PJ_Soul said:

What the fuck.

The White House will get the Mueller report before the public does in case it wants to make redactions, Barr says

https://www.businessinsider.com/barr-mueller-report-white-house-executive-privilege-2019-3?fbclid=IwAR2aWvdSPvHx7qjn4Osjy-1oWcMR0rEK7JozUiXlGMSyFUc1QttKJlzW-34

PJ_Soul said:

mcgruff10 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mcgruff10 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mcgruff10 said:

bbiggs said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

mcgruff10 said:

Not thousands like trump said but I definitely believe there were celebrations on 9/11. 
https://nypost.com/2015/12/21/nj-police-captain-says-some-muslims-did-celebrate-on-911/

15-20 people. that amounts to basically zero. 

15-20 too many. 

Agreed. They should have been thrown in jail.

For what?

Disturbing the peace by celebrating an attack on us soil. 

A ton of people were out on the streets on 9/11 "disturbing the peace".

Pesky 1st Amendment, amiright?

I wonder if the first amendment would cover them?  I m not sure.  

I'm positive that it would. Why wouldn't it?

BS44325 said:

mrussel1 said:

BS44325 said:

mrussel1 said:

BS44325 said:

mrussel1 said:

BS44325 said:

mrussel1 said:

BS44325 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

tbergs said:

Yeah, I can appreciate it to an extent, but it's clear there is some trolling going on to. Most recently the "MAGA bitches" comment. There is a lot of pompous know-it-all in there even though it's a lot of speculation and mainly just meant to annoy the status quo in here who despise a gelatinous blob as president.

Not to mention the easily dispelled BS that he posts. But one example as he repeated the Faux News talking point regarding the Steele Dossier. I guess now Senator Graham is a liar?:

Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) said Monday he had told Sen. John McCain to give the FBI the dossier on the Trump campaign’s alleged ties to Russia, a revelation that comes after Trump repeatedly assailed the late Arizona Republican over the issue.

Last week, Trump accused McCain of handing over the document “for very evil purposes.” McCain died of brain cancer in August.

Graham, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, told reporters Monday McCain showed him the dossier when he received it in late 2016.

“And I told him the only thing I knew to do with it, it could be a bunch of garbage, it could be true, who knows? Turn it over to somebody whose job it is to find these things out, and John McCain acted appropriately,” Graham said, according to CNN.

“He & the Dems, working together, failed (as usual). Even the Fake News refused this garbage!” Trump said in the tweet.

McCain was not made aware of the Steele dossier until Nov. 18, 2016 — after Trump had won the election. And while McCain himself gave the dossier to the FBI, there is no evidence he gave it to the media.

Former McCain aide David Kramer, a Russia expert, has testified that he gave the dossier to the media in December 2016.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/sen-lindsey-graham-says-he-told-john-mccain-to-give-trump-russia-dossier-to-fbi/2019/03/25/f35e28ca-4f26-11e9-a3f7-78b7525a8d5f_story.html?utm_term=.8dd1dfc33b5c

I actually think this is an important angle to pick apart. McCain's and Kramer's hands were on it. Kramer seems to have done more active disseminating then McCain but this all needs to be drilled down on. Remember at this point the dossier was not new. The FBI had it months before but now it was being passed to media through Kramer and FBI again through McCain. Did they innocently have it handed to them and just did what they thought was right or were they participating in something else. This was recycled intelligence made to appear as corroborating intelligence from a non-partisan source. This story will be told. McCain's obvious war hero status is not a reason to look away. You all felt that way in the run up to 2008.

You mean were they participating in the coup rumor that you continue to propagate without regard to the lessons learned from Iraq?  

Yes. They were participating. The question is whether they were wittingly or unwittingly participating. Lindsey Graham believes McCain was an unwitting participant. Personally I am not ready to indict them or exonerate them.

I'm glad you aren't ready to indict them, considering a few things: 1. You're not a prosecutor 2. You're not a citizen 3. You have no evidence 4. You've never interviewed a subject in the matter.  
So I have to compliment you on your amazing restraint, although you still continue to apply intent to the actions of people who you don't know, never spoke with, and are responsible for keeping Americans safe every day.  But keep at it, it makes a difference.  

Haaaa. An answer I've never seen you give to the constant insanity that oozes out of this place. Maybe this forum just ain't a place for you if random people riffing isn't your thing.

I don't mind random riffing, but the trolling you engaged in on Saturday deserves an appropriate response.  Second, the conspiracy mongering is worse than the 'Russia-gate', considering there was an actual special counsel for RG.  So until there are indictments on DOJ brass for violation of US Code related to the overthrow of the gov't, all you are doing is the very thing you were righteously railing against with the Tabbi article.  Riffing is not the same as hypocrisy.  

Nope. Sorry. The origin story is out there and legit. You are purposely avoiding known facts about the Papadopolous entrapment, DNC-Fusion GPS dossier fabrication, the participation of foreign intelligence agencies (thanks Halifax), FISA abuse, leaking to the media, the recycling of information, and the triggering of the special council. The only ingredient missing in this attempted coup was Trump firing Mueller. A necessary ingredient for an obstruction charge that never came to be. You purposely have zero curiosity about any of this. Are you concerned that it reaches all the way to the top? It's already been reported that the White House was involved in the discussions on the first FISA warrant. Some in the DOJ were uncomfortable asking for it. Page/Strozk/McCabe wanted it bad. What was Obama's involvement. It's just too painful for you to ask the question.

Whoa!  Now it's McCain AND Obama!  OMG, the conspiracy is just growing every post.  You make Tucker Carlson look fair and reasonable.  Hilarious.  @me when the indictments for the US Code hit, until then, you're just full of shit.  

Again. Apologies for making you uncomfortable. Just released Lisa Page text messages now make it an absolute fact that the White House was involved in the FISA application. Some in the DOJ were uncomfortable with proceeding and the White House got involved to move it forward. It all comes down to this meeting. Who was involved? What was the discussion that took place? Why was this application on Carter Page necessary at all? Why was exculpatory evidence withheld? A US citizen, who in the long run was charged with nothing, was spied on and was a significant gateway to the collusion investigation. Do I want the Mueller report released? Absolutely. But I want all this info released as well. You should too. Don't be afraid.

mcgruff10 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mcgruff10 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mcgruff10 said:

bbiggs said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

mcgruff10 said:

Not thousands like trump said but I definitely believe there were celebrations on 9/11. 
https://nypost.com/2015/12/21/nj-police-captain-says-some-muslims-did-celebrate-on-911/

15-20 people. that amounts to basically zero. 

15-20 too many. 

Agreed. They should have been thrown in jail.

For what?

Disturbing the peace by celebrating an attack on us soil. 

A ton of people were out on the streets on 9/11 "disturbing the peace".

Pesky 1st Amendment, amiright?

I wonder if the first amendment would cover them? (The people celebrating the attacks)  I m not sure.  

benjs said:

bbiggs said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

mcgruff10 said:

Not thousands like trump said but I definitely believe there were celebrations on 9/11. 
https://nypost.com/2015/12/21/nj-police-captain-says-some-muslims-did-celebrate-on-911/

15-20 people. that amounts to basically zero. 

15-20 too many. 

You can take that approach or you can be part of the solution.

I took an Uber to work the other day, and I love speaking to Uber drivers. We ended up having a great conversation about life in general, corruption, politicians who don't speak for us, etc. While we were co-ranting about something, my driver happened to say "and you've got to know that at the end of the day it's a bunch of Jews behind all of that corruption". I asked him if he knew about the history of Jews and their association with wealth, and he didn't. I explained to him about the Calvinist stances on wealth as being 'impure', and how they would often reach out to the only folks embedded in their community who didn't mind handling wealth - Jews.

I also then told him about how tired I was of people not openly discussing their preconceived beliefs, and not trying to have open conversations to share conflicting viewpoints. I also told him that I'm Jewish, and that while on the topic of corruption the Jewish lobby is far too powerful and far too allegiant to Israel (which is not the same as being Jewish), he should know that they don't speak for me. 

Forgive me if I misunderstood your point, but if 15-20 are too many, would you have preferred to never let Muslims into the US in the first place, would you have preferred to deport them, or would you try to talk with and understand them? My gut feeling says that far too few would try Option 3.

dignin said:

benjs said:

PJ_Soul said:

What the fuck.

The White House will get the Mueller report before the public does in case it wants to make redactions, Barr says

https://www.businessinsider.com/barr-mueller-report-white-house-executive-privilege-2019-3?fbclid=IwAR2aWvdSPvHx7qjn4Osjy-1oWcMR0rEK7JozUiXlGMSyFUc1QttKJlzW-34

There's no obligation to show any of this to the public, but in this case does Barr mean the White House gets to make redactions prior to Congress seeing it too?

It's worse than that.

Trump's defense lawyers have previously said they want a chance to review and "correct" the Mueller report before it's made public

Bentleyspop said:

RoleModelsinBlood31 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

benjs said:

RoleModelsinBlood31 said:

Meltdown99 said:

House vote to stop Trump's border plan unlikely to succeed

https://apple.news/AHR4unoRIRBK8OlJ0kNvyMg

Hell yeah-  saw that the pentagon released 1 billion and they’re building 57 miles of it near Yuma and El Paso.  Good stuff.  The media was focused on the mueller waste of time but 5000 illegal immigrants were stopped this past weekend alone. It’s out of control.  In San Antonio ice just drops off these people at these bus stops after they’ve been detained near churches and they can’t feed or clothe them because they’re out of supplies and overflowing with people.  The diseases are worrisome as very few of them are vaccinated at all.

Don't forget that the number of undocumented immigrants that ICE detains doesn't correlate with the number of undocumented immigrants coming into the US at any given time - it only correlates with the amount of energy they've been instructed to spend to detain persons. If Trump had said "ease back a bit", they'd have picked up less than 5000. What you're seeing does not mean a problem is getting worse - it means your President is tolerating less.

I'm not opposed to building the wall from a moral perspective - a country truly is entitled to fortify its borders if it chooses - but I find it short-sighted, and unnecessary (along with the things that come with it - the perceived cruelty, the real divide, the logistical challenges with a major trade partner, the increase in processing needs per border crossing and thus potential for bottleneck, and the cost of the thing, for no truly indicated or expected results).

I also think from a purely economic perspective, it's been understood for some time now that the jobs occupied by undocumented immigrants have effectively established a new market value for that labour, because they take the work that US citizens never wanted, and do it at a price US citizens deem beneath them. This means that if that influx disappears, businesses have to bear a newly increased cost for the labour. Businesses don't typically accept increased costs for labour - instead, they hire less, ask more of current employees, and have clients subsidize these realities with increased prices.

Putting all of these together, I think it's likely that the lasting legacy of a wall will be exploitation of the Mexican government (just like applying sanctions, it's another great way to restrict a country's global power while exerting your own, and gain trade negotiating leverage), the de-weaving of the social fabric with respect to US-Mexican cultural exchanges, security risks (when you threaten an entire neighbouring country's livelihood and escape route to safety, you should expect this), a less powerful internal economy where businesses act more frugally (as discussed above), a more expensive life with respect to consumer products, busier borders making trade more difficult.

Like I said, morally, if Trump wants to do this, he can, but he should know that he will own the costs and not just the benefits he perceives of this. You should know the costs too - and you should be concerned (whether you want this or not) that Trump doesn't want to talk about them.

You know, I (and many others) have been beating this drum for the longest time that wall proponents simply don't get: the effect this will have on the economy as a whole and their own wallets, specifically. 

-illegal immigrants are working in fields and construction sites for pennies on the dollar
-americans make more than those wages on welfare

They are not taking your jobs. americans are giving them to them. 
costs will inevitably increase substantially, and then all the wall bangers will be pissing and moaning about paying $3 an apple and thousands more for renos on their house. 

these issues don't matter to the people on the Hill. they can afford these increases. they are using your own fear and racist tendencies against what's actually best for you. 

You guys are both correct, I’m sure.  I am for obeying the law, though, and illegal is illegal.  If they go through the system then I have no problem with it at all.  It’s not the people I have a problem with, it’s the fact that it’s not lawful.  I’ve said it before, but even my employees who are from Mexico (some on visas and some are citizens) are against it because they did it lawfully.  They don’t like the fact that  some get to break the rules while they followed them.  It has nothing to do with race for me, I don’t care if they’re from Sweden or Russia or China or Mars, we just don’t have a problemhappening on any of our other borders, just the one with Mexico.

as for the economics, I defer to the pros on that- I’m not bothered if I have to spend more money because we enforce our laws.  That’s the way it is and we’ll change our spending habits to adapt.  Here in austin the construction guys are creating chaos because the city is growing so big- so
many undocumented guys are just leaving one site for another that will pay more in cash per day (in the middle of their shift no less,) that it’s delaying construction projects by months in some cases.  You’re right, they’re the ones who want those jobs.  I think if they were legal they’d still want those jobs though, so I’m not sure I fully get the argument that there would be no one to
fill certain jobs.  There would be, they’d just be legal

just don’t get why following laws makes people so uncomfortable 

We absolutely have a problem on the "other borders".
Tens of thousands of people come in via airports all over the country every day and overstay their visas by years and decades. But the right doesn't care  about them for 2 main reasons....
1. They tend to be caucasian
2. The right (politicians and right  wing media)is stoking fears about the southern border.

And just to be clear....as a leftist socialist liberal Democrat I want people to follow the rule of law and do things legally and safely. I, and most like me do not want, and have never called for, open borders.

There is no more "southern border invasion " now then there was 5 or 10 or 25 years ago.
Just people trying to stoke fear and garner votes.

dignin said:

benjs said:

PJ_Soul said:

What the fuck.

The White House will get the Mueller report before the public does in case it wants to make redactions, Barr says

https://www.businessinsider.com/barr-mueller-report-white-house-executive-privilege-2019-3?fbclid=IwAR2aWvdSPvHx7qjn4Osjy-1oWcMR0rEK7JozUiXlGMSyFUc1QttKJlzW-34

There's no obligation to show any of this to the public, but in this case does Barr mean the White House gets to make redactions prior to Congress seeing it too?

It's worse than that.

Trump's defense lawyers have previously said they want a chance to review and "correct" the Mueller report before it's made public