Maybe if you could spell properly, your job prospects would increase.
1 Like
Surely it’s a pi55 take? I hope…
Truth? That’s so 2015.
US Attorney General William Barr plans to issue a redacted copy of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s nearly 400-page investigative report into Russian interference in the 2016 election by mid-April.
“Everyone will soon be able to read it on their own,” Barr wrote in a letter to the top Democrats and Republicans on the Senate and House Judiciary committees.
Barr said he is willing to appear before both committees to testify about Mueller’s report on May 1 and May 2.
Mueller completed his 22-month investigation into whether President Donald Trump’s campaign colluded with Russia on March 22.
Barr sent a four-page letter to Congress summarising Mueller’s findings on Sunday.
Barr told lawmakers that Mueller’s investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired with Russia in its election interference activities.
Mueller left unresolved the question of whether Trump obstructed justice during the investigation. Barr said that based on the evidence presented, he concluded it was not sufficient to charge the president with obstruction.
Lawmakers have since been clamouring for more details, with Democrats calling for a full release of the report.
Barr said in his letter on Friday that certain information must be redacted before the report is released, including secret grand jury information, intelligence sources and methods and information that by law cannot be public or might infringe on privacy.
He said that while Trump has the right to assert executive privilege on some materials, that “Trump has stated publicly that he intends to defer to me”.
Because of that, Barr said, there are no plans for the Justice Department to submit the report to the White House for a privilege review.
1 Like
And that’s that. Nothing, I repeat, NOTHING, to be seen here.
It didn’t take him (Barr) long to release his findings though.
Could’ve at least given the appearance that he’d taken time to read it thoroughly.
Apologise for the delay - baby daughter and heavy work loads allow me to only sporadically post.
You seem to whitewash all the nefarious actions of the DNC because Bernie “isn’t really a Democrat” - your argument is pathetically weak. It doesn’t matter if Bernie registers as a Dem just so he can have a shot at the 2016 general. Do you have the same distaste for Howard Schultz who has never spent a second in politics? In any case, what does that have to do with my point about the DNC rigging the primaries to favour their preferred candidate? I can understand why they would have wanted HRC to win as much as possible, but the Clinton campaign effectively became an arm of the DNC (this is confirmed by Donna Brazille.
Your dislike for Sanders is pretty pathetic. The idea that Sanders cost Clinton the 2016 GE is absurd and laughable. The Clinton campaign’s ‘pied piper’ strategy to elevate Trump during the campaign, the hatchet job they did on Bernie, nor the $2 billion in free media exposure to Trump, or the fact that Clinton didn’t campaign in key battleground States like Wisconsin and Michigan…yeah it couldn’t have been those things, it was Bernie Sanders and his pesky supporters that did Hilary in 
Heh. Why am I not surprised at this…You think members of Trump’s inner circle going into bat on behalf of Israel, and specifically on behalf of illegal Israeli settlements, behind the scenes and in opposition to official U.S foreign policy isn’t collusion?? ■■■■ me. That’s the kind of collusion with a foreign state that would cause a meltdown in Washington if it were the Kremlin.
That’s effectively what Sanders’ is proposing - an FDR style New Deal…you could call it the New New Deal 
No worries. Life happens!
I think a lot of actions can be ignored because he wasn’t a Democrat. He wanted access to Dem donor lists, when he’s previously run against Democrats? Every right to tell him to go jump. Do I mind about the debate scheduling? Not a whit.
On the letter you quoted via NPR, it certainly isn’t a good look for the Dems, but its also clear that a lot of the anger is pretty misplaced. Other similar deals had been done with others, including with Bernie’s campaign. Did the Hillary one go further? Yes. Was Hilarly contributing more to the DNC than others? Yes. Is it a great look when Hilary wasn’t yet the only nominee? Yes. Is there conclusive evidence of coercion? No.
But I don’t think we’ll align on this. I don’t think someone who has competed with Democrats for his seat, used up Dem resources by doing so, never supported the DNC, and then jumps into the Dem primaries shouldn’t expect a level playing field, and should be thankful that the DNC system gave such a boost to his national profile.
On Howard Schultz, I’m a little lost as to what the comparison is. He is running as an independent, which he has every right to do. I’m concerned how the media is downplaying some of his weaknesses because they like the 3 competitor narrative, and I’m concerned that he’ll split the left base, but he has every right to run. Of course, if he does split the Dem base and Trump wins, he’ll have contributed to Trump winning (and vice versa, but he seems to be targeting Democrats). Schultz isn’t running in the Dem primary.
Maybe you need to check what I wrote. I did not say Bernie Sanders cost Clinton the presidency. I said he helped Trump win it. There are many many factors which impacted Clinton losing - her own poor campaigning, the Russians, the biased media, the FBI, sexism, following Obama, her husband, being a war hawk, the DNC/Hilary/media not rating Trump sufficiently, and other factors. Exactly how much each contributed is unknown, and unknowable.
However, what is known is that at a point when it was clear that Hilary would win, Bernie continued to push the campaign. He continued to attack the Democratic party, Hilary, and did very little to push his followers to support Hilary. This is all within his rights, he can campaign until he can’t mathematically win. But don’t try and pretend he didn’t know he was really lost, that there was a time when to maximise the chances of beating Trump he continued doing what was in his/his ideal’s best interests rather than the campaign against Trump.
In this, he showed exactly why the Democrats should have been able to refuse him entry into the primary. If you’re part of a team, there is a point you pull behind the team. You don’t keep pushing your preferences over the team and expect to be considered a team player.
Look at all the polling on how many people voted for Sanders in the primary, and either didn’t vote or voted for Trump in the main election. Given where Sanders, Hilary’s and Trump’s policies were, that just shouldn’t have happened. Unless he turned those people off Hilary.
I think the US has gone into bat for Israel for 60 years. Look at all the UN votes they’ve vetoed on Israel’s behalf. The money to buy armaments. Ignoring of Israel attacks on US assets (e.g. that ship).
They do so because of Israel’s influence. Israel’s influence is significant due to the US Jewish population, the legacy of the holocaust and cold wars (for Dems and Republicans), because the US christian fundamentalists are crazy for Israel since they believe its necessary for the End Times, and because Netenyahu is a poster child for the strong man leader many Republicans love. All of these groups (both USA ones and Israel itself) have money and influence, and this clearly impacts the political decisions around Israel.
That does not make it collusion. Working with someone you consider an ally to try and get a third party to vote in their favour isn’t collusion. As I said, I don’t think you actually understand what collusion is.
And I think saying Israel’s illegal settlements are against US foreign policy is a bit naive, given how many UN resolutions condemning them that the US has vetoed.
Tweetstorm coming in 3, 2, 1…
Who woulda thunk it?
And in nice news for anyone who is a Nazi:
DHS reassigns analysts in unit focused on domestic terror: report
Pretty much what the title says. Which is oh so nice and relevant when you have what happened in NZ, and in the last few days in the USA a historic social justice center outside of Knoxville, TN that hosted MLK, Jr., and Rosa Parks among others, burned to the ground with white power symbols spray painted in the parking lot and the Oklahoma Democratic Party HQs and Chickasaw Nation area offices were vandalized with white supremacist graffiti. A really good time to be cutting funding to domestic terrorism.
‘White power’ symbol found after fire destroys social justice center that hosted Rosa Parks, MLK Jr.
Nazi graffiti found at Oklahoma Democratic Party, Chickasaw Nation buildings
Suprise suprise. Muller was given the job of investigating so it wouldn’t be political and now it seems Trump’s appointed AG may not have summarized it particularly well honestly…
…fracking crooks all around
1 Like
I don’t think you really understand what happened with Flynn and other members of Trump’s transition team. The Obama admin made it clear that the U.S was planning to abstain on a UN resolution that would condemn Israeli settlement expansion in occupied territories. It was Kushner who directed Flynn to contact officials from foreign governments, including Russia, to learn where each stood on the resolution - again, this was all against official US policy.
Got it? Kushner and Flynn reached out to various governments in order to undermine the US government because the Israeli government asked them to. That’s collusion.
This is another nothing burger. Barr made two central assertions
- Trump camp didn’t conspire with Russia;
- Mueller laid out evidence on both sides of obstruction but chose to stay neutral
These ‘anonymous’ sources have disputed neither.
You missed the 3rd point.
Barr decided that there was no obstruction of justice. After reading the 400 page summary of 2m pages of evidence.
Anyone of us who has tried to read the book in a day then do the English class book report knows what he did was a farce. It would get a d or an f in class and it will get a d or an f here.
1 Like
This is a loooong read but well worth it. Real stories from people who have ‘lost’ a loved one to Fox News and the Murdoch machine.
On the second point, it’s more likely that what Barr is concealing is all of Trump’s past ‘indiscretions’ and potential money laundering schemes and fraud. End of the day there is a reason they are trying their damnedest to suppress the report and it’s the same reason why they will never willingly release his tax returns.
1 Like
It’s a long read and a sad read and one I can understand.
I spent 10 days on a dive boat sharing a cabin with a random yank from California. Retired vet, lovely guy… wearing rush Limbaugh shirts. It was pre election peak trump.
His entire view was Fox News driven. I forced myself to watch both fox, bbc and cnn here in Asia… trying to get a range of views.
Fox is a different animal altogether. A product of regulatory changes in the early 90’s that essentially allowed you to say what you want on tv without repercussions.
This guy had no idea about anything. It was fox ailing points all the way.
We shared tequilas in our cabin after diving and talk for hours every night.
I used the limited WiFi to show him counter views. He really struggled to believe any of it… even from multiple sources and even from court cases.
The hard part is, he was so invested in the right wing hate and anger the Fox News drives that it would have taken a complete breaking down of who he was in most senses to bring him back.
It is extremely cultish. You could see that he had to question his most deeply held beliefs just to consider the things I was saying.
He taught me an awful lot. He was a great guy. After a few days we stopped discussing it and talked diving, horses and life.
A couple of days later he asked out of the blue ‘explain to me again how trump blah blah blah’
We went back to talking politics. I don’t think I convinced him of anything other than maybe Fox and Limbaugh should be questioned.
It is a deep dark hold on people that in Australia we don’t really understand. Media regulations means we don’t get exposed to this unless you stand listening to the guy on the corner with the megaphone and the ‘sky is falling’ sign around his neck.
30 years ago these people were on the occasional corner or in the US on talkback radio. Now they are 24 hours a day in pretty much any house.
Read The NY Times article on the Murdochs and you will get a clear picture it isn’t going to change any time soon.
It’s all about profit and power. I’m a ■■■■■■■ investment banker and these people make me ill. It’s like King Joffrey running the world’s media.
9 Likes
Not as true as it once was unfortunately. Sky “After Dark” aka,“What the actual FK?” 
, is now not only on the Sky Skews echo chamber, … but has slipped it’s toxic tenticles onto FTA TV in the bush Via a deal with WIN.
And everywhere it’s available, it is already spreading it’s poison & ignorance.
1 Like
My dad is old and watches a lot of tv. Luckily it’s mostly history channel. He doesn’t know Sky or Fox exists.
He’s a lovely old man… but I would be writing a story like the people in that article if he discovers it. It’s weaponised hate
3 Likes
The last few posts are the reason why more progressives should pinch their nose and get on Fox News and speak to the Tucker Carlson’s of the world. While Carlson has abominable views on anyone that isn’t white, hosts like himself and others on Fox command a huuuuuuuuge viewership and if people like Sanders can get on and talk about his ideas, then all the better. The ideas that he champions are just as relevant to Fox viewers as their are to MSNBC or CNN.
1 Like