So 'IF' one group did it it makes it right??? 2 wrongs still do make a right but, in this case we are focusing on the larger, evidence based wrong not on the minor, suspected (or said as justification) wrong.

@JackPedigo

I say..... slap em all.... and let god sort them out

@JackPedigo That's not what I said. I have just stated facts that were conveniently overlooked in the original posting. The blood thirsty relentless action should be applied the same both ways but clearly that's not what we have seen for three years now.

@IamNobody I agree and even sent a comment on the very fact that power and corruption knows no boundaries. But, I disagree on the 'facts' as I have not seen any proof of the Biden's dealings. Just suppositions and leading questions.

Maybe try another source of information than Fox not-news -- you might avoid looking quite so ignorant.

@JackPedigo There is video footage of Biden telling the story, bragging about it and calling the prosecutor SOB. You can find it in YouTube

@jerry99 If ignorant in your book means to consider both sides of the story then I guess IamIgnorant

3. No, Biden did not. Biiden was not attempting to collect dirt on an American political rival to effect the outcome of our US elections. Biden also was acting in concert with the Obama administration as well as European officials, the IMF, and World Bank who all called for the resignation of Prosecutor Shokin. All these governments and world organizations wanted Shokin to be removed because he was not pursuing and prosecuting corruption cases. If Joe and Hunter Biden were engaged in corrupt activities, defending Shokin would make more sense than removing him. There are also timing issue with the Biden-Ukraine corruption conspiracy theory. From my reading, Joe Biden was acting to remove Shokin before Hunter Biden joined the Board of Burisma. With this being the case, Shokin could not have been investigating Hunter Biden and Burisma. Even so, the former top Ukrainian law enforcement official who served from the last years Obama/Biden were in office until several months ago has stated that Burisma there was nothing to investigate concerning the Biden's. He had met with Giuliani a couple times and had numerous telephone contacts with him. This Ukrainian official told Guiliani that Ukraine couldn't open an investigation on individuals - especially American citizens - without cause or without the FBI first opening an investigation. The fact that Guiliani was acting outside as a parrellel state department is a problem all by itself.

The problems with Trump and his team trying to recruit foriegn governments to dig up dirt on Trump's political opponents is the problem here. Trump withheld hundreds of millions of dollars in military and monetary aid to Ukraine until he had the infamous phone call with Pres. Zelensky of tnat nation. The discussion of the withheld aid was approached with Trump saying the US was providing lots of aid but receiving little in return. Trump immediately followed this introduction of the issue of aid by requesting the favor of investigating the Biden's and Trump repeated this request up to 8 times. The timing of the favor and the apparent reluctance of providing the aid links the two in a quid pro quo. The aid was release the following day along with an additional $140 million that Zelensky had not asked for or expected. That Trump was looking for something of value - dirt on the Democratic primary front runner - should be obvious. The illegality of the incident should be equally obvious. That anyone doesn't is only evidence of the effectiveness of Trump and gang's practice of constant gaslighting.

@RussRAB Excellent explanation and I appreciate that you took the time. One last comment though on point 3 as you have described it: Replace Biden with Trump and Hunter with Trump Jr, read it again and tell me you don't see anything wrong.

Hmmm.

1. The Mueller train started to roll after somebody fired the FBI director for investigating his (later convicted) national security advisor for acting as an unregistered agent of a foreign government, and bragged about it to Russians visiting him in the oval office, yeah? A political party is not the US government, a private research organization is not a foreign government, and the nothing burger actually led to conviction and imprisonment of several guilty individuals, including unregistered Ukrainian agent Manafort.

2. The dems paid for oppo research from a private business with private funds, and were not the president leaning on a government using duly appropriated taxpayer funds as leverage for that government to start an investigation. Didn't ask China to do it on live TV either.

3. No, Biden sought removal of a corrupt prosecutor who, and this part is what trips a lot of guys like you up, was not investigating his son.

4. Regarding our abandonment of an ally to hostile military action, even though you are not an expert, doesn't that sound just a little iffy considering the president's personal financial interest in placating the Turks due to him never divesting himself of any personal business interests within Turkey? I think it does, but hey, opinions are like assholes, everybody's got one.

1. The Mueller investigation had plenty of incidents we know occurred here to justify the time and expense. For starters, Trump campaign staff made up of Don Jr., Jared Kushner, and then campaign manager met with Russian lawyer and other Russian agents at Trump Tower with the hope of gathering dirt on Trump's political opponent Hillary Clinton. Some intersting evidence suggests that Trump was also in the building when this meeting took place. If this was the case, he was likely at least listening in on the meeting if not participating in some way given todays technology.

As if this incident was not bad enough, the cover up that followed makes all the worse. Trump wrote an initial synopsis of the meeting which was presented as Don Jr.'s personal account. This account was a complete lie except that Don Jr. and the female Russian lawyer attended it. The claim was that the discussion was about Russian adoptions which were blocked by Russia in retaliation for Russian sanctions. Slowly the truth emerged in bits and pieces with about a half dozen versions presented.

Trump also publically asked Russia to hack Clinton's e-mail. The request was made in front of TV cameras similar to how Trump requested China investigate tbe Biden's. With the trade war Trump insitgated with China, we can hardly believe that dirt on Biden might be viewed as something valuable to China in trade talks. Why not? Trump found Russian hacked e-mails valuable to his campaign.

The hacking of DNC e-mails which all US intelligence agencies attribute to Russia began the day after Trump made his very public request of Russia. Some of these e-mails showed up on a Russian website (some with misattribution of the content) and were soon removed. Within a short time, Julian Assange of Wikileaks released the bulk of them publucaly. Assange as it turns out has a rather interesting history with Russian media. We also now know that Trump advisor Roger Stone was in regular contact with Assange, and if I remember correctly, especially around the time DNC hacked e-mails were released.

Finally, we know that Paul Manafort provided voter roles to Russians at some time during the election. These roles were understood to have been used to target certain minority groups with ads on social media intending to dis ourage voters from these groups from voting.

All of these incidents were reasons to investigate Trump and his campaign. They alone justify the appointment of the Mueller as a special investgator. Mueller's report is hardly a "nothing burger". Despite Bill Barr's and Trump's mischaracterization of the Mueller report's conclusion, at least 8 incidents of obstruction of justice were detailed. One alone is an impeachable offence. Mueller also testified before congress clearly refuting Barr and Trump's assertion that the report "completely and totally exonerated" the President. He explained the reason Trump was not indicted was the DOJ's (i.e. Bill Barr's) policy not to indict a sitting President (this was the reason Barr was appointed). Instead, Mueller's report referred further action to congress which is why congress has taken the information in it and proceeded. If this report wasn't important and important to the administration, then Bill Barr wouldn't be in Italy trying to dig up dirt on it, and Trump wouldn't have contacted the Prime Minister of Australia asking for favors to discredit it (again, colluding with a foriegn government to influence US elections).

@IamNobody - Given all the same facts, I see nothing wrong. It is true that Pres. Trump has told enough lies and has so regularly misrepresented the truth that I fi d reason to distrust anything that comes out of his mouth and from those supporting him. I would expect that anyone understanding the huge degree of dishonesty that comes from Trump would feel the same.

More importantly, however, I am offended that you believe my position is not a matter of collecting facts and making my decision on these facts. Rather, your question strongly implies I am only reacting to personalities. It is not the case.

@RussRAB Fair enough

@IamNobody There is a difference from removing someone from office if one is on a board and the person being removed is corrupt and trying to bribe or even get some to dig up dirt on an opponent. The first is personal and, from what we have heard, needed to be done and I might brag too if a relative did something I thought was right. Besides this is not about Biden but tRump and throwing supposed monkey wrenches into the works will only give tRump more credibility.

@JackPedigo For as long as this effort is driven because Trump is hated so much, I will question the validity of every step along the way.

But Pete Townsend said “Joe Walsh is a fluid and intelligent player. There're not many like that around."