The bryen hammer

I find the format of his posts quite dubious. Who indents??

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bN7VBhU_QWk

I am enjoying the renaissance of illustrated posts -- It makes the Zone seem more like a comic book -- which I think is appropriate.

I’ve known Bryen for close to 30 years. He’s a great person. One of the nicest people I know. 

Larry, did you get Bryens permission before posting that? At least you blanked out his last name to protect his identity..

wait, its that bryen jen??!

Guy comes on the board and says he loves Phil more than anyone here and he's seen

Phil live more than anyone here.

Comical on a few levels.

poor Debra 

     "Guy comes on the board and says he loves Phil more than anyone here and he's seen
Phil live more than anyone here."

     Greetings, salutations, love and respect to all...I was admittedly in rare form when I made that statement, it was like 4:15 in the morning, sometimes I do feel like I love Phil more than just about anybody, but that's hard to quantify, have I seen Phil play bass more than anyone on a message board[?]...maybe, but I also know it shouldn't really matter and in a moment of reflection realize it's not necessarily relevant, I probably didn't mean for that to sound exactly how it came across, there's nowhere you can be that isn't where you're meant to be.  
     I realize we have differences of opinion on whether the Mueller probe is a legitimate inquiry or a coup d'état, but let me say I have truly enjoyed the intelligent discussion back & forth on that issue, it's the political debate of a generation, I hope I've been a respectful participant in that debate.

<<<the intelligent discussion>>>

Ha. It certainly helps if whenever you have an intelligent discussion about current events you have some knowledge of the events that led up to the current situation. Decades and centuries (even millennia) of actions and events shape the now. Funny how your history only goes back to 2008.

You might be surprised how much a broader historical overview will inform you. Or you could just stand on the corner shouting "Hillary, Hillary" to passing cars.

     Alan...history will tell this tale shortly, peace to you & yours, I like your style, you're mistaken, but I like your style.  

Bryen, will you touch a beer can to your lips.

     I usually just drink bottles, unless I'm at a music festival that just allows cans.  I'm just going to quietly fade back into obscurity, happy birthday by the way, I've always been a big fan!  :)

Bryen = Mike W.

     I think Mike drank Budweiser exclusively, I'm more of an IPA guy.

Hi Hall. 

Bryen is a very nice person. I don’t think he likes trump but he does like to discuss politics and will often take a side that seems odd. Sorry Bryen. :)

     I'm more of a constitutionalist in the tradition of Ron Paul, I actually voted for him in the last 3 cycles.  Thank you Jennifer, you are truly one of the very special human beings I have had the good fortune of knowing.

>>>  I think Mike drank Budweiser exclusively, I'm more of an IPA guy.

Yep, there goes that one.

Fuck.

Thanks Bryen! Backatya! ❤️

Bryen, lemme tell ya something in a way that you might understand:

Russia loves the good ol USA like Joan Osborne loves you ---  in your mind only. 

     Alan, the truth will be told, that is for certain, we can agree to disagree until which time it is revealed.

bryen, i hope things improve for you.

was a fan, would like to continue to be...

love,

turtle.

     Turtle things have rarely been better, truly appreciate it, much love & respect!

When do the fab four get out of the ban slammer?

    "Be Here Now" by George Harrison

    https://youtu.be/sJjFzQHDA0k

Well it appears there is something very not normal about Bryen. Fits in perfectly.

... fuckin' Bryen

Always look on the bright side of life....

 B-ry, if Mueller had unfettered oversight of the Administration’s day to day business, just waiting for a fuck up, it absolutely would be an unconstitutional coup d’etat. It doesn’t. Your base claim is 100% warrantless.

At the very least, history will show that the investigation was a very important check and balance on a political system that severely needed checks and balances. Let’s hope that it is a lesson to future administrations.

     BrianK, I truly believe we'll know soon enough, I'm pretty sure I'm correct as I'm sure you believe you are, I think there are well intentioned people on both sides of this discussion.

More "witches" to come.  Stay tuned.

>>>I truly believe we'll know soon enough, I'm pretty sure I'm correct

this is something else I don't understand about your stance on this whole thing, bryen.

u keep talking about how this investigation will soon b exposed as a sham but even if it ended tomorrow with no further charges filed, couldn't it still b considered a worthwhile success just based on all the existing indictments so far?

     "if it ended tomorrow with no further charges filed, couldn't it still b considered a worthwhile success just based on all the existing indictments so far?"

     Respectfully...and I'm going to redouble my efforts to be respectful, if none of these "crimes" have anything to do with a criminal conspiracy with a foreign government to hack into Podesta's email account, then no, I do not.

 Respectfully...and I'm going to redouble my efforts to be respectful,<<

ephthisguy

     ^ true story

A few observations:

For those who think that "dead heads" can only lean left, folks might want to remember that John Perry Barlow was a republican.

A lot of people out here have seen Phil a lot.  Like over 100 times.  Or 500 times.  After 100, that's plenty.  

Even if I disagree with ones political beliefs, I'm open to disagreeing without being disagreeable.  

Sometimes it seems like Bryen's stated political beliefs R more about pushing others buttons then his actual beliefs.  I could B wrong, but that's the way it feels.  At least to me.   But what do I know.  

     Dave, I think that was fairly well stated, I do believe in this country and this community, I think some of my comments were perhaps late night / middle of the day attempts at humorous "button pushing", but in all seriousness, for what it may be worth, I do happen to feel strongly that this is a well coordinated effort to unseat a duly elected president that isn't a willing participant in a foreign policy of war in perpetuity.  I do believe that soon enough this will all be revealed, until then if I engage at all it will be an attempt to do so as respectfully as I am able.  I do have a deep love for what we've been able to accomplish as a community, I have a genuine love in my heart for those of you whom I've disagreed with on this topic, I'll make a commitment from this day forth to raise the bar and do so with kindness and an acknowledgement that we all desire what we individually believe is best for this republic.  

> I think some of my comments were perhaps late night / middle of the day attempts at humorous "button pushing<

If that means that you were a condescending jackass,  I'd have to agree.  

     Top of the morning to you Lumber, enjoy the day!

For those who think that "dead heads" can only lean left, folks might want to remember that John Perry Barlow was a republican.>>>>

We know that. Thom is a classic example, probably a kind enough person in real life. Fafa is a republican and a good generous person in real life in general. Just differing opinions on politics. Am i missing any zoner republicans?

Now Bryen i'm pretty sure is not a republican and has taken the role of Blurt from NJ, remember all caps and different colors, at least once he admitted to trolling for a reaction and attention. Certainly odd behavior but i can see how the attention and compulsive urge for engagement could be alluring, sorta in a strange nutty way.

>> I do happen to feel strongly that this is a well coordinated effort to unseat a duly elected president that isn't a willing participant in a foreign policy of war in perpetuity.   

That our current (duly elected) POTUS is all about reshaping US foreign policy to bring peace, is open for discussion.  How weakening NATO and suspending nuclear arms control treaties will help accomplish that seems confusing.  His approach to foreign policy seems constructed to placate base supporters (in the moment), as apposed to a carefully thought out approach to end war in perpetuity. 

As for the “well coordinated effort to unseat a duly elected president,” considering the numerous campaign and administration officials who have been convicted of or pled guilty to crimes or found to have violated federal ethics rules, or forced to resign over security clearance issues, one wonders what all this stuff is about.  The criminal charges seem to be connected to the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.  What’s with all the lies?  Even if POTUS is innocent of either collusion, obstruction or any other high crime and misdemeanor, to wonder what’s going on is an effort to obstruct the end of endless war, is hard to swallow. At least for me. YMMV. 

^ Bingo.

>is a republican

As much as I couldn't take the Ronnie Raygun Republican(inevitably leading us here)  I can't fathom the party that stands behind our current administration. For what?   

     I would politely take issue with the notion that I'm "trolling" for a reaction etc...I honestly have trouble believing no one else on this message board seemingly understands what is going on, and I'm trying to be as courteous as I can with that statement, let me say I'm genuinely bewildered that seemingly no one claims to see what to me truly seems obvious, that dynamic surprises me.  Either everyone here is correct and I'm mistaken, or everyone here is mistaken and I'm correct, I suppose we will know soon enough.  In the meantime I'll certainly utilize this as an opportunity to be more considerate of other's views that I happen to strongly disagree with.

Trolling is what folks do here, nothing to be ashamed of.

     I really don't consider it that way, it's more like some desire to inform others, it doesn't seem to be a highly successful endeavor.  It does fascinate me that no one acknowledges what I honestly know in my heart and mind to be true, we'll see soon enough, in some ways I've done about all I can do on this front.  

     Let the words be yours...

Politeness is what is hanging this country.  Don't mistake politeness with rational thinking.  You aren't thinking rationally.  Other than a declaration that anyone supporting Trump is a complete useless moron, I know that I can't explain how a con man made his way to be president.  The only obvious is that as a country we failed a proverbial IQ test. 

>>  It does fascinate me that no one acknowledges what I honestly know in my heart and mind to be true, <<

Your "hope" isn't truth, nor is it evidence.

B-ry, all you’re doing is informing people of your opinions. You’re not offering facts, or even assessments of facts. You then tend to put people down when they state differing opinions, saying that they are parroting talking points.

I have tried to engage with you on a different level, but you don’t want discussion, just a soap box.

The media's and the Democratic Party's obsession with the Trump-Russia conspiracy theory originates from events of April-June 2016.  Media operations by the Democratic Party and its media echo chamber have distorted not only the information about the relevant events, but even the background political picture of April 2016.

The DNC and Hillary constructed a conspiracy theory in which Putin ordered the hacking of the DNC network and subsequent mass distribution of the exfiltrated documents to help Trump beat Hillary.  Such actions were against Russian interests and very unusual for Russian intelligence.
Driven by their conspiracy theory, Hillary indulged in anti-Russian rhetoric, and the Obama administration drove relations with Russia to the worst point in the last 40 years.  Since the elections, the Democrats, the hard left, and the institutions owned by them have been pushing Trump to aggravate the conflict, started by Obama and Hillary.  But let's proceed in chronological order.

• Summer 2015 – The FBI warns the DNC about alleged Russian hacking.
The DNC ignores the warning.

• April 28, 2016 – The DNC discovers suspicious activity on its network.
...and calls its lawyer, Marc Elias.  On May 6, after more than a week of waffling, the DNC brings in cyber-security contractor CrowdStrike, selected based on affinity rather than on merits.  CrowdStrike "determines" there were two breaches and names the culprits behind them – Cozy Bear and Fancy Bear – claimed by CrowdStrike to be Russian elite hacker units of FSB and GRU respectively.

The DNC refused to allow the FBI to access its computers, which it thought had been accessed by FSB and GRU.  Apparently, the FBI consented to be subordinate of FSB and GRU on this issue.

• June 12, 2016 – Assange of WikiLeaks declares that he's got internal documents from the DNC.

...and is going to publish them.  Surprised, the DNC and Hillary's campaign decide to pre-empt and even exploit this publication.

• June 14, 2016 – The DNC announces the network breach through a WaPo article.
CrowdStrike publishes alleged technical details on its website.  Both blame the Russian government.  The DNC says that only a few documents had been compromised, including opposition research on Trump.  This is an open invitation for WikiLeaks to publish that research.

• June 15, 2016 – Guccifer 2.0 claims the hack and posts several DNC documents on guccifer2.wordpress.com. 
Guccifer 2.0 wasn't known before that.  The opposition research is among the published files.  Independent analysts discover Russian fingerprints – the opposition research file shows an error message in Russian and had been last saved on a computer with Windows in Russian by Феликс Эдмундович.  Феликс Эдмундович refers to Felix Edmundovich Dzerzhinsky (1877-1926), the founder of the Cheka, the predecessor to the KGB.  Gotcha!  The ecstatic media form the narrative: all leaked DNC-Hillary documents come from the Russian government; Guccifer 2.0 is a front for a Russian intelligence operation.

Just a few weeks or days earlier, the DNC hired Fusion GPS, which hired Christopher Steele to produce dirt on Trump.  The outcome was a series of absurd pieces, which became known as the "Steele dossier."  It was called "a garbage document" by Bob Woodward.  The only known version of it was published by BuzzFeed.  The first "Steele report," dated June 20, makes bizarre claims and leaves the impression that Steele was unclear about what the client wanted him to write.

• July 16, 2016 – Guccifer 2.0 offers WikiLeaks about 1GB of leaked DNC documents.
Hillary, convinced that Guccifer 2.0 was a front for the Russian government, concludes that Putin had betrayed her.  I think that at that time she decided to invent a narrative that she is tough on Russia while Trump is Putin's puppet.  It was the summer of 2016, and people didn't know that the MSM had shifted from being biased to being shameless fake news.  Hillary's plan worked.

• July 18, 2016 – Hillary/DNC launch Trump-Putin conspiracy theory through WaPo and N.Y. Mag.
WaPo publishes an article titled "Trump campaign guts GOP's anti-Russia stance on Ukraine" (Josh Rogin), and N.Y. Mag "Is Donald Trump Working for Russia?" (Jonathan Chait).  The N.Y. Mag piece is a purported analysis.  It mentions the WaPo article, but it couldn't have been written in a half-hour.  Thus, these articles were part of a media operation by Hillary and/or the DNC.  The WaPo article falsely claimed that Trump's campaign had weakened the GOP platform regarding support for Ukraine against a Russian invasion and briefly mentioned Paul Manafort.

This DNC-Hillary media operation has achieved its apparent goal – establishing a crazy conspiracy theory of Trump-Putin collusion as a dominant media narrative.
• July 20-25, 2016 – Third Steele report mentions DNC files on WikiLeaks.
It's possible that Steele learned the new party line from the July 18 WaPo article, from copycats in other outlets, or directly from Hillary's boys.  None of the previous "reports" had mentioned a DNC hacking, WikiLeaks, Guccifer 2.0, or Paul Manafort.  But this one talked extensively about Manafort and the DNC documents on WikiLeaks.  Manafort and the DNC leaks had been placed together only in the WaPo article, which was largely retold in this Steele piece.  Examples:
 
"Suggestion from source close to TRUMP and MANAFORT that Republican campaign team happy to have Russia as media bogeyman[.]"
"TRUMP associate admits Kremlin behind recent appearance of DNC e-mails on WikiLeaks, as means of maintaining plausible deniability[.]"
Don't ask me which "Trump associate admits" something on behalf of the Kremlin – the whole Steele dossier consists of such rubbish.

• July 22, 2016 – A WikiLeaks dump reveals:
The DNC had cheated Bernie out of the votes in the primaries to make Hillary the presidential candidate.

• July 25, 2016 – The Democratic National Convention starts with a huge scandal.
The revelation of the dirty collusion between the Hillary campaign and the Democratic National Committee against Bernie rocks the Democratic National Convention.  Hillary blames Russia and Putin; the MSM echoes.  Hillary, the DNC, and the media become deluded into the consensus that Putin is behind Trump.  Now it's official: Hillary runs against Vladimir.

• July 26, 2016 – Fourth Steele report is almost entirely devoted to alleged Russian cyber-operations. 

Note that the "Steele reports" were received by the DNC, and any piece might have been leaked to the media at any time after receiving.

• July 31, 2016 – FBI launches operation Crossfire Hurricane.
After watching the Democratic convention for days, reading media reports and Steele fantasies conveying the Democratic narrative, Peter Strzok decided to act.  Within two days, he and a few other Obama loyalists in the FBI started the operation Crossfire Hurricane, initially spying on Trump but then attempting a full-spectrum suppression of Candidate Trump and the Republican party.

Aftermath
Within a couple of weeks, CIA director John Brennan and other members of the Obama administration joined Crossfire Hurricane.  Obama-Hillary loyalists in DOJ, FBI, CIA, DNI, and DHS incited Republican senators against Trump, spread anti-Trump propaganda through media leaks, and even broadcasted support to the DNC-Hillary conspiracy theory of in a joint DNI-DHS statement merely a month before the elections.  These efforts continued after the elections and morphed into a coup d'état.

I wonder how Steve Miller is doing on his upcoming racist State of the Union address?

"Put all those brown babies in cages NOW!"

^ That's a great opinion piece, Bryen, except many conclusions are based on a very shaky foundation.

"The DNC and Hillary constructed a conspiracy theory in which Putin ordered the hacking of the DNC network and subsequent mass distribution of the exfiltrated documents to help Trump beat Hillary.  Such actions were against Russian interests and very unusual for Russian intelligence.
Driven by their conspiracy theory, Hillary indulged in anti-Russian rhetoric, and the Obama administration drove relations with Russia to the worst point in the last 40 years.  Since the elections, the Democrats, the hard left, and the institutions owned by them have been pushing Trump to aggravate the conflict, started by Obama and Hillary."

Really? The conspiracy theory (read: FBI investigation) was created (read: initiated by the FBI) after Trump's associates were boasting about getting hacked emails etc. Don't blame Hillary, blame the clown car!

And, and the Obama administration didn't drive relations with Russia to the worst point in the last 40 years, Putin did by annexing Crimea, killing journalists and adversaries. What the fucxk!

Brayin', you should link your cut and paste...

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/08/the_dnc_leaks_and_cross...

QUESTIONABLE SOURCE

A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no sourcing to credible information, a complete lack of transparency and/or is fake news. Fake News is the deliberate attempt to publish hoaxes and/or disinformation for the purpose of profit or influence (Learn More). Sources listed in the Questionable Category may be very untrustworthy and should be fact checked on a per article basis. Please note sources on this list are not considered fake news unless specifically written in the reasoning section for that source. See all Questionable sources.

Overall, we rate the American Thinker, Questionable based on extreme right wing bias, promotion of conspiracy theories/pseudoscience, use of poor sources and failed fact checks

Analysis / Bias

American Thinker consist of two sections, one is articles and the other one is blog. You can check out their archives Here. 

In review, American Thinker uses strong emotionally loaded language in their headlines such as: “The Most Memorable Leftist Hypocrisies of 2017-8”. This article is authored by Robert Oscar Lopez who writes with extremely biased language: “The left is composed of horrible people.  Most sane people realize this, even if they have friends on the dark side.” Another article with loaded wording is this one: “The Great Depression of 2019?” Although, they utilize credible sources such as thebalance.com, CNBC, New York Times, The Guardian and factually mixed sources such as LifeZette, Wall Street Journal,Human Events.com, they also utilize questionable sources to back their claims, such as Breitbart and non-credible conservative blogs such as michaelsavage.com.  

According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, American Thinker has published Anti-LGBT articles, as well as those by prominent white nationalist, Jared Taylor. Further, American Thinker routinely publishes conspiracy theories, such as those by Pamela Geller, who is also on the SPLC’s hate watch list due to anti-Islam positions: Report: Obama said ‘I Am a Muslim’, which has been debunked as a false claim. They have also promoted conspiracies about the Seth Rich Murder and they have published numerous articles that are not supportive of the consensus of science, such as this one: The Hoax of ‘Climate Change’

A factual search reveals a few failed fact checks.

President Obama secretly signaled solidarity to African leaders at the White House using a Muslim hand gesture known as the ‘Shahada.’ – FALSE

The state of New Jersey is currently conducting, or plans to conduct, house-to-house confiscations of banned high-capacity gun magazines. – FALSE

Overall, we rate the American Thinker, Questionable based on extreme right wing bias, promotion of conspiracy theories/pseudoscience, use of poor sources and failed fact checks. (7/18/2016) (M. Huitsing 1/1/2019)

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/american-thinker/

    ^ ...It was in response to someone asking for facts, dispute the source all you'd like, but it's a factual timeline of events that I thought might be useful.  This practice of ignoring anything & everything based on what I'm sure is a bit of a "loaded dice" methodology of declaring certain publications this or that is a bit thin.

     On that note, I'm going to leave it there for a while, I have to attend to a few things today, love and respect to everyone here, I do appreciate everyone, enjoy the day!

>> .It was in response to someone asking for facts, dispute the source all you'd like, but it's a factual timeline of events that I thought might be useful. <<

It was an opinion piece, based on very shaky "facts".

I believe you believe what you believe.

Cites right wing propaganda with a history of printing false information,  but cries that the main stream media is fake news.

And like Ned wrote,  it is an opinion piece. 

Bryen reminds me of of one of those really nice but a spun-out  tourhead hippie boys who naively got on a school bus (hey brother, we are all family, have some brown rice, would you like to donate all your money to our Family?) and got brainwashed by Krishnas or worse, because it's so much easier to have someone tell you what to think and books were "so Establishment." "I got all my knowledge on the road, man."

The girls loved him and the guys took all his stuff.

    Does anyone care to dispute this as a factual statement?

• April 28, 2016 – The DNC discovers suspicious activity on its network.
...and calls its lawyer, Marc Elias.  On May 6, after more than a week of waffling, the DNC brings in cyber-security contractor CrowdStrike, selected based on affinity rather than on merits.  CrowdStrike "determines" there were two breaches and names the culprits behind them – Cozy Bear and Fancy Bear – claimed by CrowdStrike to be Russian elite hacker units of FSB and GRU respectively.

The DNC refused to allow the FBI to access its computers, which it thought had been accessed by FSB and GRU.  Apparently, the FBI consented to be subordinate of FSB and GRU on this issue.

Oh, and you can't say, "Twenty years from now let history decide who was right" if you don't acknowledge the value of history in the first place. That's plane stupid, no matter how nice you are.

And... hate to tell ya, but rain is wet and fire is hot and ice is cold *-- there is no "you have your opinion and I'll have mine."  There are some objective facts in the world. 

* for the sake of this discussion

      Alan, with respect, your thoughts on the events I just referenced?

>> Does anyone care to dispute this as a factual statement? <<

"On May 6, after more than a week of waffling, the DNC brings in cyber-security contractor CrowdStrike, selected based on affinity rather than on merits."

^ This is not a factual nor objective statement. Maybe some facts sprinkled with innuendo and snark.

     Ned, that's fairly "matter of fact", ignore for a moment the phrase "waffling" and for the sake of the discussion please comment on the events themselves, thanks.

Lol

Putting dates before half truths, with abysmal analysis, doesn’t make them facts.

I have to wonder, if nobody in the Trump campaign did anything wrong, why are they lying to Mueller so damn much?

are we “engaging” “Bryen” or are we just “enabling” him to be a troll 

I will pass, Bryen. 

Do you truly believe it was Obama that screwed up US/Russian relations, not Putin invading Crimea, threatening Ukraine, poisoning adversaries and journalists? You used this assertion above as "fact". If so, you've been played, my friend.

 April 28, 2016 – The DNC discovers suspicious activity on its network.
...and calls its lawyer, Marc Elias.  On May 6 the DNC brings in cyber-security contractor CrowdStrike,.  CrowdStrike ???  there were two breaches.

This is that same line, devoid of bias, faulty analysis and uncited “facts.”

      I think I understand the pattern here, like I said, enjoy the day, you are certainly appreciated and I hope the best for all.

"Bryen" won't comment on anything but Russia.

 He really doesn't care that Trump is just using the office to enrich

himself and his family.

"I'll never golf like Obama because I won't have the time."

Interesting that you seem to be cool with that lie.

Bryen, you can't deflect with niceties.

Best!

>>>> if none of these "crimes" have anything to do with a criminal conspiracy with a foreign government to hack into Podesta's email account, then no, I do not.

i wasn't asking your opinion, you've got some pretty weird standards and biases that I doubt will ever b satisfied by the media or this investigation.

i was asking if it could still b objectively considered justifiable/successful from a legal standpoint, since u keep bringing up how this is gonna b viewed by history.

https://themarketswork.com/2018/05/18/the-fbis-outside-contractors-dnc-s...

Under a Republican Congress and Executive, the Republican POTUS has been investigated for collusion. What exactly does that have to do with the DNC, Bernie or the price of tea in China?

That narrative is lame.

Bryen,

I appreciate that you are participating in this conversation.  I enjoy hearing/reading others' perspectives.

Unfortunately, I need to get some work done - and there's a lot up there!

-JD

>>>>are we “engaging” “Bryen” or are we just “enabling” him to be a troll

Good stuff

     Furious E, I appreciate the question...I had a bit of a typo last night, but I shouldn't have included the words "I do not" at the end of that sentence, it should have ended with "then no."

     The point being, you can't start an "investigation" on false pretenses with the sole purpose of unseating a president, with that president being innocent of the criminal offense alleged, but in the meantime run a dragnet through his campaign, associates etc...and rationalize "process crimes" as your justification.  I understand that will be the argument in the coming weeks, but it's a flawed argument.

     I appreciate the question, I appreciate the back and forth, hopefully the discussion has benefited everyone, I know I have been able to form thoughts and ideas I might not have otherwise, I think a lot of the group, I know it sounds like I'm trying to be overly polite but that's how I intend to be moving forward.

     It's a complicated issue with a lot of moving parts, I appreciate the discussion, thanks.

>>  The point being, you can't start an "investigation" on false pretenses with the sole purpose of unseating a president <<

Please restrain yourself, Bryen. If you want to be understood, listened to, I'd recommend not framing your posts this way. It's maddening. Again, I believe you believe you believe this. But, it's just plain wrong to make such assumptions. it's shows your very strong bias.

    We shall see, and with that I will bid you adieu.

>>>>I believe you believe you believe this

I don't believe in magic
I don't believe in I-Ching
I don't believe in Bible
I don't believe in tarot
I don't believe in Hitler
I don't believe in Jesus
I don't believe in Kennedy
I don't believe in Buddha
I don't believe in mantra
I don't believe in Gita
I don't believe in yoga
I don't believe in kings
I don't believe in Elvis
I don't believe in Zimmerman
I don't believe in Beatles
I just believe in me
Bryen and me
And that’s not reality 

>>>We shall see, and with that I will bid you adieu.

HA! We shall see about that too

This is what Mueller (A Republican) is investigating and Rosenstein (A Republican appointed by Trump) called for the investigation because Sessions (A Republican appointed by Trump) had to recuse himself because he lied to Congress about meeting with Russian officials during the campaign. 

any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump; and any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation; and any other matters within the scope of 28 C.F.R. § 600.4(a).” That last bit refers to a part of the federal code that says that the jurisdiction of a special counsel is to include “the authority to investigate and prosecute federal crimes committed in the course of, and with intent to interfere with, the Special Counsel’s investigation, such as perjury, obstruction of justice, destruction of evidence, and intimidation of witnesses.”

How is that starting it on false pretenses? Multiple Trump officials had multiple contacts with Russian officials during the campaign including but not limited to a meeting at Trump Tower to " get dirt on Hillary" that Trump then lied about. 

Just in case you weren't keeping track . . .

Hillary Clinton Benghazi "Investigation"
4 years
0 indictments
0 convictions

Hillary Clinton Email "Investigation"
2 years
0 indictments
0 convictions

Trump-Russia Investigation

15 months

34 Indictments/Charges (Individuals) (and counting)

3 Indictments/Charges (Companies)
5 GUILTY pleas (and counting)
4 CONVICTIONS (and counting)

Indicted: Roger Stone
Indicted: Paul Manafort
Indicted: Rick Gates
Indicted: George Papadopoulos
Indicted: Michael Flynn
Indicted: Michael Cohen
Indicted: Richard Pinedo
Indicted: Alex van der Zwaan
Indicted: Konstantin Kilimnik
Indicted: 12 Russian GRU officers
Indicted: Yevgeny Prigozhin
Indicted: Mikhail Burchik
Indicted: Aleksandra Krylova
Indicted: Anna Bogacheva
Indicted: Sergey Polozov
Indicted: Maria Bovda
Indicted: Dzheykhun Aslanov
Indicted: Vadim Podkopaev
Indicted: Irina Kaverzina
Indicted: Gleb Vasilchenko
Indicted: Internet Research Agency
Indicted: Concord Management

Guilty Plea: Michael Flynn
Guilty Plea: Michael Cohen
Guilty Plea: George Papadopolous
Guilty Plea: Richard Pinedo
Guilty Plea: Alex van der Zwaan
Guilty Plea: Rick Gates

Over 191 Criminal Charges (and counting):

Conspiracy against the USA (2 counts)
Conspiracy to launder money (2 counts)
Bank fraud (8 counts)
Bank fraud conspiracy (10 counts)
Subscribing to false tax returns (10 counts)
Making false statements (6 counts)
Failure to file reports of foreign bank accounts (14 counts)
Unregistered agent of a foreign principal (2 counts)
False FARA statements (2 counts)
Subscribing to false tax returns (10 counts)

Assisting in preparation of false tax documents (5 counts)
Conspiracy to defraud the United States (13 counts)
Conspiracy to commit wire fraud and bank fraud (2 counts)
Aggravated identity theft (24 counts)

Yeah but false pretenses!!!!

>>>This is what Mueller (A Republican) is investigating and Rosenstein (A Republican appointed by Trump) called for the investigation because Sessions (A Republican appointed by Trump) had to recuse himself because he lied to Congress about meeting with Russian officials during the campaign. 

any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump; and any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation; and any other matters within the scope of 28 C.F.R. § 600.4(a).” That last bit refers to a part of the federal code that says that the jurisdiction of a special counsel is to include “the authority to investigate and prosecute federal crimes committed in the course of, and with intent to interfere with, the Special Counsel’s investigation, such as perjury, obstruction of justice, destruction of evidence, and intimidation of witnesses.”

How is that starting it on false pretenses? Multiple Trump officials had multiple contacts with Russian officials during the campaign including but not limited to a meeting at Trump Tower to " get dirt on Hillary" that Trump then lied about. <<<<

thank u, El Niño!

bryen, u really seem like a good well intentioned dude.

it's perfectly reasonable for u to have doubts about this probe, but so far the evidence seems to indicate this investigation is both very real and very cool.

>>>>>bryen, u really seem like a good well intentioned dude.

that’s not the impression I get from bryen 

That's only because you're an even better, more well intentioned dude

bryen, should we tell some stories?