HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » H2O Man » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 112 Next »

H2O Man

Profile Information

Member since: Mon Dec 29, 2003, 08:49 PM
Number of posts: 71,584

Journal Archives

Nuance and Snakes

"Television is apparently the enemy of nuance. But nuance is essential for a thoughtful discussion." -- Barney Frank

Rep. Frank was one of my favorite politicians while serving in the House from 1981 to 2013. I cannot say for sure, of course, but I suspect that today he would include the internet as among the enemies of nuance. I shall keep this in mind as I offer my opinion on the classified documents that were not returned by then Vice President Biden.

There are three groups worthy of consideration: Democrats, republicans, and independents. On this forum, I have read a variety of opinions ranging from it is not a big deal, to it was sloppy and may create an irritation if not issue, to it might be the result of underhanded agents loyal to Trump. I find this encouraging, perhaps in part because I disagree with many of the opinions expressed on the issue. And another enemy of nuance is the groupthink often associated with efforts for solidarity.

I like and support President Biden. Along with Kennedy and Obama, he is one of the most influential presidents of my lifetime. No president or vice president is perfect, and every one of them will make errors. More, as the sign on Truman's desk read, "The Buck Stops Here." Even some of the mistakes made by aides become entrenched in a president's reputation -- as Nixon learned.

In my opinion -- of no more value than the next person's -- it was sloppy and will likely be a problem, not in the DOJ criminal investigation, but in the social-political atmosphere as we approach 2024. The "no big deal" mindset strikes me as unrealistic. Any time classified documents are removed, knowingly or unknowingly, it is as issue. Hopefully, no Democrat thinks that what happened in this case is okay. And to think many republicans will understand nuance would be an error.

It may be tempting to think that since the most awful of maga candidates lost in the 2022 elections, the republican party is on the road to recovery. It's not. Those who lost were primarily those running on the Trump platform that the 2020 election was stolen. But those intent upon "investigating" Hunter Biden's laptop, Anthony Fauci, the Attorney General and the President gained enough seats to control the House. And they will seek to exploit this issue.

This is true, even if a criminal investigation into the mishandling of classified documents concludes that there was no criminal intent, hence no prosecutions. The glaring example of the damage that even that can do is, of course, the 2016 presidential election. Many people blame James Comey for Trump's victory, and there is merit to this. In July, Comey told a press conference that although Secretary Clinton and her top aides had been "extremely careless," there would be no legal charges.

Then, on October 28, Comey notified members of Congress that the case was being re-opened. Within minutes, republicans shared this information with the media. No sane person could argue that Comey's move influenced the outcome of the election. However, having evidence that classified documents were found on the laptop of Huma Abedin's husband Anthony Weiner, showed they were not only found on the Clinton's private server. (I note that it was the NYC FBI agents that suddenly found these. For years on this forum, I have noted that there is a cluster of politically ultra-conservative agents there.)

I think it is an error to think the farce from picking a Speaker suggests there is a level of bitter in-fighting among republicans that renders them impotent for the next two years. I do agree that they will engage in zero meaningful efforts to promote the social good. For they are all rattlesnakes. There are different regional species in our country -- the timber, the prarie, and the dimondback -- and one might quarrel with another. But they are all republican rattlesnakes, and they will sink their fangs into this.

Speaking figuratively, if there is a rattlesnake out on my lawn, threatening to bite people, I'm going to get my ax and cut its head off. If there are some republican milk snakes out there, I'm not interested in taking the time to evaluate. Off with their heads. "Thoughts and prayers." Same thing here. If republicans try to compare this case with the Trump case, I think it is better to say that both were sloppy. Both are wrong. I'll avoid trying to say "no big deal" in the Biden case. But to then point out nuance -- which one was simply a sloppy error versus which one involved a deliberate attempt to cover up stolen documents. One is a big deal, and one is a big crime. Just my opinion.

Second Servings

My nephew contacted me to share a story he knew that I would enjoy. One of his daughters plays hockey on a "mixed" team, consisting of the best boys and girls in the region. They compete against other teams from around the northeast, that are mainly made up of boys. She is the Assistant Captain of her team.

A boy on the other team trie to pull her head down with his stick, which of course is a foul. But he wasn't being called on it. Finding herself on her knees, with his stick on her neck, she punched him -- hard -- in the balls. He did not foul her again. To say I am mighty proud would be an understatement. Indeed, I believe there is a lesson here for dealing with republicans.

I was able to spend the afternoon with my sons and grandson. My boys have been engaged in an on-going argument about economic theories that -- because it is way, way over my head -- I consider meaningless. Thus, my undivided attention was focused upon entertaining Cassius. At just over four months old, I am unable to translate his end of conversations, but we both get a good laugh from what each of us says.

After a few hours, the little guy fell asleep. The boys were still debating economics, so I spoke up, suggesting we discuss the Idaho murder case. Both of them suggested that there is something wrong with me, as I find "true crime, police interrogations, forensic psychology, and trials fascinating. In self-righteous indignation, I pointed out I have far more things wrong with me than that!

Trying to keep the conversation going, I pointed out that one forensic psychologist had stated that people needed to read "The Violence Project, " by Jillian Peterson and James Densley. This is the most recent book I've purchased, and it focuses on stopping mass shootings in schools. The psychologist noted that this was a variation of the same dynamics. But my sons began reciting Lennon's poem "Our Dad," and instead insisted we watch a comedian they thought I'd like.

I'n never heard of Shane Gillis before, but one thing in particular he spoke about was interesting. He noted that in the 2016 republican primaries, there were numerous experienced politicians that could speak about policies and theory. And there was Donald Trump, who at first had very little support. Instead of policy and theory, Trump relied upon the only thing he had -- fifth grade level insults. Soon, he became the republican nominee, then president.

Even though he lost the popular vote in both 2016 and 2020, he showed that the majority of republicans favot fifth grade insults to policy and theory -- something he never discussed in any of the debates he was in. Today, we see proof that this still defines the republican party. Thus, I advocate that we take a lesson from my great niece: sometimes you have to punch the opposition in the balls.

We are reaching the end of a warm period in the northeast. Last night, I took the dog out for a long walk around the lawn and field. Though she doesn't speak English, I told the dog how Chief Waterman used to call this "Caucasian Summer." Unlike my grandson, she didn't laugh, being a dog and all. As we walked, I thought about how much fun I have showing Cassius the numerous pictures of his ancestors that hang on the walls of my house. I tell him how Rubin used to remind me that every day of life on Earth is a living miracle, that we each get a turn on this living planet in the eternal Now.

And that as John sange, you've got to serve yourself. Ain't nobody gonna do it for you.

Dark Paroxysm

"Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth." —Oscar Wilde

I've been talking quite a bit with my west coast brother lately, about the University of Idaho murders. He used to live outside of Los Angeles, and enjoyed city life for decades. But when his older daughter was ready for college, he was glad she picked that university. He said a big part of it for him was it seemed like a nice, safe community.

Law enforcement has, in my opinion, done a good job in this case. Keep in mind that crime scene analysis is the first step in the making of a profile of the killer. For example, he made an effort to commit the "perfect crime," including leaving no clues. Yet that is a clue, in and of itself.

Like most people who followed this investigation, my brother and I considered a number of possible scenarios. None included a PhD student of criminology looking to commit the perfect crime. But there were a few ideas that were not that far off. Not all were original -- early on, a DUer said "incel," and I really wish I could remember who to give credit.

I mentioned that to my brother, and expanded on it to include other men who, while not incels, have a diseased hatred of women. An obvious subgroup would be those who resent educated women. This type exists. Yet, as it turned out, it appears that the DUer who said "incel" was on target. There is no evidence he ever even went on a date, but there is evidence that women he attempted to talk to at a bar found him "creepy."

On one of the shows covering the crime, I saw a retired FBI agent saying the police were wrong to say the house could be the target. She said it had to be one of the four victims. I told my brother that she must not be familiar with 10050 Cielo Drive. Yet, if the house was selected as the target, it would not mean the killer was 100% unfamiliar with who the occupants of the household were.

There is reason to believe one of the young ladies thought she had a stalker. My impression was that this issue was not being addressed publicly by police, though there could be something to it. At the same time, it is not difficult to do surveillance without being noticed. Private investigators do so every day. (It tends to be easier to remain unnoticed surveilling an individual or an automobile, than a house.)

On one program, a cop noted that "if you want to get away with murder, kill someone you don't know." Yet in this case, it appears likely the scum thought he was picking a "soft target," a household of women. That is distinct from randomly picking a house, which could have numerous men inside. Again, a crime scene is the foundation that a personality profile.

"The killer awoke before dawn
He put his boots on
He took a face from the ancient gallery
And he walked on down the hall...."
-- Jim Morrison

Through the 11th grade, he was an intelligent, overweight, and socially awkward kid who was sometimes picked on. The summer before his senior year, he got into shape. During the school year, he began to bully his friends. He also attempted to learn to box, which likely was the source of his broken nose. A bully does not do well in amateur boxing.

His studies in criminology had two focuses: learning about the passions of mass- and serial murderers, and proving himself to be the smartest person in the room. A former classmate from DeSales University said he often talked over the professor, a nationally respected expert on crime. Although she is not commenting, there is reason to believe he studied the subject of her important book, the BTK killer.It's worth noting that scum proved hard to catch, because he was an outlier among serial killers.

Seven months ago, the killer posted a survey on Reddit, asking criminals to describe their “thoughts, emotions and actions from the beginning to end of the crime commission process.” With 20/20 hindsight, I think it is clear that the killer not only was taking an unhealthy interest in murderers, but was fantasizing about becoming the most intelligent mass murderer, able to escape detection as a respected criminologist.

The killer identified his favorite quote as coming from Aristotle: "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." Yet the Buddha and Gandhi said that "what you think, you become."

Although I've only heard it twice today in the media, a non-media source told me days ago that investigators have evidence that the killer was surveilling the house nights for around two weeks before the murders. Even if he was not familiar with the residents, this creates a pattern. Neighbors notice cars that show up at night. Cameras catch the car. And cell phone pings can be found.

In college, I took some law enforcement classes. I remember the sheriff that taught the courses saying that a smart criminal might think if eight ways to cover their tracks, and a really intelligent criminal might think of sixteen. But that police have fifty ways to catch them, and the FBI has a hundred. I'm sure technology has increased the ability of law enforcement to catch criminals in the decades since then. DNA is a huge one, capable of pulling mask off.

Please Help!

I have a huge favor to ask of the DU community. It involves the case of a sexual sadist who raped and murdered a 12-year old girl on her newspaper route. This took place on March 26, 1984, and this is the third time that the guy is coming up for parole. See link below:

I am interested in this case for three reasons. The first is that when someone commits a violent crime this offensive, they should not be released from prison. The second is that Cheri's father, a law enforcement officer, was friends with two of my uncles who were BCI Senior Investigators, and I have become acquainted with him since his daughter's death.

The third reason is that, while working at the mental health clinic, one of the people I served was one of Wales' ex-wives. So I know about his history of sexually torturing defenseless victims. Indeed, crimes like this one don't just happen -- there is a history that leads up to it, including where the offender was never caught, charged, and convicted. Wales has destroyed the lives of many people, well beyond murdering Cheri.

Below is a message from her father:
Here we go again.. New York State convicted murderer and child rapist James B Wales SR DIN 84C1060 is once again up for parole. He is the guy that murdered and raped our 12 yr old daughter. he doesnt deserve freedom. please send E mails opposing his release to melissa.celeone@doccs.ny.gov Include his full name and DIN on all emails need all the help I can get THANK YOU PLEASE SHARE

I appreciate anyone/everyone who participates in this.
H2O Man

A True Holiday Story

A true Christmas story from my childhood is one of my children's favorites. I was riding the school bus on the way to the final day before the holiday break. As a first grade student, I was mighty excited by the mere thought of getting free stuff, and my buddies and I were excitedly discussing what we had asked Santa for.

Suddenly, an older kid who was definitely part of our conversation turned around, and said, "There is no such thing as Santa." Outraged, I snarled, "What did you say?" For I could not believe my ears! "There is no Santa," he repeated. "It's your parents."

Now, I had been to Kent's store the evening before. Santa had recognized me as I walked towards him, and we had a great conversation on the True Meaning of the holiday -- the gifts I wanted. I was so excited that I didn't pick up on voice being very much the same as my father's friend, Mr. Vaughn.

"My parents couldn't afford a G.I. Joe, you idiot," I yelled as I left my seat to inflict this kid's reward for such blasphemy. I beat him in his seat, and when he tried moving to the front of the bus, I decked him and delivered blows without mercy. By the time we reached the school, all of the other kids seemed please that I had stood up Santa Claus. My older siblings in particular appeared impressed.

As I reached the front of the bus, the driver told me to head straight to the principal's office. Few things could have made me happier. Along with my faith in Santa, my older brothers had convinced me that the principal had a Spanking Machine for bad little boys. I was certain that I would be treated to watching the kid who dared insult a great American further ponishment.

I proudle entered the office, and was told that Principal Dunbar was on the phone with my mother. I found it encouraging that I could hear him laughing. Everything seemed so perfect -- I was there before the older kid, and would watch when he came in for a good spanking! And I was surely entitled to a generous reward!

Before the older kid arrived to take his whipping, I was called into Inner Sactum of the principal's office, for the very first of what would become dozens of times throughout my grade school career. Principal Dunbar was still laughing, enough so that he had some difficulty getting out his first few sentences: "I know he really upset you, but we don't beat people up. Instead, tell your teacher when you get into homeroom, okay?" I was more than a bit confused, because I considered my attack to have been fully justified. But I nodded my head, and was sent to join my class.

That evening, I fully anticipated my father proudly entering our house after work. Surely some reward would be given! I knew it couldn't possibly be anything as expensive as a G.I. Joe, of course, as we were a poor family. Dad was grinning as he pulled me aside, and began asking why I attacked the older kid. For whatever reason -- I have no idea why -- I yelled, "But he has red hair!" My father noddd his head, and said, "Now son, I'm going to tell you one of the secrets of life. You're young, but I want to tell you -- never make a red-haired Irish girl mad at you And don't start fights at school. Okay?"

I had a good Christmas. Santa brought me a G.I. Joe, along with other presents. And a few months ago, my younger sister sent me a package of things that she found while cleaning out our late mother's house. Included was my first grade letter to Santa.

Peace to you & yours this season!
H2O Man

On Prosecuting Trump

"The certainty of being caught is a vastly more powerful deterrent than the punishment. Research shows clearly that the chance of being caught is a vastly more effective deterrent than even draconian punishment."
-- US Department of Justice


Yesterday's January 6 Committee's hearing was a powerful presentation of the violent crimes that will be remembered for as long as the United States remains a nation of laws. It was a stark reminder of how a core group of criminals, headed by Donald Trump, attempted to agitate the overthrow of our country. Like everyone here, I want to see Trump indicted, tried, and convicted.

From the day Jack Smith was appointed by the Department of Justice on, I've noted that I think the indictments will start in mid-February of 2023. However, since Professor Tribe has now predicted March, I am willing to wait patiently for those few more weeks. However, I do experience episodes of impatience, especially after watching the J6 Committee's hearings.

Yesterday's hearing was the icing on the cake. I'm old enough to remember watching the various Congressional (Hous & Senate) hearings on both Watergate and Iran-Contra. The criminal activities that are being investigated -- and I think prepared for indictments -- seem to involve the worst aspects of both of those previous scandals. Thus, I am extremely impressed by the J6 Committee's work.

There are a few things I say frequently here, including "the institutions will hold." They did, but certainly the Trump years did significant damage. I understand that such damage takes time to repair. I think our Attorney General is about as good as was Robert F. Kennedy during his brother's administration. Older forum members will remember how long Kennedy went after Jimmy Hoffa, and how difficult that struggle was, despite the evidence of Hoffa's criminal nature and behaviors.

I think that there are three questions that we should be considering regarding indictments and trials. The first has to do with which case has the greater likelihood of conviction: the insurrection or the stolen documents? That is certainly a question that the DOJ prosecutors have to determine, though for the rest of us, it is a matter of opinion. Thus, there isn't a right or wrong answer for us.

The second is how will Trump's legal team try to defend against each potential case. Mike Pence floated the "he was doing what his lawyers advised" yesterday. As obnoxious as Pence is, the fact is that retired federal prosecutors -- ones that think Trump must be prosecuted -- have said the same thing. And since the jury will not be made up of DUers, it woul only take one to think that creates "reasonable doubt."

At the same time, we know that White House legal counsel told him that he had lost the election, to call off the insurrection, and to return the stolen documents. Likewise, I think that there are ways to counter any defense Trump attempts.

The last question has to do with the DOJ considering if prosecuting Trump is good for the country. I think that after what he has inflicted upon the country, it is necessary to prosecute him. And as the quote from the DOJ at the top indicates, it will deter others from similar attempts, if they know they will be caught and prosecuted.

Mind Laundry

I have a nice framed picture taken that shows the Beatles in a Florida gym with a young man named Cassius Clay, who was training to challenge Sonny Liston for the heavyweight title. This picture was autographed by Muhammad Ali. Few people could imagine, at the time, what was to come. What I find interesting is the response of a number of rigid, right-wing people from that era.

On February 25, 1964, Cassius shocked the world by TKOing Liston. The next day, he told the press that he had joined the Nation of Islam, and taken the name Cassius X. About a week later, due to an internal struggle in the NOI, he was given the named Muhammad Ali by the NOI's leader. In response, the "experts" opined that the "Black Muslims" had "brainwashed" the young champion. This was when I first became aware of the concept.

Earlier in the month, the Beatles had appeared on the Ed Sullivan Show. Like millions of other kids across the country, my siblings and I were watching. The older generation largely viewed them as a fad that would soon fade. While the group would evolve, they didn't vanish quicker than you could say "Bay City Rollers." And thus, the christian right-wing leaders determined the group was a Soviet-controlled plot to brainwash American youth.

Being young, I relied on my older brothers to explain the concept of "brainwashing" to me, so that I could understand the hatred directed at Ali. They explained that Ali had been taught by Malcolm X, a man both brothers considered to be a a good and important figure. And that "brainwashing" was something the Chinese and North Korean did to American POWs in war.

Now, I loved Ali and the Beatles. I was convinced they hadn't brainwashed me, because I've always had a dirty mind. As a response to Watergate, there were investigations that documented how US intelligence had tried to master the process of brainwashing, though without good results. As a young adult, I would sample some of the substances that were used in brainwashing experiments, but to no avail -- I still have a filthy mind. But, in the words of Randle McMurphy, "At least I tried."

I came to suspect that people could not be "brainwashed" until I witnessed the rise in influence of groups such as the Moral Majority," which was neither. Yet the growth in technology, which allowed a vulnerable television audience to join these cults, got me to reconsider. I knew that the evil guru Charles Manson was said to have brainwashed his followers, by isolating and drugging them, and that the media had described thm as "hypnotized zombies." Were groups like the Moral Majority be a prelude to something far worse? Might an evil guru exploit advances in technology to create an army of hypnotized zombies?

Watching some of the Trump supporters on the news in the last week, I found the answer.

Basketball Jones

Recently some people opined that Kyrsten Sinema has a narcissistic personality disorder. I think that she has some narcissistic features, but that there is an alternative way of viewing her that may shed light on what we are witnessing. I would like to start by noting that, in the relatively brief period that I've been aware of her, there was nothing that made me think she could be trusted.

Thus, rather than define her in the context of boxing, I will opt for basketball, for some of the concepts of developmental psychology can be understood with this team sport. As we know, develomental psychology focuses on the physical, cognitive, and social-emotional development of the individual. Initially it was the study of the growth of children and youth, although in more recent times, it includes focus on the aging process.

We shall start at the stage found in junior high schools. If we think of boys or girls junior high school basketball teams, we know that when a team has the ball, there is not a great deal of passing. At this stage of development, most kids want to shoot the ball. There may be one or two that experience anxiety on the court in front of the audience. But most of them are focused exclusively on being the star.

On high school teams, both boys and girls have generally grown to understand that it is a team sport, and that passing the ball is a better option than forcing a bad shot. Now, I could go on and on, and talk about coaches that mistake themselves for being of the quality of the best college coaches, and how their yelling at junior and/or senior high players relates to a lack of understanding of developmental psychology. But I'll spare you -- this time.

Kyrsten can thus be understood to have not progressed on important levels beyond the junior high level. This is not to say that she is not intelligent, or even that she does not have some impressive sports accomplishments. But never team sports.

Now, most politicians in DC have a positive opinion of themselves, including many who should not have. One has to think they can do their job very well. I remember when Jesse Jackson was running for president in the 1980s. A reporter made a snarky comment about his having a siperiority complex. Jesse asked if someone with an inferiority complex should be president? I think Nixon documented why not.

Rather than viewing Kyrsten as having a full-blown narcissistic personality disorder, I see her as a junior high school basketball player. She is stuck in the early teen level where boys and girls try to be the center of attention. She has traded party affiliation more frequently than a young teen changes odd outfits in an attempt to get attention. She fancies herself the "free agent" of the Senate, rather than having loyalty to a team. And she will find that there is a price to pay for that.

Bend the Arc: Support Senator Warnock!

One of DU's very best, Faux pas, posted an OP yesterday about the need to keep our eyes on the prize, by focusing on what we can be doing now. Senator Warnock's re-election campaign is what is important right now.

While communicating with Faux pas, I happened to check my e-mail. I found a message -- linked below -- from my favorite social-political grass roots organization. It details how each one of us can help.

Thank you for your attention and hopefully participation in this important activity!


Five Eyes

"We must accept finite disappointment, but never lose infinite hope." -- Martin Luther King, Jr.

A while back, I quoted my late friend Rubin's saying that a mind with very little to compare, finds very little to understand. I explained that this was not intended as a comment on intelligence, but rather familiarity with a given subject. A person might be an expert at a system at one level, for example, but not familiar with the dynamics that come in play at a different level.

In order to not set one's self up for disappointment, it is important to understand the practices and rules governing the system being operated in. Let's consider an example that is currently at hand. For sake of discussion, perhaps we can start with the name Jack Smith. In doing so, based upon my reading of this forum, there seems to be two groups worth considering: those who have been so disappointed in past investigations, that they have lost hope in this one, and those who are hopeful at what I think is an unrealistic level.

First, let's look at a few cases so we have things to compare to the current situation. This may help us to understand what is possible, what is likely, and what will be very, very unlikely to happen. Many people of my generation wanted Richard Nixon prosecuted for his criminal actions in the vast series of crimes we know as Watergate. The myth is that Al Haig got Gerald Ford to agree to pardon Nixon, if poor Richard would just resign.

Like all myths, there is a thread of truth there. But Haig knew that Nixon'sdefense, if he was prosecuted, would have insisted they needed classified and highly classified documents on national security be turned over. There was zero chance that the highly classified documents would be turned over and made public. What Haig and Ford actually discussed was pardoning Nixon to put an end to "the long national nightmare" that prosecuting Nixon on the serious charges would have extended without success.

Some here have mentioned Patrick Fitzgerald's work on the Plame scandal. Although the operation was conducted out of the Office of the Vice President, many here at the time -- and definitely including myself -- were certain that George W. Bush was deeply involved. As it turned out, he wasn't. Dick Cheney was, however, neck-deep in what the OVP referred to as Scooter Libby's "black op." But because Libby refused to turn on Cheney, Fitzgerald was only able to prosecute and convict Libby.

At the time, no one was more disappointed than I was. I recall talking with one of my uncles, an investigator who had done trainings for both the FBI and CIA. He explained that Mr. Fitzgerald was going after Libby on the charges that were 95% likely to get convictions. And that Libby kept silent, because he was certain that Cheney could convince Bush to pardon him. Instead, my uncle pointed out, it resulted in Cheney being casterated within the administration, and Bush refusing to pardon Scooter.

At the same general time, there was another espionage scandal that was largely ignored by the mainstream media, involving the sharing of highly classified intelligence with a foreign country. It involved the Cheney policy towards Iran, and related to US miliary intelligence activities in Iraq. Without going into great detail, federal judge T/ S. Ellis ruled that the government would need to release highly classified intelligence to the defense teams, in order to move forward. The prosecution dropped the charges. The more highly classified the documents/ intelligence, the less likely a prosecution.

Others here have pointed out the Mueller Investigation. Although this led to the prosecution and conviction of numerous players involved -- including several of Trump's people -- many of us were hoping for a criminal prosecution of Trump. My uncle reminded me that Attorney General Barr was acting as Trump's personal lawyer and body guard, much as he had done to protect the players in the Iran-Contra crimes with Bush the Elder. He said that had Mr. Mueller openly said Trump had committed crimes, much less advocated the DOJ prosecute him, that Barr would have been able to dismiss the Mueller Report from being made public, and done more of a cover-up than he did when the heavily redacted report was published.

Comparing these cases with that which Jack Smith is currently overseeing, we should be able to come to a realistic understanding of how the stolen documents part of the investigations -- there is also January 6 -- might be handled, as well as how it almost certainly will not play out. Yet to do so requires that one have an understanding of more than U.S. federa law, although we can all agree that Trump violated some in stealing intelligence documents. One has to understand, for example, the Five Eyes intelligence alliance, as well as ECHELON. For the most highly classified documents that Trump had involve more than the United States. Thus, one should be familiar with things such as The Fifth Estate's recent documentary on what Trump unleashed by stealing these documents, from a Canadian point of view.

When we take these factors into consideration, it should help us understand that while it is unlikely that Smith has been brought in to make potential charges against Trump disappear, it is equally unlikely that Trump will be charged with the highest potential charges. This has to do with both the 95% chance of conviction, as well as not exposing what is high-level intelligence beyond what is exclusive to the US. Hopefully, this makes sense to those who expect nothing and those hoping for everything. More, as other countries do have a stake in this, and absolutely want some criminal convictions as Trump's consequence for dangerous criminal activity, it sheds light on why I have held since the day Jack Smith was appointed, that he is the perfect choice.

Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 112 Next »