The Mueller report should be made available to the public as soon as possible.

Yes, there are legal and constitutional questions. Those questions should be able to be resolved in a timely manner, now that a more than two-year investigation has concluded, and its findings have been sent to the United States’ attorney general.

The few-page summary by the attorney general concluded there is no legal justification to pursue any further the allegations that President Donald Trump’s campaign worked with the Russian government to fix the 2016 election.

Trump said the release of Mueller’s full report “wouldn’t bother me at all,” and Democrats quickly put that statement to the test, demanding that his administration hand over the entire document and not just Sunday’s four-page summary from Attorney General William Barr.

Barr has said previously that he wants to make as much public as he can under the law, though grand jury material is not expected to be released.

We agree with the president, we agree with Barr and we agree with the Democrats.

There is a difference the decisions of judge and jury make in a court of law.

In a court of law during a criminal trial, the phrase “beyond reasonable doubt” is a cornerstone of a verdict. In a civil case, a “preponderance of evidence” is the litmus test.

If what we are hearing from Attorney General William Barr is true, what special counsel Robert Mueller found was that evidence did not rise to either level of proof.

But there is a court of public opinion. That court is held daily in barber shops, coffee houses, offices, street corners, best friends watching a Final Four basketball game during a commercial break, or even a drunken brawl at a tavern.

There seems to be a basic understanding by the public servants in Washington and Austin that what they do in the halls of Congress or the state capitol is upon sacred ground, to be untouched by anyone who hasn’t been invited or elected.

Something, though, appears to be amiss. We are not beholden to the politicians, they are beholden to us.

So, the Mueller report should be released to the public; warts or no warts.

By doing so, in making it available to the entire public, the report can bypass the usual rhetoric of “fake news,” “nothing but a campaign soundbite” or even worse “giving a good news spin to a blatant lie to make it become believable and then the perceived truth.”

As he should, Barr noted in his summary the Mueller investigation reached no conclusion on whether Trump obstructed the federal investigation, instead setting out “evidence on both sides” of the question and stating, “while this report does not conclude the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”

In 1913, U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Louis Brandeis wrote: “If the broad light of day could be let in upon men’s actions, it would purify them as the sun.”

For more than a century – even more if you factor in the United States constitution — the premise is a well-informed public is best for the country and best for the simple concept of democracy.

So, whether it be an investigation into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s email usage or Trump’s actions during an election, the public has a right to know.

• Dave Mathews

Dave Mathews: 409-683-5258; dave.mathews@galvnews.com

(97) comments

Mike Zeller

Well said Dave Mathews, "the public has a right to know".

Carlos Ponce

"Something, though, appears to be amiss."
Dave, that makes you sound like a conspiracy theorist.
This editorial seems to say, " I want it, and I want it NOW!" The document will soon be released but not in its entirety. Certain things must LEGALLY be omitted like grand jury and national security material. But you knew this: "Barr has said previously that he wants to make as much public as he can under the law, though grand jury material is not expected to be released."
If there were anything wrong with what Barr and Trump are saying don't you think Mueller or part of his team would have said something about it by now?
I wish you were this adamant about Mueller concluding the investigation in the first place. It started on May 17, 2017, almost two years ago. You gave Mueller 22 months to do the investigation so why the sudden hurry? Reminds me of an impatient child who wants to open his Christmas presents weeks before December 25th.
Not to worry. Once the report in its LEGALLY redacted form is released the conspiracy theorists will still demand all of it and read things into the report which simply are not there. The anti-Trumpers will not be satisfied with the released document at all. So, why rush? Let Barr and the Department of Justice do what it has to. It won't be immediate. It should not be rushed.
Patience is a virtue. Practice it.[beam]

Ron Woody

Hear, Hear!!
My question Mr. Matthews is do you not also want to see what the FBI used to get the FISA warrants on a private citizen for a crime that there was no evidence it existed?
I appreciate the attempt at writing an impartial commentary on current events, but it certainly fell short.
While there is no evidence that the Trump campaign had any collaboration with a foreign government there is a significant amount of evidence that a federal law enforcement agency conducted surveillance/spied and planted a spy/covert informant into a private American enterprise without cause.
Peter Strozk, the man who knew more about the facts than any other person stated two years ago that there was nothing there. Yet, your brethren in the media breathlessly begged, hoped, pleaded and wished for it to be true! Who does that?
Why are you not calling on the facts to be known about what started the investigation? Is it because you already know that the reason is the wrong person won the Presidency. How sad!

Gary Scoggin

The right’s lack of curiosity as to how the Russians tried to influence our election continues to amaze me. The assault on our democracy was the reason for the investigation. It wasn’t intended to beatake downof the President. But he and his acolytes are so thin-skinned they can see nothing else.

Carlos Ponce

The "right" KNOWS how the Russians TRIED to influence our elections, Gary. If your news source didn't inform yo then change the channel.
"The assault on our democracy was the reason for the investigation." - BULLSTUFF!

Gary Scoggin

If the investigation wasn’t about Russian interference then why did Mueller indict so many Russians?

Carlos Ponce

Why did he indict so many Russians? One of the indicted Russian companies did not even exist. Will any of the Russians ever be tried? No. A part of his team just wanted to appease those with pitchforks and torches out to get the president.

Carlos Ponce

All you have to do is read the House and Senate Intelligent Committee reports to see "how the Russians tried to influence our election", Gary.
https://docs.house.gov/meetings/IG/IG00/20180322/108023/HRPT-115-1_1-p1-U3.pdf
Descriptions on Russian attempts in this country begins on Page 22. Note that a lot of this has been redacted but there is enough revealed to see what they did.

Bailey Jones

That's the question I keep waiting to be answered, Gary - why isn't Russian interference in our election worthy of this 22 month FBI investigation?

Carlos Ponce

"FBI investigation?" The 22 month Special prosecutor's investigation I surmise. And the House and Senate Intelligence committees already investigated. Their conclusions are on-line.

George Croix

That's dishonest, Gary.
It's not a lack of curiosity, it's just not driven by blind hatred of an elected President, and also bases itself on what was learned in the 7th grade by,evidently, only 'the right', about Russian interference at every chance, everywhere. All blended with the REAL issue of why was known interference. months ahead of the election, not attended to by a President who KNEW about it.
The Mueller investigation was started to find out if a CANDIDATE colluded with russians to help him win an election.
You tell me, what part of that 2 year investigation tells us WHY no effort was made to STOP that interference by the EXISTING President? Why he didn't WARN Americans of bots and fake social media posts so we could be more on guard.
THAT is 'Russian influence' issue, is it not?
Yet, all we hear is Trump Trump Trump and never the name of the President at the time who LET the Russian interference go on, and said nothing to the public to warn them....reckon why that is? Does anyone on 'the left' care, or is it just a Trump issue........?
Well, never mind, I know the answer to my own question.....
Just more left wing claims of one thing while actually working in the other direction....
Nothing new there..........

Cary Semar

George, it is pretty obvious why the then EXISTING president did not try to stop the Russians from interfering. The most effective way to stop it would have been to expose it and that would have likely changed the outcome. Would you have been OK with that? That would have been outside the then EXISTING norms and would have been perceived by the Republicans and those who supported Trump as a partisan attempt to interfere with the electoral process.

Rather than create a constitutional crisis, the then EXISTING president chose to rely on the good sense of the electorate. It was a mistake, but the kind of mistake that men of honor are prone to make.

Steve Fouga

Though the reason for Obama's inaction was obvious, Cary's reply is the best-worded explanation for it that I've yet seen. Rock and a hard place, just like Comey faced, twice! Still, I find it nearly unforgivable that he didn't expose the whole bloody thing at the time... But who knows what I would have done?... 😎🤔😳😞😩

George Croix

Cary, I'm always OK with the HONEST winner of anything, winning it....there's no credibility without that....IF Hillary had gone to Wisconsin and PA, she'd BE President right now....I'd HATE that personally, but as a citizen she'd be my President, just like the last in-my-opinion Nixon/Carter clone was my President, despite me despising pretty much everything he did.....this is America, not Venezuela, something the 'resistance' would do well to remember. Hillary lost because primarily because she was a lousy candidate and strategist, and because secondarily a lot of...challenged...people believe everything they read on 'social media'......not because Putin had people over here voting with fake ID's.......even with the bots and gaming, she'd STILL have won had she not taken 'reliable' blue votes for granted.
Do you think Obama thought Trump would WIN? That he wasn't doing all he could to prevent that?
You don't think that withholding the Russian stuff, not acting on it, was because he feared ANY change would affect her chances of winning, as right up until the very end, a couple weeks, she was GUARANTEED to win by at least 9 out of 10 prognosticators? That a 'third term' and continuance of his legacy wasn't paramount? How about just simply being HONEST with the American people, Cary? Was Obama not capable of that??
Ex-Pres. Obama THEN went on after the election to MAKE IT ALL A PARTISAN ISSUE anyway by spending the last 2 years acting like he had nothing to do with the Russian interference', only Trump did.....that's just utterly dishonest, and the 'electoral process' suffers from DISHONESTY.., don't you think? An entire 'resistance' has been based on that dishonesty. How's that help the process?
"Rather than create a constitutional crisis, the then EXISTING president chose to rely on the good sense of the electorate. It was a mistake, but the kind of mistake that men of honor are prone to make."
Cary, you can't have it both ways...if you claim the electorate had sense enough to NOT be influenced by interference from Russians, then why care that the Rooskies did this time, as it was NOTHING they haven't done every time they could for the last century? Why spend 2 years looking for something you say wasn't a factor in not notifying the voters? HOW would there have been a 'constitutional crisis' by a President doing what he's SWORN to do - protecting the citizens of this country from all enemies, foreign and domestic? He did NOTHING here except, like usual, lead from behind and vote 'present'.......
Cary, seems to me we're a LOT closer to a "Constitutional crisis' TODAY when after 2 years of searching by a team who to a man hated Trump and had every reason to hang him for 'collusion' and had the total support in that effort by every last left leaning person in this country and unlimited power and funds and resources but found NO such collusion, yet the SAME people who supported Mueller for 2 years now damn him or try to claim that Barr is somehow at fault. As if the Mueller team and Rosenstein would just sit by and say nothing if Barr unilaterally lied about what he said the evidence rose to.
Cary, that's just not credible, at least, and unfixable, at worst.....

Jack Cross

Gary, the only evidence of people meeting with the Russians are democrats. Hillary and the democrats paying for the fake dossier, Adam Schift meeting with a Russian to dig up dirt. where is the blind justice. All this happened during the Obama administration, people were fired but not prosecuted at least not yet, The democratic party was so un secure the Russians hacked it, when the FBI wanted to look at the server, the democrats said no and the FBI said OK. For crying out loud, where is blind justice. I respect you but I am angry. We don't have a country without equal justice and we don't have a country if we take in every poor person who wants to come here. People may not like Trump but framing a president is criminal.

Gary Scoggin

"Gary, the only evidence of people meeting with the Russians are democrats."

Hmm.. I guess the definition of Democrat includes Michael Flynn, Jeff Sessions and Donald Trump, Jr.

Gary Miller

There was no evidence Trump had done anything wrong before the Mueller appointment. There is no evidence Trump did anything wrong since the Mueller appointment. What the liberals want is a chance to SPIN every word in the Mueller report. Barr should and will release what the law permits as soon as he is convinced the law can be observed. No hurry, It will change nothing if released sooner or later. Liberals will look for word games when it's released.

Bailey Jones

If "There was no evidence Trump had done anything wrong before the Mueller appointment. There is no evidence Trump did anything wrong since the Mueller appointment." then that will all be made clear in the report. Trump has said "“Let it come out, let people see it. Let’s see whether or not it’s legit.” One thing is for sure - not releasing it will not shut up "the liberals".

George Croix

Releasing it will not shut up the left, even if it's content makes it 100% proven to anyone with a double digit IQ they've been totally wrong........there's no fund raising without the issue.......there is NO proof or conclusion that the usual suspects will accept.
Heck, those hacks Schiff and Swalwell , et al, are STILL claiming they have "'proof' of Trump Russia collusion", and the base eats it up, never asking WHAT PROOF....where is it.....why didn't they give it to Mueller......Lets put them under oath, subpoena their 'proof' then include it with the report that found none...I mena, how can people be so dam_ dumb as to fall for such obvious dishonesty from people who cannot back up what they say....
Today is Day 6 since last friday.....6 DAYS. And the howling is merciless.
Blah blah blah.....especially silly when recalling the 8 years of intentional stonewalling we just finished a couple years ago....
Maybe the adults in the room will show themselves and tell the kiddies to stop wailing, let the redactions required by law take place, then try to come to a different conclusion in our living rooms than an entire team of anti-Trump people with unlimited time, resources, and budget could not come to.........
Maybe the instant replay will give a different result for the 'resistance'......

Can't fix that..............

Jarvis Buckley

That's why our President will allow it to be released.

Jarvis Buckley

Gary Scoggin, I enjoy your comments most of the time but lately your starting to sound more like a New Yorker or Californian than a Texan.
Come on back home friend. Your articulate & our President could use your support fighting the left wing socialists.

margo holst

New York & California? The lead the nation in much good and much bad. It seems TX just leads the nation in bad K-12 schools, least health care coverage and environmental safety and probably near the bottom on mental health and prison reform. Socialists, sure there are rightwing of the belief but what would you do without fire departments, water, sewer, roads,SOCIAL Security and Medicare? Leftist Socialist is the mantra of the 2020 election, you already have accepted the meme.

Carlos Ponce

"bad K-12 schools" - Can you name ONE that is bad? the state dissolves "bad" K-12 school districts. LMISD is an example. If there is a "bad" district the state should be notified. Name them please.

Carlos Ponce

Margo Holst posts, " It seems TX just leads the nation in bad K-12 schools."
And Margo cannot name a single district.

Dan Freeman

Texas consistently does poorly in education. https://www.expressnews.com/news/education/article/Texas-gets-lower-marks-in-reading-math-on-12819649.php
Denial is not just a river in Egypt.

Carlos Ponce

From your article:
"Texas students long have performed better on math tests than reading assessments, which could be attributable partly to the state’s large percentage of students for whom English is a second language."
Better in math than reading since arithmetic is a universal language.
In 2018: "There are 509,000 anchor babies and 79,000 illegal immigrants under the age of majority in Texas, according to the Migration Policy Institute. This gives us a total of 588,000 children presumably enrolled in Texas’ public education system....."
How are the other states with children of illegals faring?
"How Illegal Immigration Destroyed California’s Public Education System"
https://nationaleconomicseditorial.com/2018/01/24/illegal-immigration-destroys-american-schools/
Although California spends $88.3 billion on its K-12 public education system, its schools are among the worst in the country. Not only does California have one of the highest student-to-teacher ratios in America—35 percent above the national average—but per-pupil spending has been decreasing steadily.
A recent study ranked California’s K-12 public education system as the 37th worst in the Union in terms of educational quality, and 49th in terms of school safety. That is, California’s schools not only provide students with middling educations in reading and arithmetic, but they’re also dangerous, violent places." "There are 1,227,000 Illegal Immigrants & Anchor Babies Enrolled in California’s Public Schools: 1 in 5 Students"
School districts are doing their best as are principals and teachers. The anti-wall crowd says: "Problem? What problem?"

George Croix

No, denial is also present in comments that exclude a major reason WHY Texas is lower in reading and math, and I suspect other areas, too.
Anyone?
Anyone?
C'mon, ya'll know....take a spoon full of sugar then take your medicine.....[beam]
Gotta love it that so many advocate FOR a MAJOR reason for low performance and high costs eating into available funding...then deflect.....
It would be funny if not so serious, and utterly unfair to our OWN citizen and legal resident children, AND the hardworking teachers doing their best with an ever increasing workload of totally unprepared and high maintenance 'students'....

It's not unfixable, but it requires a will to be honest, not politically correct......

Gary Scoggin

Thanks, Jarvis. I assure you I am as Texan as they come, with forebearers going back to the Battle of San Jacinto. 😀

What bugs me about all of this is that none of the outrage seems to be directed at the guy really trying to undermine our Democracy - Vladimir Putin. It’s not the press, it’s not the left, it’s not even the President’s incurious supporters. The threat is that we are under a real, continuous attack. This war may be fought with bits instead of bullets but it is a war nonetheless. Just ask the people of the Ukraine who keeps taking down their power grid.

As far as the Barr summary of the Mueller report, it reports no indictable crimes of conspiracy or obstruction by the President or his staff. I, for one, am happy to hear that.

Collusion isn’t a crime, it’s a behavior. Call it collusion, call it coordination, call it what you want but we don’t know the facts as to how the campaign worked with favorable interests in Russia. We should know the facts here for the political implications, not necessarily the legal ones. (If Hillary had won, we would need to know the same. She didn’t win, so it’s much less important.)

George Croix

Gary, we know how the losing campaign worked with Russia, including millions in payoffs, with one to a husband, and the generation of a phony dossier ultimately used by corrupt FBI officials and the upper DoJ as a basis for a lied-about warrant to spy on the opposition campaign. All this while the President at the time knew what was going on. THEN after the election starting a phony investigation on the winner supposedly to hunt for things THEY were doing themselves
For goodness sake, THAT is as close to a coup attempt as we're ever known...known...to have had.
Isn't that important? ESPECIALLY following Mueller's report where the ACTUAL guilty were proven wrong in their daily projections onto others?

Trump has already been tougher on Russians than his predecessor and his predecessor and his and his all the way back to GHWB taking over from the last guy actually kicking them. There've been no hot mike 'flexibility' issues in the last 2 years, yet THAT, absolute in our ears evidence of 'Russian collusion' got a pass....and still does. The Russians didn't pull any vote levers. They've been doing this stuff since God's dog was a puppy. I'm WAAAY more worried about 'social media' and how millions of people get so dam_ dumb that they believe whatever pops up on their electronic nipples......
An adult should be able to hate Trump yet stay awake to the real bad actors all around getting a pass.

Remember the E.L.F.? HE was our 'Putin'....what could we have done about him?? I personally wrecked my career chances and got ZERO raises my last 5 years there by bucking his and his toadies stupid policies to try and keep my folks safe, policies that ultimately got people killed and maimed. In retrospect, I'd say 'so what'.....I actually accomplished nothing outside my own sphere of influence....
That's exactly the same for Putin...we can win a battle here and there and are at least doing that, but absent a SEAL Team 6 visit, there's not a darn thing anyone can do to him personally, and NOTHING can stop 'interference as long as people blindly obey the internet.......just keeping focus on him IS the victory, as time is wasted hardening other areas.
IMO, as always............
Essentially, this country for 2 years has been more focused on a mosquito bite than the imbedded gangreen eating us up from within......

Steve Fouga

George, you should be worried about Putin. And Xi, too. The Russians will NEVER have American interests at heart. Trump is not being tough on Russia, and I can't begin to understand how you think he is. If you could explain it, maybe I could understand, but I doubt it.

Carlos Ponce

"Trump is not being tough on Russia...." Unless Steve wants a nuclear bombardment of Russia, it's tough enough and tougher than under Obama who sends this message: "You said Russia. And the 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back." That sounds a lot softer on Russia than Trump. [cool]

George Croix

Steve, I learned a long time ago how to worry a LOT but not panic or focus on one problem while letting equal or worse slip by. Better to ferret out all contributing factors, and take actions to make the situation better, or at least hold as is, rather than run around shouting 'do something'......
Recognizing that as long as there is an internet and as long as it's available to people who will believe whatever they want to believe without ANY effort to vet it and that Vlad Putin is just another in a century long string of Russians who hate America and will do whatever they can to hurt or screw us around does not mean I agree or don't care. If anything, I think it means a better grasp of a situation, because I also want to know who ELSE was really hip deep in Vlad's pocket.....It's odd to me that hoping to find dirt on Trump has totally been the show playing while we let the pile(s) we know about from the other side just sit there......
That may well change soon.
We may find out what all was involved in Putin's boys paying an ex-President a huge sum for a 30 minute speech, and then a Foundation making big bucks as some strategic materials change to other hands, and exactly what 'more flexibility' amounted to.....maybe why we 'led from behind' and let the Iranian's die in the streets rather than help as the Russians supported that regime and why a 'red line' went to joke status while the Russians helped the Syrians gas their own people and why we let the Ukraine get invaded with nothing but a 'harruumph' or two....
Yeah. I'm concerned about Putin...I guess I'd ask if anybody else really is, other than to try to tie Trump to him....
Anybody?
Anybody?
[huh]


Heck, WERE all of the the 'meddlers' even Russians? We had people in THIS country posing as Russian sources meddling in some Congressional elections....
I believe no less than Barack Obama declared that the Russians didn't directly change the outcome of the Presidential election.
Looks to me like we'd be better off asking why THAT President sat by and allowed the Rooskies to 'meddle' than pretending we don't know why they did....
To help Trump?
Sure.
Let's pretend that Hillary as Sec. of State did NOT spend much of 2011 doing her best to trip up Putin's re-election in Russia. I mean, it just COULDN'T be that 'helping Trump was actually attempted revenge for Hiullary screwing around with Putin's election.....naw....no way.....that would just ruin a perfectly good phony 'resistance' narrative.........[beam][beam][beam][beam][beam][beam]

George Croix

He's not, Steve?
Tougher than previously is not denied, is it?
He's sure being tougher than 'more flexibility' and a phony 'reset' and a rework of the START Treaty that let the Russians build up while we cut back, etc.
By the standards set by who Trump replaced (see preceding sentence) , and arguably as far back as Bush 41, Trump's kicking Rooskie but_t by any objective comparison...of course, 'tough' is all relative....
What do you propose the USA do to stop Putin being Putin?
And why is it just now so important to do so, AFTER we've already pulled back our European forces, after we've screwed ourselves with the START debacle, and after Putin already has retaken the Crimea while we 'led from behind'.
Not exactly fair to blame Trump for not being tough when he replaced a guy who was the Russian's best friend for 8 years in helping them get stronger........

Steve Fouga

Please name something Trump has done to be tough on Trump. Maybe I'm just forgetting, but I can't think of a single thing. Not one.

Carlos Ponce

Steve, from CNBC:
Russian troops were killed in Syria during bombing raids.
August 2017, Trump signed into law the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act, or CAATSA.
According to CNBC, "Indeed, some of the toughest sanctions in years have fallen on Russia’s elite under the Trump administration."
Trump approved the sale of lethal weapons to Ukraine — something Barack Obama did not do.
The Trump administration expelled 60 Russian diplomats from the U.S.
From NPR:
"There's never been a president as tough on Russia as I have been," Trump told reporters on Wednesday.
That might sound like hyperbole, but in this case, there's actually some basis for the president's boast."
"Trump gave U.S. forces in Syria more leeway to engage with Russian troops."
"Trump has aggressively promoted U.S. energy exports..." This is a challenge to Russian energy sales.
From Breitbart, in addition to those named above:
In December 2017, the Trump administration banned the use of software from Russian cybersecurity giant Kaspersky Labs, citing concerns about security exploits in the software and “ties between certain Kaspersky officials and Russian intelligence and other government agencies.”
The Trump administration punished Russian companies in December 2017 for helping the Kremlin develop a cruise missile that violated Cold War arms control treaties.
Politifact rates Trump's claim as "Mostly False" because he failed to confront Russian meddling in the elections. First, the meddling happened during the Obama administration. Second Russian meddling had NO effect on the election.

George Croix

Been busy watching granddaughter play softball, just finishing ahead of rain storm...:
Steve, Carlos beat me to it.

Also add in response to various Russian no-no's, versus doing nothing, the previous method:
Sanctions.
Expelling diplomats.
Closing a consulate and some other facilities
Selling arms to Russia's adversaries, rather than just sending blankets and MREs.
The sale of missile parts from Russia to NK has been halted, or at least driven out of sight or in hiatus.
NONE of this was even remotely on the last guy's radar, except as talking points for Fine Soaring Rhetoric Speech numbers 3007 thru 5689......
Pres. Trump hasn't sent SEAL Team 6 after Putin personally, which just may be the only thing you'd recognize, Steve, as tough.
Like I said, comparatively, just addressing Russia and not 'having more flexibility' would put him way ahead of his predecessor....talk about REAL 'Russian collusion'....a hot mic full of it.............

margo holst

DJ Kava
While some in comments sparse every adjective and verb they it tends to serve as misdirection for the large picture. For examples the editorial about the Mueller report seems neglect suspicions of Barr’s history in helping covering up independent counsel Lawrence Welch investigation of the illegal Iran-Contra events. Not only in his job as Attorney General encouraged Bush to pardon Defense Sec Casper Weinberger and five others on December 24, 1992, he made sure Congress never got to see Welch’s results. As Welch commented, there went the case. There is every reason in the world to distrust Barr's statements and actions.

George Croix

But, the fact that Bob Mueller is BEST FRIENDS with fired disgraced FBI director Comey and hired ONLY a team of investigators who were pro-Hillary contributors and STILL after unlimited time, funds, and resources declared Trump and no members of his campaign colluded with the Russians means NOTHING to you?
EVERY reason and opportunity to hang the guy, and couldn't.......
And it's BARR who's in focus......??

Well.................

Gary Scoggin

So far there has been no demonstration of collusion or non-collusion. Collusion isn’t a crime. Conspiracy and obstruction are. According to Barr’s summary, Mueller found evidence of neither that warranted indictment.

Emile Pope

Let's see...The AG sent a letter before getting the job saying that the president can't be convicted of obstruction of justice under any circumstances. Then when he gets the Mueller report he doesn't send it to congress. He personally states based on his own personal opinion (which he had stated earlier) that the president didn't break any laws. He also gives no basis for his decision. Then he refused to allow congress to see any of the evidence until he AND the white house have seen AND edited it. And he won't give a date as to when he will allow the report to be seen. Seems fair I guess. Plus the fact that not a single complete sentence by Mueller was quoted in the four page letter submitted by AG. The swamp is now a cesspool...

Mike Zeller

Emile, Emile, Emile, STOP IT with all these facts. Some may get confused.

George Croix

Facts?

Now, that's funny, I don't care who ya are.......[beam][beam][beam][beam]

Carlos Ponce

No facts, Mike. Emile made the whole thing up. Don't believe me - believe the "letter" Barr sent Rod Rosenstein:
https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthelper/549-june-2018-barr-memo-to-doj-mue/b4c05e39318dd2d136b3/optimized/full.pdf#page=1

Steve Fouga

It'll work out okay, Emile. This administration is the most self-destructive group of lamebrains I've ever observed. By pushing through "The Wall" at the expense of the military, eliminating millions of peoples' health insurance, reducing Medicare, and doing nothing about gun violence and climate change, the Republicans are supporting the opposite of pretty much everything most important to the public. It's hard to imagine anybody voting for this dufus or any of his sycophantic Republican senators in 2020.

I know some will, of course, because I read this forum.

George Croix

I suppose I could vote for anyone who thinks the border security issue is a 'manufactured crisis', or that extending barracks facilities is more pressing than thousands of illegal invaders per week, or that deductibles too high to afford is actually 'insurance', or that Medicare fraud is a canard, or that 'gun violence' is cured by more laws against honest citizens, or that 'climate change' can be cured in 10 years or we're all dead, and all we have to do is return to the 15th century are important to a public with any notion of reality. The others, well.......

But, no thanks........I think I'll stick with progress, rather than 'progressive'........[beam][beam][beam][beam][beam][beam][beam][beam]

Carlos Ponce

"By pushing through "The Wall" at the expense of the military..."
The Secretary of Defense and Pentagon recommended the transfer of funds as prescribed by law - 10 USC 284:
The Secretary of Defense may provide support for the counterdrug activities or activities to counter transnational organized crime of any other department or agency of the Federal Government or of any State, local, tribal, or foreign law enforcement agency for any of the purposes set forth in subsection (b) or (c), as applicable, (7) Construction of roads and fences and installation of lighting to block drug smuggling corridors across international boundaries of the United States.
Their goal is to protect American lives, protect the borders of the United States.

George Croix

"Then when he gets the Mueller report he doesn't send it to congress. He personally states based on his own personal opinion (which he had stated earlier) that the president didn't break any laws."

For once, you're right about 'garbage'.....[whistling]
By now, pretty much anyone should know that it's against the LAW to reveal any part of that report that's related to sources and methods, related to national security, or related to anyone not charged. There's not much to be done for anyone who doesn't care. I know we're used to the ex-Pres. not caring about laws and rules, but we'll just have to get used to how things are supposed to work...no 'tarmac meetings' allowed..... At least this one has called for release of ALL that can be lawfully released, TOTALLY unlike his predecessor, rather than stonewall until 2024 or claim 'it was the video'....Be patient, and in the meanwhile, go to Rosenberg Library and look up some Government 101 ....American government, I mean, not 'world government'....

And, anybody able to walk and chew gum at the same time knows that Barr did NOT unilaterally decide squat, unlike Holder (or Lynch)....
Assist. AG Rosenstein, who APPOINTED Mueller so had the most to lose politically from a Mueller strike out, AND the Justice Dept. lawyers involved, AND the Office of Legal Counsel, all no friends of Trump, all were included in that decision. - it's a flat out canard that Barr did it all on his own......
Don't believe so?
Then, WHY AREN'T MUELLER AND WEINSTEIN AND THE OTHERS screaming like gutshot eagles that Bar did not tell the truth??? You think they'd just sit there the last 3 days and say NOTHING after 2 years looking all they could to find campaign related dirt on the Pres. and his family and everybody he ever knew, then couldn't, if Barr had said anything they didn't agree with in conclusion?

Can't fix that....

Carlos Ponce

"Let's see...The AG sent a letter before getting the job saying that the president can't be convicted of obstruction of justice under any circumstances."
I see Emile is rewriting history again.
Here is the letter to Rod Rosenstein. Not quite as described by Emile:
https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthelper/549-june-2018-barr-memo-to-doj-mue/b4c05e39318dd2d136b3/optimized/full.pdf#page=1
Let me point out certain FACTS that in the light of day show the accusation that the " the president can't be convicted of obstruction of justice under any circumstances" is pure FABRICATION.
From the letter:
"Obviously, the President and any other official can commit obstruction in this classic sense of sabotaging a proceeding’s truth-finding function."
But he does point out: "As things stand, obstruction laws do not criminalize just any act that can influence a “proceeding.”
"It appears Mueller’s team is investigating a possible case of “obstruction” by the President predicated substantially on his expression of hope that the Comey could eventually “let...go”of its investigation of Flynn and his action in firing Comey."
He concluded:
"Mueller should not be permitted to demand that the President submit to interrogation about alleged obstruction."
Your allegation: "The AG sent a letter before getting the job saying that the president can't be convicted of obstruction of justice under any circumstances." is not found in the letter.

George Croix

Weinstein?

Rosenstein.....

Doesn't need to be close where facts don't matter to the 'resistance' anyway......

Emile Pope

Let's see. donald wants to eliminate Obamacare and coverage for pre existing conditions. But later on, in the sweet bye and bye, he'll come up with a healthcare plan although he can't say when and has no one working on one. Guess those people who get sick in the meantime will have to count on the healing powers of the MAGA hat...oh and the cuts to Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security will equal the tax break he gave to the top 1%. So much winning...

George Croix

Where do you get these ideas?
Never mind...I know....TIP: Preparation H will help the soreness........

Carlos Ponce

Emile, put on a MAGA hat and you will be HEALED![wink]
But I'm calling you out on the alleged "cuts". I've already shown you the amount spent on Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security RISE each year.

Carlos Ponce

Put politics aside, Emile. Look at the numbers only:
Medicare:
2018 = 582 Billion Dollars
2019 = 645 Billion
2020 = 702 Billion
2021 = 762 Billion
2022 = 861 Billion
2023 = 892 Billion
2024 = 920 Billion
2025 = 1,038 Billion = 1.038 Trillion dollars
2026 = 1,121 Billion
2027 = 1,202 Billion
2028 = 1,385 Billion
2029 = 1,361 Billion
If you remember anything about elementary math you will see the amount budgeted for Medicare INCREASES each year. There are NO cuts. Similar numbers for Medicaid and Social Security found on page 113 of proposed budget PDF:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/budget-fy2020.pdf
You are entitled to our own opinion, Emile, but not your own facts.

George Croix

Dontcha know....a decrease in an increase is a cut for the left.....
It's the same way they come up with 'don't get an income tax refund' with the new tax laws despite paying less in total income taxes......

In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king......


Jarvis Buckley

Editor: commentor calling president of the United States Dufus & Lamebrain does that fall into your
Limits of censorship? If you continue to allow this type of comment I'm afraid by the 2020 election it's going to get out of hand. I would like a response from the editor please.

George Croix

Jarvis, by printing just about nothing except negative articles and editorials either proprietary or AP sourced or whatever for the last couple years, what opinion do you expect the GDN to actually hold on that subject that would get you an answer you evidently expect?[wink]

Personally, I support the 'resistance' and other opposition's free speech right to be as verbally derogatory as they want absent attacking or threatening harm to anyone's family. It doesn't hurt anybody aimed at, and rest assured that the President doesn't care......, and more than the last one did......

Jarvis Buckley

George I have a lot of respect for GCDN . We all speak our mind regarding various political view points. I just thought those comments crossed the line. If the paper doesn't think it did . I expect it's going to get a lot worse.

Jarvis Buckley

Just my thoughts✌️

George Croix

WHAT line(s), Jarvis? [beam]
The lines we grew up with pretty much all crumbled when the 'resistance' decided to talk it, but then not walk what they talked.....becoming, themselves, that which they declared would be the result of 'failing to accept the results of the election".....a 'direct threat to our democracy'.....
Can't fix that [censored]

Steve Fouga

Jarvis, I've been calling politicians dufuses and lamebrains for, oh, 50 years or so, and almost everyone I associate with does the same. I only use language that mild in this forum because I know the GDN wouldn't print the words that truly express my feelings. In fact, the level of disdain I feel for the current administration goes far beyond words.

Like you, I hope the editor responds to your request. In fact, I can hardly wait.

George Croix

ps:
Jarvis, we just endured a 2 year hysteria cluster you know what where the usual suspects EVERY DAY promised 'collusion' WILL...WILL....THERE"S PROOF.....LOTSA PROOF..... ANYBODY KNOWS IT......be found between the Russians (sic) and the Trump campaign... AND daily doses of "Trump would fire Mueller'. "Mueller must be protected". "Any effort to stop Mueller will be met with lawsuits".
"ETC." And add in the MSM talking heads and 'celebrities' and assorted other mixed prognosticators all devoted like the members of the left side of Congress to the 'collusion' mantra and to The Man Who'd Find IT - Bob Mueller.
Yet, none of that happened, and the MINUTE Mueller doesn't find that collusion, they turn on him like Brutus on Caesar, and suddenly it's all Barr's conspiracy to 'let Trump off the hook".
I'd say it's ALREADY a lot worse, and dealing with people this dedicated to their own personal realities, oen 'truths', means it will...will...get worse, and there's no place for even a smidgen of alternate discourse.
These guys HAVE to 'double down' and just get worse, or risk admitting the collosal degree of their own culpability in the biggest political scam on the American people since Nixon. Heck, bigger, because all Nixon did was break into an opponent's office and then use the IRS against his enemies......Here we've got everybody from POTUS on down involved in a projection of guilt when not directly involved in a soft coup attempt or at least an effort to invalidate the results of an election they just knew...KNEW...they couldn't lose.......
Pres. Trump is not somebody I personally like, and I suspect he's got some bodies buried here and there like pretty much all big business people and politicians, so it's possible or likely that with half the country looking for dirt that it will be found.
But this inquisition makes 'birther' mania look positively minuscule......
Hang on.
Welcome to the future..............too.........

George Croix

Been listening to Nancy hold court this morning going on about 'transparency' in immediate release of the full Mueller report. Evidently, one can be Speaker of the House and be clueless about basic legalities, but then she's been there before......

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9uC4bXmcUvw

Looks like she's reversed course and is now for 'transparency' after being against it....

John Kerry, eat your heart out......[beam][beam][beam][beam][beam][beam][beam][beam][beam][beam]

Jarvis Buckley

Steve I honestly wasn't trying to be personal with my objection.(didn't
mention name.) I just figure the closer we get to 2020 the more personal comments will probably get. You may not agree with the conservative view points of commentor's like myself but I would never for instance call Beto
Bozo . I have called him a socialist because I truly believe he is. I apologize to you if I offended you.
Not my intent. I just hope we can maintain a little civility going into the 2020 elections . At least on these forums.

Steve Fouga

No offense taken, Jarvis. I never call any fellow participants names, but I figure politicians are fair game. Still, I agree that the high road is usually best.

Jarvis Buckley

👍

Jim Forsythe

Next thing that will happen is someone will ask that comments be censored.
We have a President that call people worse names than Dufus & Lamebrain..,so if someone wants Dufus & Lamebrain censored,Trump must also be censored. Censorship is the first step to Dictatorship.

"Editor: commenter calling president of the United States Dufus & Lamebrain does that fall into your Limits of censorship? If you continue to allow this type of comment I'm afraid by the 2020 election it's going to get out of hand. I would like a response from the editor please"
Even his Atty General, called Trump a lamebrain and a dingbat.
“I have respect for the president, but I wouldn’t say he is a political prodigy,” said Atty General Jeff Sessions. “More like a loathsome lamebrain or a despicable dingbat.”

Carlos Ponce

Jim can you cite a reputable source for your alleged Jeff Sessions quote? I can only find it at medium.com - not reputable. The article was written by Allan Ishac
whose writings consists of satire, humor. Medium.com is "a hybrid collection of amateur and professional people and publications, or exclusive blogs or publishers on Medium, and is regularly regarded as a blog host."
Since it appears NO WHERE else, I question it.

George Croix

Doesn't matter whether it's a fact or not, it's a 'truth' for anyone looking for one.....
[smile]

Jarvis Buckley

Reading some of these really harsh comments about The United States
Of America's President. Really takes away all hope of us ever being
bipartisan . Meanness appears to
Prevail amongst the liberal socialists
Today Eric Holder asked the question. When was America ever great? This is a man that was found in contempt of Congress. Paid for years a great salary . Out of my pocket & your pocket. This is troubling times. Thank goodness we have a President with the mental fortitude to take the incoming assaults the MSM & Washington swamp has showered him with.
Our former president Hussein Obama
Was looked on as a Rock Star by MSM. $150 billion cash money
Sent Iran. My money your money.
How was that money dispersed?
It's a legitimate question MSM never
asked. Socialists don't love our Country. They love power.

Steve Fouga

Gimme a break, Jarvis! Are you saying Trump DOESN'T love power??

I get a kick out of folks saying "liberals want to ruin our country," and "lDemocrats all want socialism and that's BAD." No one wants to RUIN the country. It's just that their ideas for how to make the country better are different from yours. I think they're right about half the time. That's why we have 2 political parties that tend to get about half the vote.

Mike Zeller

C'mon Jarvis, quit your bellyaching. Do you think anyone is going to take you serious, when you do the exact same thing you have been whining about. Our previous Commander in Chief was President Barack Hussein Obama II. I'm sure it was in no way, to try and belittle our former President, when you conveniently left off his first name. Just an honest mistake, right ! "Respect is a Two-way Street"

Paula Flinn

So much right-wing hate, or bias, to cut through here. Just look at this conversation and reread what has been said. Fox News has done its job of spreading the hate toward Pres. Obama and the last Administration. All has been regurgitated by one leader, our president now, who has called all Democrats and the MSM (except for Fox News) “Evil.”

Now Pres. Trump seeks to eliminate (instead of fix) the ACA, wants to allocate less than needed money in the budget to Medicare & Medicaid, wants to “affect” our Social Security, wants to destroy all the good faith, tariffs, and treaties with our foreign allies, wants to destroy all the good faith with Democrats and Independents he, himself, brought to the table while campaigning. This he does by lying and taking revenge on anyone who criticizes him, like Sen. John McCain did. Pres. Trump also backs dictators who have no ethics or integrity—some who are dangerous murderers, like the Saudi Prince, Putin, & Kim Jung Un.

Pres. Trump is a climate denying person who is not curious enough to seek the truth about global warming and climate change. Knowing that Galveston and surrounding areas will be the first areas affected, especially when we have another tropical storm/hurricane, it doesn’t bother Republicans here or even peak their curiosity. All they are worried about is the money it will take to keep the refineries safe.

The new Secretary of Interior, the former lobbyist for Big Oil, will make sure all the laws preserving the environment will be weakened, like the one recently enacted where you may kill hibernating bears and sleeping cubs in their caves during the winter.

It only took New Zealand 6 days to pass common sense gun laws after the first tragedy there. Here in the US we cannot even pass a law restricting mentally ill people from purchasing guns. The NRA has become a corrupt, political tool against anyone who wants to pass common sense gun legislation.
President Trump now threatens to close the border, “for a long time.” Trade with Mexico would be cut off resulting in billions of dollars and thousands jobs lost. Harley Davidson, Carrier, GM—when are you moderate conservatives going to realize that enough is enough? I guess when it affects your pocketbook or livelihood, like the US farmers.

Carlos Ponce

Looks like Paula is regurgitating Left wing propaganda.
"wants to allocate less than needed money in the budget to Medicare & Medicaid"
Here we go again! You must be very poor in math. There is MORE MONEY for Medicare and Medicaid in each successive year.
Medicare:
2018 = 582 Billion Dollars
2019 = 645 Billion
2020 = 702 Billion
2021 = 762 Billion
2022 = 861 Billion
2023 = 892 Billion
2024 = 920 Billion
2025 = 1,038 Billion = 1.038 Trillion dollars
2026 = 1,121 Billion
2027 = 1,202 Billion
2028 = 1,385 Billion
2029 = 1,361 Billion
If you remember anything about elementary math you will see the amount budgeted for Medicare INCREASES each year. There are NO cuts. Similar numbers for Medicaid and Social Security found on page 113 of proposed budget PDF:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/budget-fy2020.pdf
You are entitled to our own opinion, Emile, but not your own facts.
Paula, if you cannot grasp this just ask one of your middle school students to explain that more money is budgeted each year.

Steve Fouga

Of course what matters is whether the budget covers the need.

Carlos Ponce

Paula posts: "Pres. Trump is a climate denying person..."
Trump, like me, believes in climate change. Climate change is a natural cyclical occurrence.
"It only took New Zealand 6 days to pass common sense gun laws..."
New Zealand has nothing comparable to our Second Amendment. Sad.[sad]
An armed good guy could have confronted the shooter in New Zealand. Only a fool would believe that the "common sense gun law" will have any real effect on deterring gun violence.

Steve Fouga

Coulda woulda shoulda. "Armed guys" almost never do confront the mass murderer, until the cops get there.

George Croix

PF, if your neighbor driving a big pickup truck runs over somebody and kills them, is it 'common sense' to ban ALL big pickup trucks? Even though 99.5% of the drivers did not run over and kill somebody?

There's nothing 'common sense' about blanket laws that effect NOBODY BUT THE HONEST. Maybe you figure the bad guys over there will voluntarily turn in their evil guns?
Maybe....there's always a first time in the history of the world.......
It's the typical leftist 'gotta do something' then doing the exact thing that does nothing to make any real difference, just screws over the innocent.
Nothing new there.....

Steve Fouga

Maybe if there were thousand-horsepower pickup trucks designed to run over people, and people were using them to kill big groups of them, then yes, maybe they should be banned.

George Croix

You're knowledge of weaponry could use some work, there, Steve, if that analogy was meant to actually be meaningful....[rolleyes].
Personally, I figure 300 dead people spaced over a couple months every couple of months is still more than 50 once or twice a year, but then math was never my strong subject area....
But then, it's not about the deaths, but the politics, on this subject.....
For volume all at once look at Airplane crashes......but, why spoil the emotion of the thing with reason.....[innocent]

Steve Fouga

I wrote it hurriedly, George, and it's hypothetical, but the analogy works. I'll try again. I realize you don't need a lesson on guns and trucks, but this is my reply:

Guns are used for a number of things, but their underlying purpose, the reason they were created, is for killing. I have no objection to this, because people have a right to defend themselves and to hunt, and guns make this easier. The guns used most often in mass murders are high-capacity semi-automatics based on military weapons specifically designed for quickly and efficiently killing PEOPLE (and even better, in combat, wounding them). This is why both of us value this type of gun over other firearms for defending ourselves and our families. And this is why some folks want this type of gun banned. High-capacity semiautos are simply so good for killing that many people consider their existence a danger.

Pickup trucks are used for a number of things, but their underlying purpose, the reason they were created, is for hauling and towing. We have a right to haul and tow, and pickup trucks make this easier. The pickup trucks that most often kill people in traffic weigh about 4,000-5000 lb, and have engines of 250-450 hp. My hypothetical is this: What if someone designed and sold a 7,000-lb pickup with 10,000 hp, especially for mowing down crowds of people, and then nutcases actually bought the trucks and did it. It wouldn't be the fault of the trucks, it would be the fault of the drivers. Yet there would be an outcry calling for the banning of such vehicles.

To me, that analogy, though hypothetical, makes more sense than one involving the everyday use of everyday pickup trucks, by which bystanders are killed in greater numbers than in mass murders.

George Croix

Interesting comparisons, Steve.
Except the more correct power equivalent to your 10,000 hp pickup, if one ever existed, would be a 30mm Vulcan cannon like the AR10 Warthog aircraft carries, or the 20mm version that the Phalanx ship mounted close range defense systems use.
Hardly shoulder fired firearms, although certainly military style.

The AR15 and it's various look alikes firing the 5.56mm round, to use a popular target (no pun), are a LOT...a LOT....less powerful than even the weaker range of typical deer hunting cartridges fired from all sorts of weapons, including shoulder fired semi-autos. So, false equivalency.....only in the movies and the fake news and the false 'common sense gun control' propaganda is this weapon given mythical powers and capabilities far beyond any that an actual user of one could ever hope to extract. They are popular with MILLIONS upon MILLIONS of honest, law abiding citizens, and owned by them, because they are lightweight, DO use a lower power/lower recoil cartridge that itself is lighter in weight, are excellent self-defense weapons when used by someone capable of using one, and the intangible(s) factor(s) of being appealing to a lot of us for multiple reasons.
I used my comparisons because big pickups are so often hated by the same folks who so often hate the AR15, because they say nobody 'needs' one or the other or both. Hence my comparison of the two....
Me, I'd be all over severe punishment for a driver or a shooter misusing their killing device of choice, not deciding what really was needed was to take similar away from my honest and upright neighbors, then pretending I'd done something 'common sense'.
But, that's me.
And Multiples of Millions of others, too..........just not the ones favored by the folks and 'journalists' with more PC personal agendas and no common sense.....
We're back to Ward and Charles, again..............[whistling]

Steve Fouga

"The AR15 and it's various look alikes firing the 5.56mm round, to use a popular target (no pun), are a LOT...a LOT....less powerful than even the weaker range of typical deer hunting cartridges fired from all sorts of weapons, including shoulder fired semi-autos. So, false equivalency....."

Being in favor of both, I don't really want to argue guns and trucks, but in my opinion my analogy is not a false equivalency. The 5.56 is powerful ENOUGH to kill humans, and that, combined with a soldier's ability to shoot it well and carry more of its ammunition as opposed to more powerful cartridges, is why most of the worlds' militaries have settled on it. In that way it is MORE deadly than an M14, for instance. If more powerful cartridges were better for killing a lot of people quickly, then that's what the military would use.

My hypothetical pickup would be better at killing a lot of people quickly than a run-of-the-mill F-Series. If somebody created one to kill people, and used it to kill people, folks would want it banned. Hence the comparison.

I have to tell myself from time to time that those millions of us who enjoy the shooting sports are outnumbered by the many, many millions more who don't have a dog in that hunt, so to speak. Our continued ability to enjoy our hobby and defend ourselves as we see fit are in the hands of those many millions. I would far rather compromise on a few rules, than to lose the whole game.

George Croix

You're betting on unemotional reasoning to prevail, Steve.....that if we sacrifice Joe we can save the rest of the folks.
Good luck with that......
Give an inch, and you will...will. find your whole ruler gone before you know it.....

George Croix

ps:
Nice Democrat talking point badmouthing the NRA.
The NRA was the FIRST organization asking for mandatory background checks and insisted that long arms be included along with the original intent of handguns only.
Listening to the Left make a demon straw man out of 5 million plus honest citizens is pretty much the MO of that bunch, though.....
Is PETA to blame for animal bites.................???[beam][beam]

Steve Fouga

Nobody's upset about the 5 million law-abiding card-holders. It's the few lobbyists with an inordinate amount of power.

George Croix

Then why not say that, Steve, instead of a blanket condemnation?
There's a reason for that..........
Why not be mad about the criminal misuse of a firearm, rather than damn owners of them? Put so much misery on the actual criminal that he/she will never ever get another chance to repeat. Stop pretending that regulating Ward Cleaver will stop Charles Manson......
The fact is, 'NRA' has become the straw man for all misuse of firearms.
Yet one wonders why AAA is not the same for all misuse of automobiles.....
If the subject is actually concern for needless deaths, then as usual, the usual suspects reveal both faces............
I've got multiple 'military style weapons' along with multiple 'sporting weapons'....and a few more than a couple of boxes of ammo.
As but one example, I don't text or talk on a cell while driving.
Yet, so many folks who do call ME a 'threat', while they engage in activities that are far more likely to cause harm to innocent people....

Can't fix that........

George Croix

"So much right-wing hate, or bias, to cut through here.'
What a load of manure.....

So soon we forget the 'downright mean country'.....
Exactly who is it that urges others to attack people with different views, physically and verbally? Who does the rioting and looting when they don't get their way?
Who's unwilling to even let opposing political views speak on a college campus?
Who gins up the most false charges honest people (as found AFTER their reps are in tatters)?
Who's FIRST effort when some nut kills people is to dump on honest citizens?
Which bunch can always be counted on to race bait?
Which folks make up phony 'attacks' to make some PC point or to enhance their own PR?
Which 'leader' went on a world apology tour, essentially blaming his own country (that's US...the citizens) for the ills of the world?
Which political side folks are the 'resistance', as deluded and dishonest a bunch of folks as there has ever been.
Total bunk ....but typical projection.
The left can ALWAYS be counted on to howl and deflect at others for exactly what they themselves are doing right then and there.....

Jarvis Buckley

Seems as if this old blue eyed gray haired white male struck a nerve.

Steve Fouga

Yep. Stirred up some angry right-wingers, Jarvis!

George Croix

Got a few Twilight Zone dwelling liberals and fence sitters, too, Jarvis.....[beam][beam][beam][beam]

Jarvis Buckley

One last comment , to all Trump haters Google "the walk away movement" you might learn a thing or two .

Steve Fouga

I was already a centrist and independent voter (though on this forum that makes me a leftist), so no need for me to "walk away" from the Democrats. The idea of the Walk Away movement, unless it is just a social media sabotage of the Democratic Party, is sound: That is, it's hard for a moderate Democrat to stick with a Democratic Party that has slid so far to the left that its principles are as far out of line with your beliefs as those of the far right. Those people need a home somewhere in the political spectrum. Unfortunately, right now neither party offers one.

Gary Scoggin

Steve... I'm with you. I'm a middle of the road independent, which sometimes makes me just short of a Communist around this place.

George Croix

Which road...????[beam][beam][beam][beam][beam][beam]

As a plain old conservative who actually tries to form my own opinions rather than get them from Facebook or the MSM, I'm an Alt-Right Nazi Skinhead Fascist Racist Bigot Misogynist Gay Hating Gender 'Identifying' Idiocy Opinionated Entire Muslim Race Blaming Climate 'Denying' Snowflake Deriding Gun Toting Killer Wannabe NRA Terrorist Cat Hating ([wink][smile])PETA Scoffing Fossil Fuel Loving Meat Eating Carbon Credit Sceptic Big Oil Advocating Soulless Jackal to the Left in general, and the 'resistance' in particular along with all the other of their less nutty but sympatico with them assorted wackadoodles (I use that term with the deepest possible respect......).......
I'd suggest you two guys learn to not care, like me.....about the not caring, I mean.....[beam][beam][beam][beam][beam][beam]

Gary Scoggin

George, I was with you until you got to cat hating. :)

George Croix

My Shepherds loved cats......but they didn't like fried shrimp......no accounting for the 'tastes' of various life forms......[beam][beam]

Jim Forsythe

One of the best political signs I have ever seen was in Lake Jackson. It said,
Lefty Was Right.
I have no idea what Lefty was right about.
More information was needed.
The same goes for how some people see's others, sometimes it is not reality.
To celebrate Lefty from Lake Jackson is a song by Gerry Guthrie - Lefty was Right.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uWJCJ50W1cw


Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.

Thank you for Reading!

Please log in, or sign up for a new account and purchase a subscription to read or post comments.