Subject: Re: OT: "Holy Crap"
Full headers:
X-Received: by with SMTP id 21mr802084ita.13.1512653736309;
Thu, 07 Dec 2017 05:35:36 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by with SMTP id u17mr1128969otc.7.1512653735916;
Thu, 07 Dec 2017 05:35:35 -0800 (PST)
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2017 05:35:35 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <>
Injection-Info:; posting-host=; posting-account=0CpTdQoAAAAmSInk8jVG66x_0WniZELF
References: <>
<> <>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <>
Subject: Re: OT: "Holy Crap"
From: -hh <>
Injection-Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2017 13:35:36 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Received-Bytes: 4045
X-Received-Body-CRC: 1225275314
Print Article
Forward Article
On Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 12:46:58 AM UTC-5, Dene wrote:
> Bobby wrote:
> > -hh wrote:
> > >
> > > A quick read.  Little wonder why it has an approval 
> > > rating of 29% ... yes, even lower than Trump:
> > >
> > ><

Gosh, Greg "forgot" to comment on the first, OP, part!  /S

> > An even better article.
> > 
> >

Sure, its a good article, but its on a different topic than the Tax Plan.

> The conclusion of the article is to let the inspector general
> do his job and not be engaged in a witchhunt against this poor
> civil servant who happens to have anti-Trump views.

Agreed, and well done:  it sounds like the information that I've
I've posted previously on the Hatch Act was actually understood.

> Great advice....unless you are a "journalist" at CNN, MSNBC,
> and their ilk.  They, of course, are allowed to engage in
> witchhunts and speculative journalism.  

Not quite:  it is the responsibility of the Free Press to push 
for accountability by the Government, and to that degree, they
are empowered to be speculative such as to explore potential
connections, ramifications, etc, in informing the public interest. 

> Even 58 congressmen who voted for impeachment are guilty of the same.

Yes, that was ill-advised and inappropriate for them at this time,
because they are more strictly bound to due process principles.  
However, this also applies to all of the congressmen who ended up
squandering $20M of taxpayer's money on the Benghazi investigations
despite overwhelming evidence that there was no responsible crimes.
Similarly, there was also extensive irresponsibility and abuse of
congressional power in the additional $82M squandered in the prior 
decade, desperately searching for anything on Bill Clinton's admin:
the net outcome of this $100M of taxpayer's money spent was damningly
miniscule: a scattering of small convictions & fines over three decades
and but only one person ever removed from office:



> Such hypocrisy!

Yes, as evidenced above from the partisanship of the Republicans too,
and to a much fiscally larger degree:  Mueller's investigation has 
spent only $7M to date, and has already effectively removed more 
public officers than the $100M spent attacking the Clintons.  And
because he is finding criminal activity and getting guilty please,
he's already proven that he's not just some empty partisan witch hunt.