patrick.net

"Let's be clear here...evidence of Donna's actions was revealed in March of 2016, and at that time the party in the White House were Democrats. Later, more direct evidence was revealed and nothing of consequence at that time nor today has occurred"

That's not true at all. The Dems lost the election, for god's sake. They disenfranchised a boatload of Sanders voters and paid the price--that was the consequence. Not to mention that the head of the DNC was sacked.

Nothing illegal occurred so there was never any possibility of legal action. DNC is a private organization and make up their own rules for nomination. They could literally pick someone in the back room with no primaries if they wanted. That obviously would not be the best way to win elections, but perfectly legal.

Rew says

sagacious1 says

Again, it is this type of party blindness on the part of the media which creates the mistrust amongst conservatives.

I agree. The partisanship, and politics as a game, have destroyed our ability to function much at all, in the government.

I would add the media to the fray as well, yet your comment is the most truthful, accurate one I have read on this forum yet.

Rew says

errc, it is of concern too. Absolutely.

We need to examine how on earth we have become a nation which imprisons people at such a high rate, and seemingly so unevenly in how the application of our 'justice' is applied ... especially for things like mandatory minimums on low level drug offenses.

I'm no fan of marijuana. I'm not for legalization, and realize I am in the minority of that. But the punishment doesn't fit the crime ... absolutely.

What crime is that?

Do you believe that the Government should be in the business of criminalizing Hemp and Cannabis?

sagacious1 says

I would add the media to the fray as well, yet your comment is the most truthful, accurate one I have read on this forum yet.

The News industries willingness to participate in the dirt fight is for sure a problem. They have suffered a shift in business due to catering to demand. American media appetite drove this to a degree. We MUST demand better and support better. $

I've subscribed to more news and donated to more causes this year than at any time in my life, prior, likely combined.

But, cries of "Fake News" and serious arguments being made on the backs of blogosphere propaganda? I'm sorry. Yes, the majority of mainstream outlets lean left. Always has and forever always will be. That doesn't lend any credence to Breitbart or FOX not amounting to state controlled media itself.

errc says

What crime is that?

Do you believe that the Government should be in the business of criminalizing Hemp and Cannabis?

Maybe not. I'm warming up to thinking I might be wrong.

Rew says

errc says

What crime is that?

Do you believe that the Government should be in the business of criminalizing Hemp and Cannabis?

Maybe not. I'm warming up to thinking I might be wrong.

Well, you were the one saying earlier that the people of this country need to address the propaganda problem.

And it's impossible to side with the Medicinal Flower prohibitionists, without being completely ensconced in propaganda. Information will set you free

joeyjojojunior says

"Let's be clear here...evidence of Donna's actions was revealed in March of 2016, and at that time the party in the White House were Democrats. Later, more direct evidence was revealed and nothing of consequence at that time nor today has occurred"

That's not true at all. The Dems lost the election, for god's sake. They disenfranchised a boatload of Sanders voters and paid the price--that was the consequence. Not to mention that the head of the DNC was sacked.

Nothing illegal occurred so there was never any possibility of legal action. DNC is a private organization and make up their own rules for nomination. They could literally pick someone in the back room with no primaries if they wanted. That obviously would not be the best way to win elections, but perfectly legal.

Actually corruption can be criminal, even more so than collusion, which for all practical purposes isn't even a crime ironically. The DNC is a private organization, yet it has interest in securing public governmental offices. For example, how did Donna Brazile obtain the questions for the National presidential nomination debates in advance? Were they simply given to her for some purpose such as to advance a public candidate running for high public office by CNN, or did she obtain them illegally in some manner? She was working for 2 private entities at the time, CNN and the DNC both with vested interest in the election. Taking something from an employer that is expressly forbidden take, can be considered theft. Using that stolen material to advance a public figure running for public office can be considered corruption.

Sure--if Brazile obtained the questions illegally, then that would be a crime. But the DNC helping one candidate over another isn't.

Guess I'll have to research treason.

joeyjojojunior says

Sure--if Brazile obtained the questions illegally, then that would be a crime. But the DNC helping one candidate over another isn't.

Just like when the Housing Bubble popped, maybe there wasn't prosecution because there were no specific laws broken.

People may be pretty stupid, but they're not blind, and it's not that hard to tell right from wrong.

As a political agnostic, I can see very clearly that the media and Deep State only ever cared about defeating Bernie. He is the outsider that the Status quo fears most.

All the bleating on about Trump is just low hanging fruit for their business model

"People may be pretty stupid, but they're not blind, and it's not that hard to tell right from wrong."

Yep--I think they way Sanders was treated had a lot to do with the Dem's problems.

"As a political agnostic, I can see very clearly that the media and Deep State only ever cared about defeating Bernie. He is the outsider that the Status quo fears most."

I agree with this too. Everyone knew Trump was only interested in winning--he didn't care about governing. And, at the end of the day, he would let the GOPe do whatever they want. Tax cuts for the rich. Free trade. Get rid of Wall St./big banks regulation. Sanders, on the other hand, wouldn't bow to the establishment.

hehehe

https://video.twimg.com/tweet_video/DEd57RBVYAEDTP3.mp4

Speaking of Historical context.

Ted Kennedy DID collude with the Russians to influence 1984 election.

http://thefederalist.com/2015/03/10/ted-kennedy-secretly-asked-the-soviets-to-intervene-in-the-1984-elections/

Tenpoundbass says

hehehe

People tend to tweet, when News Papers warn them, "We are going to go to print with this. Any further comment? Do you deny this?"

Small reporter fish got beat by big big formidable NYT.

:)

Mueller has been quiet this story is going nowhere.
Pelosi has been silent this story is finished
HIllary has laryngitis nothing left of this story.
They all hope you will riot in the street over it though. Feel free to go all G20 on us.
That's just how you Liberals do!

Capitulation is beginning. We will have a remorseful "I didn't know any better" at the Senate soon ... "The mean lady tricked me."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/07/11/sean-hannity-is-gloating-about-landing-an-interview-with-donald-trump-jr

Rew says

understand intent for meeting better than the current representation by the NYT?

yes, i do. this story is garbage. you do indeed look like fools again.

June 7 - 5:16 PM - Don Jr. confirms meeting w/ Russian lawyer
June 7 - 9:13 PM Trump promises press conf the next week with Clinton dirt.

That could merely be circumstantial ... but wow! I'm interested. :)

joeyjojojunior says

Sure--if Brazile obtained the questions illegally, then that would be a crime. But the DNC helping one candidate over another isn't.

Unless you're suggesting that CNN was complicit in this corrupt scheme, I'd be interested in knowing how Donna Brazile the vice chair and ultimately chairperson of the DNC " legally" obtained (in advance) the questions to the national presidential nomination debates, in order to secure advantage to one candidate over the other? I don't know of one, yet I'm interested in your position. Of course anything you suggest would be speculation, since no one has bothered to learn this....why is that, and why doesn't that bother you? Also, the cloak of "private entity" does not make any organization immune from law. We are a representative government, this is a foundational principle of our Constitution. An entity cannot usurp the constitutional rights of the people by disenfranchising their right for representation, merely claiming to be "private". The argument of choice is moot, as millions of Democrats feel defrauded by these corrupt acts. Fraud is a crime, corruption can be a crime. I don't pretend for a moment the GOP is any better, they just didn't get "caught" yet. Frankly, it's my feeling the reason Congress can get nothing done for the people, is because it takes so much time deleting decades worth of corrupt emails and evidence. I'm sure when that task is completed, they can get back to regular "work".

I take it "all" back. Trump and his administration have been 100% consistent. They have always maintained, at every turn, they did nothing wrong.

The only thing that has changed: all the details and reason why. ;)

"We did not chop down that cherry tree."

sagacious1 says

Unless you're suggesting that CNN was complicit in this corrupt scheme

I think they sent the questions to the DNC in advance. Pretty sure that's public knowledge from the released emails, but I will look.

sagacious1 says

Of course anything you suggest would be speculation, since no one has bothered to learn this....why is that, and why doesn't that bother you?

Like I said--pretty sure people did learn this. And why would you pretend to know what bothers me?

sagacious1 says

An entity cannot usurp the constitutional rights of the people by disenfranchising their right for representation, merely claiming to be "private". The argument of choice is moot, as millions of Democrats feel defrauded by these corrupt acts. Fraud is a crime, corruption can be a crime.

What are you talking about? The DNC doesn't have to offer the people any choice. They can nominate whoever they wish. And people can choose to not vote Democratic as a result. Fraud in a legal sense has a specific meaning which simply doesn't apply here.

Hey--I'm always been a big Sanders backer so I think it sucks as much or more than you. It's just not a crime.

joeyjojojunior says

sagacious1 says

Unless you're suggesting that CNN was complicit in this corrupt scheme

I think they sent the questions to the DNC in advance. Pretty sure that's public knowledge from the released emails, but I will look.

sagacious1 says

Of course anything you suggest would be speculation, since no one has bothered to learn this....why is that, and why doesn't that bother you?

Like I said--pretty sure people did learn this. And why would you pretend to know what bothers me?

sagacious1 says

An entity cannot usurp the constitutional rights of the people by disenfranchising their right for representation, merely claiming to be "private". The argument of choice is moot, as millions of Democrats f...

No, CNN did not send any questions to anyone in advance of the debates (or so is their adamant claim) and yet somehow Donna Brazile had them?. What would be the point of a candid debate, if questions are given in advance? No one knows how Donna Brazile obtained them...it is a mystery and I'm aware of no one pursuing that answer. However it was a severe enough breach, to cause her to be fired, or perhaps she resigned from her lucrative CNN salary. The DNC does maintain a written charter, and a section of that charter regards commitment to party members of complete neutrality towards nominees. It is that section, and various stated other reasons, that is now the central points of a class action lawsuit brought against the DNC. Highly unlikely it will be successful, though not for want of merit but rather for adept legal maneuvering of high powered DNC lawyers. Profit is so sweet, even if it by deception.

you miss the point. read tpb's line again.

Rew says

Tenpoundbass says

Trump was elected to Break that shit.

Trump isn't a champion of the little people.

BlueSardine says

you miss the point. read tpb's line again.

I know I always burn my house down first when I want to remodel. Insanity.

APOCALYPSEFUCK_is_ADORABLE says

You met Mueller, you met a piece of steel that knows when to fire.

If he's there, he knows the case is a lock.

They are looking for the money, the contacts, the network of people and influences. They are gosh darn counter intel terrorist hunters: a tip of the intelligence war spear.

sagacious1 says

It is that section, and various stated other reasons, that is now the central points of a class action lawsuit brought against the DNC. Highly unlikely it will be successful, though not for want of merit but rather for adept legal maneuvering of high powered DNC lawyers. Profit is so sweet, even if it by deception.

I hope it is successful--possibly it will open the eyes of the party leadership.

When the foundations busted you don't remodel...

Rew says

BlueSardine says

you miss the point. read tpb's line again.

I know I always burn my house down first when I want to remodel. Insanity.

Adam Goldman just now tweeting: "I'm still reporting."

That's a NYTimes reporter, after two days chock full of NYT destroying the Trumps over Russia, saying he has something more for us. Could be small, but something more comes. Adam covers FBI and Intel stories.

BlueSardine says

When the foundations busted you don't remodel...

Oh. Interesting. You are not one of the new breed of originalist constitutional scholars the current right wing GOP has produced? Instead a true reformer?

You want to amend the constitution with what?

Rew says

That's a NYTimes reporter, after two days chock full of NYT destroying the Trumps over Russia, saying he has something more for us. Could be small, but something more comes. Adam covers FBI and Intel stories.

NYT credibility is shot they said the Lawyer had ties to Kremlin she did not. Said a British Agent contacted them, it was a pop star agent that contacted them.
The whole story is a Zach Galifianakis award comedy about ineptitude. The only thing missing is Megan Fox and Billy Bush.

The constitution is the land the foundation sits on. That can stay.
The foundation is made up of corporations, lobbyists, and politicians. The current crop must go.

Rew says

BlueSardine says

When the foundations busted you don't remodel...

Oh. Interesting. You are not one of the new breed of originalist constitutional scholars the current right wing GOP has produced? Instead a true reformer?

You want to amend the constitution with what

Tenpoundbass says

NYT credibility is shot they said the Lawyer had ties to Kremlin she did not.

Fascinating ...
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/11/world/europe/natalia-veselnitskaya-donald-trump-jr-russian-lawyer.html

BlueSardine says

The foundation is made up of corporations, lobbyists, and politicians. The current crop must go.

"Current crop" ... hmmm ... they look like they are staying. Trump family and WH administration, looking pretty shaky.

Stupidest thing I've ever seen a President do: declare war on the intelligence services and media less then a day apart.

www.youtube.com/embed/6oJP0umCDgI

Nothing, except I put Jared and Manafort right in the crosshairs, and the email clearly states it is from Russian state interest to help his dad Trump.

You want me to believe you were playing spy and good guy? I think not. You start getting communications like that, you go right to intelligence officials: FBI. They can advise you on how to behave.

Amateur hour.

Be sure to send Kamala my regards, when she questions you. :)

Was it Collusion?
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/11/us/politics/collusion-trump-russia-campaign.html

Simple, rational, well done. Go NYT! Go Deep State!