If for no other reason than the boring nature of the tedious back and forth.

I'm sure there is a place for this sort of thing but it ain't here.

Apparently Kick is okay with commenters making statements about what other commenters believe because she said in comment 92 you all believe TS can read and is entitled to his opinion.

No I did not, you lying piece of spit. I said:

I believe we all believe TS can read and is entitled to his opinion.

You then quoted me in 94 verbatim... So what part of I believe is confusing at all? You are either incapable of comprehending the English language or you're a liar... or both.

Over and out.

Thank for acknowledging that you you cannot back up your argument by once again avoiding the issue and trying to distract with a false equivalency argument that does not stand up to scrutiny.

I simply took your argument about TS and applied it to your own argument. If you think your own argument is avoiding the issue, then at last we've identified the problem: YOU! :)

Do you all agree with that statement by Stig?

I believe we all believe TS can read and is entitled to his opinion. :)

Stig also claimed that the commenters here "do not want big money politics."
Was he right about that?

See above.

If so, then why do so many of you keep voting for Big Money candidates?

Why do you keep voting for them, Don?

It may not bother you when someone makes a statement about what "so many" of us do that may not be true as you have no problem doing it yourself, but this is you making a statement about what "so many" of us do so I thought I should point it out in case it bothers you.

No one is required to address my points,

Fact.

but when people make false claims about One Demand or provide a ridiculous argument against One Demand I am allowed to respond and call for them to back up their statements.

You are asking him to "back up" his opinions when you have refused repeatedly to do that yourself.

They can avoid the issue at hand with whatever excuse they want, but it only exposes that they cannot defend their argument.

Pot-Kettle, Don. :)

I am not saying that. I am saying something similar to what Winston Churchill said, which he probably borrowed and improved from somebody else*.

"No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."

I favor strategies that offer a good prospect of improving representative government. I have evaluated your concept and have found it wanting. It boils down to another variant of spoiler politics, which plays into the hands of big money politicians who adore divide and conquer strategies. I see you as a boiler room operation, minus a working boiler. You have signed up 6 people the last time checked....and I can't even be sure those 6 are real.

So stop flapping your gums until you actually address the points I make and the issue at hand and explain why you think democracy can't work.

Don, no one is required to address your points. Let that permeate. :)

I take your point, but the sealed indictment approach comes with a 2 to 6 year minimum delay. That's ignoring vital repairs for a long time.

Go for state tax evasion. Bloti McBlotus can't pardon himself for that. Or other state laws offering up hard time. The law may be an ass, but it's also a hydra.

Yes, sir... exactly right... and in the meantime you indict and prosecute the co-conspirators for federal and state crimes, with the unavoidable side effect that Bloti McBlotus [LOL, love it] gets tried in the Court of Public Opinion while the co-conspirators are being "shaked and baked" for their unpardonable "sins."

I take your point, but the sealed indictment approach comes with a 2 to 6 year minimum delay. That's ignoring vital repairs for a long time.

Go for state tax evasion. Bloti McBlotus can't pardon himself for that. Or other state laws offering up hard time. The law may be an ass, but it's also a hydra. Also, state prisons tend to be nastier than Fed. That would affect Trump's calculus. Maybe lead to to a Nixon style resignation. I would see that as good outcome, even factoring in a few years of Pence. Uuuuuhhhh.

Wisdom. Thanks. Needed that.

Awesome summary. Dead on. :)

Stig [63]: The lawsuit is a predicate for prosecution for tax evasion, which comes later, after Trump is found guilty of these shenanigans.

Balthy is correct. Also consider the possibility that the sealed indictments I have been posting about for a long, long time actually do exist... because they do. :)

I'm converting to the dark side.

Well, you did become a U.S. citizen so I believe I see your point there.

Talking of the dark side, there are a series of event today to protest the separation of children from their asylum seeking families:
https://familiesbelong.org/

But, Neil... the little elf and the mouthpiece in pearls insist they're being Christ-like.

This is not U.S. - we need to remind the world that Trump and his asshole supporters only represent a hate filled minority and are not real Americans.

Amen. You know something is FUBAR in America when they're blaming their Trumpian policy on nonexistent laws that they claim are justified by Biblical scripture. Pathetic. It will come to pass that Trump too shall pass. :)

As far as I can tell, the State of NY is only pushing this as a civil action, not a criminal one.

Operative words there being "as far as I can tell." :)

They have ample hard evidence in the form of his signature "under penalty of perjury" along with his past settlements for nonpayment of taxes to pursue a criminal action. Fact.

So the State of New York could simply obtain sealed indictments and pursue this action after Trump is no longer BLOTUS. It's not like he can pardon himself or his co-conspirators (the Trump spawn) for crimes against the State of New York, now is it? I believe that is what Mueller would advise... if you know what I mean. :)

What is NY trying to accomplish with this warning - and what is their next move if Trump shrugs, pays the fine and moves on?

I do not believe for a single second that this is a warning. Campaign laws were violated too... federal ones. Ooops. :)

I thought they would do exactly that. This report is not the slam dunk Blotus was expecting AT ALL and the smarter Repubs don't want to go out on shaky limbs. They will wait until FOX and the rest of the machine dig up some quotes from the report - out of context - and do some trial runs. If something sticks at all they'll repeat it. Otherwise they'll hope it fades away like a Devin-Nunes press conference.

As TS said, you've made the pitch multiple times and gotten your responses. Time to take it to new pastures since this one is dry.

I'm sure this impacted on Comey's thinking about being as transparent as possible. That is especially so when you consider that very few people expected Trump to win.

So that's good news.

He concludes:

Hillary Clinton’s emails are going to go down in history as one of the great gaslighting campaigns of all time. After it was all over and the full weight of evidence began trickling out, it turned out that pretty much everyone—including the FBI—concluded that:

* Clinton should have used a State.gov email address for her non-classified messages, but otherwise didn’t really do anything seriously wrong.

* Confidential material was handled just as carefully by Clinton and her aides as it was in other administrations.

* Clinton and her aides took care to phrase things carefully when they were using non-secure email—which includes both State.gov accounts and Clinton’s personal email. Again, this is the same as how other administrations have handled this.

* The FBI’s investigation of Clinton’s email was perfectly reasonable and their conclusions were correct.

* James Comey should not have editorialized about Clinton when he announced the end of the email investigation in July.

* He should not have released his October Surprise letter to Congress.

*No one in the FBI appears to have handled the investigation in a biased way. The one possible exception was the New York field office, which favored Trump and was suspected of being ready to leak news about the Weiner laptop if Comey had kept quiet about it.

A pox on all of them.

I'm converting to the dark side.

Talking of the dark side, there are a series of event today to protest the separation of children from their asylum seeking families:

https://familiesbelong.org/

This is not U.S. - we need to remind the world that Trump and his asshole supporters only represent a hate filled minority and are not real Americans.

Interesting Report. But here's the bottom line, helpfully labeled: conclusions.

1. "While we did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that improper considerations, including political bias, directly affected the specific investigative actions we reviewed in Chapter Five, the conduct by [Strzok and Page] cast a cloud over the entire FBI investigation and sowed doubt about the FBI’s work on, and its handling of, the Midyear investigation."

So, alot of sound and fury signifying: nothing. The IG looked for the slightest bit of bias introduced into the investigation by either agent, and came up empty handed. The IG, however, made clear that it looked really bad. It 'implied' he states, "a willingness to take official action to impact a presidential candidate’s electoral prospects", but is accompanied by not one example of either agent taking any such action. The one thing that is pointed to is "Strzok’s failure in October 2016 to follow up on the Midyear-related investigative lead discovered on the Weiner laptop", but somehow leaves off the end of the sentence the fact that the narrative reveals that everyone in the Agency knew about the emails on the laptop in late September. It wasn't even his call to make, I don't think. By then, the Clinton investigation had been declared officially closed.

So maybe back to the other theory: Strzok and Page were just blowing off steam. As reasonable as any.

2."..in key moments, then Director Comey chose to deviate from the FBI’s and the Department’s established procedures and norms and instead engaged in his own subjective, ad hoc decisionmaking. ..by departing so clearly and dramatically from FBI and Department norms, the decisions [made by Comey] negatively impacted the perception of the FBI and the Department as fair administrators of justice."

Again, the IG says that the worst part is that it might have impacted the 'perception' of the FBI and DOJ.

The story of the interaction of all of these characters, especially Comey, is dramatically presented, and screenplay-ready. One can almost sympathize with Comey's ultimate decision, but also feel strangely compelled by the interaction between Yates and Lynch when Comey again wanted to go it alone on the letter to Congress. They were afraid to confront Comey directly about his decision, fearing perhaps that to do so would be viewed as interference. There is a lot of talk about how something is 'viewed' or 'perceived' in this document, far less about anything wrong being actually done.

The "lot of interest" amounts to people asking you to stop flogging a dead horse. You are pitching a product people don't want. Change your product to meet customer needs or move on to a new town. Why is that simple marketing concept so hard for you to grasp?

Importantly, the IG confirms that it continues to investigate improper disclosure of non-public information by DOJ and FBI employees involved in the Clinton email investigation and plans to submit a separate report once these investigations are concluded. It will be vital that the IG thoroughly review whether these leaks informed public statements by Trump campaign surrogates, including Rudy Giuliani, who boasted of foreknowledge about DOJ and FBI actions in the weeks prior to election day.

(https://twitter.com/RepAdamSchiff/status/1007355595714854917)

The real bastards were the anti-Clinton FBI agents leaking to Giuliani and other DT campaign scumbags. I will be interested in THAT report.

The issue in IG Report is not that it somehow fails to prove Trump's arguments. Democrats need to be on the attack. Because it shows that -whatever the motivations- the FBI and DOJ damaged Clinton dramatically. They're vindicated. She was cheated, mistreated, has a legit beef.

See the receipt from Blotus authorizing using his "charitable" donations to pay off a Mar-A-Lago legal bill.

Good times.

Isn't that precious? Tangible evidence of crime.

There's the proof also that Mueller and the State of New York are working together. They have been for a long, long time. Trump cannot pardon himself and others for crimes against the State of New York, now can he?

Exactly. :)

Yep.

Sorta like they all clammed up after seeing proof that there was no FBI 'spy' in the Trump campaign, and no wiretap on Trump Tower.

Of course those zombie lies are still ambulatory down in Alex Jones world, eating brains.

Blotus will probably demand it and he and Hannity will be screaming that the Deep State is lying, blah, blah, blah. I suspect top Repubs will duck because they know they got nuthin'.

Thank God for some common sense around here (or whatever deity CRS prostrates himself to, if any).

You just know it's a woman.

I'm not even interested in letting other like-minded 'Y' chromosome holders me vote - I want a one person, one vote democracy - and I'm the one person.

Sounds very Trumpian, Neil. Will you be saluting the North Koreans too? ;)

From NY AG: Our investigation found that the Trump Foundation raised in excess of $2.8 million in a manner designed to influence the 2016 presidential election at the direction and under the control of senior leadership of the Trump presidential campaign.

In light of this misconduct and total lack of oversight, we are also suing to dissolve the Trump Foundation under court supervision and bar @realDonaldTrump and the other members of the Trump Foundation’s Board of Directors from serving on the board of any other New York charity.

https://twitter.com/NewYorkStateAG/status/1007272628560826368

So you were actually agreeing with me that I was not making a threat?

I was making a similar point about what "extortion" is and is not.

I've got to admit I never considered that was a possibility and it caught me totally off guard.

I can slip up on people like that, Don. It comes from years and years of training.

My apologies. I clearly misinterpreted that one.

No apologies. I actually expected it. Thank you. :)

There's more interesting stuff breaking!

I've been watching closely the roll-out of the IG Report, since I'm sure there will be some parallels between this roll-out and the future presentation of the Mueller Report.

And as I predicted, the Administration is getting some early spin out to try to get ahead of it.

The first leak seems to be a 'new' (i.e., not yet discussed to death on Faux) email between Strunk and Page, the FBI lovebirds who were summarily fired by Mueller once it was learned that they were using DOJ email servers to hide the affair from their spouses. Something about "this will stop Trump from becoming president". Too bad it didn't.

Also that Comey probably broke some rules with his first lengthy press conference in which he criticized Hillary Clinton while simultaneously announcing that there was nothing to charge her with. Well, duh, we all knew that was weird.

What I don't hear yet is any evidence that Mueller and his team are inherently biased against Trump, or that the DOJ covered up serious charges that could have been brought against Hillary.

Trump must be furious.

https://twitter.com/jonswaine/status/1007276360715382784

Good times.

Another example of your total lack of comprehension, not only of what I write but what you write.

Oh, really?

You quoted me making an emphatic suggestion to CW and then quoted neilm suggesting that I add an "or else" and imply that I am attempting extortion.

Thank you for the recap, Don.

Delusional.

It was sarcasm, Don; I was kidding. Thank you so much for making my point in the exact manner I anticipated. :)

then you had better put your signature on my Ralph Nader petition, the Giants petition and write about the Nader petition and One Demand.

And as per the email I sent you yesterday, you'd better do it NOW!

I realize you don't have anything to threaten with really, but still.

Thank God for some common sense around here (or whatever deity CRS prostrates himself to, if any).

I'm not even interested in letting other like-minded 'Y' chromosome holders me vote - I want a one person, one vote democracy - and I'm the one person.

why would you oppose citizens that were going to waste their vote in 2018 participating in One Demand instead if they feel that Big Money is a problem?

People don't get out of bed to vote because of campaign finance. That is just a fact. I wish they would, but they simply don't.

Your approach isn't working even here, a place where you have a sympathetic audience (or had, you're getting somewhat confrontational). Learn from that - I gave you a suggestion (not an order) because I try to give constructive feedback.

Do you think I'm the reason One Demand isn't working?

neilm: Or what, Don? You'll post another 50 comments in this blog?

OMG! It's extortion! Somebody condemn this NOW!

:)

So, not interested in the wager then?

OMG!!!!! Cry me a river is right. I live rent free in your head along with Barack "Odumbo" and "Bubba" Clinton.

You want to condemn the person who posted your personal information and the information of your family? Find a mirror and take a good long look. No one threatened your family, and you "doxed" yourself and your family so I hereby condemn you for that.

In the meantime, you look pretty stupid whining incessantly about "extortion" and then expecting to be taken seriously as "law enforcement." *LOL*

Meanwhile, the administration has to hold a job fair to try to get WH staff:
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/06/no-one-wants-to-work-at-the-wh-so-its-having-a-job-fair.html

Blotus has pictures of himself placed in the signs around the internment camps where children are being imprisoned. They can all look at those pictures and internalize the fat-orange-face of the bastard who ripped them away from their parents and thus will always have a mental graphical representation of evil to fall back on. Hatred for DT is spreading to all corners of the world - he will definitely be a record-holder for that. He will end his life as the most hated man by the most people in the most places in history.

You just HAVE to know that such a statement will come back and bite you on the ass.. :D

Can't speak for neilm, but for myself, I definitely think that way. Women shouldn't even be allowed to vote, and only men who agree with me should be.

I never see such reluctance from you when joining the majority around here..

'S ok... I know that Party slavery is strong.. It's hard to be the sole voice of reason..

Trust me.. I know....

Let's keep it simple - the results of the November election will identify the winner of a cheeseburger. OK?

I'm watching my weight.. :D

Note: I have a cheeseburger bet with my friend's son about gun control that ends in 22 years (we made it three years ago for 25 years in the future - he has already forgotten but I have the evidence - I'm like that).

Getting involved in other people's online battles is a lose-lose and I always stay clear.

Let's keep it simple - the results of the November election will identify the winner of a cheeseburger. OK?

I don't think that big money is the real problem with our government - I think that the real problem is polarization and that is being driven by social causes that are not being addressed at any level at the moment.

If big money was distorting our politics that we'd see a rush to the middle where large organizations want government to be - they want loose economic policies; sane, stable and simple rules and regulations that they can work within; politicians that don't inflame social issues that impact their business practices (i.e. having to stop advertising on this show or that one because small, stupid issues get blown up to Washington DC level fiascoes; etc.

When to be concerned about money in politics is when everything is bland and the populace are overwhelmingly in support of one viewpoint. Take Russia as an example of what money in politics really does to a "democracy".

Sure there is more corruption than there should be, but big money doesn't like corruption - what starts as the rich controlling politicians can quickly become the politicians using the powers of the state to rob the rich - again look at Russia.

Yea.. You keep saying *IF*...

But ironically, ALL YOU HAVE is "if"... :D

Let's be clear on the rules - I'm predicting that the Democrats win at least one of the branches - house of Reps or Senate - agreed?

Agreed...

If I win, you join me in condemning Victoria AKA Kick for her extortion and her attacks and doxing on myself and my family...

If you win, you can name your price...

Sure - what's the wager? I usually do a cheeseburger - but that isn't so easy given the continent between us - how about $10 gift card for a burger place of the winner's choice?

Let's be clear on the rules - I'm predicting that the Democrats win at least one of the branches - house of Reps or Senate - agreed?

Then why are the Republicans attacking a Republican investigator? And why are the Republicans trying to close this down?

If you are right, the Mueller investigation should be the best thing that ever happened to your team. That is why it seems odd that you are trying so hard to stop a Republican from investigating you.

Remember, if you lose either house in November you are going to have two years of the Democrats verson of Trey Gowdy chasing this day-in-day-out - with investigation after investigation and spin-off investigations - just like Benghazi!!! - you better just hope that, like Benghazi!!! there is no there there.

somehow, given Trump's financial history I think there is going to be a lot of dirt.

And this is another reason the Republicans should be supporting Mueller - he isn't leaking or making findings public - do you think the Democratic version of Gowdy is going to be so restrained leading up to 2020?

A poop storm is coming and most of the poop in it came out of Trump's ass.

That analogy just put me off my popcorn ;)

Just the facts.... I know, I know.. No one cares about FACTS around here..

So, no wager??

"Whatsa matter, McFly?? Got no scrot!?"
-Thug, BACK TO THE FUTURE PART II

:D

Wanna make a wager??? :D

Anyone else want to make a wager??

I am putting up that the House and the Senate will remain in GOP hands after the mid-terms..

Any takers??

I doubt it.. Ya'all KNOW what a bad track record ya'all have and what a good track record I have when it comes to President Trump... :D

Well I did ask you to "cry me a river" and you did ;)

Just the facts.. It's sad to me to see all the support such actions have..

I had honestly thought you people were better than that..

It's quite dis-heartening to see I was wrong about that..

If I travel'ed back in time to Sep 2006 and told the denizens of Weigantia what has become acceptable political discourse in Wegantia 2018;

1. Extortion

2. Doxing

3. Attacking and Doxing Commenters' families

4. Name-calling..

5. Attacks based on skin color..

.... the Weigantians of 2006 would think me daft....

And yet, the facts are clear...

Sad.... Really sad to see...

Whatever you have to tell yourself to sleep at night.. :D

It's funny though..

Hysterical Democrats attacked and vilified Ken Starr during the Clinton years for doing EXACTLY what you are describing..

NOW you are all for it..

Hypocrisy much. :D

It's ALL about the -D/-R... Nothing else is relevant..

After the November elections you might not have a chance to stop the justice system, so you'd better act now.

It's abundantly well documented that the Big Blue Tsunami you have been pinning your hopes on has morphed into a Red Wave... :D

President Trump is going to be in a BETTER position, politically, after the mid terms..

Wanna make a wager??? :D

I mean, it isn't like the rule of law is important any longer for your team.

This has NEVER been about the rule of law.. This is SOLELY about and has ALWAYS been about nullifying a free, fair and legal election because a bunch of whiney and bitchy sore losers couldn't handle the FACT they they lost the election...

I guarantee you that 5 televised perp walks for CEO, COO or CFOs of large corporations that have an above average number of illegal workers would cause a mass exodus of illegal aliens as well as cut the economic migrants to a trickle.

The Republican Party support for sanctuary companies is a disgrace and it needs to stop now!

Your team better close down the Mueller investigation quickly. It is spinning off secondary investigations now and has the potential to become a many-headed-hydra that will be impossible to kill just by cutting off the head (do you think Mueller planned this?).

After the November elections you might not have a chance to stop the justice system, so you'd better act now.

I mean, it isn't like the rule of law is important any longer for your team.

Cry me a river Michale ...

And yet, that seems to be the GO TO for many Weigantians..

I guess that is acceptable for those who think in "approved" ways...

Or what, Don? You'll post another 50 comments in this blog?

You need to separate means from ends. Everybody agrees with your end goal, but your proposal to get there isn't working.

Find another way. And if that doesn't work, find another. And perhaps to get to the end goal you might need to achieve some interim goals - such as support politicians that are sympathetic to your cause that have a chance to win.

How about a simple "Voter Bill of Rights" where you outline 3-5 finance reform goals, and ask your local politicians to sign a letter of intent, that, if legislation that supports one of these goals is proposed, they will back it - you aren't asking them to do anything except make a promise - Politicians are good at that. Once you have pleasantly badgered enough politicians in a legislature (start local, work your way up) you can then see if you can find one to propose a bill.

You can, at the same time, ask people to agree to call their politicians if a bill supporting the "Voter Bill of Rights" comes up - again you aren't asking anything of them up front, just a promise.

Then when you get a bill you support (even if it only covers one of the articles on the Bill of Rights) you can call in your promises - people don't like to be inconsistent, so you can pleasantly remind people they agreed to vote/call and make it really easy for them to do so.

Flaming and threatening are not going to work. The above proposal might.

As would the rest of the country.. :D

Oh and, by the bi..

"Welcome to the party, pal!!!"
-John McClane, DIE HARD

:D

"Oh puulleeese... Teleportation is as likely as.. as time travel!!"
-Jeanie Miller, STARGATE ATLANTIS, McKay & Mrs Miller

:D

"Oh puulleeese... Teleportation is as likely as.. as time travel!!"
-Jeanie Miller, STARGATE ATLANTIS, McKay & Mrs Miller

:D