified information goes to prison for 20 years…do not pass go..do not collect 200 bucks.

        • And if you classify something illegal / malfeasant? How does one blow the whistle on that?

          You know a great deal more than me about the systems in place.

          • Damn, Mathius……great question.

            In the military, there is a watchdog on classified material. As a commander, I could not simply classify something…..I can do it temporarily to prevent exposure but it still goes through a formal process of remaining classified. I could only classify “eyes only” until I got a full classification through. There are fast tracks to do this in the event of life or death.

            Trump could do the same thing. He can classify confidential or eyes only until such a time as the formal procedure permanently issues the proper classification. However, as a Commander, and I am sure as CIC, Trump can do the same….if I felt that the normal classification route is compromised, then there is an additional procedure I can go through until such is ruled on by higher command.

            Trump is the CIC…..the big bear….and if he wants to shit in the woods, he can. BUT, even as POTUS, what he cannot do is issue a permanent classification. He DOES NOT, even as POTUS, have the authority to permanently classify something. He can request it. Many people think that as POTUS….he can simply say …”This is top secret” and have it be so. He can request Top Secret and give his reasons for it but he does not have final authority.

            Now, here, it gets real tricky. As a Commander, I can request it to be “rat holed” until such a time as the incident is finished or no longer poses a threat. I am quite sure he can do the same being the big dog. SO…if several of his phone calls and transcripts were leaked previously, to prevent such leaks in the future, he can issue “eyes only”. This prevents disclosure for a particular period of time and authorizes non disclosure to Congress for a set period of time. Not indefinitely. He can justify this on National Security reasons and it does not require additional approval for 180 days….this is a long time.

            As a commander, I can do the same. I can make a judgement that a certain thing my intelligence found out to be eyes only…..and it stalls the procedure of classification for 180 days. I never had to wield that kind of power….but I did have it. I played by the rules and to my knowledge, I did not have to worry about leaks.

            • Now, to go further to the question of who has the clearance to see things. Need to know is the qualifying criteria…..it is that simple. Does the person or persons have a “need to know”. This is not subjective. I have seen a Command Sgt Major demoted and lose his security clearance for merely reading something inadvertantly without a need to know.

              • So here’s the question: Trump had a number of conversations. In them, he repeatedly brought up Biden / Biden. Trump says “fuck you, these are classified now!” But Bob hears from someone who was listening in that these were super tit-for-tat blah blah blah blah illegal blah blah blah political motivation blah blah blah.

                Bob has no first hand knowledge. Only what he heard from people who DO have first hand knowledge.

                Trump says no one gets to know for 180 days.

                For our arguments’ sake, lets pretend that threshold crosses the election, so it’s a critical issue.

                How does BOB proceed?

              • Its being reported that there are numerous mistakes in the complaint vs. The transcript. I have not studied this yet, but IF true, there may not be any reliable heresay at all. Just made up bullshit from a political hack maybe?

                I’ll look into it later, but this looks like every other political hitjib the Crats have tried….falling apart faster than they can keep track.
                Oh, p.s. Schiff is a fu#$%ng liar. 😛

          • Just A Citizen says:

            Point of order in this discussion. Per the info presented so far, the conversations were not “classified” by anyone. They were simply moved to a server which only has classified access. So if this is true, and the conversations are not classified themselves, and they are in fact subject to review by Congress or anyone else, the Administration should have to release them.

            Point of order on Bob. Bob is not the whistleblower so Bob should do nothing. Except maybe contact the actual whistle blower to talk him/her into going directly to the IG. The whistle blower process is designed to protect the person uncovering wrong doing and I do not think classifying the information prevents them from reporting on the wrong doing. They may not be able to copy documents or make them public but they can go through the process. Bob is free to contact the IG or even the Congressional Committee in charge of the agency or issue. CONFIDENTIALLY. Bob just doesn’t get official protection as a whistle blower.

            Here is the kicker, the Committee is supposed to keep the investigation into the allegation CONFIDENTIAL, until it can be determined to be valid or not.

            • Point of order on Bob. Bob is not the whistleblower so Bob should do nothing. Ehhh…not quite. Bob reports it to his boss….he is out of it.

              I do not think classifying the information prevents them from reporting on the wrong doing. correct

              They may not be able to copy documents or make them public but they can go through the process Correct

              Bob just doesn’t get official protection as a whistle blower. Correct, nor is he implicated an anything either.

  55. Equine Weapon says:

    😦 😦 😦

    https://www.statnews.com/2019/09/23/what-to-know-about-eee/

    (2nd attempt because gman is a fascist)

  56. Sir Mathius,,,,,,Bob simply goes to his immediate supervisor and report what he heard. There is no other avenue of approach. But, in the military, if someone came to me and I am the commander….I will ask from whom did you hear this…..if I get the answer I cannot or do not want to implicate the source…..it will carry no weight with me and die right there. If the complaint or infraction is enough to warrant gossip….then the person spreading same should have the balls to stand up and say I THINK THIS IS WRONG. As a commander, I am not bound to “look into this”….it is not my purview. However, as a commander, I would report the same thing to my boss….

  57. ALSO….Trumps argument to shifting to the server that is classified is compelling. Prior leaks of his telephone conversations have been leaked before. Now, you send them to a server where only certain personnel have access…..narrows the leaks.

  58. Canine Weapon says:

    Here.. you all should get a kick out of this…

  59. Stephen K. Trynosky says:

    It is a shame in many ways that Alan Drury, Pulitzer Prize winner for “Advise and Consent” is long dead. Mr. Drury had a knack of predicting where left wing politics in this country was headed. For those who remember, the “controversy” in the book was the selection of a former left leaning gentleman as Secretary of Defense by a dying President of the US. . The more conservative forces in the country, not thinking him hard enough to stand up to the expansionist Soviet Union opposed his nomination. The President desperately wanted an accomodation with the USSR as his legacy and was convinced his VP was unwilling to follow his lead and was too “weak” to even be President.

    The book and film excellently portrayed what was to come. In this case the President was fairly obviously a moderate to liberal democrat, his VP, a more conservative one and the Republicans were traditional moderate conservatives.

    There were however evil characters in the book including an incredibly slimy ultra liberal California Senator (Fred Van Ackerman) whom I must say, Adam Schiff could play today. They were willing to go to any length to see the vote go their way. There always was a question as to whether the VanAckerman types were really Communists themselves. They obviously thought that the nomination of a former fellow traveler was a good idea. They certainly thought he could be controlled one way or another.

    The Senate was closely divided on both intellectual and party lines and it seemed the approval or failure would come down to a small number of votes, perhaps only one. There was a young Senator from Utah, a Mormon, nominally a moderate conservative who was the swing vote. This young family man had, in his youth during WW 2 a brief fling with another soldier. He then cast off that demon and became a straight arrow, beloved by all. Sen. VanAckerman and his allies uncovered that particular secret and used it to blackmail the Utah Senator leading to his suicide.

    Perhaps the only real reason the nomination failed was that in addition to disgusting some moderates by what the VanAckermnan side had done, the President died during the final vote. Members of his party, feeling they no longer needed to be loyal to a dead man, voted to defeat the nomination and in the aftermath the perceived “weak” VP came into his own and demonstrated that loyal as he was to his late Chief, was his own man and had the same questions about the reliability of the nominee.

    Drury demonstrated the dog eat dog nature of US Politics but also I thought when I read his novels in the mid 1960’s had a sense of where politics was going in this country. Four more books followed where the left became increasingly radical. Taking both their masks and gloves off in fights to follow including those over a war similar to Viet-nam.

    An incident in a later book sticks in my mind to this day. A conservative President is assassinated, someone along the lines of a Reagan (long before Reagan did get elected), as the funeral cortege drives towards Arlington, they are met with protestors throwing eggs, rotten fruit and chanting in unison, “Into the ditch with the son of a bitch”. Folks, we are there!

    Casting for the film was superb. With Henry Fonda as the nominee, Franchot Tone as the President, Lew Ayres as the VP, Charles Laughton as the leader of the conservative forces, Walter Pidgeon as the minority leader and Don Murray as the Senator from Utah.

  60. Stephen K. Trynosky says:

    Hey G, I wrote a piece on the book “Advise and Consent” which seems to be in the nether world. want to see if you can find it?

      • Good Find

      • I was curious why the complaint was addressed to Burr and Schiff and not to the IG or DI. Could it be that Schiff had a copy of this or participated in its writing as in the Ka vanaugh case?

        • Just A Citizen says:

          T-Ray

          I believe that is because that is the procedure for complaints reaching the high degree of concern. They are supposed to go to the respective committees overseeing the agency.

          I am wondering why it went to the IG, given that the form only suggest it go to the IG when classified information is involved.

          Think we are missing some needed info on their process.

      • Just A Citizen says:

        Well let me just add one leeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeetle thang.

        The IG in his letter cited the relevant paragraphs of this form to justify his need to act. So let’s look at the applicable paragraph, or in other words, option for the complaint.

        “☐ A serious or flagrant problem, abuse, violation of law or Executive Order, or deficiency relating to the funding, administration, or operations of an intelligence activity involving classified information, but does not include differences of opinion concerning public policy matters. STOP and contact the ICIG Hotline (855-731-3260) to determine appropriate submission procedures for disclosures containing classified information.
        ☐ A false statement to Congress, or a willful withholding from Congress, on an issue of material fact ”

        Note the category or types of offenses that are include in the checkbox selection. Flagrant problem, abuse, violation of law or Executive Order, or……….. There is not problem, abuse or violation of law or Executive Order cited. Only an accusation based on the opinions of the second hand whiners/howlers. Note that the IG simply restated this section of this paragraph in his letter. Making it look like a “flagrant problem, abuse, violation of law or Executive Order was the issue. But without any evidence other than people are telling him that they are concerned.

        Also note that this episode does not and can not fall under the remaining descriptions of this paragraph. But the IG used the end of this last part “but does not include differences of opinion concerning public policy matters” in his statement. Tying the front to the end while leaving out the entire middle of the full requirement description.

        One other note: This may not apply to intel agencies but the one I worked for would have to got through the CFR process to change any official forms. They are not just done in the dark by the agency without some input from somebody outside the agency.

  61. Penn State 38 Maryland 00000000000000000 and it is only halftime.

  62. Just A Citizen says:
%d bloggers like this: