Donald Trump

Can Politicians Move on From the Mueller Report?

It's time to focus on policy.

|

The filing of special counsel Robert Mueller's report on whether there was collusion between President Donald Trump and the Russians to interfere with the 2016 election should put an end to speculations, accusations, and outrage. The report finds that there was no collusion. But long live speculations, accusations, and outrage.

As soon as Attorney General William Barr summed up the report for Congress, Trump administration allies started to call for the heads of those who had fed the rumor mill for months. On their end, the Democrats didn't wait long to warn the administration that this wasn't over and that they would continue investigating the president for alleged obstruction of justice. That's their prerogative, obviously.

Yet, it's hard to feel that this obsession with the Mueller report and Russians is not just another excuse for each side to continue talking about everything except policy issues. We can argue that since the Republicans lost control of the House, there's little chance of legislative reforms getting through. Still, that's no reason to not try fixing what needs to be fixed or do what needs to be done.

But after I suggested on Twitter that legislators go to work now, Dan Mitchell of the Center for Freedom and Prosperity issued this warning: "Be careful what you wish for. If the crowd in Washington has more time to focus on policy, do you think they'll make problems better or worse?" There's some truth to this. Legislators have a tendency to try to address government-created problems with more misguided policies or propose solutions to fixing well-functioning markets. If it's not broke, they'll still try to fix it.

That's why I will narrow it down for them to a few policy areas:

First, spending. Call me old-fashioned, but I believe that passing a budget on time by following the rules is one of Congress' top jobs. Yet a new book by Brookings Institution economist William Gale tells us that, "Congress designed (the current budget) process in 1974. Since then, in only four years has it passed all of the appropriations bills for discretionary spending on time." Shouldn't our elected officials try to correct their dismal record by working to pass a budget following the normal order?

Second, immigration. Republicans and Democrats have deep disagreements on this issue, but there's at least one aspect that both sides should agree on: finding a way for the "Dreamers" to continue living in the United States legally.

Trump canceled the Obama-era program that protected individuals who were brought here as children by their parents and have since been living here illegally. The threat of deportation leaves these immigrants in limbo in a country that has been their home since childhood. Bipartisan support for providing "Dreamers" with a pathway to citizenship makes for low-hanging fruit, especially since the president signaled that he could be swayed on this issue.

Then there's trade. The U.S. economy has been doing well in spite of self-inflicted protectionist wounds. Months of tariffs shouldered by Americans and a trade war with China have delivered none of the results promised by the administration, except swelling the revenues of a few protected firms, making American consumers poorer, and raising production costs for many U.S. producers who use tariffed imports as inputs. News that the world economy is slowing down should be reason enough to unite Congress in demanding that tariffs be lifted immediately.

Finally, there's health care. Neither party can agree on which third party should pay for Americans' health care. Democrats want the federal government to pay. Republicans prefer for the money to come from private insurers or state governments. These options are all bad because they create incentives for Americans to consume health care irresponsibly, inevitably leading to the rationing of services.

They should instead focus on creating incentives to reduce health care costs so that third-party payers become less important. Reduced costs are possible only if the supply side of health care is freed from regulations that jack up prices. This outcome requires that special interests be stymied, bureaucratic obstacles be removed, and competition be restored, in order to encourage innovators to challenge incumbents with new devices and drugs.

Yet, instead of taking these positive actions, Democrats and Republicans would prefer to pontificate on the Mueller report as an excuse to dodge their responsibilities.

COPYRIGHT 2019 CREATORS.COM

NEXT: ICE Detained a Flight Attendant and DACA Recipient for 6 Weeks, All Because She Worked on a Flight to Mexico

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Can’t legalize dreamers until they become libertarian. Once that happens then sure. However so far I’ve seen few signs. Mostly they seem to love the progressives. Also need to abolish social security. Here’s my plan.

    1. I quit working at shoprite and now I make $30h ? $72h?how? I’m working online! My work didn’t exactly make me happy so I decided to take a chance? on something new? after 4 years it was so hard to quit my day job but now I couldn’t be happier.

      Heres what I’ve been doing? ,,,

      CLICK HERE?? http://www.AproCoin.Com

    2. I earned $5000 last month by working online just for 5 to 8 hours on my laptop and this was so easy that i myself could not believe before working on this site. If You too want to earn such a big money then come and join us.

      CLICK HERE?? http://www.Theprocoin.com

  2. I basically make about $6,000-$8,000 a month online. It’s enough to comfortably replace my old jobs income, especially considering I only work about 10-13 hours a week from home. I was amazed how easy it was after I tried it? http://www.home.jobs89.com

    1. I earned $5000 last month by working online just for 5 to 8 hours on my laptop and this was so easy that i myself could not believe before working on this site. If You too want to earn such a big money then come and join us.

      CLICK HERE?? http://www.finestylereview.com

  3. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go to tech tab for work detail.
    >>>>>>>>>> http://www.GeoSalary.com

  4. Democrats want the federal government to pay.

    Gee, I wonder where the federal government gets money.

    1. That’s the first thing I thought.

  5. “Trump canceled the Obama-era program that protected individuals who were brought here as children by their parents and have since been living here illegally.”

    Note that, while this was nominally the way the program was supposed to work, it was basically on the honor system, so that there’s little doubt that many of the “Dreamers” were not actually brought here as children during the relevant period, and/or have been to their home country many times since.

    1. Seems kind of unlikely that a lot of children who are well acculturated to the US would be making multiple illegal border crossings.

      1. You’re assuming that “well acculturated”.

        Again, while the Obama program nominally was restricted to individuals who were brought here as children, and had grown up in the US, it was run on the honor system, because as illegal aliens they typically would not have much in the way of reliable documentation.

        1. Do you have any evidence for this supposedly rampant fraud in the system?

        2. Well, it’s pretty easy to pick out the ones that aren’t.

          And they should be able to provide documentation that they went to school in the US, at least. Whether they are asked for anything like that, I have no idea.

  6. Can Politicians Move on from the Mueller Report?

    Sure. But first they have to see the Mueller Report.

    Kinda strange how Veronique de Rugy left that out……

    1. You’ve proven time and time again that you arent intelligent enough to understand a) the actual laws in play and b) a complex report without resorting to conspiracy theories.

      And let’s be honest, you’re not going to read the report. You’re going to wait for Media Matters to tell you what to be outraged about in the report.

      1. The special counsel regulations only require Barr to send Congress a summary of the report, not the report itself. But that does not preclude a congressional request or subpoena. I’m assuming you understand that distinction, but please let me know if you need additional help.

        At his Senate confirmation hearing in January, Barr pledged to make as much of the final report public as possible. “My goal will be to provide as much transparency as I can consistent with the law,” Barr said then. Even given that was probably a brazen lie, there’s only limited sections of the report Barr can attempt to hide. For instance, what would be the legal basis of concealing Mueller’s summary of evidence, or his interviews with cooperating witnesses?

        And shouldn’t you want to see Trump’s exoneration in full detail, JesseAz? Maybe you’re afraid of all the sleaze laid bare when the report is made public? Perhaps worried over how stupid the “witch hunt” crap will look with the facts laid out? Why not be honest about that… It’s healthy to own up to your fears….

        1. It’s not really healthy to treat delusional fantasy as if it had merit.

          1. Delusional fantasy? Not a bit. What we’re looking at here is a variation on the Nunes Memo experience. For those who can’t remember when Nunes wasn’t a national joke, a reminder :

            (1) There was a document. In the Nunes case, it was a memo supposedly proving impropriety by government agencies investigating people associated with Trump

            (2) There was a Republican media campaign based on the document. In the Nunes case, Trump supporters insisted that the memo conclusively proved Trump a victim.

            (3) The same Republicans making this claim refused to release the evidence. In the Nunes case, there were multiple “security reviews” delaying the memo’s publication for weeks.

            (4) After countless media cycles the document was finally forced public – and proved a GOP embarrassment, nothing at all like the claims made about it. In the Nunes case there were lies in the body of text disproved by footnotes in the same damn memo. Devin’s not too bright; maybe he didn’t think people would notice.

            Probably the same thing here. Issue sweeping claims – ride as many media cycles as possible as you fight release – then stage a rear guard retreat when the real details emerge. I don’t doubt the overall conclusions will hold, though we all need to see the two sides of Mueller’s report on obstruction. But the more Barr fights release, the more you can be sure there’s sleaze and embarrassment in the report about his master…

            1. Keep tilting, grb.

            2. Nice try. It was reviews demanded by Team Blue and bureaucrats who delayed the release. And for all of the caterwauling from Schiff and Friends, the Team Red “counter” memo revealed far more about supposedly sensitive means and methods.

              But keep the tin foil hat snug; it helps with leaking brains.

              1. NotAnotherSkippy,

                Confession : You’re actually right to a degree. My memory was conflating the Nunes Memo with the detailed response by the Democrats. Lesson learned : I should never trust my memory. I knew that already, but then forgot.

                That said, the rest of my point holds : The Republicans rode empty spin as far as they could – the original Nunes fraud – all the time fighting like hell to prevent the details which would refute it from becoming public. Own the news cycle today, don’t care if you’re disproved tomorrow.

                Also: Shouldn’t your quote – Team Red “counter” memo – actually read Team Blue? I’m not being critical. To err is human…..

                And the counter memo revealed nothing about sensitive means and methods. The Fisa warrant process wasn’t entirely unknown, and what’s so sensitive about it to any degree it was?

                Lastly, Trump and the GOP can put off swallowing their medicine (ie : public Mueller report) but what does it gain them? Barr’s four pages don’t seem to have moved the needle on Trump’s trust or popularity numbers. It’s not like postponing the inevitable is reaping any great dividends..

                1. As I’ve said before, the fact that McConnell and Graham are in full-out, dick-waving triumph mode says that the report doesn’t have anything new or shocking. These two aren’t Trump, they calculate before they celebrate.

                  The Republicans will have Barr deliberately sit on it until the media works itself into another frenzy, and the Dems start up the impeachment talk again, and then when the clamor reaches a fever pitch they’ll release it all.

                  Over and over again this administration has baited the media and the Dems in this way, and yet they still fall for it.

    2. I hope they get the report soon, because watching 535 politicians trying to understand a report of a two year investigation will be comedy gold. It’ll be like a monkey trying to fuck a football.

      1. Yep, almost as much fun as watching them read the text of the Affordable Care Act.

    3. “”Can Politicians Move on from the Mueller Report?

      Sure. But first they have to see the Mueller Report”””

      The rules for the special council clearly said the report would NOT be delivered to Congress. Congress knew that all along and had no complaint. But now that they didn’t win, they want to complain and try to ignore the rule.

      Much like Hillary complaining about the EC, democrats are showing the rules should for cast aside when they don’t get what they want.

      The party of petty is going to lose in 2020 if they keep it up.

      1. The rules for the special council clearly said the report would NOT be delivered to Congress

        Nail, head, blammo.

        Why is nobody in the 4th estate bringing this up?

    4. grb|3.28.19 @ 8:16AM|#
      “Can Politicians Move on from the Mueller Report?
      Sure. But first they have to see the Mueller Report.”

      Aw, how CUTE!
      Still hoping, are you?

    5. People keep getting this whole thing wrong….It is NOT the Mueller Report that needs to be investigated, it is THE FAKE DOSSIER which appeared way before Trump even got elected…The fairy-tale Dossier that Clinton’s campaign & the DNC paid for & created out of thin air to help her win the election…These are the people that paid Christopher Steele, a British foreign agent, to lend his name to it, though he alter admitted he did not write it & also they conspired with Russians as well to lend the fantasy some credence…What must be looked at is the fact that Nellie Ohr, who is married to Bruce Ohr at the DOJ worked for Fusion GPS, the company that was paid to create it & then she gave it to hubby & we were off to the races….All the bad actors, Page, Strozk, McCabe, Comey, Brennan, Crapper, Lynch, et al. must have all known it was a fake but ran with the football anyway & ran straight to the FISA court for wiretaps!!…Heck, I would not doubt that Horse-Face Mueller also knew it was BS!!!

      These were HIGH CRIMES against the Republic & there now should be a Special Prosecutor for all this! Can one blame Trump for firing Comey with this crap out there?

    6. “But first they have to see the Mueller Report”

      First they had to wait for the Mueller Investigation to be completed. Then, when it failed to find evidence of collusion, they had to wait for the full report to be released. When the release of the full report fails to show evidence of collusion, what’s your/their fallback position? Mueller’s part of the Trump/Putin conspiracy? Aliens are controlling our minds? Fox News secretly runs the world?

    7. She doesn’t even get its conclusion right. From what we know via Barr’s summary, Mueller did not find sufficient evidence of a criminal conspiracy with Russia to support additional indictments. That doesn’t mean he concluded that there was “no collusion.” It just means that, if there was, it wasn’t criminal collusion, or the evidence to support charges wasn’t there, or who knows what else.

      But, to be fair, nearly everyone is mis-reporting it this way. The Mueller Report was 300+ pages, digested over a weekend, and summarized by an AG who got the job almost precisely because he was critical of the investigation. But the media is ready to move on, and they have almost as one.

      1. But, both the DEMs & GOP easily confirmed Barr quite quickly, so the DEMs have to live with what he says….This whole fiasco was totally nothing from the start….The real collusion was with the Clinton campaign & DNC colluding with Steele, some Russians, & GPS Fusion & also with the DOJ & FBI & CIA!!!

  7. Barr didn’t “sum up the report”. Trump, like a rabid dog, can’t be bargained with so good luck moving on to governance. Nothing is stopping any of you from putting your heads in sand if that’s what you prefer.

    1. A real estate developer can’t be bargained with? As opposed to his predecessor?

    2. Sticking with the full retard huh?

    3. OBL is officially the 2nd best parody account on this site now.

      Or is this just a schtick where you’re trying to be OBL’s angsty teenage offspring?

      1. OBL is a parody of a right wing retard trying to parody a liberal.

        1. Whereas you’re a left-wing retard all on your own.

    4. OP, you are one fucking stupid piece of shit.

  8. “Can Politicians Move on from the Mueller Report?”

    Maybe after every House committee subpoenas Mueller and grills him on why he couldn’t find ANYTHING substantial to hang on Trump. That should occur around November 2020.

    1. I hear, people are saying, that Mueller isn’t happy with the way the report was characterized by Barr and he expected the whole thing to go to Congress for its deliberation.

      1. “I hear”

        “People are saying”

        Thanks for more progressive “facts”.

        1. I was mocking Trump in case you missed it.

      2. Full retard.

      3. So, what would Congress do with the report? You may not be aware of this, but Congress is the legislative branch of the government. They don’t do law enforcement.

        1. The same thing they did with the Watergate report and the Starr report. They would read it and decide if Trump committed high crimes and misdemeanors. Congress is exactly the body responsible for checking and judging the executive. It’s exactly how the Constitution reads.

          1. LOL you know that isn’t what’s going to happen.

            Democrats will pull selected tidbits out and declare it proves Trump is colluding with Putin and Melania is an FSB-trained assassin who dresses up like a ninja every night and murders a random person just to stay in practive.

            Republicans will pull selected tidbits out and declare it proves Trump is Jesus Christ reborn and his urine has healing qualities.

            Meanwhile, for us ordinary folks none of this will mean anything.

            1. That’s why the report needs to be released so we can see for ourselves and be better judges of who is misrepresenting. The next Democratic president is going to release it. If the report exonerates Trump then prove it by showing how it does. Don’t you want to see how pure and honest our president is?

              1. The next Democratic president is going to release it. If the report exonerates Trump then prove it by showing how it does. Don’t you want to see how pure and honest our president is?

                I will admit to want to seeing you neck yourself when the report is released and confirms the same thing the summary did.

              2. Bwuhahaha you have no more intention of “judging” the report than I have of going to the far side of the moon. You’re just going to mine it for talking points.

                “But look here! Page 1036, paragraph 4, subparagraph A, sub-subparagraph iii! It says that Joe Blow The Ragman heard from his second cousin who heard from her BFF who heard from her hairdresser who heard from his boyfriend who heard from a janitor at Trump Tower that Trump said ‘nyet’! Out loud! What more proof do you need?”

                And as I said, none of this will mean anything. If the Democrats are stupid enough to keep dry-humping this dead horse they’ll lose in 2020, so your hoped-for release will come in 2025 at the earliest. Shit, Trump will probably be dead of old age by then.

              3. “” Don’t you want to see how pure and honest our president is?”‘

                None have ever been. That’s why I laugh my ass off when people want to make lying a big issue. They are hypocrites that said nothing when their team was doing the lying.

          2. “”The same thing they did with the Watergate report and the Starr report. They would read it and decide if Trump committed high crimes and misdemeanors.””

            You are totally glossing over the fact that Clinton plead guilty to crimes. That gave the Republican an opening they wanted. Of course the impeachment of Clinton worked out well for the Republicans. NOT. Even Pelosi knows this and does not want the dems to lose in 2020 which is why she is against impeachment unless something significant pops up.

            Dems are going to be the party of pettiness, and lose in 2020 if they are not careful. The smart move is to move on, take the high road, govern like you care about people and not like your vindictive assholes that are going to throw fits when they don’t get their way. Leave that to Trump.

            1. What are the Ds going to have, if not pettiness?

              They had the option of being largely silent after 2016, as Rs had presidency and majority in both legislative bodies, while siding with Trump on several issues that he stole from them. They could’ve retained possession of some of their ideas (like infrastructure), shown themselves as responsible governors willing to compromise, and stoked division within the Rs. At the very least, they’d have been able to wash their hands of the negative effects they predicted from R and Trump policies.

              But they’re totalitarians and psychotics. They lack self control, foresight, and comprehension of reality – as well as any modicum of respect for the American people.

              So now all they have left is pettiness and batshit crazy, fully exposed anti-Americanism

              1. “”What are the Ds going to have, if not pettiness?”‘

                Good question. They need to come up with something if they want to win in 2020, or even 2024 for that matter.

                Wait, I said 2024, damn I’m getting old.

            2. Dems “the party of pettiness”? A large portion of the core of the party is driven by pure hatred of Trump. I see it among my family and friends and have seen nothing like it for any prior president.

              I lived in Berkeley/Oakland during Reagan and Bush I and saw nothing like this. I saw hatred, but nothing like this, during Bush II. You might pick up a rock somewhere and have found it among some little creatures for Clinton (Bill) or Obama, but for Trump the pure hatred is widespread and open (among the media and many prominent celebrities).

              This is a blind hatred. They want Trump to fail at everything and scarcely any consequence for the country is too bad. They will do anything they can to see such failure happen, because they expect to pin it all on him, and conservatism in general by association, and pick up the pieces afterward with a mandate to create a new society.

      4. Where, who, and what medium Dr. Seuss?

    2. I wonder which of the following is more likely to occur first:

      1. A Democrat accusing Mueller himself of colluding with the Russians.
      2. A Democrat claiming that Mueller was intimidated by Trump’s criticism of his investigation as a “witch hunt.”
      3. Rep. Omar insinuating that Mueller is a homosexual being blackmailed by Vladimir Putin.
      4. Diane Feinstein announcing that she has “credible evidence” that Mueller organized rape parties when he was in the Fourth Grade.

      You know that at least one of these will occur…

      1. 3. Rep. Omar insinuating that Mueller is a homosexual being blackmailed by Vladimir Putin.

        She’s more likely to accuse him of being a tool of Israel than what you’re guessing.

        1. Perhaps. But isn’t what I suggested the same as what she insinuated about Lindsey Graham?

    3. Honestly, if the Democrats were to pump this thing constantly until just after the 2020 election, even if there were no “there” there, it would be 100% point-by-point what Republicans did with Hillary’s emails. Fair play, etc.

  9. What we should be asking is, “Can the media move on from the Mueller report?”

  10. You guys are wrong. They are already moving on. At least one house committee has already gone after all of his accounting records and all communications that the accounting firm has had with or about Trump or any Trump organizations or companies.

    You know. As chairman Elija Cummings said, why are you complaining? “We are just seeking the truth, thats all.”

  11. Well it is sad that this is the age that we are living in, where drama and tribal warfare seem to matter more than policy or issues.

    Scandal sells even better than giving away ‘free’ stuff. Who would have guessed.

    1. Yes, but I’m of the opinion that no action from Congress is better than the most likely outcome from Congress’ actions. Legislation that advances the cause of individual liberty is so rare that we’re probably better off with all of the partisan bickering and investigations.

      1. I like Congressman Gridlock. He never lets me down.

        1. I may just write him in for 2020.

      2. I am all for continued divided govt. Neither side has shown the ability to control their spending and balance a budget. Best part of O’s presidency was that he got checked by the Rs in congress. I’ll take the fat retard in office if the Dems can keep him checked in congress or one of the moderate dems as prez if the R’s can keep the senate.

        Really we just cant have the dems get full control, that would be the most damaging from a spending and individual freedom perspective.

        1. I can’t argue with that. Not only are the Dems horrible on most of the issues, they seem to vote more in blocs than the Republicans do. Even when the Republicans are in power there seems to be enough fragmentation in the party that they can’t ever do much besides tax cuts. You know, the one thing that they are generally reliable on.

          It bit us on Obamacare repeal, but otherwise, a fragmented Republican party seems to be a good thing.

          1. The least diverse party of diversity

      3. >>>no action from Congress is better than the most likely outcome from Congress’ actions

        at all times, every day.

      4. Legislation never advances the cause of individual liberty.
        That’s why it required the justification of a compelling national interest for legislation, that didn’t conform to the powers that the Constitution laid out for Congress, to remove whatever liberty it denied.
        That all changed with the century-late interpretation of the 14th amendment, that created the concept that the compelling national interest be one of “equality” and denial of liberty was no longer a concern.
        Virtually ever ruling based on this interpretation of the 14th amendment has removed vast segments of liberty, and are celebrated by the left as their path to totalitarianism.

    2. The guy who promotes economic terrorism against bakers and others who dont agree with his social values is talking about tribal warfare…

      1. And by “promoting economic terrorism”, what Jesse really means is “support the right to boycott”. Except that when people choose to exercise that right against people Jesse likes, he calls that “terrorism”.

        Boycott Nike, and that’s “taking a stand’ and “voting with your dollars”.
        But, boycott Masterpiece Cakeshop, and that’s “economic terrorism”.

        Got it!

        You’re one of the worst tribalists around here, Jesse.

        1. Boycott Nike, and that’s “taking a stand’ and “voting with your dollars”.
          But, boycott Masterpiece Cakeshop, and that’s “economic terrorism”.

          Yeah, it would have been nice if the couple had simply boycotted MC instead of tattling on it to the Colorado Civil Rights Commission, a “bipartisan” quasi-legal body loaded with gay rights activists that got smacked down by the Supreme Court for blatant religious bigotry.

          But that’s not what happened. Your comparison is shit.

          1. I never defended what the Colorado Civil Rights Commission did. What I am referring to is actual boycotts. THAT is what Jesse is labelling “economic terrorism”.

            1. What I am referring to is actual boycotts. THAT is what Jesse is labelling “economic terrorism”.

              So, you erected a strawman to support your shit comparison.

              1. Chemjeff is a typical psychotic.
                He consistently argues against what he imagines is the contra position.
                Then he’ll deny that the strawman is made of straw, but is instead real.

  12. “just another excuse for each side to continue talking about everything except policy issues”

    Once you take a stance on an issue, you’re going to alienate at least some voters. So that’s why politics is just personal attacks on character. You can kind of understand this from the perspective of pols.

    1. What’s interesting though is that media devotes so much more time to personal attacks than the issues especially given the fact that mainstream media is nothing more than propaganda. You get more intelligent analysis from bloggers and YouTubers than from MSNBC, CNN, or FOX. But the big 3 complain when they’re called fake news. I have an idea for them. Start reporting real news.

      1. You get more intelligent analysis from bloggers and YouTubers

        Quoted for truth.

      2. You get more intelligent analysis from bloggers and YouTubers

        No, you get more pseudo-intellectual garbage that sounds intelligent because it confirms the reader’s biases.

        1. Oh yeah. Like all those lefty talking heads walking it back or still maintaining denial on television. No confirmation bias to see there at all over the past several months.

        2. “”No, you get more pseudo-intellectual garbage that sounds intelligent because it confirms the reader’s biases.””

          That’s what you get on most shows on the 24 hour news channels.

        3. “No, you get more pseudo-intellectual garbage that sounds intelligent because it confirms the reader’s biases.”

          So true. Before the internet we were all misinformed the same way, which helped with national cohesion. Guys like Alex Jones broadcasted on some low wattage AM radio station at 2 AM, or handed out hand lithographed pamphlets on a street corner. Now, I can come to places like H&R and have all of my horrific biases confirmed, and molded into things even more horrific by others caught in their own information feedback loop.

  13. Russia’s attack on our 2016 election and installation of one of its intelligence assets as President has been the biggest scandal in world history. You don’t just “move on” from that ? especially now that recent developments have proved #TrumpRussia denialists like Glenn Greenwald totally wrong.

    #MaddowWasRight

    1. Hire new writers, ordinary person is becoming Chris farley, and you’re only David spade now.

      1. David Spade is still alive, so…

      2. How could a parody even hope to compete with the sincere psychosis of posters like grb, Kirkland, buttplug-moneyshot, chemjeff, chipper morning eunuch, OP, Tony, etc?

        These folks live Poe’s law

        1. I prefer the way OBL puts things to how this cast of characters does.

          OBL sounds like my progressive family and friends speaking among themselves (and to me). They just assume everyone listening agrees with the “truths” being told. OBL’s parody is of the inside echoing of the received truth of the latest party line.

          These other characters know they’re posting into a generally hostile environment, so they have a more combative tone.

  14. Here’s an interesting statistic:

    “Over the entire 33-year period, the FISA court granted 33,942 warrants, with only 12 denials”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U…..ance_Court

    It has been widely reported that Comey’s warrant application to the FISA court to wiretap the Trump campaign was rejected twice. The FISA court finally approved the warrant on the third try–after Comey included the information from the Steele Memo. In other words, a FISA court, which is usually a rubber stamp, thought bugging a political campaign was such a serious breach, that they refused to rubber stamp it–twice.

    Moreover, the warrant application that the FISA court finally approved did not reveal that the new evidence came from opposition campaign research by way of the Steele Memo, but Comey is on the record stating that he knew the evidence came from opposition campaign research at the time that he submitted the warrant application to the court.

    The FBI wiretapping political campaigns on the basis of evidence they know to be of dubious provenance–and withholding that dubious provenance from the FISA court–is an extreme abuse of power that should be prosecuted. The tiny iota of integrity that the FISA courts posses was flagrantly violated by Comey, and he should be called to account for that in front of a jury.

    1. All the tinfoil hat wearing anti-patriot act people were right. it only took till the next administration to abuse the fisa courts and politicize the counterintelligence operation on innocents and not just any innocents but politicians in the highest offices See the senate wiretaps and presidential wiretaps. I’d say that the Bush admin was also pulling this type of shit but it probably would have been leaked as the biggest scandal ever and people would have gone to jail.

      1. I didn’t mean to conflate politicians with innocents. My overall point is if politicians are targeted regular people are.

    2. There is another side to that. The FBI and the judges would say that they work together to ensure that only cases that are worthy are ever brought before the court. The claim is that the cases the court would turn down are just never brought up because the court makes it clear they won’t give the warrant.

      I think there is some truth to that. The 96% figure is decieving. What is not decieving, however, is the fact that they have gotten over 33,000 warrents and have nothing to show for it. When FISA was up for renewal, the FBI couldn’t come up with a single example of where a FISA warrent had prevented a terrrorist attack or provided any value to the country. They of course claim “its secret and we can’t say”, but anyone paying attention knows that is bullshit. If there were any examples of FISA resulting in foiling any terror plots, the FBI would have long ago leaked it to the media so they could take credit for it.

      So, the FBI is listening to all of these phone calls and the only value the country is getting from it comes in the form of the various FBI abuses that have resulted.

      1. Value to the country has never been the goal.

        1. No kidding.

  15. Even after The Full Report? is made public the issue will not be settled. As in: “The Bible says it, I believe it, that settles it.”

  16. If the FBI can openly bug a political campaign on the basis of opposition research without being held accountable by anyone, then why shouldn’t future presidents use the FBI to wiretap their opponents when they’re running for reelection?

    1. Not just presidential candidates but the most powerful members of congress. People should have gone to jail for this.

      1. Carter Page was a known Russian asset described as a useful idiot by Russian spys. How does a guy like Carter Page wind up as a top foreign adviser for a campaign?

        1. How many mediocrities have risen to be foreign policy gurus? You can ask that question of every administration. Also how many people actually were willing to work for a guy like Trump, which is a post admin career death sentence in this town.

          1. Regarding your last sentence: For all the continual media droning about “chaos” in Trump’s administration, I am surprised that he has been able to attract the quality of help that he has.

        2. Because Carter Page is a whatever you say he is, that means the FBI should be unaccountable?

          Is that how logic works in your world?

          Don’t you ever get tired of making a fool of yourself?

        3. “”Carter Page was a known Russian asset described as a useful idiot by Russian spys.””

          Really? If that was true I’m sure the government could do better than charging him with lying.

          1. They didn’t charge him with lying. They didn’t charge him with anything at all.

            The reason they didn’t charge him with anything is that he is not, and never has been a Russian anything. He’s just a doofus. He tried to get into some business deal several years back with someone who – unbeknownst to him – had something to do with Russian something. When the FBI quetioned him his transparent doofosity shone through, and they realised that he was just an innocent dupe. So they used him – with his willing consent – to get evidence against the Russian.

            So he was just an innocent doofus, whose connection with the FBI was effectively that of an informer in a previous case involving a Russian. This time round the FBI used him as a patsy on whom they could hang a FISA warrant to two hop their way into the heart of the Trum campaign.

            If the FISA applications are ever made public, we will discover that the FBI never told the court about Carter Page’s previous role as an FBI informer.

            1. Sure. He plead guilty to avoid being charged. And that’s the best they got. No indictment as you mention.

              “”and never has been a Russian anything.””

              He had been working with Russia on energy issues. Which doesn’t necessarily mean anything else. When you are dealing with countries that have partial state ownership of energy production, you are going to have government level contacts. Some what this to mean it’s proof of collusion. And collusion it might be. Collusion to have better Russian / US relations and energy partnerships. To some this means election fraud.

              “”If the FISA applications are ever made public, we will discover that the FBI never told the court about Carter Page’s previous role as an FBI informer.”‘

              It should be made public. However, the government has a vested interest in keeping FISA abuses secret. It works in their favor.

              1. No, Carter Page hasn’t been indicted and he hasn’t pled guilty to anything. Nada. Four FISA warrants and nada,

                You may be thinking of Papadopoulos who pled guilty to lying, and now, as I understand it, is walking that back.

                1. Yeah, I think your right.

              2. I don’t believe that Carter Page was ever indicted, charged or pleaded guilty to anything. Anything at all. i’ve Google’d it, and still can’t find anything. i’m calling bullshit here on trickyvic. Carter Page seems to be the shaky foundation of this whole circle-jerk, and has never been charged.

                1. I thought I remember him as being one of the ones to plead out. But I didn’t find anything after searching it either. so bullshit it is.

        4. Ask Alger Hiss.

  17. “just another excuse for each side to continue talking about everything except policy issues”

    One of the problems is that the progressives lose on the issues–and they know it. They just got hit over the head with the Green New Deal. And it’s not as if Medicare for All or reparations for slavery were likely to fare any better. Maybe they should make 2020 all about transgender issues or about opposing free speech on college campuses?

    Trump is the only issue that gives them a chance to win. All they can do is make him the issue, hope that people hate him more and more over time, and hope for a recession.

    1. Pollution sucks. I don’t know where you live but I live near the intersection of a congested interstate and foul spewing chemical plants. The sooner we rid ourselves of gas powered shit the better.

      1. Yeah, we have no regulations on pollution mitigation. None at all.

      2. You should check out the environmental damage done by mining for rare earth elements necessary for solar and wind to be even somewhat (but not really) feasible.

        1. I will.

          1. Ordinary Person|3.28.19 @ 10:24AM|#
            “I will.”

            And you’ll return to lie about it.

          2. Since solar and wind is inconsistent sources and generally require a battery, look up the environmental damage done by mining with respects to lithium batteries while you are at it.

            You will see that between the two, it’s not the model for clean energy as some will tout.

            1. Right. Actual environmentalists are either Malthusians or rabidly pro-nuclear power.

              We can’t maintain anywhere near our current standard of living with our current population and energy consumption and environmental load without mass nuclear, and the alternative for and environmentalist is to either reduce the standard of living, or the population – which are both Malthusian solutions.

      3. You be free to make whatever sacrifices you want for your favorite cause.

        Using the coercive power of government to force everyone else to sacrifice their standard of living for your favorite cause is not only authoritarian–it’s also a political loser, whether you like it or not.

        The senate Democrats won’t even stand behind their own Green New Deal, and that’s the point. The progressives can’t win on the issues because their issues are so unpopular, their own politicians won’t even go on the record voting for them–and that’s why they concentrate on Trump rather than the issues.

        1. But don’t forget that Trump is a hate-mongering racist (and sexist and homophobe)!

      4. “”I don’t know where you live but I live near the intersection of a congested interstate and foul spewing chemical plants.””

        New Jersey?

      5. I don’t know where you live but I live near the intersection of a congested interstate and foul spewing chemical plants.

        WWSKD?*

        *What would Sam Kinison Do?

        1. “”*What would Sam Kinison Do?”‘

          Yell at me for living in the desert?

          1. there’s no foooooooooooooooooooood!

            1. It’s sand! Do you know what it’s gonna be a hundred years from now? It’s gonna be saaaaand!!!

  18. I don’t know where you live but I live near the intersection of a congested interstate and foul spewing chemical plants.

    #UrbaniteBugmanProblems

    1. You’re making it real easy not to like your politics.

      1. You’re already there.

  19. “You traitorous Russian stooge, wait until Mueller gets the goods on you…on second thoughts, why don’t we all just move on?”

    1. Exactly. I have a lot of time for Veronique de R as a policy wonk. She’s interested in policy and clueless about politics.

      Side A has just used the awesome powers of the State to subject Side B to a ruthless and compulsory legal colonoscopy, using the excuse that Side B are actual traitors. Side B has said all along that there was nothing to investigate except an illegal and outrageous coup attempt by Side A, using the powers of the State to bring down the Side B President on imaginary charges and imaginary evidence. Side A has blocked any attempt to investigate Side B’s charges on the grounds that such an investigation might hamper Side A’s investigtion.

      Now Side A’s investigtion has come to an end, finding nothing at all – as Side B has predicted all along – Side A suggests that it’s time to move on.

      No way. It’s time to start investigating Side B’s story, for which there is already about twenty times as much public evidence as there ever was for Side A’s story.

      And purely as a matter of policy, Veronique, it’s really bad policy for political partisans to take over the DoJ and FBI, use it to try to affect an election and then to bring down the winner, with no repercussions. As policy matter, it is essential that their asses are repercussioned to the fullest extent of the law.

  20. Dan Mitchell is right. The more Congress wastes time on Mueller the less likely they pass new laws. Generally that is a good thing.

  21. The Republicans shouldn’t let it go. They should remind voters of it every day.

  22. The Democrats and their allies in the media were indulging in conspiracy theory fever dreams for over two years in an attempt to explain why they lost the election could not be their candidate’s fault.

    I am not sure they are capable of giving up on that and the GOP has no reason to let them live it down.

  23. I can’t even move on from how the Mueller Investigation originated, which apparently was with urging direct from Obama’s White House with propaganda support from the Fake News brigade and “evidence” manufactured by Russian associates of British Intelligence paid for by the Hillary Campaign.

    I can’t move on from this little scenario because there appears to be heaps and tons of factual evidence to substantiate the whole fantastic allegation. Moreover, once proven, it clearly amounts to a “high crime” or “sedition” or “treason” or any number of descriptors you can apply when the American constitution gets gang-raped by power-mad federal bureaucrats still seeking to please an outgoing president whose self image is as a messiah. (Also won the Nobel Peace Prize at the same point when prez-elect Trump would be having his transition team secretly spied on and wiretapped by the FBI! Beyond outrageous.)

    1. Exactly that. WE can move on from the Mueller report after we fully expose the people who caused the investigation to exist in the first place.

      DeRugy is pathetically transparent here. Suddenly, she is all interested in moving on from this whole thing. Bullshit. She is just doesn’t want to see the people responsible for this held accountable or for people like her who pushed this hoax on the public to have to answer for doing it. Her Emily Litella act shouldn’t fool anyone.

    2. Actually, beyond an insult to law, justice, honor, any sense of right and wrong or American tradition. Lisa Page just said that the Obama DOJ “ordered” the finding of exoneration of Hillary email and other matters. That was presumably after the A.G. accidentally met with Bill on the tarmac. Call off your dogs. OK.

      1. FBI agent admits the DOJ obstructed justice. Team blue doesn’t care while trying to argue Trump firing Comey, which was a lawful duty, is obstruction worthy of pursuit.

        1. Notice, not one person claiming Trump has committed obstruction will support an investigation into this obstruction.

          1. As with so many things the left expects everyone to accept, it is a matter of faith.
            Trump firing Comey was to obstruct the investigation.
            Climate change is going to destroy the planet in 12 years.
            Handing money to poor people will bring them out of poverty.
            Gender is a personal choice.
            Homosexuals are how they’ve always been, but it isn’t genetic.
            Taking from white people, to give it to minorities will heal race relations.

  24. Lets read the report first then we can move on.

    1. Really? The reason many want to read the report is because they think it will have something in it that will keep it going.

      1. Maybe it does. Maybe it doesnt. I feel 100% confident in saying you would not be ok with Clintons AG (Janet Reno?) 4 page summary of the Starr report.

        1. “I feel 100% confident in saying you would not be ok with Clintons AG (Janet Reno?) 4 page summary of the Starr report.”

          Where did you find this talking point?
          It’s asinine, since there is no comparison, but it’s showing up all over, so it must have been put out on some lefty site or other.

          1. Not only that. It’s stupid to assume you know how someone thinks by a statement or two.

            For the record. I would be perfectly fine with Reno issuing a 4 page report in lieu of the full report if that was the rules.

            Also, for the record, I personally did not approve of the Clinton impeachment.

        2. “”Lets read the report first then we can move on.””

          “”Maybe it does. Maybe it doesn’t””

          Do you want to move on after the report is released or do you want the report to be released hoping you have ammo to keep it going? If it’s the later, you initial post is a lie because you have no intent to just move on afterwards.

  25. I understated the problem right wing Americans have with the way the Mueller Investigation originated. It is beyond an insult to the rule of law. It is an absolutely unforgivable obscenity.

    For their part, Democrats have shot the moon with their non-stop TDS symptoms, tantrums, posturing, signaling to each other, and random public attacks on Republicans and ordinary citizens wearing Trump identifier hats in public. They are so proud, so cocky. So arrogant.

    They have no idea what they have stirred up. Their paranoias were pathetic imaginings of Nazis, rednecks, and KKK caricatures. What they are going to get is an irresistible upswelling of ordinary, middle class folks, patriotic folks that are so pissed they make the green vest rioters in France look like meek Sunday picnickers.

    1. What they are going to get is an irresistible upswelling of ordinary, middle class folks, patriotic folks that are so pissed they make the green vest rioters in France look like meek Sunday picnickers.

      Nope. That would have happened had the Mueller Investigation found evidence against Trump AND the House Democrats proceeded with impeachment. Only those so consumed with “politics as sport” care about this silly sideshow. So feel free to rise-up my red blooded, ordinary patriot…the rest of us will go on with our lives.

    2. I have practically no fear of Nazis, rednecks, KKKers, and their ilk for my minority, female, and gay family and friends.

  26. My friends with MAGA hats weren’t cocky, just happy to have a Republican leader that didn’t cave to any and all Democrat threats or accusations. Me, I’ll take the gridlock. They won’t create any laws to screw me over if they are busy fighting each other over stupid stuff.

  27. In a sense this was answered with the mention of the more important things like passing a budget. In the current “there’s a squirrel” attention span these things must be kept alive to deflect from pesky issues like budgets, unsustainable entitlements and the rest.

  28. Trump canceled the Obama-era program that protected individuals who were brought here as children by their parents and have since been living here illegally. The threat of deportation leaves these immigrants in limbo in a country that has been their home since childhood. Bipartisan support for providing “Dreamers” with a pathway to citizenship makes for low-hanging fruit, especially since the president signaled that he could be swayed on this issue.

    Team Blue was offered amnesty for 2.8MM, which was more than the ask. They said no because they need the issue. Let’s not pretend otherwise.

    1. “Bipartisan support for providing “Dreamers” with a pathway to citizenship makes for low-hanging fruit”

      Only if politicians are considered, because there’s something like 70% bipartisan opposition to “dreamer” pathway to citizenship among the electorate

      1. Yup. Keep up the warring I say!

  29. This is very Amazing when i saw in my Acount 10000$ par month .Just do work online at home on laptop with my best freinds . So u can always make Dollar Easily at home on laptop ,,
    Check For info Here,
    ===> http://www.Theprocoin.com

  30. How can we move on from the report until we see the report?

    1. The report was never intended for you or Congress to see. That was part of the ground work that set forth the investigation.

      How did Dems expect to move on knowing the rules say they do not get to see the full report. They have know this for over two years. Why is it an issue now?

      1. Why is it an issue now?

        Because it’s not the report they wanted?

  31. No.
    Next question?

  32. John Brennan is a communist piece of shit.

  33. “another excuse for each side to continue talking about everything except policy issues”:

    I don’t think it’s an excuse for the Democrats to avoid talking about anything. I think the Mueller report and all the investigations of Trump still to come are driven by blind hatred for the man (or monster, depending on your perspective).

    Past Democrat-Republican spats were driven, to a large extent, by power plays, and some ill will?and, yes, sometimes even some hatred. But this hatred toward Trump by such a large, often prominent, group of Democrats is something else again. It washes over everything.

  34. I quit working at shoprite and now I make $30h ? $72h?how? I’m working online! My work didn’t exactly make me happy so I decided to take a chance? on something new? after 4 years it was so hard to quit my day job but now I couldn’t be happier.

    Heres what I’ve been doing? ,,,

    CLICK HERE?? http://www.TheproCoin.Com

  35. I doubt it, considering they haven’t moved on from Trump’s election yet.

  36. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go to tech tab for work detail.
    >>>>>>>>>> http://www.GeoSalary.com

  37. Yes, it is time to move on.

    Move on to investigating the people who initiated this gross abuse of government authority.

    Once that is settled then we can put the whole matter to rest.

    1. The argument that the whole thing was engineered to cover up Obama/Clinton approval of illegal spying on the Trump (and possibly other candidate’s) campaign being equally – of not more – plausible and substantiated as the ‘Russian Collusion’ accusations.

      We need an independent counsel to look at this.

  38. on Saturday I got a gorgeous Ariel Atom after earning $6292 this ? four weeks past, after lot of struggels Google, Yahoo, Facebook proffessionals have been revealed the way and cope with gape for increase home income in suffcient free time.You can make $9o an hour working from home easily??.
    VIST THIS SITE RIGHT HERE
    >>=====>>>> http://www.AproCoin.Com

  39. I am getting $100 to $130 consistently by wearing down facebook. i was jobless 2 years earlier , however now i have a really extraordinary occupation with which i make my own specific pay and that is adequate for me to meet my expences. I am really appreciative to God and my director. In case you have to make your life straightforward with this pay like me , you just mark on facebook and Click on big button thank you?

    c?h?e?c?k t?h?i?s l?i?n-k >>>>>>>>>> http://www.Geosalary.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.