Active Now

Twinkle Dink
Discussion » Questions » Current Events and News » Mueller report is done. No recommendations for any farther indictments. No collusion. Surprised?

Mueller report is done. No recommendations for any farther indictments. No collusion. Surprised?

Posted - March 22


  • 14454
    Did I make a determination about what they discussed? No, I said it should be determined....

    We only just got past the Comney stuff. Part of the reason for Mueller investigation was the firing of Comney. As you said report just came out Friday. 
    The Inspector General is still investigating Comney, McCabe,  etc actions under Obama while investigating Hillary. So no we are really not over all of that.
      March 24, 2019 6:05 PM MDT

  • 9233
    Every communication by a government employee, especially one high up in the administration is part of the government archives.  They are accountable for their calls.  How do you know that what they discussed was legitimate?  We are past Obama and Comey and Hillary and Bush and Carter and Reagan, so stop rehashing all that nonsense already.  If it was so bad when the others did things wrong, why is THIS administration still doing them? This post was edited by SpunkySenior at March 24, 2019 5:44 PM MDT
      March 24, 2019 5:43 PM MDT

  • 5537
    I've noticed that when you tell Don Barzini that you know what he meant to say as opposed to what he actually posted, I'm sure I hear the universe sneeze and cough and mutter a swear word that I can't quite make out, but can probably guess.

    Please refer to the terms of service and respect what the man said.  If you choose to attempt to correct him, please state why you think he was mistaken.

      March 23, 2019 1:57 PM MDT

  • 14454
    I was simply assuming he knows that our country is  and has always been a REPUBLIC. 

    IF you believe I have somehow violated the TOS please hit the report will go straight to JA. 
      March 23, 2019 2:04 PM MDT

  • 3455
    Yes, I am aware the US is a Constitutional Republic, but the TYPE of it’s govt is a Democracy; as opposed to a Theocracy, an Autocracy or a Monarchy, or a dictatorship. 

    I can only articulate my thoughts, I can’t impose comprehension. 

    @Tom: It was a sneeze. Lol. 

      March 23, 2019 2:43 PM MDT

  • 5537
    Could have sworn it was the commonly used phrase for "bovine excrement."  But at my age, my hearing may in fact be slightly compromised.
      March 23, 2019 3:02 PM MDT

  • 14454
    Republic is a type of government. 
      March 24, 2019 7:37 AM MDT

  • 5702

    Well I feel called upon to address some of this even though no doubt anything you can readily dismiss anything I put forth. 

    I wonder if you had people working and scheming 24/7 both privately and quite publicly to bring you down you would not become a mite uncivil as well as be less forthcoming with "every aspect" of your life and personal dealings?  Not sure why you think our president is a "genius"  but I would say he was most forthcoming about such things until he found they would be turned against him.  As has been, unfortunately, almost everything he has done!   I learned growing up that we don't have to necessarily like someone to work with them and learn from them.  What is "divisive" is that some people refuse to do either.  They don't care for him and they refuse to work with him and they will spend the rest of their lives hating him.

    The "pillars of American Democracy:" (as you express it) are personal freedom, personal initiative, hard work and success.  Because without those there would be no "American Democracy".   Plus a good dose of Christianity.  And you need not remind me that many if not most of our "founding fathers" were not evangelical Christians.  Some were but most, being good sons of the enlightenment, would have subscribed to the reasonableness of Christianity. The only notion of "equality" exists in God's love for all God's Creation. 

    Just as you are "no liberal" Donald Trump is no conservative. But he was willing to lend his support to some very basic conservative ideas and beliefs including those mentioned in my previous paragraph.  Which was the reason, and the only reason, that many of us decided to vote for him.  My husband and I rather supported Cruz/Fiorina but they didn't make it so our only real alternatives were Trump and Clinton.  Now Trump was not so popular with many conservatives in our state(Massachusetts) - yes there are more than only four of five of us here! - but we thought best to support the candidate whose beliefs were closest to our own. 

    My assumption has been that his strategy has been to restore some sense or reality and practicality to our government.  If such a thing is really do-able.  Now you have accused him of dealing with "criminals and incompetents".  As to the former do you even imagine that anyone playing as big a game as he through his would not have had to to accomplish what he wanted to accomplish?   You want to build in certain parts of Philadelphia you deal with the "mob" and appease the unions or else it doesn't get done. That is the reality of life in many places whether you wish to acknowledge it or not.  Now as far as "incompetents" he has to get the best people that will work for him.  And seems to me the way he has become accustomed to doing things rather he chooses to make most if not all of the decisions.  Would you work for him?  I would not but then no doubt he would not even ask me to. 

    I don't know if you wait to see who is elected and then  make them the "leader" by just following them. But many of us are not looking for a leader - we have our own lives to lead and we lead them ourselves. We elect a president to take care of the business of being president. Just as we all have our own jobs to do. 

    Not sure what kind of "national progress" people are looking for - we are quite happy with our own progress which is national enough for us. We can be ourselves and rise or fall by our own efforts that is enough for us. 

    Not sure if you mean the "tilting at windmills" to be our ideals which yes I suppose many of us have. But we know they are just ideals and not the way the world runs - they work ell enough for us but we would not expect they would necessarily work for everyone. 

    And I would say that in these days when hard work and success is demonized and Christianity is laughed off and many people would gladly give up their freedoms for a government check that many of us find ourselves clutching at whatever straws of "perceived possibility" (real or imagined} we can find. 

    Just the opinions of one who has worked hard and done well and who has some assurance for eternal salvation through Jesus Christ  but otherwise makes no claims of superiority of any kind so expects to be "put in her place". 


      March 23, 2019 3:03 PM MDT

  • 5537
    "Just the opinions of one who has worked hard and done well and who has some assurance for eternal salvation through Jesus Christ but otherwise makes no claims of superiority of any kind"

    So, for clarification, do you in fact claim superiority because you have "worked hard and done well and...(have) some assurance for eternal salvation through Jesus Christ"?

    I mean, since Don Barzini has previously stated on this site that he is an atheist, your "some assurance for eternal salvation through Jesus Christ" represents a value and a virtue that sounds like something that you think Don Barzini is unlikely to attain.

    Are you really as "pink" as you imply?

    (Pink is romantic and intimate, feminine, loving, caring and extremely considerate. It tones down the physical passion from the red color and replaces it with a gentle and loving energy. The color pink is insightful and intuitive and it shows tenderness and kindness from its empathetic and sensitive nature.)  
      March 23, 2019 3:24 PM MDT

  • 5702
    Hi!  Well I am trying to realistically anticipate that some will regard those things as my claiming "superiority". Don knows I am no mental giant or genius at understanding and he can reason rings around me in a single breath. I had sort of given up responding to his answers and comments because he only belittles me. Nonetheless I stand up and write my piece.  My husband does not belittle me (not most of the time!) and even enjoys my intellect and company when he is not working.  I am perfectly OK with his being an atheist if that is what he wants - it is his life.  I simply have chosen another way. We have previously gone a little back and forth on that subject.  Anyway I doubt it is his atheistic beliefs which have put him off Trump.  And he (Don) has already "attained" many things which I can never even hope to aspire to. 

    Don't understand the "pink" business.  If you are doing a color analysis of my personality I would say you are perhaps  giving me too much credit!  I gravitate more to green myself.  As a color.  Thank you sir. This post was edited by officegirl at March 23, 2019 6:05 PM MDT
      March 23, 2019 3:44 PM MDT

  • 5537
    Pretty good response---kudos to you.

    The "Pink" issue:  our youngest daughter-in-law (34) has a number of workout outfits and miscellaneous casual wardrobe items that say "Think Pink"

    While I was aware of the singer and the relationship of the word "pink" to Victoria Secret, neither association of the word "pink" seemed to explain the apparent high esteem with which the phrase was being employed.

    A day or two ago, I finally searched for "pink."  After going to the second page of results and clicking on one of the other searches, I found the website I referenced in my response to you.

    It's an interesting site apparently in some way related to marketing, and it talks about colors.  (No mention of auras.)

      March 23, 2019 8:52 PM MDT

  • 3455
    I appreciate your careful analysis of my post, Officegirl, allow me to lend clarity to at least a few of the things you mentioned:

    The President has been quite adamant about avoiding dissemination of his medical records, SAT scores, his extensive business dealings, his net worth, and Tax returns, even going so far as to threaten to sue anyone who speaks about them. He’s never been forthcoming in any sense on these things, before or after the election. He lies about them (and most everything else) constantly. 

    I used the term “ stable genius” because Trump has famously called himself one.  I assure you, I don’t consider Donald Trump either stable or a genius at any level. Quite the contrary. He has less formal education than I do. 
    I would point out that so many who support Trump seem in denial that his prickly behavior would cause others to treat him the same way. Insulting and bullying does not inspire affection, dear. You reap what you sow. How dare he talk trash about the late John McCain, a war hero. (Are we not better than that?) 
    Does it NOT bother you (especially as a Christian) that the President has no regard for The Golden Rule? That he spends weekends alone, Tweeting storms of hateful and divisive comments? This is not leadership.

    I referred to the “criminals and incompetents” that appear to constantly surround Trump, in his private life and particularly, in his administration. He chooses these people to populate his inner circle. 6 are convicted of crimes, more may be. Many have been chased out. Curious?
    And NO, of course I would not work for him. Maybe you’ve noticed how badly that typically turns out for those who do. 

    I don’t know what your assertion of your faith has to do with this conversation. 

    I hope this provides some insight to my points. I read your response as a sincere one, I can see that you applied a lot of thought to it and merited a reply. 

    The rest of my post is as plain as I intend to make it, I get that not everyone is conversational at the same levels.
    I am pleased it generated some thoughtful debate. 
    Best to you. 

    This post was edited by Don Barzini at March 24, 2019 1:27 PM MDT
      March 23, 2019 5:52 PM MDT

  • 7507
    "Stable genius" has a misplaced "i". He's a stable genus. A stable is precisely where you'd expect to find a horse's a$$.
      March 25, 2019 6:30 AM MDT

  • 1777
    The russophobia always was fake news.  This post was edited by Malizz at March 23, 2019 6:04 PM MDT
      March 23, 2019 4:32 PM MDT