DOJ Set To Release Comey's Memos, Could Lead To End Of Mueller's Investigation, Top Democrat Says

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: DBCowboy

Damn. DC. Thank goodness for you!

I teach highschool wrestling. That's about as far as I go but we need people like you in government. (Just not to high up or they replace your sole with pyrite)

We're a non-partisan committee who meet quarterly with the politicians, usually hosted somewhere by the Chamber of Commerce.


We look at proposals and budgets and tell them what they can realistically can/cannot do.

For the most part, it keeps them honest.


The most common phrase we use is, "I know what you WANT to do, this is what you can AFFORD to do".

a reply to: DBCowboy

That is some radical stuff!

a reply to: luthier

I spent a he past week getting called a secret democrat shill for condemning trumps Syria strike

I have said repeatedly that no matter why am investigation started or who is leading it, if trump is proven to have committed crimes he should be jailed

I called out congresses extension of fisa authorization

I have routinely said I have little hope trump will change anything of substance ( I think he and Bernie have forced the establishment on both sides to more publicly out themselves which is good)

None of that seems to be reason though to think that the fbi and doj should be able to stonewall congress

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: DBCowboy

That is some radical stuff!

It's why thinks work better at a local level and not-so-much at the federal level.

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: The GUT

He may but he has to stop tweeting every time he is bothered. It's worse than my 15 year old.

It frightens me, but then again it has been a big part of his mojo that has the old system overheating and shorting out.

It frightens some folk in the right way though maybe. Like Kim. No telling how that will turn out don't get me wrong, but between being an end around run of the sellout MSM and the thinly-disguised deep state "advisors" Washington tries to surround him with it's a pretty good way of negating road blocks. Yes, hell yes, I wish he would tone some of it down lol, but damn he hits some homers here and there too.

a reply to: DBCowboy

Yes sir. Next time I argue with you just know respect you immensely. It ain't easy anymore to use common sense.

a reply to: Grambler

Well I may misread you then or perhaps social media and text doesn't allow for deeper discussions.


I have been away from ats. Couldn't stand it anymore. I prefer listening to Joe Rogan have 2 hour discussions where people can explain themselves. Literally didn't listen to the news for a month besides what was by osmosis. Listened to Henry Rollins to Jordan pederson have 2 hour discussions. All kinds of views. Today was Sam harris and maajid newass where I learned twitter blocks Milo but not Hamas.

So I just have checked out. My solution is to work with my community and people I can reach but the poli sci fascination I have made me check in this week.

Should have stayed away. I don't fit neatly in a party box.

Sounds like you may not either.

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: The GUT

It really pissed me off they just ignored him.

He was having crowds at universities. They abandoned all those voters.

That's exactly why a hard ass like Trump was our only choice. Ron couldn't find a way to get around the rigged system. I hate the controlled-media for that. How they marginalized him.

Campaign reform would actually make some difference if we collectively get the balls to address it.

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Well as a idealogical conservative the special elections don't give me hope you are correct. The hope is however democrats put up more centrists and the regressive left goes away.

I'd say I am the same, however my outlook greatly differs.

The midterms are far enough away that a report like this, with as many names as it likely has, will keep the MSM busy well past election day.

This is going to create the rift, or tear, in the party that has been anticipated for a while now.

It will likely result in the creation of a new movement, yet solidify the GOP further.

Anywho....just an old fart POV here....

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: The GUT

He may but he has to stop tweeting every time he is bothered. It's worse than my 15 year old.

He needs to tweet more.

On his way to the pot.
On the pot.
Just after a wipe.
The direct line to the People is more real than the fake journalists who are parroting Party manifestos daily from their handlers.

a reply to: The GUT

I have to politely disagree. I agree we didn't need a Clinton.


However, I will hold my opinion until the end result.

I think he would make a great ambassador to China. I will leave it at that.

I really think the American people need a reminder we are all in this together and it's OK to be different.

But I really am just an opinion. I don't think it's fact.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Well as a idealogical conservative the special elections don't give me hope you are correct. The hope is however democrats put up more centrists and the regressive left goes away.

I'd say I am the same, however my outlook greatly differs.

The midterms are far enough away that a report like this, with as many names as it likely has, will keep the MSM busy well past election day.

This is going to create the rift, or tear, in the party that has been anticipated for a while now.

It will likely result in the creation of a new movement, yet solidify the GOP further.

Anywho....just an old fart POV here....

Lol well thank you my friend. I apreciate a civil discourse.

We will see. I just hope the dems shape up. We need them too. In fact I hope the conservatives remember to be conservative too.

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: The GUT

He may but he has to stop tweeting every time he is bothered. It's worse than my 15 year old.

He needs to tweet more.

On his way to the pot.
On the pot.
Just after a wipe.
The direct line to the People is more real than the fake journalists who are parroting Party manifestos daily from their handlers.

Yeah I disagree. Social media is dumb. Trump says dumb things and gives away too much info.

I personally loath social media and the msm. One isn't better than the other imo.

a reply to: luthier

Fellas I hope you are right. I hope trump is all your projections.

I just need proof.

Proof will be written in the history books. Possibly after I am no longer on this rock, probably after I am too old to care.

In the meantime, we do the same thing humanity has always done: fight for what we believe. hopefully, we believe the truth; often we do not. But we still fight for our beliefs. It's in our nature.

What we are seeing now is unprecedented with in our history, with the possible exception of just before the War of Northern Aggression. We held an election in 2016, wherein the candidates differed substantially in their promises.

Donald Trump said we need more, better jobs. Hillary Clinton told West (By God!) Virginia coal miners that they just had to suck it up.

Trump said we needed a better boarder and better immigration, including his wall. Clinton said we had to open our borders to everyone.

Trump said we needed better trade deals to even the marketplace. Clinton defended the deals in place and proposed more along the same lines.

Trump said he would remove us from the Paris Accord, saving us trillions of dollars. Clinton said the Paris Accord was vital.

Trump said corruption in Washington DC needed to be curbed. Hillary said there was no problem with corruption in Washington DC.

Trump said he loved all the American people and wanted to work for all of them. Clinton said half of them were "deplorable."

Surprise, surprise... Trump won.

No small part of that win was due to several different allegations surrounding Clinton, none of which appeared to be fairly investigated, of corrupt dealings. Even after election day, reports and rumors of corruption surfaced, both on Trump and on what has come to be known as the "deep state." Almost no evidence has been provided against Trump, save words used in his background that were often taken out of context; literally mountains of evidence have piled up against the "deep state."

You say you are a fan of Ben Shapiro; so am I. Back during the Roy Moore campaign he put out a YouTube video wherein he stated the truth about why Trump was elected: it was never about Trump. It has always been about the people. Trump rode the wave, but if Trump were to buck the wave, he would be ousted as fast as he was instigated. I cannot find the exact video, sorry; Ben is very prolific.

What good has Trump done? From my perspective, he

• cut taxes across the board, including on small businesses.
  
• appointed someone who seems to be a reasonable judge to the Supreme Court.
  
• removed the individual mandate from the ACA.
  
• saw the stock market grow by leaps and bounds.
  
• claims to have personally brought new manufacturing back to the US.
  
• has taken a hard line stance on the use of troops in foreign conflicts.
  
• has increased border security effectiveness.
  
• has made multiple attempts to build the wall he promised.
  
• has tried to take steps to protect US citizens from potential terrorism.
  
• helped promote space exploration by increasing NASA's budget and proposing an ambitious goal.
  
• worked with China and our Asian allies to at least bring some hint of stability to the North Korea situation.
  
• increased the military budget to promote our readiness for any military action.

But he's not perfect either. What bad has he done? From my perspective, he:

• allowed net neutrality to be compromised.
  
• supported civil forfeiture.

Neither list is complete, but they are both everything I could think of off the top of my head. That's a lot more good than bad, and there would be more good if he had not been stymied at every turn by legislative judges and the Congressional Democrats. The latter group have created a lot of bad, from my perspective, including

• shutting down the government for no reason
  
• refusing to help the DACA recipients
  
• characterizing bonuses and tax breaks for middle class folks as "crumbs."
  
• crying to have a free election overturned by impeachment, beginning before Trump took office.
  
• promoting an investigation that we now know never even considered Trump himself as suspect.
  
• mischaracterizing statements made to promote partisanship.

So, in light of all of the above, I believe Trump is doing a good job. Could he be better? Sure. But so far he's keeping campaign promises and acting the way I expect a President to act: strong, confident, and in the best interests of America.

If I am in the majority, the history books will record this. If not, they will record the opposite. I don't write history books, but I damn sure plan on being involved in the plotline. Even if my involvement is not perfect in an imperfect system made up of imperfect humans.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

My fellow Amierican. have been around long enough to understand everything you listed is subjective statistical shell game.

Trump is a direct spitting image of the Bill Clinton presidency.

Right down to the BJ.

Minus the balanced budget.

Ps I do greatly appreciate the care you took with your statement.

I also think you legitimately made correct claims amongst your report.

However, I find a few more things concerning. But, some is my own bias of course.

a reply to: luthier

But, some is my own bias of course.

As long as we can admit that to each other, we can move forward.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: luthier

But, some is my own bias of course.

As long as we can admit that to each other, we can move forward.

TheRedneck

For sure. It's about character. Taking a minute to go "wait a minute let me think about that, haven't thought about it that way" you honestly do that here in a board where it's rare.

Ps check out..youtu.be...

Off topic but a great conversation I think you would appreciate.

a reply to: luthier

I always do that. Of course, I do consider the source where a source has been shown to be inaccurate, but I always try to keep an open mind.

That does not mean I will not argue vehemently for what I believe, though.

The 1000 pound gorilla in this room is that we are all being fed a diet of 90% BS injected with 10% truth. The trick is to find the truth among the BS.

I'll check it out tomorrow (no sound here, wife is asleep).

TheRedneck

a reply to: luthier

The fact of the matter is that no-one does, people subscribe to a political party to gain power behind their ideas. It's very much a situation of compromise, no politicians are actually working for our benefit, so you have to use their voice for the ideas they represent that best benefit you. All of this gets lost in translation due to people not having the time or space to explain what led them to their decisions. There are lifetimes of experience behind each individuals beliefs, that we will never understand, because we don't have time to listen to life stories.

a reply to: Grambler

Fake corruption in the here to for well respected intelligence community. Everybody can see through all the clumsy attempts to discredit them.
Don't you guys know that everyone just laughs at this now?