That may have been YOUR point, but mine was ease of use...

CW agreed with me.. :D

Troo...

But simply right-clicking on a link is easier still..

The point was that "scrolling back to try and find the comment" is an unnecessary problem of your own making when anyone can easily perform a simple search using the provided comment number rather than depending on being spoon-fed a link. :)

But simply right-clicking on a link is easier still..

Humble request..

Saves time scrolling back to try and find the comment.. :D

CW provided the name and comment number flyswat [57] -

Rather than scrolling, you can do a quick search by copying and pasting (or typing) the comment number into the search box.

Ctrl F [57]

Just a minor quibble..

Easy to do a search, though. :)

TRANSLATION: FLAKE IS NOW TOEING THE DUMBOCRAT PARTY LINE SO NOW HE IS OUR BESTEST BUDDY

Of course, when scumbag Democrat James Hodgkison went on a GOP hunting spree and Flake had run from victim to victim rendering aide, no one here applauded Flake's actions then..

Back then he was just another Rethug giving aid and comfort to other Rethugs...

But NOW..... Now that Flake is singing ya'all's tune, now ya'all LOVE Flake..

Comey... Mueller... Sessions... Now Flake..

I am sensing a pattern here..

One that is too blatant and obvious to overlook...

IMHO Dunkirk has some of the finest aerial combat footage ever. The interior cockpit shots are particularly good, especially the gauges (tap tap...nice) the hydraulics and the obsession with fuel level. Ditching and crash landing scenes were also first rate.

The main historical inaccuracy, maybe bias is a better term, has to do with the "
Little Ships." With very few exceptions, pleasure craft were not manned by their owners. The British wanted tonnage, not amateur sailors. Naval ratings and professional civilian sailors crewed nearly all small craft. Lifeboats (shore based rescue lifeboats) were especially useful. The boat manned by Rylance seems to be a composite of 3 historical exceptions to the rule.

I certainly don't love Sessions. But Trump has done one thing I never thought would happen -- I am beginning to feel a little sorry for Sessions.

Sessions screwed up..

Trump is holding him accountable...

It's what good leaders do...

Different thing.

Not really..

Feeling sorry for someone implies sympathy..

If Sessions was the racist scumbag the Left (and many Weigantians) said he was, how could ya feel sympathy for him??

You would say, "Serves the scumbag racist right!!"

"afw'ein Mnhei'sahe"
-Romulan Proverb

My point, though, is simple..

As with Director Comey, the Left's attitude towards Sessions changed 180 degrees SOLELY based on the actions of President Trump...

How is this not hypocritical???

I promise I'll keep this idea in mind in the future... anything to make the site easier to use...

Danke... :D

I tend to agree with you on this one, too. There's such a thing as historical accuracy...

Yep...

Let's see if your side can live up to your expectations....

I have no side... My "side" is the United States Of America...

Having said that, yea... It would be nice if the OTHER side could live up to what is required of them as well..

Yeah, and get back to me when GOPers release their "deficits don't matter" tax/budget plan.

Let's see if your side can live up to your expectations....

-CW

I tend to agree with you on this one, too. There's such a thing as historical accuracy...

"Foyle's War" had a good episode on Dunkirk, without all the spectacular SXF.

-CW

That is actually a good idea. Here you go:

http://www.chrisweigant.com/2017/07/31/kelly-in-mooch-out/#comment-106835

I promise I'll keep this idea in mind in the future... anything to make the site easier to use...

:-)

-CW

But there is the REAL DEAL...

On health care, double down on the failing ObamaCare disaster.

On campaign finance reform, pretend to be against Super PACs, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

That's the Dumbocrat Party in a nutshell..

No wonder they can't win elections...

By and large...

As with most true and valid rules, there are exceptions..

Did you hear that Left Wingers are complaining because the movie DUNKIRK was "male-centric" and didn't have any strong female leads??

Get that!??

The movie was sexist because this WORLD WAR II battlefield movie didn't have any strong female leads!

Gods, please deliver us from moronic political correctness... :^/

:D

The rules for military are different..

EVERYONE of higher ranks is "sir" or "ma'am"...

For a person in the military, addressing a person of higher rank by their rank as opposed to "sir" or "ma'am" is tantamount to an insult or disrespect..

On another note, I wish we could use the STAR TREK format and just refer to everyone as "sir".... Make things so much easier...

flyswat [57] -

First off, welcome to the site! Your first comment was held for moderation, but from now on you should be able to post comments instantly.

Humble request..

When you welcome a new commenter to the site, can you put a link to their comment??

Saves time scrolling back to try and find the comment.. :D

Just a minor quibble..

Trading in a Mooch for a General Kelly is "declining"???

Heh.

Thank you.. I have my moments.. :D

Comey called up Kelly and talked him out of it. Kelly's devoted to the country and the Constitution, not Trump, from all I hear.

I am not saying yer wrong.. I am simply saying that, from all that I have read, General Kelly is completely devoted to the President Of The United States..

If there is anything out there that says otherwise.....

"I am all ears"
-Ross Perot

Cite??

If you can't back up this claim, then the claim is not valid and is false..

:D

Flake's been all over the place hawking his book. He's getting increasingly worried about his chances next year, methinks.

After all, he wasn't one of the "no" votes last week...

Balthasar [95] -

Saw a tweet this week, with a link to the Mooch firing story:

"Best season of Hunger Games ever this year!"

Heh.

OK, that's it! All caught up!

:-)

-CW

Trading in a Mooch for a General Kelly is "declining"???

On what planet???

OK, hard to argue with that one!

:-)

Heh.

Michale [19] -

OK, now you're back to losing again. LizM's right. Comey called up Kelly and talked him out of it. Kelly's devoted to the country and the Constitution, not Trump, from all I hear.

neilm [22] -

Seemingly the script writers for SNL are damn near suicidal over the news "The Mooch" has gone. This would have been comedy genius.

Yeah... what might have been...

SNL Weekend Update is doing some sort of mid-summer thing next week, so they'll get at least one crack at it... Aug 10th I think?

neilm [24] -

Good list. Except for the last item. I think if Mueller is fired, what will happen is Congress would immediately appoint him "Independent Counsel" (rather than "Special Counsel") and the investigation wouldn't skip a beat... I've heard many Republicans threatening this, even. If Congress appoints an IC, then Trump can't fire him, period.

LizM [tangent] -

Hey, here's a link for you:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2017/08/01/sanders-preps-month-long-campaign-for-single-payer-health-care-with-legislation-to-follow/?utm_term=.e035f3b1a5e3

Bernie's about to begin his single-payer rollout...

Michale [28] -

Dream on, Kemosabe.

Michale [32] -

You mean, of course: "Not screwing up the WS rally that began a year into Obama's term..."

There! all fixed!

:-)

TheStig [33] -

Marines build men? Wasn't Steve Austin from the Air Force? Or maybe NASA? I'm confused...

Heh.

Michale [44] -

I certainly don't love Sessions. But Trump has done one thing I never thought would happen -- I am beginning to feel a little sorry for Sessions.

Different thing.

neilm [48] -

Starr couldn't be fired because he was an Independent Counsel. Just like, if Trump did fire Mueller, Congress could immediately appoint him as IC, and Trump would be powerless to do anything about it.

TheStig [58] -

You just HAD to use that particular analogy, didn't you?

Heh.

LizM [61] -

Senate confirmed Wray today. Overwhelmingly, I believe. McConnell is going to use his extra 2 weeks in August to move on a lot of confirmation votes, from what I hear.

neilm [79] -

Here's the only Scottish joke I know:

An Englishman, an Irishman, and a Scotsman walk into a bar and all order a pint. As the pints are served, three flies waft down and alight on the three pints.

The Englishman (in a snobby posh accent) says: "Barman -- can you draw me another pint -- this one has a fly in it!"

The Irishman rolls his eyes, fishes into his pint, pulls the fly out and tosses it aside. He then proceeds to drink deep.

The Scotsman picks up the fly in his pint, holds it over the glass, and yells: "Spit it oot, ye wee bastard -- SPIT IT OOT!"

Heh.

Seems like a good place to end this comment...

-CW

Yeah, especially since one of the WH interview questions must now be: "You do have your own personal lawyer, don't you?"

Heh.

Paula [2] -

One positive note -- Kelly's apparently already called both Pelosi and Schumer, in an effort to build some sort of relationship with congressional Dems. More than the Trump WH has yet done, so like I said, a cautiously optimistic note.

But you're right, if Kelly lasts 6 months, I for one will be shocked.

Paula [3] -

Had to have been someone on that AF1 flight. The details of where Trump actually was in the plane kinda pointed to someone in the air with Trump while it happened.

altohone [10] -

The official line is Kelly wanted "a clean slate." The unofficial line so far is pretty close -- that Kelly demanded Mooch's removal as a condition of taking the job, and Trump knuckled under.

michale [15] -

So... he's earned "General" but Barbara Boxer is a [insert misogynist slur] for demanding to be called "Senator"?

Heh. Couldn't resist.

Actually, I kinda agree with you on this one, more on your second point than the first. He's not currently in the military, is he? Therefore the "General" is just a courtesy title (like referring to Bubba and Dubya still as "President" not "ex-president").

The Washington rule is, as far as I understand it, that the proper title to use is (in order of importance): Your current job, your previous job if retired. The only real exception to this rule is that when two titles could be appropriate (current and former, for instance), the higher-ranking one is used.

By this rule, he would properly be White House Chief of Staff Kelly. WHCoS outranks pretty much any military title, I think.

BUT (and here's where I agree with you a little) it is kind of confusing to just call him Kelly, because there's already a Kellyanne.

OK, to end on, funny joke from one of the late-night guys last night: "John Kelly, a man with two first names, will replace a man without a single recognizable name: Reince Priebus."

Heh.

OK, I'm going to post this so I don't lose it and continue in the next comment...

-CW

This is something that a lot of Republicans I know have done, and in fact Trump's wealth was the reason that some of them gave for voting for him.

When I've tried to point out that wealth & brains are NOT necessarily connected (Einstein & Tesla, for example), I only get back looks of disbelieving pity.

Scaramucci was one who brought that attitude with him to Washington. In a January 23, 2017 article for New York Magazine, he says that the "thing I have learned about these people in Washington is they have no money. So what happens when they have no fucking money is they write about what seat they are in and what the title is. Fucking congressmen act like that. They are fucking jackasses".

Clearly, he had no idea of how American government works. The downside to this is that when the government does assert its authority to regulate Wall Street behavior, if feels capricious and arbitrary to guys like him because they don't understand its basis: "..what happens in Washington is they will stab you right in the chest with a smile on their face," says Scaramucci, "It’s like the Game of Thrones and the Hunger Games screenwriters got together with the writers of House of Cards and they made a story."

It's tragic: folks like the Mooch are just the most public examples of "constitutionally impaired" Republicans. I understand that the GOP now considering ways to help us all donate to these misunderstood and unfortunate victims of 'wealth delusion'. heh.

Long-term processes of income redistribution from working people to everyone else, non-working welfare recipients as well as the very rich, had been evident for at least two decades.

So the rich don't actually work and nor does anyone receiving welfare? That is a weird trait for two such different groups to share!

What makes your link so good and worth reading?

Care to summarize ...

Great, another anonymous commenter.

Well, welcome aboard and all that ...

First off, welcome to the site! Your first comment was held for moderation, but from now on you should be able to post comments instantly.

Just limit yourself to one link per comment, as multilink comments are held for moderation automatically.

Second, thanks for the link, I will check it out!

:-)

-CW

Who could blame the people who felt abandoned and ignored by the major parties for reaching in despair for a candidate who offered oversimplified answers to infinitely complex questions and managed to entertain them in the process? With hindsight, it is clear that we all but ensured the rise of Donald Trump.

I will let the liberals answer for their own sins in this regard. (There are many.) But we conservatives mocked Barack Obama’s failure to deliver on his pledge to change the tone in Washington even as we worked to assist with that failure. It was we conservatives who, upon Obama’s election, stated that our No. 1 priority was not advancing a conservative policy agenda but making Obama a one-term president—the corollary to this binary thinking being that his failure would be our success and the fortunes of the citizenry would presumably be sorted out in the meantime. It was we conservatives who were largely silent when the most egregious and sustained attacks on Obama’s legitimacy were leveled by marginal figures who would later be embraced and legitimized by far too many of us. It was we conservatives who rightly and robustly asserted our constitutional prerogatives as a co-equal branch of government when a Democrat was in the White House but who, despite solemn vows to do the same in the event of a Trump presidency, have maintained an unnerving silence as instability has ensued. To carry on in the spring of 2017 as if what was happening was anything approaching normalcy required a determined suspension of critical faculties. And tremendous powers of denial.

Maybe Flake is the Republican voice of reason we've been praying for. He's not perfect, but it's a start.

Maybe because anything anyone has said in an attempt to defend Trump has been shown to be bullshards by Trump's own admissions. See the Comey firing as a perfect example of this. No one can speak as to Trump's motives for his actions because typically Trump doesn't even know why he does things at the moment he does them!

Speaking of the Comey firing, Trump reportedly told the Russian Ambassador that firing Comey would remove the pressure that the Russian investigation was causing him. Why? The investigation would continue unless the White House instructed the DOJ to kill it.

Which leaves the question: Did Trump order the DOJ to kill it when they fired Comey or did Rosenstein act In their hesitation to do so when he named Mueller as special prosecutor?

Here Josh Marshall talks about the timeline involving Blotus, Junior, Putin and the meeting stories:

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/did-president-trump-dictate-the-false-statement-or-was-it-president-putin

In addition to the issues raised at TPM, there's just the simple matter that Blotus and several of his underlings, and Junior are once again caught out in a lie. Blotus' lawyer Sekulow lied to Chuck Todd and George Stephanopoulis.

You're one of my favourites, too. :)

To give proper credit, Steven Colbert coined the acronym "BLOTUS" and it stands for Big Liar Of The United States.

POTUS IS BLOTUS AND KNOWS IT - RESIST is a catchy demonstration chant that may come in handy if and when we enter Constitutional Crisis Phase of the Trump Sadministration.

You may also enjoy using the acronym SLOTUS in reference to Don Trump Jr. It stands for: Slow Learner Of Trump's Unqualified Sons.

I assume you refer here to the statement Comey gave following his investigation of Hillary Clinton and her use of a private email server and handling of classified information.

This case was hardly a normal case. Indeed, this was a highly politicized case in a hyper-partisan environment with a presidential election process underway and, therefore, an extremely high public interest involved.

I fully accept Comey's explanation before a congressional committee that he was left with very bad options and he chose the least of the bad and the most responsible option.

The only evidence I have are Comey's public statements.

I would also like to know what facts you think Comey deviated from ...

What "facts" did Comey deviate from???

Re Comey

I feel that Comey tried to be "fair" to 45 expecting, as too many people did, that he had no chance of winning.

His mistake was deviating from the "just the facts" approach that would have served him far better.

I'm happy, as usual, to be corrected if you have reliable evidence to the contrary.

Thanks for having a good self deprecating sense of humor. Kudos.

Just got back from my little sister's Birthday party in Scotland. Happy. Happy.

As one of my favorite posters keep up the effort. Appreciated!

And you people wonder why it's ODUMBO and DUMBOCRATS all the time???

Like I always say..

I don't make the rules.. I just play by ya'all's....

Separately, as a web developer I run into people constantly who underestimate what's involved in doing web work -- and the worst are often people who have unrelated, but technical, skills. They think: "I'm good at this, so if I spent half an hour I'd know everything there is to know about web development." It's a funny kind of arrogance.

Blotus has this idea in spades - he thought he could roll into D.C. and just order everything to change because that's how he ran his family business. He had no conception about the terrain he was walking into, and no respect for people who have skills he doesn't. He also seems to think people being rich makes them automatically qualified to do anything. He ranks people by their wealth -- which may be part of his love-affair with Putin. Putin may be the richest man in the world, and his money came via crime. Blotus doesn't care HOW you get money, just whether you do.

People who are knowledgable but not rich are meaningless to Blotus. So he puts rich people who pledge loyalty into jobs THEY aren't qualified for. And THEY, like him, think they're qualified because they're rich/successful in unrelated areas. Peter Principles in action.

Remember he quite literally thinks/thought his money-inheriting-real-estate-magnate son-in-law was going to just wave his hands and fix every problem under the sun.

I don't think Blotus' choices of incompetents is deliberate - he picks badly-qualified people because he is one.

Yea... Cuz yer such an expert... :D

Where was all your Russia concern when NOT-45 was selling out the US to Russia???

Non-existent...

Why not??

We all believed that when we elected Odumbo...

A critical relationship will be that of General Kelly and Bannon, a former Naval officer. Bannon doesn't seem to be in line with a 'buttoned up' operation, but might give deference to an officer of superior rank, even all these years later.

Face reality, people..

General Kelly is going to fix the problems..

Then ya'all will have NOTHING to bitch about.. :D

A critical relationship will be that of General Kelly and Bannon, a former Naval officer. Bannon doesn't seem to be in line with a 'buttoned up' operation, but might give deference to an officer of superior rank, even all these years later.

I agree. Recent reports of conversations between Ambassador Kislyak and Moscow describing details of his meetings with Sessions suggest to me that they might have been both using and simultaneously setting up the Trump transition team. Surely Kislyak knew that others would be listening in on a phone call - it's in 'Introduction to Spying 101', I'm sure.

I heard former CIA chief John McGlaughlin describe the Russians recently as "cynical". It feels apt.

[68] TheStig: Yep. Blotus made up the story.

Also, fun story, FOX is being sued by the detective who was working on the Seth Rich murder, for all their lies about that. Blotus also implicated -- suit alleges Blotus was consulted and the lies and specifically directed they be pushed and Hannity -- FOXes scummiest resident scumbag fully complied. http://www.npr.org/2017/08/01/540783715/lawsuit-alleges-fox-news-and-trump-supporter-created-fake-news-story?utm_campaign=storyshare&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social

ANd you can TRUST WaPoop because they have NEVER been wrong before!!! :D

hehehehehe

I wish ya'all could step back and see how HILARIOUS ya'all are... :D

Trump Dictated Misleading Statement on Son's Meeting With Russians.

Advisors fear it could put him and others in legal jeopardy.

To be clear, the article alleges that D. Trump ghost dictated his son's response that was delivered to the Senate. Since Jr's document had complete sentences I am assuming somebody, probably not Jr, translated the gist of the transcript into standard English.

Anyway, Trump staff is leaking, while other Trump staff is lamenting Trump Sr. shooting another toe off his already mangled foot.

{chiirrrrrpppppp} {{{chhiiiiirrrrrrppppp}}}

Ah yes.... VaporWare....

Who could have POSSIBLY predicted that!??

Oh... wait.. :D

:D

U.S. eases environment laws for Mexico border wall near San Diego

WASHINGTON, Aug 1 (Reuters) - The U.S. Department of Homeland Security said on Tuesday it would waive environmental and related laws in order to expedite building security-related barriers and roads along the nation's border with Mexico near San Diego.
http://news.trust.org/item/20170801134803-a4w11

Making America GREAT Again!!!

Yea??? Then why is OdumboCare imploding???

how to build as well as Obama did.

Odumbo didn't build that!!

BBBWWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Trump, ever the dilettante, apparently came into office believing that governing requires little more than a political base and a few policy prescriptions, much like someone who might believe that building skyscrapers requires little more than a plot of land and an artist's rendering.

Perhaps that's the way that Fred Trump left the Trump organization for his heir - as an idiot-proof pyramid of skills that allows Don to pick out the colors of the drapes while his underlings do all of the detail work. Must be: he's survived building inspections on thousands of properties for forty years somehow. Maybe that's why, in recent years, Trump has preferred to slap his name onto already built and separately managed properties in return for endorsement fees instead.

Obama, by contrast, was a student of government: he had been a state legislator and a Senator, and had taught Constitutional law. He understood that a good law requires a good foundation, architecture, and internal structure in order to function sustainably into the future - very much as a skyscraper does, as a matter of fact.

Republicans have repeated the lie that the ACA was 'hastily and secretly' constructed for so long, that they've forgotten that it took nearly two years from its introduction to its passing. Obama hosted several public sessions at the White House before even submitting a draft.

Compare that to Trump's back-of-an-envelope Immigration ban, an incredibly poorly written attempt, or to every hastily written iterations of GOP 'replacement' that McConnell put on the floor last week. Might as well propose replacing the Waldorf with a food truck.

This is why, I think, Trump and the GOP are having such a hard time dismantling Obama's legacy: it's just better built then they thought, to begin with. If Trump really wants to dismantle the Obama legacy and replace it with something that will last beyond the next election, he will have to learn, ironically, how to build as well as Obama did.

But I completely understand why ya'all indulge in this delusion..

Because the reality...... that the Democrat Party simply sucks... is just too much to bear...

So ya'all have to invent fantasy tin-foil based conspiracies and totally ludicrous shadow-puppets....

I get it.. If I were a better friend I would indulge ya'all in yer delusions and let ya'all enjoy them in peace...

But, this is a reality-based forum and so reality is the soup de jour....

And why has it not been an issue until now??

BECAUSE YA'ALL LOST!!

Face the facts, TS....

If there *WAS* a "Russian Gambit"... (oooooooooooo TinFoil hat on tight??) :D

.....it could *ONLY* have succeeded with a really REALLY close election...

Now... All of ya'all ask yerselves ONE question... If you have the courage..

*** WHY WAS THE ELECTION SO CLOSE??? ***

The answer to that will explain why ya'all simply CANNOT win any debate on this issue.. :D

Of course, this all ignores the **FACT** that ya'all have not a SCINTILLA of facts or evidence that shows a NOT-45 vote was changed to a Trump vote..

NOT AN IOTA OF FACT OR EVIDENCE....

In other words, it's a bona-fide delusion.... Wishful thinking... :D

Btw, hasn't he been confirmed yet? The official FBI site still shows the acting director??

This is worth a read.
It's a stunning summary of non-ideological investigative reporting that includes key criminal players linked to Trump deals.

http://therealnews.com/t2/component/content/article/357-esq-james-s-henry/3253-no-wray

It's a column, not a video... don't miss the footnotes.

A

I wouldn't rule out a legal standard of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians. It may not be a prosecutor's path of least resistance, but an aggressive prosecutor is going turn over a lot of rocks and see what crawls out.

I don't assume the Russians were initially seeking to make Trump President. A more limited, but more obtainable objective would be to undermine the US public's faith in the US Electoral System and US Government. This type of covert operation has been in the Russain/USSR playbook for generations, and it succeeded brilliantly in 2016.

However, now that Trump is POTUS, it makes sense for Russia to build on success and sow further chaos by taking the Trump Operation down. In short, rub our noses in their success.

The Russian's gambit is like the one monkeys play at a zoo. A monkey pisses on the first few rows of a crowd around the cage. There is a gasp from the front rows, and they move back. The back rows rush forward to see what the hell is going on. The monkey has saved some urine and takes takes another whizz. Now the whole crowd of bystanders in shouting and scattering. Happy Happy Monkey!

Who would be in a better position to take down Jr. than the Russians who set up the meet and greets in the first place? Drop a few intel hints to grease the skids leading to Trump failure and/or downfall. Happy Happy Russians. They are very good psychologists.

Points 2 and 3, I could not agree with you more.

https://www.the-tls.co.uk/articles/public/trump-dynasty-luttwak/

Cite???

If you can't back up your claims with facts, your claims are invalidated...

I don't make the rules... :D

Re: collusion with Russia. Per Bill Browder's testimony, there are ways Putin's operatives go about entangling people and people DO get entangled. It isn't the least bit farfetched to think 45 or Kushner or one of the kids got enmeshed in stuff, even, initially, unknowingly. That's how it's done. It's also not far-fetched to wonder if 45 isn't in a position to be blackmailed by Putin because 45 has been doing business with Russian criminals for years. Indeed, Trump himself makes a point of never putting things in writing; he likes to meet in person and do stuff verbally -- this is a guy who knows all about incriminating evidence.

Did he directly collude re: the election? What we know is Junior was READY to do so. I don't think 45 masterminded any collusion but its quite possible he was informed about shady stuff and just thought "sure, why not?".

What we DO know, too, is 45 is trying to reverse/cancel sanctions against Russia, which are specifically sanctions against oligarchs/criminals in Russia. The sanctions keep these people from being able to come to the U.S., launder their money through U.S. banks, and secondarily through non-U.S. banks that do business with U.S. banks.

For the last 2 days we've been told 45 was going to sign the sanctions bill voted for at 98 to 2 or whatever it was by the Senate. They will override his veto. As of today he hasn't signed it.

45 is desperate to do 2 things: keep Mueller out of his business history and remove sanctions for Putin's benefit. They may be related; they may not be. Either way, it looks bad. Why do you think 45 wants to let Putin get his hands on stolen money?

I thought you knew that.

:-)

I think I just threw up in my mouth a little.. No.. a LOT...

I don't hate Sessions. If I hate anything, it is his views and willingness to hurt other people for what he thinks.

That's the politically correct way of saying you hate someone.. :D

Good grief Michale, read the history, it is all there. Clinton did not have the ability to fire Starr.

If Clinton wanted to have Starr fired, he could have... Just like Trump can have Mueller fired..

But the situations are not analogous because Starr didn't have a conflict of interest..

To make the situations analogous, it would be as if Starr was married to Linda Tripp or Monica Lewinsky while prosecuting Clinton...

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/ken-starr-baylor-university-reportedly-fired-campus-sexual-assault-a7047341.html

You're confusing "inability" with "not politically acceptable"...

Good grief Michale, read the history, it is all there. Clinton did not have the ability to fire Starr.

I don't hate Sessions. If I hate anything, it is his views and willingness to hurt other people for what he thinks.

OK, I'm going to restate this for the umpteenth time but add a proviso.

1. I don't think there was any material collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign, even if Don Jr. was dumb enough to try to do something - the Russians were desperate to defeat Clinton (because she was the true American patriot), but they wren't dumb or desperate enough to trust 45 and his brood of clowns.

2. 45's real problem is his involvement with Russian money laundering and he knows it.

NEW:

3. Even I didn't think 45 was stupid enough to make the "cover up is always worse than the crime" mistake, but he is really poorly educated and obviously losing his marbles. Let's assume he had some base cunning to bluster his way through large real estate deals 20 years ago (even though most of them failed), however those days are passed and grampa has lost the plot.

To-may-toe, po-tay-toe

The fact is ya'all hated Sessions..

Until Trump hated Sessions..

Now ya'all love sessions..

Look at the powers Kenneth Starr and Clinton's inability to fire him as the model for Mueller's replacement.

You're confusing "inability" with "not politically acceptable"...

Clinton was a political animal and wouldn't do ANYTHING that upset the political apple cart..

President Trump has proven beyond ANY doubt that he doesn't give a shit about politics...

I'll tell you what, you stop doing to Mueller what Clinton did to Starr and we'll stop laughing our heads off at you.

Where was Starr's conflict of interest??

Yer comparing apples and celery...

I'll tell you what, you stop doing to Mueller what Clinton did to Starr and we'll stop laughing our heads off at you.

Deal?

Btw, that is simply a small courtesy to inform that I won't be responding further.

All you need to do is stop reading and commenting Elizabeth. The dramatics are unnecessary.

NOW that Sessions is on President Trump's bad side, NOW Sessions is "extremely well liked"...

I didn't say "extremely well liked" Michale - you even copied my comment - I said "personally liked", i.e. people like him as a person, even though he has extreme fundamentalist views wrt to marijuana and social issues.

Try to stick to what I say, not what you want me to have said.

I predict it will result in two responses:
i/ replacement of the role with another diligent investigator
ii/ legislation like the "Russian Sanctions" act that limits 45's power to fire the replacement

Limiting the President's power in that regard would be ruled unconstitutional.. With prejudice...

Look at the powers Kenneth Starr and Clinton's inability to fire him as the model for Mueller's replacement.

Loss aversion also helps explain why many of Obama’s supporters undervalued the accomplishments of his presidency. The left shrugged at the passage of some of the most sweeping domestic reforms in decades. Obamacare? “A very small number of people are going to get any insurance at all, until 2014, if the bill works,” sniffed Howard Dean. “This is essentially the collapse of health care reform in the United States Senate.” The Paris climate accord? Meh, said Bernie Sanders: “We need bold action in the very near future and this does not provide that.”

Trump’s efforts to reverse these achievements has produced a very different assessment among supporters of these measures. Dean has called Trump’s health-care rollback “a disaster.” Sanders has called his withdrawal from the Paris agreement “an abdication of American leadership and an international disgrace.” It is logically impossible for the repeal of an insignificant reform to be catastrophic. If it is a big deal to uninsure 24 million Americans and cut taxes on the rich, then it must be a big deal to insure 24 million and raise taxes on the rich. Yet the psychology of loss aversion is pervasive in American political thinking, especially on the left. The threat posed by Trump has allowed progressives to realistically assess the scale of Obama’s achievements for the first time.

Ya'all are hoping that Mueller does to President Trump what Ken Starr did to Clinton..

But ya'all yelled bloody murder about Ken Starr doing it to Clinton.. Yet ya'all STILL want Mueller to do the EXACT same thing to President Trump..

How is this NOT pure unadulterated and unequivocal hypocrisy???

"Anyone??? Anyone?? Buehler???"

.... You HOPE......

As Josh Marshall noted on Twitter last night, 45 is the only person who knows everything. He knows what Mueller may uncover; Kushner, Junior's boy, boy and girl may know some of 45's crimes, and even participated in them but only 45 knows them all. And 45 has been doing everything he can get away with to obstruct. In NY they're going after the sex-trafficking in 45's modeling agency, and has been speaking with the woman who was going to come out right before the election to talk about being raped as a thirteen-year-old, but she didn't. She claims she's been threatened.

Among the nasties in 45's past, there's something lurking that's particularly smelly.

If you can back up your claims, you are lying troll...

Not my rules.... Just sayin'... :D

I think USMC Kelly is very much the type of man that Trump pretends to be...and knows full well he isn't. Maybe Kelly can shame/cajole/convince Twitterpated Trump to put down the smartphone and engage in some manly 6 AM PT. As the recruiting posters used to say: Marines Build Men. It's worth a shot.

And will you give credit when it happens??

Of course not... Party zealotry is too strong...

I think USMC Kelly is very much the type of man that Trump pretends to be...and knows full well he isn't. Maybe Kelly can shame/cajole/convince Twitterpated Trump to put down the smartphone and engage in some manly 6 AM PT. As the recruiting posters used to say: Marines Build Men. It's worth a shot.

US futures jump as Wall Street kicks off August on a high note
U.S. stocks were set to build on the sharp gains they posted last month.
The three major indexes also notched multiple record highs last month as Wall Street reacted positively to strong quarterly reports from major companies.
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/01/wall-street-set-to-open-higher-on-earnings-momentum.html

Making America Great Again...

Btw, that is simply a small courtesy to inform that I won't be responding further.

Comey's reputation is soiled only in the minds of those who fail to understand what he did and why he did it.

Context is everything.

Director Comey is one of the few characters in this sordid saga who began with a solid reputation for integrity and professionalism which remains very much intact.

Better for the Left is Mueller voluntarily resigns..

Mueller has an undeniable conflict of interest..

This is fact..

If he doesn't do the right thing and resign, President Trump should fire him...

It's that simple...

I completely agree..

SOME people even believe that political correct is simply the best way of doing things.. :D

Those who constantly harp on what is politically correct are usually the ones who are most clueless with what the phrase actually means or refers to.

Funny how Sessions was called every name in the book by Democrats, including practically every Weigantian, when he was nominated..

NOW that Sessions is on President Trump's bad side, NOW Sessions is "extremely well liked"...

I saids it befores and I'll says it agains..

Such vigorous and blatant 180s simply CANNOT be good for ya'all's bonal structure.. :D

I predict it will result in two responses:
i/ replacement of the role with another diligent investigator
ii/ legislation like the "Russian Sanctions" act that limits 45's power to fire the replacement

Limiting the President's power in that regard would be ruled unconstitutional.. With prejudice...

There is a building level of disgust with 45 over the way he is treating people who deserve a lot more respect than they are getting.

Here are 12 firing/"resignations" in order of "who cares":

1. "The Mooch" - everybody thought this guy was a foul mouthed clown. No harm done, in fact this was probably a popular move.

2. Michael Flynn - you can't be a traitor and expect to keep a position in even 45's White House. No tears here.

3. Sean Spicer - Spicey had lost all respect from his peers and everybody else. Basically he became "Baghdad Bob". It just became sad in the end, and needed to happen.

4. Reince Priebus - another previously respected player who became a muppet. He did himself more harm by waiting for "The Mooch" to basically force him out. He had become all but meaningless in his role.

5. James Comey - Now we are getting into dangerous territory for 45. Comey had soiled his reputation during the election, however firing the FBI head requires more than a garbled and changing story.

6. Sally Yates - again 45's need to ponce around in the public eye turned a "standard transition" into a clown show.

7. Preet Bharara - this was an act of pure desperation to try to stop a vigorous investigation from continuing - ringing alarm bells around the country. I predict this will be seen as the first example of the behavior that brings 45 down.

Upcoming or in play targets:

1. Jeff Sessions - Sessions is regarded as an extremist for his views, however he is personally liked, so while his ejection may not cause many tears, if he is humiliated then there will be universal disgust at 45. Most of the anger will be on the Republican side who need to up their game - and if this brings them to their senses it will be about time.

2. Rod Rosenstein - Rosenstein's firing would be seen as a pathetic act of vindictiveness - in other words, right up 45's alley. Unless Rosenstein is fired for refusing to fire Mueller then it will be a one day or maybe even one hour news item in the clown tornado that is 45's disastrous time in office.

3. Robert Mueller - this is "Saturday Night Massacre" territory. I predict it will result in two responses:
i/ replacement of the role with another diligent investigator
ii/ legislation like the "Russian Sanctions" act that limits 45's power to fire the replacement

Interesting times.

Com'on Neil!!! Don't tease me!!! :D

Seemingly the script writers for SNL are damn near suicidal over the news "The Mooch" has gone. This would have been comedy genius.

And Kelly is a believer, too. People closer to the general than I am tell me he is unabashedly committed to President Trump's agenda, if not also President Trump the man. He has worked assiduously at the Department of Homeland Security to execute Mr. Trump's immigration and border objectives, and he believes in his heart that Mr. Trump has exactly the right vision for the country.
http://www.chrisweigant.com/2017/07/28/ftp447/#comment-106565

What upset the general about the Comey firing was the way it was handled by the president ... which is to say very poorly.

If that is what General Kelly said then I would say I have to agree with him..

But simply criticizing how it was handled is a far cry from actually resigning over it..

As far as the firing itself, you once again have to realize that President Trump is not like other Presidents.. Other President's played the Politically Correct game and was very cognizant of the politics when someone is fired...

President Trump just flat out comes out and says "YOU'RE FIRED"

Frankly, getting away from all the politically correct felgercarb is refreshing..

Patriotic Americans *LIKE* that about President Trump.. It's why we elected him President..

I agree with the general about that and I think the general and the director are cut from a wholly different cloth than is President Trump.

Probably.. But there are some similarities between President Trump and General Kelly.. Straight shooters who despise political correctness...

What upset the general about the Comey firing was the way it was handled by the president ... which is to say very poorly.

I agree with the general about that and I think the general and the director are cut from a wholly different cloth than is President Trump.

Thank you, Liz... :D

was ready to resign over the firing of Director Comey.

Everyone who knows General Kelly has said that he is completely devoted to President Trump...

I am not being facetious when I say I would love to read any thing that claims the opposite..

Will there be a time next year when the press literally stops reporting or taping most of what the president and his staff say, because it is so consistently wrong and/or dishonest that to report it as "news" would be misleading to viewers and readers?

Or, more accurately, the news media itself is being wrong an dishonest by reporting "news" that would be misleading to viewers and readers.

There are ample examples of the news media just making shit up to take down Trump..

But, sssshhhhhhhhhh We're not allowed to talk about that here.... :D