K-9

Read Rosenstein’s letter of appointment and you’ll clearly see Mueller has the authority to investigate any matters they may arise during the investigation as well as other matters within the scope of his mandate. It’s also worth noting that he was specifically charged with investigating “Russian interference with the 2016 Presidential Campaign and other matters.” Nowhere does it say he is limited to investigating “collusion.” Look, this is a thread for the IG report released toda and everything I’ve said about Mueller’s scope of authority, I’ve said a year ago in that thread.

I understand your anger given your political leanings, but I’ll have to wait and see what the next phase of the IG report brings. Emails and texts from FBI agents hating on Trump are a very bad optic for sure. But FBI agents or anyone else in public service aren’t precluded from having their own political views. What’s important to me is if those agents were SO motivated by their biases against Trump to act, what ACTIONS did they COMMIT and what DAMAGE to Trump was inflicted. The IG report doesn’t indicate that at this point. There will be other investigations and if it’s proved that FBI agents broke any actual laws you’re right, they should be dealt with to the fullest extent. Until then, the IG report says whatever people want it to say. But it’s important to remember that as of now, it doesn’t say anyone broke any laws.

No, it isn’t as other players and other activities have come to light since. For instance, Mueller was into his work for just a couple weeks when he hired several investigators with expertise in money laundering with particular experience in Eastern European banks and schemes.

Collusion in and of itself is not against the law and I said that a year ago. As for when Mueller began, colluding with Russia was just one plank of the investigation.

Very well stated. And we should all take a breath amidst the frenzy of spin around the IG report and remember that we ARE a nation of laws; laws that EXIST and not laws that we merely wish were on the books.

That’s not how I read that particular quote. Sounds to me like Comey didn’t want to conceal the material BEFORE she was elected so as to prevent questions about her legitimacy AFTERWARD. In this instance, I think he was right; there would have been a huge crap storm if, after the election, he suddenly announces that, oh by the way, we have reason to suspect there may be incriminating material on Weiner’s laptop but we decided to wait. The timing was bad, but he did the right thing by bringing the Weiner laptop info to light BEFORE the election, which LEGITIMIZES his action. Looking forward to to the next IG report. I think you have a good bead on some of the projected outcomes for some of these players.

LMFAO! Well done. Above and beyond. The football gods must be overjoyed!

Done? Let’s see pictures of your mangeled knee before we pronounce anything “done.”

I agree wholeheartedly. Is it your position that sometimes the demands of a job won’t put a person between a rock and a hard place? Maybe I’m being too simplistic.

Now you’ve done it. Go outside right now and bang one of your knees with a hammer to make proper restitution to the football gods. And speak of these things no more.

Good point here. He was between the proverbial rock and a hard place at the time. No matter how he proceeded he was going to upset some political faction or another.

This is nothing new as everybody and their mother was saying he broke from normal protocol when he did it at the time in 2016. The FBI had always respected that time window relative to Election Day regarding the nominated candidates. He was lauded by the right for his courage at the time. How he managed to piss off both sides so readily is truly amazing.

This is upsetting. As it should be. And I don’t mean that towards you personally at all because your decisions on how to present yourself to your friends comes from a place of deep empathy and respect, imo. But you touch upon upon a subject that my sister and other educators in inner city school environments often lament and that is the deliberate lack of effort and classroom participation by obviously bright and gifted students because they didn’t want to be rejected by a less talented peer group or worse, ostracized, bullied, or worse. I can’t imagine that kind of pressure on a kid already pressured by the sheer environment he’s in. Was that an issue for you growing up?

DR is giving his opinion of what’s in Tump’s mind, and based on what Trump has said, DR are is correct; Trump thinks N Korea is no longer a nuclear threat. He came right out and stated that after all. Where DR and I really depart ways is that I think that’s a total crock while DR has more respect for the president’s opinion.

Packers fan I see. Nice.

If you read the entire exchange between DR and I, which is lengthy and easy to miss certain points within, you’ll see the context in which he made that comparison.

You would think so, but there are people on the right who won't watch a Penn, Deniro, or Streep movie just as there are those on the left who won't watch a James Woods, Dennis Miller, or Mel Gibson movie STRICTLY because of their political views. Short sighted and stupid? Yes. But people conflate actors and their roles all the time. Sad but true.

A throw made with anticipation? Be still my heart.

Precisely why I can’t believe Gregg would stretch so far to make such a false equivalency in the first place.

France, Great Britain, Russia? How about China or Israel? Or Pakistan? Why not list EVERY country that has nukes? If that's the standard, why are we even bothering about N Korea in the first place? That's rhetorical, btw. I can't believe someone of your intelligence would seek to make such a false equivalency. Why don't we just agree to disagree and hope for the best. This is too exhausting. Beer back at ya.

Question: if N Korea has nuclear weapons, are they a nuclear threat or not? The answer is obvious. Trump clearly stated they are no longer nuclear threat. He is wrong about that at this time. Hopefully, the reality will catch up with his rhetoric. Here's his tweet from five minutes earlier in this Chicago Tribune article where he clearly states "nuclear" http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-trump-twitter-north-korea-nuclear-threat-20180613-story.html Here's his entire twitter string from today and it's there as well: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^author

Also with respect, I don’t buy it. He was very specific by saying no longer a “nuclear” threat and that’s plain wrong. As long as they have nuke weapons, they are a nuke threat. Simple as that.

Never said they were the same thing. Not even close. I said that Trump had a sudden change in tone and my OPINION is that’s because China started talking about sanctions relief immediately after the summit. And I find that a bit concerning. Why else would Trump suddenly declare N Korea no longer a threat? Also, that “evidence” of denuking may take years. Given N Korea’s previous history, I’d be shocked if they waited that long.

Because words are important for the honest brokers in the world. And they allow for a basis of accountability moving forward. Words serve as the framework for treaties to be abided by. They can’t prevent a bad actor from breaking their pledge, but that doesn’t make them unimportant.

Today Trump said N Korea is no longer a nuclear threat. I can link it if you like, but it’s all over the news. I found that concerning coming only a day after alluding to sanctions staying in place until they fully denuclearize. If they aren’t yet denuclearized, how can they now suddenly be considered a nuclear threat? IMO, it’s because China immediately called for sanctions relief after the summit was over.