RadioFreeLiberal.com

Smart Voices, Be Heard
It is currently Sat Dec 16, 2017 10:41 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Forum rules


Please click here to view the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 94 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Nov 16, 2017 11:33 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 10:20 pm
Posts: 5488
Yes, your statement is true just as if I say we don't know if North Korea is planning to launch frozen turkeys towards the U.S.. The fact you refuse to acknowledge your statement doesn't have any value other than to make people think the Clintons are under investigation confirms your dishonesty. Anything you say should be met with a huge dose of skepticism.

Just in case you haven't been keeping up with current events. The Clintons are not your run of the mill citizens. They are public figures. They have been in the news quite a bit lately. Lots of people inside and outside of government have questioned their honesty. Lots of folks are calling for an independent counsel. the AG was questioned about whether the Clintons were or were not being investigated and was also questioned about whether the AG was open to appointing an separate independent counsel. In short the Clintons have been in the news quite a bit lately and the question of whether or not they should in fact be investigated is pretty much on the news on a regular basis. On the other hand, I doubt anyone paid any attention whatsoever to you or me.

So no, we don't know if the Clintons are in fact being investigated or not. It wouldn't surprise me under the circumstances either way. As I said earlier, the JD doesn't announce such investigations but as I said such an investigation probably would in fact leak to the press so it is probably a pretty good guess that they are currently NOT under investigation. The fact that my statement has no value to you probably stems from the fact that you have trouble following conversations or connecting the dots. So since you seem unable to keep up I will view anything you say with a huge dose of skepticism.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 16, 2017 11:40 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2011 1:17 pm
Posts: 6947
Yep. The "news." Fox News, for example, is all over the Clintons, bringing up bullshit scandals past that have been debunked. Yep. Them rotten Clintons! Hey, it worked during the elections, so lets keep it going. What a great way to distract and create noise from Trump and the GOP being investigated for very serious crimes involving National Security.

_________________
“The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness”. — John Kenneth Galbraith


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 16, 2017 11:48 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 10:20 pm
Posts: 5488
Yep. The "news." Fox News, for example, is all over the Clintons, bringing up bullshit scandals past that have been debunked. Yep. Them rotten Clintons! Hey, it worked during the elections, so lets keep it going. What a great way to distract and create noise from Trump and the GOP being investigated for very serious crimes involving National Security.


Distract who? Mueller? I doubt he is swayed one way or the other. That's why they call them independent counsels.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 16, 2017 11:53 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2011 1:17 pm
Posts: 6947
You can't be serious. Are you really playing dumb? I'm not talking about Mueller. Tell you what. Read my post again, and try to figure out who Fox News is targeted to and what they gain by distracting them from reality.

_________________
“The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness”. — John Kenneth Galbraith


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 16, 2017 11:55 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 10:06 pm
Posts: 11487
Just in case you haven't been keeping up with current events. The Clintons are not your run of the mill citizens. They are public figures. They have been in the news quite a bit lately. Lots of people inside and outside of government have questioned their honesty. Lots of folks are calling for an independent counsel. the AG was questioned about whether the Clintons were or were not being investigated and was also questioned about whether the AG was open to appointing an separate independent counsel. In short the Clintons have been in the news quite a bit lately and the question of whether or not they should in fact be investigated is pretty much on the news on a regular basis. On the other hand, I doubt anyone paid any attention whatsoever to you or me.

It doesn't matter if they've been in the news lately or not, what matters is facts and you've presented nothing to indicate to a reasonable person whether or not the Clintons are under investigation. We have the likes of Fox News and the conservative media continually over the past 30 years attacking the Clintons so it's no wonder they in the news quite a bit. If your standard is someone is in the news then you'd have to conclude we don't know if every celebrity is under investigation.

Quote:
So no, we don't know if the Clintons are in fact being investigated or not. It wouldn't surprise me under the circumstances either way. As I said earlier, the JD doesn't announce such investigations but as I said such an investigation probably would in fact leak to the press so it is probably a pretty good guess that they are currently NOT under investigation. The fact that my statement has no value to you probably stems from the fact that you have trouble following conversations or connecting the dots. So since you seem unable to keep up I will view anything you say with a huge dose of skepticism.

I don't have trouble following the conversation but you do have a problem with honesty. Your earlier statement is similar to the Fox News and conservative media innuendos claiming the Clintons did something wrong. Like I said, you are dishonest.

_________________
IMPEACH NOW, REPLACE LATER!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2017 12:01 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 10:20 pm
Posts: 5488
You can't be serious. Are you really playing dumb? I'm not talking about Mueller. Tell you what. Read my post again, and try to figure out who Fox News is targeted to and what they gain by distracting them from reality.

What counts in the long run is the investigation and the investigation is proceeding in spite of the press on either side. If the investigation produces evidence of the corruption you suggest, there won't be any way to distract from that. It will be Watergate on steroids.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2017 2:08 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 3:07 am
Posts: 8384
Just in case you haven't been keeping up with current events. The Clintons are not your run of the mill citizens. They are public figures. They have been in the news quite a bit lately. Lots of people inside and outside of government have questioned their honesty. Lots of folks are calling for an independent counsel. the AG was questioned about whether the Clintons were or were not being investigated and was also questioned about whether the AG was open to appointing an separate independent counsel. In short the Clintons have been in the news quite a bit lately and the question of whether or not they should in fact be investigated is pretty much on the news on a regular basis. On the other hand, I doubt anyone paid any attention whatsoever to you or me.

So no, we don't know if the Clintons are in fact being investigated or not. It wouldn't surprise me under the circumstances either way. As I said earlier, the JD doesn't announce such investigations but as I said such an investigation probably would in fact leak to the press so it is probably a pretty good guess that they are currently NOT under investigation. The fact that my statement has no value to you probably stems from the fact that you have trouble following conversations or connecting the dots. So since you seem unable to keep up I will view anything you say with a huge dose of skepticism.


Joe, the subject came up with regard to a special investigation of Clinton.

Jeff Sessions said he needs a factual basis to start a special investigation on Clinton, implying that there's not a factual basis from which to begin.

Shepard Smith at Fox News took that issue up and lowered the boom on Trump and the Fox News Opinion and conspiracy theory side of the house. He was methodical when he bashed their pet Clinton theory to bits.

Watch this, this is wild eyed entertainment:

www.youtube.com Video from : www.youtube.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2017 7:31 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Wed May 04, 2011 11:26 pm
Posts: 32836
Joe, I would love for you to watch the video of Shep Smith - A Fox News host - that Sam just posted, then explain why you think a Special Prosecutor needs to be appointed.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2017 11:18 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 10:20 pm
Posts: 5488
Joe, I would love for you to watch the video of Shep Smith - A Fox News host - that Sam just posted, then explain why you think a Special Prosecutor needs to be appointed.

Okay. Will probably be sometime this weekend but I promise to circle back to this.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2017 11:37 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2011 1:17 pm
Posts: 6947
What counts in the long run is the investigation and the investigation is proceeding in spite of the press on either side. If the investigation produces evidence of the corruption you suggest, there won't be any way to distract from that. It will be Watergate on steroids.



People are already distracted by it. Manafort and Gates have already been indicted. There's lots more indictments coming. News comes out daily with bombshells against Trump, if you've been paying attention, and hyper partisan cultists don't believe it because they're told not to.

Do you know how many people I've come across on forums and Twitter who are distracted from reality (including some of my own family members), that don't believe Mueller is qualified, that he should be removed, or that he's not really investigating Trump at all, but instead he's going after HRC? "Evil Bill and Hillary are the ones people need to pay attention to! Look over here!"

Straight out of the dictator's handbook, Donald Trump has stated he wants to use the DOJ to go after his poltical enemies. Fox News is convicing people the Clintons are the real criminals. And if a large portion of people don't question Mueller being removed or believe that he was removed justly, if it came down to that, the investigtion against Trump is stalled or eliminated. Comey was already fired unjustly then vilified by the right. And what do you suppose will happen when radicals don't believe Trump is guilty and he's forced out of office, if it comes to that? Do you think in this current climate everything will be fine? Propaganda is real, it's powerful, and dangerous.

I saw a poll recently on conservatives. The majority don't believe Bill O'Reilly or Trump have committed sex crimes. But most of them agree Bill Clinton and Harvey Weinstein did. That's the mentality we're dealing with.

_________________
“The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness”. — John Kenneth Galbraith


Last edited by Drak on Fri Nov 17, 2017 12:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 17, 2017 11:43 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2015 3:09 am
Posts: 5068
Trump is one of the most divisive politicians ever in the history of American politics.


Gonna take a miracle for us to not end up in a more serious state of civil war due to his malfeasance.


But hey, might as well start off with a toast to hoping for miracles.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 10:26 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 10:20 pm
Posts: 5488

Joe, the subject came up with regard to a special investigation of Clinton.

Jeff Sessions said he needs a factual basis to start a special investigation on Clinton, implying that there's not a factual basis from which to begin.

Shepard Smith at Fox News took that issue up and lowered the boom on Trump and the Fox News Opinion and conspiracy theory side of the house. He was methodical when he bashed their pet Clinton theory to bits.

Watch this, this is wild eyed entertainment:

www.youtube.com Video from : www.youtube.com


As promised, although a little late) I watched Shepard Smith's report. I found Smith's report to be an accurate accounting of the way the process for approving such transactions was designed to work. I cannot dispute or argue that the controls he documented are in place and designed to insure that proper approval is obtained for international transactions of this type. What an investigation is designed to do is to verify that the described system worked as designed. The largest embezzlement case I was ever involved in had controls designed to prevent fraud and abuse. The problem is that those controls were bypassed. That's why you have audits and that's why you have investigations. Not everything is as it appears and not everything works exactly as designed. You don't just take someone's word for it. You gather facts and evidence. You take testimony and compare answers from the affiants to make sure they are consistent. There is a big difference between and interview and a deposition under oath and there is a big difference between an investigation by a law enforcement agency and a news report. IMO there is sufficient evidence to warrant an investigation into this transaction. A lot of money changed hands - that is as GoU has said a "red flag" especially when the parties involved have influence over policy. The reason I believe an independent counsel is needed is because Hillary supporters would question any findings if they were adverse. Obviously Sessions believes that such an investigation if initiated can be handled professionally and objectively by the JD. I disagree.

JMHO


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 11:20 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2015 3:09 am
Posts: 5068

JMHO


Yeah, sure.


And we should all be so enthralled with hearing about your opinions, right?




Well hey, at least that part jumps out big time, "JMHO."




Jesus fucking Christ, assholes everywhere you turn.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 11:52 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 10:20 pm
Posts: 5488

Yeah, sure.


And we should all be so enthralled with hearing about your opinions, right?




Well hey, at least that part jumps out big time, "JMHO."




Jesus fucking Christ, assholes everywhere you turn.


You want to see an asshole take a good long look in the mirror. I was asked my opinion so I gave it. I don't give a shit what you think about it. This is a discussion board and last time I checked you don't run the place. If you are somehow unable to deal with differing points of view then I suggest you get back on your meds and work on your people skills. Until then if you don't care for my opinion feel free to ignore it the same as I ignore most of yours.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 12:52 am 
Offline
Board Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 3:07 am
Posts: 8384

As promised, although a little late) I watched Shepard Smith's report. I found Smith's report to be an accurate accounting of the way the process for approving such transactions was designed to work. I cannot dispute or argue that the controls he documented are in place and designed to insure that proper approval is obtained for international transactions of this type. What an investigation is designed to do is to verify that the described system worked as designed. The largest embezzlement case I was ever involved in had controls designed to prevent fraud and abuse. The problem is that those controls were bypassed. That's why you have audits and that's why you have investigations. Not everything is as it appears and not everything works exactly as designed. You don't just take someone's word for it. You gather facts and evidence. You take testimony and compare answers from the affiants to make sure they are consistent. There is a big difference between and interview and a deposition under oath and there is a big difference between an investigation by a law enforcement agency and a news report. IMO there is sufficient evidence to warrant an investigation into this transaction. A lot of money changed hands - that is as GoU has said a "red flag" especially when the parties involved have influence over policy. The reason I believe an independent counsel is needed is because Hillary supporters would question any findings if they were adverse. Obviously Sessions believes that such an investigation if initiated can be handled professionally and objectively by the JD. I disagree.

JMHO


He reported more than about the process for approving such transactions was designed to work. He showed that the issue was not what the ones calling for an investigation are saying it was, and as thus it was an issue of dire importance to our national security.

I had already looked into the issue before Shepard Smith did his report. Smith did a brief overview. The approval was not for the sale of the company. It was an approval to transfer one of that companies many mines mineral rights, and with those rights a transfer of the licence to allow that mine to operate.

I suppose Canada could have blocked the sale of the company itself. Had those mineral rights of that one mine and that mines license to operate not been transferred then we would have heard from Republicans all about those miners losing their jobs. :|

In the scale of things that mine is not actually all that large. The amount of the value of the extracted ore coming out of that mine doesn't seem to me to be enough to warrant a (bribe) of the size of the contribution passed through a Canadian charity to the Clinton foundation for the money to be used to do the work the Canadian charity raised the funds for. I think those funds were what they appear to be, charity funds.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 3:28 am 
Offline
Policy Wonk
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 9:46 am
Posts: 1415

Distract who? Mueller? I doubt he is swayed one way or the other. That's why they call them independent counsels.

No.... distract idiots like you.... cause if the 35% of the americans that support trump start to crumble..... it's fucking done son.

_________________
24 hours in a day, 24 beers in a case. Coincidence.....I think not!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 4:12 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 10:20 pm
Posts: 5488
No.... distract idiots like you.... cause if the 35% of the americans that support trump start to crumble..... it's fucking done son.


First,

Thankfully you are not in my family tree. You want to come across as a wise folksy ole father figure? Calling me "son" fails miserably.

Second, I support and supported the Mueller investigation from the beginning.

Third, I did not support nor have I ever supported Trump.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 4:27 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2012 11:01 pm
Posts: 13543

First,

Thankfully you are not in my family tree. You want to come across as a wise folksy ole father figure? Calling me "son" fails miserably.

Second, I support and supported the Mueller investigation from the beginning.

Third, I did not support nor have I ever supported Trump.


You're also not supporting the immediate removal of Trump from office. So AFAIC that makes all your affirmations of support for Mueller, and non-support of Trump as substantial as a fart in a windstorm. Unless you now want him gone immediately. Has something changed?

And even if it has changed...you're still gonna vote for asshole Congressional Republicans who have decided to look the other way while Trump wrecks this country. So much for all your good intentions.

_________________
Image
White vote 58% Trump...6 of 10 white Americans are scum. Officially ashamed of my race.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 4:40 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 10:20 pm
Posts: 5488

You're also not supporting the immediate removal of Trump from office. So AFAIC that makes all your affirmations of support for Mueller, and non-support of Trump as substantial as a fart in a windstorm. Unless you now want him gone immediately. Has something changed?

And even if it has changed...you're still gonna vote for asshole Congressional Republicans who have decided to look the other way while Trump wrecks this country. So much for all your good intentions.


So what is your party doing? What about the people you support Ike? You talk a whole lot of shit and you are plenty critical but it is all just talk. Nothing more. Where are the articles of impeachment signed by all your house members? Where are all the Senators on the capital steps calling for removal of the President? Sure I see one or two here and there but no general movement. Just where are all your culture warriors? You might have a legitimate criticism if YOUR party were speaking with one voice and YOUR party were standing as one. But they aren't. So you are gonna keep voting for asshole Democrats who are also looking the other way. So much for all your good intentions.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:22 pm 
Offline
Policy Wonk
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2015 10:41 pm
Posts: 2146
Location: Oregon
Argument made of wet clay...the only people who can logically begin impeachment procedures at this moment in time are the Republicans. Even those Democrats who are starting impeachment procedures know that it's all for show--they have no reason to believe they'll go anywhere unless they get Republican support. Why do they do it then? I don't know, possibly to keep the possibility public; to demonstrate that Republicans have a monster as their party leader and do nothing.

_________________
"There are but two parties now: Republicans . . . and Americans." -Keith Olbermann


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 7:09 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Wed May 04, 2011 11:26 pm
Posts: 32836

So what is your party doing? What about the people you support Ike? You talk a whole lot of shit and you are plenty critical but it is all just talk. Nothing more. Where are the articles of impeachment signed by all your house members? Where are all the Senators on the capital steps calling for removal of the President? Sure I see one or two here and there but no general movement. Just where are all your culture warriors? You might have a legitimate criticism if YOUR party were speaking with one voice and YOUR party were standing as one. But they aren't. So you are gonna keep voting for asshole Democrats who are also looking the other way. So much for all your good intentions.

Nice deflection. Nothing more. We don't have control. We aren't the fucking Republican Party, which is more interested in grandstanding than actual governing. They started an impeachment they knew they couldn't win, just for show.

You know, no one started an impeachment of Nixon until the Republican Party was also on board. The House vote was 410-4.

You want to see talking shit? Watch your fucking elected Republicans. That's talking shit.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 7:28 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 6:48 pm
Posts: 14547
Nice deflection. Nothing more. We don't have control. We aren't the fucking Republican Party, which is more interested in grandstanding than actual governing. They started an impeachment they knew they couldn't win, just for show.

You know, no one started an impeachment of Nixon until the Republican Party was also on board. The House vote was 410-4.

You want to see talking shit? Watch your fucking elected Republicans. That's talking shit.



Lets not forget not long after the Nixon impeachment vote the Democratic Party awarded a committee chairmanship to a man who admitted to raping an underage boy.

_________________
If you could combine Bill C's skill with Obama's morals you would have the perfect President. One just like Ronald Reagan.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 7:30 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Wed May 04, 2011 11:26 pm
Posts: 32836


Lets not forget not long after the Nixon impeachment vote the Democratic Party awarded a committee chairmanship to a man who admitted to raping an underage boy.

What? Isn't it time for you to bring up Robert Byrd and Chappaquiddick?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 7:42 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 6:48 pm
Posts: 14547
What? Isn't it time for you to bring up Robert Byrd and Chappaquiddick?


Far be it from me to bring up the Sainted Democratic Party's history. The GOP is currently going through what the DNC went through not that long ago. and Doing just as poor a job at figuring out how to rid themselves of bad players without alienating the base and losing power for a decade or more.

At the end of the day the Democratic Party is better off today because of what it went through and hopefully the same will be true of the GOP once this current era is a thing of the past.

Which in the long run will be good for our nation as a whole.

_________________
If you could combine Bill C's skill with Obama's morals you would have the perfect President. One just like Ronald Reagan.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2017 7:47 pm 
Offline
Board Emeritus

Joined: Wed May 04, 2011 11:26 pm
Posts: 32836

Far be it from me to bring up the Sainted Democratic Party's history. The GOP is currently going through what the DNC went through not that long ago. and Doing just as poor a job at figuring out how to rid themselves of bad players without alienating the base and losing power for a decade or more.

At the end of the day the Democratic Party is better off today because of what it went through and hopefully the same will be true of the GOP once this current era is a thing of the past.

Which in the long run will be good for our nation as a whole.

First the Republicans decided to use the Southern Strategy, the politics of racism. That gave us Nixon. Then Rush Limbaugh and Newt Gingrich took over the party. And that led to Trump.

And this is the party you vote for.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 94 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], bird and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group