Unless the FBI arrived to pick up classified documents with or without a search warrant, and were PHYSICALLY DENIED ACCESS to pick up the classified documents, then Trump has done nothing wrong or indictable.

Sometimes the Washington Swamp loves to convolute the law so they can force their intended target into a court of law, which now includes the former President of the United States. 

Allegedly Trump has denied, stalled, ignored and avoided dealing with repeated requests to return classified documents to the FBI and the present Government.

It appears the FBI, knowing how Trump would respond to being forced to do something, entrapped Trump for the purpose of arresting and indicting him when all they had to do was show up and take what they felt was theirs. Yes, it's really that simple.

What if the FBI had just appeared one day at Mar Lago and said they were there to retrieve all the classified documents Trump had in his possession? If Trump lets the FBI in and the FBI retrieves all the Classified Documents, then has Trump committed an indictable crime? If the answer is no, then once the FBI showed up and as long as they were allowed in to remove classified documents, then Trump did not violate any laws. 

Why didn't the FBI send a couple of agents over to review and discern which documents had to be returned, and which ones did not need to be returned? Unless Trump physically denied access to the FBI agents, Trump has not done anything worthy of any indictments.

Doesn't Trump have his own Secret Service in his presence? Seems like the Classified Documents could have been picked up by verified FBI Agents at any time with no threat to the FBI's safety, and no need to indict Trump.

As for Trump "returning" documents, how is Trump to know what he can keep, and what he must return? Isn't it logical to presume the only way the documents could safely leave Trump's possession would be to have the FBI retrieve and transport them, which in the end, is exactly what they did, but with a whole lot of Swamp Drama attached to the situation.

 

 

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

When Donald Trump Speaks, he allegedly commits crimes, is that how it is supposed to work?

There is something about the perpetual attacks against Donald Trump going back to 2015 that I find perplexing.

Whenever there has been a breaking news story about something Donald Trump has "done", it seems to involve something Donald Trump allegedly said, not something Trump actually did. 

Whether it's Donald Trump pleading with Georgia to find him some votes to offset the tens of thousands most likely fraudulently collected ballot harvest votes, or stalling the Secret Service as to when they can collect Presidential papers, or refusing to answer questions about an alleged encounter that has no date attached to it, to allegedly falsifying tax returns in a way that is no different than how many others have done, the entire actions of our present regime seems like an insurrection against our prior President.

I recall when Donald Trump wanted to find out if a private citizen named Joe Biden who had not yet announced his plans to run for President, had any financial ties to Ukraine, Trump was laughably accused of "digging for dirt".

Possibly the moment we lost our democracy was when the mainstream media actually claimed that "digging for dirt" was a legal term to be taken seriously, and that Trump was in violation and thus should be impeached. 

Ever since "Digging for Dirt" gate was concocted, we have all been taken down a rabbit hole in which everything Trump says is illegal, and therefore subject to an investigation and now prosecution, when the reality is, if it is not a written order, IT DID NOT HAPPEN because the person receiving the verbal command has the right of refusal until the order is put in writing.

As Trump is repeatedly tried on a multitude of alleged violations of the law, remember this, ASKING, or TELLING, someone to do something, is NOT ordering them to do it, unless it is in writing, or a threat of being fired actually becomes a firing, I don't think Trump has broken any laws.

 

 

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

Are we to believe we cannot convert "excess" Carbon Dioxide into anything useful?

More sky is melting rhetoric from Juan Cole. Cole shows charts that reveal CO2 is allegedly at record levels. Then Cole begins discussing what CO2 levels were 200 years ago, and also what CO2 levels were millions of years ago. Cole never explains how he knows what CO2 levels were 200 years ago, nor how CO2 levels were known from millions of years ago, but we should just believe him anyways. 

 

Even if Cole is correct, Cole's article avoids discussing if there are any ways to convert excessive CO2 to something else. Are we to believe that over the next 10 years all of civilization cannot figure out how to tame and safely convert CO2?

Are any billionaires offering a reward for the first CO2 "invention" that allows "excessive" CO2 to be converted to something more environmentally safer?

If the end of the world is upon us because of excessive CO2 already in the upper atmosphere, and not one reward is being offered by a billionaire to incentivize a way to reduce CO2 that is already in the atmosphere, then, I can't come up with a then, can you?

 

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

The Republican flaw regarding how they view, Abortion, Gun Rights, Global Warming, Caregiving, and Popular Vote.

Having been a former life long Democrat for several decades, I can see why I now usually loath present Democrat Progressive policies, when the Policies don't work, we are lied to and told they do work. However, it appears that Republican Politicians have an inability to innovate better options and solutions to Societal and Environmental Issues Democrat Politician seem to be bungling.

While Democrat Politicians want their first place trophy for attempting to bring feel good solutions that do not work, they manage to so offend Republican Politicians who know the Progressive ideas are not working that the Republican Politicians walk away without offering a better solution other than to fall back on the "Constitution" or the country is a "Republic, not a Democracy".

I cannot do all the topics stated in the title, Abortion, Gun Rights, Global Warming, Caregiving, and Popular Vote, justice in one article. Instead all I can ask anyone who reads this article is to question why each Political Party seems reluctant to outdo each other with great ideas, and instead are comfortable simply jousting against each other at every turn.

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

MSNBC Durham Investigation Rebuke misses the there there there while mocking the there there.

While MSNBC attempts to discredit the four year Durham investigation regarding the conspiracy to connect Donald Trump with Russia, MSNBC creates a new there there without realizing it.

Quoting from the MSNBC biased editorial masked as news analysis...

"All of the substantiated claims that he (Durham) makes were likewise previously acknowledged in a 2019 report from the department’s inspector general that found that despite some serious concerning mistakes, the Russia investigation was justified."

end quote.

51 Former Government Intelligence Officials signed a letter less than 2 weeks before the 2020 Presidential Election claiming the Hunter Biden lap top was a ruse and most likely Russian disinformation. This last minute fraudulent claim of fraud concocted by the Biden Presidential Campaign helped put Joe Biden over the top in 2020, yet MSNBC not only ignores this reality, but attempts to gaslight the Durham Investigation by claiming a report released a year before the 51 signature fraud somehow negates everything in the Durham investigation that has been ongoing for the past 4 years.

How does a 2019 Inspector general report negate facts and stories that emerged a year later, also known as Hunter Biden Laptop Gate just before the 2020 Presidential Election? 

The Gaslighting of the Truth never seems to end with MSNBC.

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

What we can all learn from the Jordan Neely, Daniel Penny Subway Choke Hold Tragedy.

I am not against what Daniel Penny initially did to ensure that Jordan Neely's verbal threats in an enclosed area were met with resistance. Unfortunately the news failed to mention if and when the train reached a stop during the 15 minute choke hold.

Was the Train in an actual Train Depot waiting for the Police to arrive? Was the train in between stops and there was no way off the train? Was the Train Moving? 

My suggestion is in this type of situation, and assuming the train was not moving and the other passengers had a safe way to leave the specific train where the stranglehold was going on, the specific train should have been Immediately evacuated and Mr. Penny and the other people detaining Jordan Neely should have then left so Mr. Neely would be all alone inside the train cab, presumably still alive.

While it is easier to come to such a conclusion after the fact and from a distance, this was not an airplane where the passengers had no where to go. Maybe it is time for Subway services to make passengers aware of evacuation options when a situation is occurring involving a physical confrontation, and it is safe to leave the actual train cab.

I hope the New York Subway system begins to offer evacuation instructions when it is safe to do so since not doing anything might have created a problem, while doing something with no end in sight created a tragic outcome.

 

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

How can the E. Jean Carroll trial go on without an actual allegation date attached to it?

Every Detective Show I have ever watched asks one simple question, "Where were you on the night of", or "the afternoon of", etc. This allows the alleged suspect an opportunity to prove where they were at that specific date and time.

The E. Jean Carroll lawsuit against Donald Trump apparently has no specific time or day attached to it. How can anyone mount a defense if no specific date or time is attached to the accusation?

Appearing as a defendant under such loose guidelines would basically allow the plaintiff's attorney to ask any question about anything that might relate to proving that at some point in time Mr. Trump was at the location in question.

It's just such a silly premise under which to have a trial that it may be setting a dangerous precedent. Remember, these are two adults, so it is not as if this was a child who can't remember the exact time and date of an incident. 

I wonder if a dangerous precedent has been set in which in the future, an allegation without an actual date attached to it will still be allowed to go forward. 

I suppose there are cases where someone states..."On or about", but even in that scenario, the on or about I would presume is related to a specific date. If "On or about" is allowed to be used to describe something that happened during a specific year, or decade, it seems like that would both weaken the ability to mount a defense while placing the defendant in peril of having to answer all kinds of questions in an effort to pinpoint a time the defendant may have been at that location as if that would somehow prove something happened. 

There seems to be a nefarious purpose to this lawsuit in which every American can now be accused and tried without attaching a specific moment in time to when the allegation actually occurred. 

Carny was once explained to me as playing a game where the entry fee costs more than the most valuable prize a contestant can win in return. This E. Jean Carroll lawsuit sounds like a carny trial, and we are all the worse for it no matter what the verdict is.

If an appeal has to be filed by the defense, How about the Defendant was unable to mount a defense against an accusation that had no date attached to it? 

Meanwhile, CNN makes no mention of the ginormous elephant in the room, the lack of a specific time and date attached to accusation. And the assertion that E. Jean Carroll no longer had a social life because of this alleged encounter, was this only brought up in the closing statement, because E. Jean Carroll co-founded a dating site called "Greatboyfriends.com" 

Did the defense protest the statement made by plaintiff's attorney that E. Jean Carroll went decades without dates or being married and having children because of the Trump encounter, because this was easily refuted and I hope Trump's lawyer challenged the claim.

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.

How Reporters screw up basic common sense comments regarding January 6th.

Before anyone can claim no "Credible Evidence" regarding the 2020 Presidential Election and possible vote tampering existed, one would presume that investigations would have been done. There were no credible investigations regarding the 2020 Elections by the mainstream media, not before, during, or after. 

There was no follow up investigations from the mainstream media regarding the many complaints that were cited, depositioned, and then basically ignored by the Judicial system that began claiming no one had 'standing". 

Postal employees ignored their subpoenas to appear for questioning.

Basic questions about how much "power" the vote uploaders had to change a vote, or to reupload the same ballots over and over, or why ballots existed with no folds, which if they were provisional in nature should have still been connected to an actual voter but may not have been, were all issues worthy of investigating.

This article link literally has no understanding of how Ted Cruz is using the phrase "credible evidence"   

Christopher Krebbs admitted during a 60 minutes interview that were problems on the ground, but dismissed them without mentioning what they were.  What type of investigative journalism is this?

This constant MSM gaslighting about the 2020 Elections when no real investigations went on just creates more and more suspicion that there probably was something going on that needs to remain covered up or the news would be earth shattering.

 

 

Please consider signing the Debt Neutrality Petition by clicking here.