Open Discussion for December, 2019

Avatar
-from press release
Comment Policy: We welcome your comments, with some caveats: Please keep your comments positive and civilized. If your comment is critical, please make it constructive. If your comment is rude, we will delete it. If you are constantly negative or a general pest, troll, or hater, we will ban you from the site forever. The definition of terms is left solely up to us. Comments are disabled on articles older than 90 days. Thank you. Carry on.

361 Responses

  1. Avatar Bruce Vojtecky says:

    Merry Christmas, get those lights up.

  2. Barbara Rice Barbara Rice says:

    Just an FYI for anyone who might have done this or be thinking of doing this:

    Repeatedly re-posting the same comment/ links while using different names/email addresses/i.p. addresses constitutes Spam, and will be treated as such.

  3. Avatar Doug Cook says:

    Now if only we can have a Bethel free and Trump free Open Discussion for December… that would make my Christmas.

    • Avatar Patrecia Barrett says:

      Doug Cook,

      Don’t hold your breath.

    • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

      Doug, it’s already a Bethel- and Trump-sullied Open Discussion, thanks to your first December post. But I’ll tell you what…if Trump can resist tweeting anything outrageous this month—refrain from calling his political opponents traitors, for example—I’ll zip it.

      As for Bethel, I couldn’t be more bored by that subject. To me, Bethel is a local force of nature. If you don’t like the hot summers here, move.

      • Avatar Anita Lynn Brady says:

        You mean like pointing out that “Lisa Page had affair” tweet with Donald being a multiple offender to all of his wives…… That kind of outrageous tweet?

        • Avatar EMILY says:

          BINGO!!!! How in the world can Trump, Rudy, Rush, Corey, Hope etc. dare point their finger at anyone who hasn’t done anything compared to their sleazy adultery?

  4. Avatar Patrecia Barrett says:

    The impeachment report is completed. It’s extremely damning, and the evidence to support it is overwhelming.

    Of course we know that Republicans won’t do the right thing by impeaching this demented criminal. However, they had no trouble impeaching Clinton for something that was nothing by comparison.

    His treasonous crimes aside, I’ve always been curious as to why Trump isn’t already in prison for the countless sex crimes he admitted to committing. Dozens of his victims came forward (some were brave enough to come forward against a powerful billionaire even before his gloating admission). Why wasn’t he arrested and tried for his crimes?

    • Avatar Tim says:

      Because in America you need more than unsubstantiated accusations to send a rich white person to prison.

      And the partisan impeachment report won’t change a thing. Only a minority of Americans support impeaching the president (vs 80+ % of Democrats).

    • Avatar Doug Cook says:

      Wow…you already read all 300 pages to come up with that conclusion?

      • Avatar Patrecia Barrett says:

        Doug – Anyone who has made any effort at all to follow the proceedings would have come to that inescapable conclusion.

        Tim – Even when the perpetrator admits – and brags about – his crimes on tape? I can’t think of any better “substantiation” than an actual confession. As far as rich white men going to prison – quite a few in Trump’s inner circle have.

        And Democrats are Americans too (80 percent is not a “minority”).

        • Avatar Doug Cook says:

          The problem for the Democrats is, not only are they failing to move the needle in support of impeachment among Americans, they are struggling to make them care at all. President Trump’s approval rating increased since the hearings, and independents are turning against impeachment. The hearings proved nothing. The evidence was conspicuously underwhelming. Our Founding Fathers did not want an opposing party to remove a president for political reasons…simply because the other party dislike the president or his policies. Yet, that is exactly what the Democrats are doing.
          I keep asking the same question, and nobody seems to want to answer. The Senate will not vote to remove the president, so then what, Patrecia? President Trump is still in office with higher approval ratings, the Democrat Congress will have no major legislation to speak of as they put all their energy into impeachment. They are stuck with underwhelming candidates that will not beat the president. So tell me, Patrecia..what is the end game here? What do you expect will happen and how will it benefit the Democrats?

          • Avatar Patrecia Barrett says:

            Doug Cook,

            According to the more legitimate polls (like Gallup) Trump’s approval ratings have remained basically unchanged since before impeachment proceedings began – all groups still closely approve or disapprove to the same extent, which comes as no surprise. Did you really expect a huge exodus of Republicans to the other side? And of course “independent” is generally just code for an extreme version of Republicans.

            It seems to me that if Republicans can impeach a Democratic president for simply lying about an affair, they can certainly impeach one for abusing the power of his office by blackmailing a foreign government into digging up non-existent dirt on a main political rival, which could conceivably destabilize an entire region of the world, and interfere with peace efforts and efforts to address corruption. Those accusations have certainly been proven.

            Democrats are attempting to do the right thing. Republicans won’t, but that comes as no surprise either.

          • Avatar Tim says:

            Clinton didn’t just lie about an affair, he also obstructed justice by:

            1) encouraging Lewinsky to file a false affidavit
            2) encouraging Lewinsky to give false testimony if and when she was called to testify
            3) concealing gifts he had given to Lewinsky that had been subpoenaed
            4) attempting to secure a job for Lewinsky to influence her testimony
            5) permitting his lawyer to make false statements characterizing Lewinsky’s affidavit
            6) attempting to tamper with the possible testimony of his secretary Betty Currie
            7) making false and misleading statements to potential grand jury witnesses

            No one disputes that Clinton was guilty of those actions, but only a minority of Americans felt his crimes were worthy of being removed from office.

            The same can be said for Trump. Like the progressive organization’s name says: MoveOn

          • Avatar Doug Cook says:

            Patrecia, in the Clinton impeachment…the Republicans made a mistake in pushing for impeachment. It ended up being a negative for the GOP and Clinton’s approval ratings soared. Same thing here. This will turn out to be a negative for the Democrats and guaranteeing a Trump victory for him in 2020. So I ask again. Since he won’t be removed from office, what is the end game? What do the Democrats hope to achieve? It is certainly hurting Joe Biden by focusing on his loser son and the crooked dealings and nepotism. I could just imagine your reaction if Trump Jr got a sweet deal with an Ukrainian oil company like loser Hunter got.

          • Avatar Doug Cook says:

            Ok, Patrecia. For the sake of argument, let’s say the polls are unchanged. That means after weeks of hearings and testimony, it changed nobody’s mind. And you want to impeach the president on that? By the way, according to Pew. Most Independents align with one if the two major parties with Democrats getting more than Republicans. So your assertion that Independents are ‘ extreme versions of Republicans’ is just not true. The fact is that the Democrats have been trying to impeach the president since before he was inaugurated, they came up with a verdict and have been searching for a crime ever since.

          • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

            Doug — Is it so hard for you to imagine the Democrats reluctantly proceeding with an impeachment inquiry simply because it’s the right thing to do? Because the crime against the nation—demanding that a foreign power that needs our aid against one of our prime adversaries, asking that ally to interfere in our election—demands that the criminal be held accountable? That it’s the right thing to do regardless of the political consequences?

            You sound like almost every Republican in Congress— to almost the last person, their only concern is winning. The preservation of our nation’s political integrity means nothing to you people.

          • Avatar Doug Cook says:

            Steve, When President Obama refused to give military aid to Ukraine because he didn’t want to upset Putin, I don’t recall much of an outcry. When Biden threatened to withhold aid to protect his son, I again don’t recall much of an outcry. Now… holding up aid for a month is now an impeachable offense? President Trump helped Ukraine quite a bit more than President Obama did.
            No, Steve…it isn’t the right thing to do to impeach the president over this incredibly weak case. The goal in all of this is to remove the president from office, or at least damage him. That is not happening, is it? I’m sure the Democrats want to win. This is not going to give them that chance. They are guaranteeing a Trump victory.

          • Avatar Patrecia Barrett says:

            Doug Cook,

            The only person guilty of “crooked dealings and nepotism” is Trump. It wasn’t Joe Biden’s totally unqualified nitwit daughter and thoroughly corrupt son-in-law who were on the government payroll as “senior advisors” to the president.

            Not only that, but Trump rewarded his nutty base by taking a sledge hammer to the constitutional separation of church and state. He placed God-in-government fanatics in charge of all the highest levels of government, and has surrounded himself with the most extreme religious charlatans as advisors on domestic and foreign policy.

            When push comes to shove I suspect that the majority of the population will rebel against Trump’s special-interest extremism, failed – and harmful – trade policies, broken promises, obvious corruption, blatant racism and sexism, and all-round insanity. No one pays any attention to polls anymore – not after the fiasco of the last presidential election, when Trump was supposed to have lost by a landslide (and should have).

            Tim,

            Trump has been guilty of all those things, and so much more.

          • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

            Doug — I’m only going to address one of the steaming piles of BS you’ve shat out.

            You say that the aid to Ukraine was held up for a month.

            Lt. Col. Vindman testified that he became aware of the hold on July 3–we don’t know how long it had been on hold prior to that. The whistleblower filed a complaint on August 12. The aid was released to Ukraine on September 11. The whistleblower report wasn’t released to Congress until September 25.

            I count that as more than three months—at the very least. And it would have gone on until Trump got his Biden monkey-wrenching if Congress hadn’t gotten wind of the scheme.

            Your other accusations aren’t even worth addressing, they’re so Fox News weaksauce.

          • Avatar Tim says:

            Patrecia: Trump’s kids are not on the government payroll. They are unpaid advisors.

            Steve: “Interfering with the election” is the same old, so-hyperbolic-as-to-be-false, claim. The integrity of the US presidential election has not been compromised since the mob helped (Democrat) JFK win half a century ago.

          • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

            Tim sez: “The integrity of the US presidential election has not been compromised since the mob helped (Democrat) JFK win half a century ago.”

            Oh you sweet summer child…how naive. The integrity of *every* U.S. presidential election is compromised, owing to everything from the influence of corporate and SuperPAC $$$ to systematic voter disenfranchisement. And then there’s the biggest violation of integrity of all: The electoral college, which was in large part supposed to be a hedge against the rabble picking a village idiot to be POTUS, and now ironically serves the exact opposite function.

            But none of that is to the point of the POTUS committing the crimes of bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors. The crime here is bribery, if it isn’t treason. As a congressman, Mike Pence argued that Bill Clinton’s sex life wasn’t the issue, and it wasn’t even narrowly that he’d lied under oath about having an affair. It was about the POTUS undermining the legal norms that are the foundation of the country’s government.

            So now we have a POTUS who has attempted to use financial leverage in the form of desperately needed aid to a geopolitical ally, in order to gain personal favors in the form of dirt on a political opponent. A POTUS demanding that a vulnerable foreign government influence a U.S. presidential election. If that isn’t an impeachable offense, nothing is.

            I know you’re far too intelligent to believe the idiotic lie that Trump—in defending a corrupt Ukrainian prosecutor (a guy who all of the EU wanted removed for failing to fight corruption) and taking aim at the Bidens—was merely trying to combat Ukrainian corruption. Or do I have you all wrong?

          • Avatar Tim says:

            None of that has anything to do with the integrity of the election – i.e. does a person’s vote count towards the candidate of their choosing (and/or are their fraudulent votes).

            PACs and announcements about investigations influence opinions and might sway people’s choices in an election, but they are not a reflection of the election’s integrity itself. The old Democratic favorite of promising voters free stuff like debt forgiveness, college, medical care, etc falls into this exact same category btw.

            Clinton obstructed justice to advance his own interests over a lawsuit. No one can possibly argue that his crime could in any way benefit the country. The same goes for Nixon.

            This is not the case with Ukraine. I can very easily argue that investigating potential corruption is in the US’s best interests – especially corruption regarding someone with whom we’re about to send a bunch of money & aid. You may disagree with it or find the investigation was just cover for a partisan hit job, but the argument can still be made that investigating corruption is in the US’s interest.

            Yeah yeah, you’re dying to say “didn’t you follow the hearings? The national security experts all said it harmed national security!!!” They did. But they were Democrats’ hand-picked experts in a partisan proceeding. There are countless other experts who will undoubtedly testify the other way if called by Republicans (who were not allowed to call witnesses in the sham impeachment inquiry).

            So you’re left with Mueller’s report and obstruction, which Mueller didn’t think was severe enough to warrant proceeding a year ago and even the Democrat leadership agreed. So why push forward with impeachment now – less than a year from the election? If Democrats are supposed to be the party of democracy, why are they trying to take away from voters a popular choice for president in 2020? Isn’t THAT interfering with the integrity of an election?

            If they feel so strongly about Trump’s abuses, censure him and MoveOn.org

          • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

            Tim — Are you really arguing that systematic voter disenfranchisement by the GOP aimed at reducing the percentages of minority and poor voters has nothing to do with the integrity of an election? :::boggle:::

            I have never heard a single person argue that Clinton’s offense was for the benefit of the country. Red herring.

            I am not dying to say, “Didn’t you watch the hearings?” I couldn’t care less about what the experts said about harm to national security—I think that’s not to the point. Trump probably put our national security at risk to some degree, but that in itself is not a crime—it’s just bad judgment. The crime was bribery in exchange for personal favors.

            Your last question answers itself. There is no compelling political reason for impeaching Trump with a year left on his term, and Pelosi isn’t a rash hair-on-fire leader. The pending impeachment holds tremendous political risk for the Democrats. The safe play would be to censure Trump and move on. So why don’t they?

            The simplest explanation is that they feel compelled to impeach because they truly care about the integrity of our institutions, and fear that they are under attack by sinister forces that aim to turn Trump into one of the autocrats he so admires.

          • Avatar Tim says:

            I’m not following – are you now alleging Trump is causing voter disenfranchisement?

            I’m no fan of gerrymandering and find the Democrats are just as eager as the Republicans to redistrict to their benefit. Only 21.5% of Californians and 41% of registered California voters are Democrat, yet Democrats have super majorities in both chambers & hold the governorship…

            When it comes to systematic disenfranchisement, I’m no fan. But I don’t find the Democrats’ hypocrisy very persuasive: if getting a valid ID is such an onerous process that it legitimately leads to disenfranchisement, wouldn’t requiring an ID to buy ammunition do the same? And if purchasing a pistol is such a weighty matter that it requires passing a written test given only in English, shouldn’t that apply to voting as well? I no more want an ignorant & irresponsible voter than I do an ignorant & irresponsible gun owner. The stakes are underappreciably high in both cases…

          • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

            Tim — I don’t think I suggested anywhere that Trump is causing voter disenfranchisement. His party certainly tries to, frequently and systematically, but it’s done mostly at the state level.

            Oh, and the most heavily gerrymandered states have Republicans at the helm. Using efficiency gap analysis, of the 20 most gerrymandered states, 15 are Republican, including the top five. And the newly conservative majority SCOTUS recently ruled 5-4 that states can gerrymander all they want with no interference from the federal courts. Incumbent politicians instead of voters picking the winners, just as with any sound representative democracy.

          • Avatar Doug Cook says:

            Steve, after the 2016 election, 2/3rds of the state legislatures in the country were Republican controlled, so yes…the GOP has more chances to Gerrymander districts, just like California has done for the Democratic side. Elections have consequences. If the Democrats assume control of these states, then they will have the chance to do all the Gerrymandering they wish.

          • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

            In ahistorical Dougworld, all of the GOP states got gerrymandered after the 2016 elections. Yep, it all happened that recently, in a flash. It’s not that 2/3 of the state legislatures are GOP because of longstanding gerrymandering. Also, it’s a mere coincidence that all of the disenfranchisement is happening in GOP-led states. The Democrats would do it too, if they could.

            Jesus God, the mental gymnastics you guys have to resort too. It must be exhausting.

  5. Avatar Bruce Vojtecky says:

    And in really important news with all the NFL quarterback droughts will Kap and Newton find jobs. As conditions seem to be crumbling in New England and Green Bay will the two northern California quarterbacks, Brady and Rodgers, seek warmer teams in their home state? If Phillip Rivers is done with the Chargers and still in good if not prime conditions could he be headed to Sin City? Can Elway find a quarterback after passing, two drafts ago, the stud in Laramie, Josh Allen, who has the Bills relevant again after demolishing Dallas in a game that was worse than the score indicated. And in DC will the Skins leave town for Mexico City or London? Lots of burning issues to work on.

  6. Avatar Gary Tull says:

    Doug, So this U.S. president goes to the NATO summit meetings in London and constantly makes incorrect statements – ignorant misspeaks and lies that reflect badly on our representation. Are you okay with that?
    https://apnews.com/6af7ca6d77fd1e6df0c747d4d118edb5

    • Avatar Doug Cook says:

      Gary, that is what everyone said about the last NATO summit he attended, where he criticized our allies about not paying their share for defense. So what happened? Instead of the US footing most of the bill, European contribution to NATO is up over $1.3 billion. That is why the president will get reelected. Other presidents get walked all over, Trump calls them out for their BS. It is refreshing

  7. Avatar Miguel says:

    NATO summit. And Donald Trump is once again utterly embarrassing himself and his country on the world stage. My humper cousins, “Well I”M not embarrassed!” Every other sentient being, “Yes .. we know. And that’s what concerns us.”

  8. Avatar Chad Magnuson says:

    I continue to hear the right wing claim Democrats have been wanting to impeach trump since day one.
    Could it be we saw the con man trump was from day one.
    From childish lies about crowd size at his inaugural day to his overt love of our countries and particularly the Republican Party bad guy Putin.
    From his cuddling up with despots and enemies of our country.
    His attacks on our institutions, our intelligence agencies, our military.

    Yeah, trump has deserved to be considered for impeachment from day one.

    • Avatar Larry Winter says:

      And part of the Democrat’s secret Deep State plan was to win the House of Representatives 2 years later.
      Boy, aren’t they cunning.

    • Avatar Gary Tull says:

      “Democrats have been wanting to impeach trump since day one”.

      Well yes. Of course they have because of his deceptive and reckless behavior since well prior to day one.

      Well spoken, Chad.

  9. Avatar Doug Cook says:

    Yes, Chad…it shows the pettiness of the left. That they can’t deal with an election that doesn’t go their way. Strange that a charge for impeachment, according to you is his love of our country. You want to impeach the president because he loves his country?And remember Chad…it was President Obama that cowered to Putin…that the former president refused to give military aid to Ukraine so as not to upset Putin. It was President Trump that gave Ukraine offensive weapons to protect their country from Russia. Why the left can’t accept election results is baffling to me. If you don’t like President Trump, find a candidate that can beat him…so far you all are failing on that front. Today’s hearing was a complete disaster (again) for the Democrats. Thank God for Professor Turley who was the only sensible person testifying. And how about that moron that brought in the president’s minor child into the discussion. Shameful and embarrassing

    • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

      Doug sez to Chad: “You want to impeach the president because he loves his country?”

      I read Chad’s post 2.8749 times, searching for the bit where Chad says he wants to impeach Trump for Trump’s love of our country. Of course it’s not there, so we have to assume that Doug is projecting his own feelings about Trump, not describing Chad’s.

      It’s a mystery to most of us how anyone could conclude anything other than: Trump has a profound love for himself, and nothing else. Trump is the Platonic ideal of self-worship.

      I’ve never wanted to see the horror movie “The Human Centipede” because it just sounds too disgusting. But I can imagine you as the third person in the triad, with Putin in the lead followed by Trump.

      As for the moron who brought up Trump’s son Baron: O! The Outrage! Her joke was a clunker: Trump can name his kid Baron, but he can’t make him a baron. Lame, inappropriate and unnecessary. I take solace in the fact that people like you who are faux-red-faced about it thought it was hilarious when when Bill Clinton had been POTUS-elect for a few days, and Rush Limbaugh, on his short-lived late-nite TV show,made a joke comparing a cute kid entering the White House. He then projected a picture of a dog, followed by picture of 12-year-old Chelsea Clinton. Howls of laughter from Limbaugh’s audience, because HA HA HA HA HA, what a great humiliating joke at the expense of an awkward-looking 12-year-old girl! Rush totally owned that kid!

      • Avatar Doug Cook says:

        Then you may want to read it a 2,8750th time. The professors entire testimony was embarrassing and a flop. And to think she was considered a SCOTUS prospect…scary. You assume that I was ok with Rush’s comments about Chelsea. Why do you assume I thought it was hilarious? No ..it was disgusting and inappropriate as any negative comments about president’s children are. What is sad is that it was obvious that she rehearsed that line. Did anyone but me actually watch that circus yesterday? Doesn’t sound like it. This is why impeachment is going nowhere. I can see Pelosi pulling the plug on this whole fiasco.

        • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

          If you take a harder look, you’ll see I said I’d read it 2-point-8749 times (i.e., not quite 3 times).

          As for the Chelsea joke, the point wasn’t that you thought it was hilarious. It was that your right-wing outrage is extremely selective.

          And you continue to see this as nothing but a political test of will and muscle. You seem impervious to the notion that at times it’s important to set aside what’s safe and simply do the right thing. Pelosi is going to pull the plug in your dreams—she’s already announced that the HOR will proceed with drafting articles of impeachment.

  10. Avatar Candace says:

    A self admitted sexual
    predator (we heard it with our own ears), racist (again, we heard it with our own ears) lying, narcissistic, crash dummy is currently the elected president of the United States. The fact that the same people who say of course they don’t condone sexual abuse or predatory behavior “because they have daughters, wives, sisters, etc.” (who also say they do not condone racism) are willing to turn a willful blind eye to this president and his cronies’ despicable behavior because “things for them personally are good right now” is what I find to be both shameful and embarrassing (sorry, people of color, just ignore the racist stuff – I am. Oh, and sorry daughter, wife, sister. Yes, our president is a self- admitted sexual predator but hey, that’s ok, don’t worry your pretty little heads about that fact – I’m not.) Also, offended about the “Baron” thing? While perhaps in poor taste, THAT’S the thing people find embarrassing and shameful? Because Trump is always so overtly concerned with decorum and respecting the feelings of others and their families? That’s like focusing on the crime of a man’s bad hair cut while ignoring the fact that he’s an axe murderer. Sad. Loosen the red hat. Grow a conscience.

    • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

      Right? The joke was lame, and the Harvard professor who told it later apologized. But she also pointed out that Trump never apologizes for any of the outrageous things he says or does—he even defended his admission of serial sexual assaults as mere locker-room talk (which isn’t even a denial of the assaults—just a rationalization of his course descriptions of them).

      In light of what Trump says and does, the faked-up conservative outrage over the Baron/baron joke is hard to stomach. And note well that the person who first brought it up here to get political mileage out of it is none other than Doug Cook. If the concern for poor Baron was in any way sincere, we’d have all agreed to not mention it at all. Instead, Doug turns Baron into an ANC football. What a flaming hypocrite.

      • Avatar Doug Cook says:

        The Barron joke was a minor part of her embarrassing testimony. It was a train wreck all around. You believe that the hearing yesterday was going to move the needle towards impeachment? My guess it will move the opposite way. It’s amazing how the left is now so concerned about Aid to Ukraine, when under Obama, not a word was said when the president refused to give Ukraine military Aid when their country was being overrun by the Russians. Which president had been tougher on the Russians? Obama or Trump?

        • Avatar Larry Winter says:

          Wrong Doug, the needle moved toward impeachment this morning with “smart” Nancy Pelosi, who you predicted wouldn’t go this far. The Articles of Impeachment will be written up and brought before the House.

          And the question isn’t who was tougher on the Russians, but who used their Presidential power to solicit domestic political favors from a foreign leader in exchange for “rewards”.

        • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

          Doug sez: “Which president had been tougher on the Russians? Obama or Trump?”

          Whataboutism is so weak that it deserves to be ignored, but I’ll rise to the fly.

          You guys had your shot at Obama. You took your hacks and struck out. This has nothing to do with Obama, or Trump being tough on the Russians (LOL). It’s a simple question of whether or not Trump abused his office by trading U.S. aid for personal favor.

          Regardless, Trump’s ongoing insistence that it was Ukraine and not Russia that interfered in the 2016 election—a claim that has been refuted by every agency that has investigated it, including Trump’s own AG—is far more comfort to the Russians than anything Obama ever did. Trump’s literally encouraging the Russians to do it again.

          Traitor.

    • Avatar Doug Cook says:

      I’m starting to see a certain desperation in recent comments as those on the left are beginning to realize that they have failed in finding a candidate that can beat President Trump. This desperation to push lame impeachment charges, which had done nothing but increase his support. President Trump was duly elected by the people, fair and square. Sorry Hillary. To now demand that the will of the people be overturned, just because you don’t like the president is troubling. Not to mention the precedent it will set for future presidents. I recommend you listen to Prof Turley’s testimony about why impeachment is not a good idea. Put your hate away for a few minutes and be open and concerned about our Constitution and future political ramifications

      • Avatar Larry Winter says:

        I don’t hate our President, and I did watch Prof Turley’s testimony. Rep. Swalwell recited a quote that Turley used in defending a judge that ended up being impeached with near unanimous consensus. He used the same argument yesterday and Swalwell called him out on it. Turley was exposed as playing the part of a defense attorney, and not a constitutional scholar.
        It’s too narrow and too fast and didn’t include the Judiciary Branch or a law needed to be broken were his main points.

        None of these points relate to the Constitution in any manner or form.

        What’s troubling is your continued misrepresentation of why the Ukrainian issue has pushed the Democrats to move forward with impeachment while pretending those Trump defenders as being concerned with the Constitution and future political ramifications.

        The Constitution and future political ramifications are exactly why the impeachment will occur.

      • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

        Doug sez: “President Trump was duly elected by the people, fair and square.”

        “The people” favored Clinton by 3 million votes. The electoral college (square miles) chose Trump. You can call that “fair and square.” I don’t think it’s either.

        Turley’s argument that Trump’s blatent aid-in-exchange-for-personal-favor crime wasn’t an impeachable offense was pure defense attorney argumentative hand-waving, when he was supposed to be there as a constitutional expert.

        But because I’m not a blindly hyper-partisan parrot like you, I’ve already acknowledged that Turley made some good points about allowing some of the challenges to Trump’s stonewalling be resolved in federal court before proceeding with impeachment. I’m in agreement that another 4-6 weeks to allow for that would be prudent. This is a constitutional crisis—the SCOTUS can drop what it’s doing to address it, as they did with Bush v. Gore in 2000.

        But again, the will of the people my @$$. A plurality of us wanted someone else.

        • Avatar Doug Cook says:

          Sorry Steve, Seriously? Bringing up the electoral college? We don’t and never have elected presidents by popular vote. Nor should we. Why? because our Founding Fathers knew several things we have forgotten… Simple democracies are dangerous. Emotional majorities can tyrannize even large minority groups. Two wolves and a sheep voting on what’s for dinner is not a good system. What would happen if we went to a national popular vote? Democrats would almost certainly spend most of their time in the large population centers in California and New York. Republicans would campaign in the South and Midwest. Large cities would be focused on almost exclusively as the candidates seek to turn out as many votes as possible in “their” region of the country. Small states, rural areas, and sparsely populated regions would find themselves with little to no voice in presidential selection. In this scenario, a handful of states (or heavily populated cities) win, while the remaining states and less-populated areas suffer significantly. Not a good system.
          We do in fact elect presidents by popular vote, the difference is it is conducted at the state level rather than the national level.

          • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

            Doug — Who died and left you proctor of things that we can bring up for discussion here in Open Conversation? I’ll bring up the electoral college if I effing feel like it. Seriously, what color is the sky in your world?

            You suffer under most of the delusions about the reasons for the electoral college that are common today. I posted a link to a recent article in The Atlantic about that topic in a thread down below; I’ll repost it here.

            The main purpose of the electoral college was to provide the less populous southern states with more representation—they feared being swamped by the more populous northern states. The EC is related to the 3/5 compromise (irrelevant in today’s America, thank goodness). It’s also related to the fact that HOR numerical representation is determined by population, not numbers of voters, as the South at our founding wasn’t as enlightened as the North regarding suffrage (still a big issue, unfortunately). In other words, the South wanted everyone counted in one way or another for the purpose of representation, even if they only wanted a small minority of their people to have a vote.

            The electoral college was also devised as an alternative to congress selecting the president—one of the more popular alternatives on the table at the time. (Remember that at the time, US senators were selected by state legislatures, not by popular vote). It was a compromise between popular vote and selection by congress.

            Every other functioning democracy in the world makes do without an electoral college—it’s wholly unnecessary. But oh shit oh dear, the tyranny of the majority! No matter the tyranny of the minority of rubes…the tyranny of owning more real estate. The tyranny of having to put up with a shit-heel like Trump who most of us didn’t want. Not even worthy of consideration, right?

            https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/11/five-common-misconceptions-about-electoral-college/602596/

          • Avatar Doug Cook says:

            Sorry Steve, the Electoral College wasn’t about northern and southern states, it was to protect the smaller states like New Hampshire and Rhode Island, to allow them to have a say in presidential elections. …which are not southern states, and it has nothing to do with the 3/5th compromise. Were it not for the Electoral College, presidential candidates could act as if many Americans don’t even exist. They could simply campaign in a small handful of states with big populations. Who would care what the people in Iowa think? Or Wyoming? Or any number of other states with smaller populations? You really want California and New York to elect every president? Of course not. “Presidential candidates must build a national base among the states before they can be elected. They cannot target any one interest group or regional minority. Instead, they must achieve a consensus among enough groups, spread out over many states, to create a broad-based following among the voters. Any other course of action will prevent a candidate from gaining the strong base needed to win the election. The necessity of building such a national base has led to moderation and a strong two-party system in American politics.”

          • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

            Doug — The electoral college was about sharing the power of the vote in disproportion to population. The Three-fifths Compromise was about sharing the power of the vote in disproportion to population. They are often mentioned in the same paragraph. To say that they are unrelated is ignorance squared.

            The Connecticut Compromise that created a bicameral Congress, giving both large and small states two US senators, was the primary protector of the interests of small states. Not the electoral college.

            Do you know who were the primary proponents of the electoral college? Not the New Englanders—not even the ones from Rhode Island. It was mostly the Virginians—Southerners—Madison in particular. The primary supporter from the North was Hamilton. Hamilton was from populous and voter-rich New York. You’re just flat wrong, Doug.

            For every absurd question you ask—do I really want California and New York picking the president?—there is an even more compelling counter-question.

            Do I want only swing states to determine who gets elected president? Do I want the other states to be largely ignored during the campaigns for president? Do I want the interests of those states pandered to, often at the expense of ours?

            No, I do not. I live in California.

            You say: Small states, rural areas, and sparsely populated regions would find themselves with little to no voice in presidential selection.

            I say: Too bad. People should bet represented, not square miles. Your argument is analogous to that of the State of Jefferson yahoos who insist that we have no representation, when in fact we have equal per-capita representation, and what they really want is disproportionately more per-capita representation. They have never presented a cogent argument for why they’re entitled to that. Neither have you.

  11. Avatar Common Sense says:

    Where’s Rudy?

    Oh, he is back now. What do you do when you commit crimes against our Country and have taken in way too much of the Kool Aid? You go to the scene of the crime again, that’s what you do. Rudy and Co. are doubling down.

    https://twitter.com/kenvogel/status/1202273499060064256

    Rudy….a little advice…..you are Not getting Pardoned…..and if you do get Pardoned you are not getting away from State level Indictments and Crimes! Co conspirator #1 will find that out one day.

    Who else is going down with the ship? There will be many….no doubt.

    The toughest call right now for the 20+ Republicans that are up for re election in the Senate….should we vote to Remove after he is Impeached or take our chances?

    Do you believe the facts….or the Alternative Facts? Do you believe in the rule of Law and our Constitution and Democracy or not?

    Do you have a grip on “Reality” or are you still watching Faux News and following every “Conspiracy Theory” down the rabbit hole?

  12. Avatar Candace says:

    “Put your hate away for a few minutes and be open and concerned about our Constitution and future political ramifications”. EXACTLY. great advice for OUR PRESIDENT. SPOT ON.

    • Avatar Doug Cook says:

      But yet, it is the left that wants to dump the electoral college..that wants to stack the Supreme Court, that wants to turnover a fair and free election. The left that is in favor of stifling free speech. Seriously, you are trying to convince me that the left is concerned about the Constitution? Hilarious

      • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

        The Constitution, by design, is amendable. Many of the articles of the Constitution we hold most dear are amendments. It’s appropriate to dump the electoral college if it’s not working as intended* (not that it will ever happen). Just as it was appropriate to dump the rule that made slaves worthy of 3/5 representation on behalf of their masters, but gave them no vote.

        The rest of your comment is just the usual hooey that everyone on the left wants the same über-PC restrictions on free speech as Birkenstocks-wearing radical feminists on university campuses. That’s bullshit. There is currently a big backlash going on within the left against “cancel culture.” Former President Obama recently and famously called bullshit on the practice of calling people out for un-PC behavior, as if that accomplishes anything.

        *Here’s a good article, published last week in The Atlantic, about the Founders’ intentions when they hatched the electoral college:

        https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/11/five-common-misconceptions-about-electoral-college/602596/

      • Avatar Patrecia Barrett says:

        Doug Cook,

        It takes a lot of nerve to talk about “stacking the Supreme Court” when Trump has been doing exactly that – with sexist, racist, homophobic throw-backs who are salivating over the prospect of depriving entire groups of hard-won civil rights. At least with the left we’d get SANE moderates like Merrick Garland, instead of ultra-religious lunatics.

        In addition, the antiquated electoral college hasn’t been much of problem up till now, since Trump is only the 5th president in the entire history of the country who didn’t get both the popular vote and the electoral college vote. In this case the electoral college failed in the one thing it’s actually good for, which is to keep a presidential candidate who is provably mentally and morally unfit out of the office.

        Finally, the bulk of society has finally moved past just standing idly by while hate groups and their spokespeople use blatant lies and hate speech to incite violence and prejudice against vulnerable groups. If the vast majority of students (thousands of whom actually live on the campuses being violated by these thugs) don’t want them in their schools/homes, they have every right to protest. It’s too bad there weren’t more protests during Hitler’s rise to power.

        • Avatar Tim says:

          In reality Trump’s 2 picks for SCOTUS are the moderate “swing” votes. The liberal wing votes as a block a majority of the time…

          And court packing isn’t merely replacing a vacancy with a judge you hand pick, it is expanding the court to add more judges until you get the court biased in your favor. This perversion is a strategy being actively endorsed by many leading Democrats.

          Patrecia says: “Finally, the bulk of society has finally moved past just standing idly by while hate groups and their spokespeople use blatant lies and hate speech to incite violence and prejudice against vulnerable groups.”

          Tell that to the president of Chico State’s College Republicans, who was recently violently assaulted for holding an “All Lives Matter” sign: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eIxh5cr83sg

          • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

            The far-left’s calls to pack the SCOTUS are a product of Senate Republicans’ refusal to hold confirmation hearings on Merrick Garland, President Obama’s 2016 nominee to the bench to replace Justice Scalia.

            I am not a proponent of packing the court—I agree with you that it’s a perversion, if only a theoretical one at this point. But it’s 100% a response to the GOP’s *actual* perversion.

          • Avatar Patrecia Barrett says:

            Tim,

            Yeah right. He was so “violently assaulted” that he’s strutting around with a big smirk on his face. Trump supporters have committed more ACTUAL violence – by far – than left-wing protestors. Getting hit with a piece of paper is a far cry from being stabbed to death, shot, run over with a vehicle, beaten in the head with a metal pipe, shoved down flights of stairs, etc. etc. etc. If right-wing white supremacists are out looking for a fight, they’re probably going to find one.

            And expanding the Supreme Court may be the only way to save the country’s judicial system. Trump’s lunatic fringe appointees could undo a half-century of hard-won civil rights, and cause untold harm for decades to come.

          • Avatar Tim says:

            Steve: they should have held the hearings & voted. This toxic partisanship goes back a long way – even long before then Senator Obama attempted a filibuster during the Alito nomination.

            Patrecia: I’m talking about actual violence by illiberals against Californians here in the North State. I’m also talking about Californians being shut out of jobs, denied educational opportunities, and even being systematically denied banking & internet hosting based on their beliefs & convictions.

          • Avatar Tim says:

            PS: Very sad to see SJWs normalizing the commission of a hate crime here in the North State, but it makes obvious their underlying disdain for “equal protection under the law.”

          • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

            As for the video from Chico State: All I see are two obnoxious recital orifices.

          • Avatar Tim says:

            …one violently infringing upon the rights of the other based on race, sex, gender, &/or political affiliation (all 4 of which are supposedly specially protected classes in California).

          • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

            I agree—the woman who’s yelling that he made her unsafe has to be joking, right? He could have suffered a paper cut to the eyeball from her physical attack.

            He’s still an obnoxious penis with limbs, though.

  13. Avatar Candace says:

    Doug. I watched every bit of the hearing. I didn’t see a circus but I did see a couple of apoplectic GOP carnival barkers. As usual you assume you’re the smartest guy in the room.

  14. Avatar Common Sense says:

    The Florida move might not pan out like it was supposed to?

    How would you rate the job Donald J. Trump is doing as president?

    Combined disapproval-Florida,55% Combined Disapproval! Floridians have good memories on those “No one will lose Preexisting Conditions” and other campaign promises.

    https://trumpsbrokenpromises.org/florida/

    Start drinking more Orange Juice to keep that “glow” up is my advice…..that and get another Attorney or two on the payroll.

    Impeached….another one added to the History Books.

  15. Avatar Chad Magnuson says:

    The republicans now want us to believe the impeachment process is moving to fast. Actually it was their only defense as spouted by their constitutional expert.
    But as I recall this same group complained the Mueller investigation was taking to long.
    So what is it?

    The swift activity of the House maintains the constitutional guarantee of a speedy investigation/trial.

    Certainly the efficiency of the House is a weak defense from the republicans.
    But when the facts are against you they will stoop to any level to find an arguable, yet weak deflection.

    • Avatar Doug Cook says:

      The efficiency of the House. .lol, good one. The only reason Pelosi is pushing for a quick vote is to get this fiasco over with. Chad, we already know the outcome, don’t we? The Senate, controlled by Republicans get to set the agenda for the trial. They will show the folly of this ill advised circus, make the Democrats look bad, and the American people will move on and forget all about impeachment. I’m sure Pelosi is kicking herself for letting AOC and her gang talk her into impeachment.
      By the way, did you happen to catch the video of Nadler from the Clinton impeachment days saying that we should NEVER go through impeachment if it isn’t a totally bi partisan effort.

      “There must never be a narrowly voted impeachment or an impeachment substantially supported by one of our major political parties and largely opposed by the other, “Such an impeachment would lack legitimacy, would produce divisiveness and bitterness in our politics for years to come and will call into question the very legitimacy of our political institutions”
      My, how times change.

      • Steven Towers Steven Towers says:

        Pelosi is nothing if not pragmatic, and there’s probably some truth to the notion that for pragmatic reasons she’d like to punt the process to the Senate ASAP. She’s in a weird position, because while Trump is clearly guilty AF of soliciting interference by a foreign power to monkey-wrench our election in exchange for aid, Republicans have convinced themselves that his crimes of bribery and attempted election-queering amount to nothing more than party fouls*. She further knows that Democrats risk energizing Trump’s base of Dunning-Kruger berzerkers who have plenty of reasons to abandon him, not the least of which is that significant numbers of people, including some former supporters, are sick of his Flunky the Clown act.

        *The most bizarre of the GOP’s defenses is the repeated assertion that Trump’s attempted crimes weren’t fully consummated before he got caught, so HE’S NOT GUILTY OF ANYTHING!

        • Avatar Doug Cook says:

          “… Trump is clearly guilty AF of soliciting interference by a foreign power to monkey-wrench our election in exchange for aid”

          That is your opinion, not proven by facts, matter of fact…the only witness from the hearings that actually had a conversation with the president testified that the president said, I want nothing, no Quid Pro Quo. Sorry, Steven. You can’t impeach a president on speculation and interpretation. You need facts.

          • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

            It’s not just my opinion, Doug. It’s the sworn testimony before Congress of quite a few people in Trump’s administration. As for Sunderland’s quote of Trump, that’s the kind of thing that a guy like Trump blurts out when the lights come on and his pants are down around his ankles. Everything else Sunderland had to say corroborated the quid pro quo charges.

            Not to mention, Trump has muzzled nearly all of his closest advisers, some of whom seem eager to spill the beans if given the go-ahead by the federal courts. If you’re innocent, why do you muzzle those who could exonerate you?

            You muzzle them if they’re going to bury you. There might be two or three idiots left in Trump’s orbit who would be willing to go to prison for the loyalty-free president. Barr and Pence might be that stupid, but I wouldn’t count on anyone else committing perjury on behalf of Trump. Bolton, in particular, seems eager to come clean. And I’m 95% sure that Giuliani will vomit out a confession to save his own ass.

  16. Avatar Linda Cooper says:

    Perhaps corny, yet it’s how I feel right now. I’m feeling proud of the United States constitution. Which allows for a process of checks and balance. Frankly, I had tears when I watched every square inch of the impeachment hearing, and learned new aspects of the constitution. One point that stood out was that the office of the President, is the only elected position with requires an individual to be “born” here. Because the founders were so concerned about foreign influence. I knew the law, I didn’t know the reasoning in regard to the law. Frankly, in high school I just assumed the founders were maybe racist. If someone makes a snarky comment about former President Obama’s birth certificate, (you know who you are) I’m going to write, “don’t mess with me.”

    I don’t get those in opposition with an inquiry and eventual trial, and I actually find them un-American. Especially when comments are made that Madison, Jefferson, Hamilton, etc. were from long ago, so why listen to them. Really? I grew up with the “Russian threat” as presented by mostly Republicans. How times have changed.

    I am so relieved to live in a country that allows for this impeachment process. Instead of being inflamed about the process, I embrace it. Makes me wonder (not really) why there are those self-serving individuals who are inflamed and resistant. Something about that line from a movie, “you can’t handle the truth.”

    Of course we all know how the Republicans will vote. Unlike silly me, who has served on a jury, my goal was to keep an open mind and respect the process.

    • Avatar Doug Cook says:

      Linda, we can all be proud of the US Constitution, but be concerned about this impeachment and what the ramifications are for the future presidents. I quote Prof Turley who testified Wednesday, “…Today, my only concern is the integrity and coherence of the constitutional standard and process of impeachment. President Trump will not be our last president and what we leave in the wake of this scandal will shape our democracy for generations to come. I am concerned about lowering impeachment standards to fit a paucity of evidence and an abundance of anger. If the House proceeds solely on the Ukrainian allegations, this impeachment would stand out among modern impeachments as the shortest proceeding, with the thinnest evidentiary record, and the narrowest grounds ever used to impeach a president. That does not bode well for future presidents who are working in a country often sharply and,
      at times, bitterly divided.”
      What we all should be concerned about is a party who’s dislikes the president so much that they were talking impeachment before he was even inaugurated. Go back and read my last comment where I quoted Rep Nadler talking about the Clinton impeachment, where he said we should NEVER impeach a president if it isn’t a bipartisan act.
      Impeachment was never intended to be used as a mid-term corrective
      option for a divisive or unpopular leader. Republicans could have easily brought up impeachment charges on President Obama for a variety of questionable acts…obstruction in the Fast and Furious scandal, droning and assassinating an American citizen as examples. But we didn’t impeach him because that is not what we do…until now.
      Linda, I don’t mind the process, I am not resistant to it. But unlike the trial you were on as a juror, this process is not fair to the president, where the opposition controls the list of witnesses and line of inquiry. I hope you are just as open minded when the GOP Senate gets to set the agenda for the impeachment trial.

  17. Avatar Patrecia Barrett says:

    Doug Cook,

    The evidence provided by a long list of highly credible witnesses is overwhelming. Trump’s own post-whistleblower admission that he demanded help from a foreign president to dig up non-existent dirt on a main political rival with $400 million in military aid (already approved by Congress) being with-held, and the lengths to which he went to cover up this act of blackmail, would be enough to convince anyone who isn’t determined to ignore all facts.

    And of course Trump and his close associates have been involved in so many sleazy and illegal activities that quite a few of them are now in prison, or on their way to prison. That Democrats haven’t been able to thoroughly investigate Trump’s involvement (which the Mueller Report in no way ruled out) is simply due to the fact that before they can devote the attention to each outrage it deserves, something even worse comes along. We would know more if Trump hadn’t spent so much time trying to keep the public in the dark about his finances and business dealings. However, we do know that Trump is in hock up to his eye teeth to Russian investors, because his son admitted as much publicly.

    Trump should clearly not have been allowed to assume office to begin with. Prior to the election the public was warned by entire national psychiatric associations and countless other mental health professionals that he is demented and potentially dangerous, and were it not for members of his staff who have been able to control him to an extent (so far at least, but we don’t know how long that will last), the consequences would have been dire. Just one example of his derangement was his recent demand that asylum-seekers all be shot down at the border. Just the fact that Trump has openly incited so much violence should have automatically disqualified him from being president.

  18. Avatar Doug Cook says:

    “…Trump should clearly not have been allowed to assume office to begin with”

    That sentiment is exactly why the Democrats will lose again in 2020. Apparently, Patrecia knows better than the rest of us. Meanwhile latest job reports are out, unemployment has dropped yet again to a new low of 3.5% and wages grew over 3%, Average hourly earnings climbed 3.1% from a year earlier, exceeding projections, and the prior month was revised higher. Those are statistics that will give the president what he needs for reelection. Get used to 4 more years, Patrecia

  19. R.V. Scheide R.V. Scheide says:

    Trump is going to lose because he’s way more embarrassing than any of the leading Dems. Embarrassing sums him up.

    • Avatar Tim says:

      Aside from you, do you know of any other 2016 Trump voter who isn’t eager to vote for Trump again? Because I know a lot of Libertarians & independents who absolutely refused to vote for Trump in 2016 but currently see him as the least evil in 2020…

      The only times Democratic presidential candidates from wokity woke left-wing states win over swing states is when those candidates are unusually young, attractive, and charismatic (JFK & Obama). And the only time incumbent presidents lose is when a recession hits in the year or two before the election.

      • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

        It doesn’t speak well of swing-state moderates and Libertarians if they only vote for Democrats when they’re young and pretty, but we’ll take your word for it.

        Tulsi Gabbard/Cory Booker 2020, I guess.

        • Avatar Tim says:

          Sure, but mainly their preferences say IA, OH, MN, PA, etc. liberals have considerable difficulty relating to CA, NY, NJ, & MA liberals and instead relate more to liberals from conservative-leaning places like AR, GA, & TX.

          Swing state conservatives are the same way, they tend to reject candidates from the deep red states:

          Nixon: CA
          Reagan: IL/CA
          Bush 1: CT/TX
          Bush 2: CT/MA/TX
          Trump: NY

  20. Avatar Chad Magnuson says:

    I recently responded to a friend that I was a constitutionalist.
    I’ve taken the oath to uphold and defend this document. Albeit decades ago, I remain confident that oath was a covenant for a lifetime.

    He responded that how could I be a constitutionalist if I didn’t support the 2nd amendment.
    My response was that supporting the constitution had nothing to do with believing the constitution to be amendable and is not the final word on an issue. Certainly as our country evolves so should our constitution. As it has been evolved/amended many times.

    As a result the constitution outlines and provides a tool for investigating and keeping the checks and balances of the branches of government accountable in an easy to understand processes. It’s interpretations are nothing new today.
    But interpretations are not subject to unfounded conspiracies that rebuke verifiable facts and thoughtless spewing of lies.

    The debate for when a president should face the articles of impeachment is really not debatable.
    Trump has certainly met those minimum limits on more than one occasion.

    This impeachment is really not about trump. It is about defense of our constitution.

    If a mere man is sacrificed to maintain the integrity of our constitution it is a small price to pay.

  21. Avatar Bruce Vojtecky says:

    The Democrats are like the Dallas Cowboys, over flowing with incredible talent, but no leadership.

  22. Avatar Doug Cook says:

    Chad, if you are so concerned about the integrity of the Constitution, a document we both served our country to protect, you would have accepted the will of the people and have accepted the outcome of the 2016 election. But no, you consider President Trump to be an illegitimate president. You want to sacrifice this man because you don’t like him. That is not being a Constitutionalist. That is being a petty loser. Your Democrat leader and Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee have both said that impeachment should only happen if it has bipartisan support. It does not. Yes, it is debatable that President Trump should or should not face impeachment. Half the country believes he shouldn’t, half of Congress believes he shouldn’t. Don’t hide behind the Constitution, just because you dislike the president and want to overturn the will of the people. The Democrats have not proven their case. During the Senate trial, they will prevent the opposing view, which will further instill doubt of his guilt. Once again, not accepting the results of a duly elected president is not being a Constitutionalist

    • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

      Doug — Your repetitions of this nonsense grows tiresome. Removing Trump from office puts Mike Pence in the Oval Office. Arguably, since there isn’t any real Pence fatigue that’s built up over the years, he’s more electable than Trump next year.

      And like many moderates and liberals, I see NOTHING that I like in the prospect of having Mike Pence as the most powerful man on the planet. His apocalyptic vision of Christianity scares the hell out of me, as does his rabidly rigid self-righteousness. I don’t think he’s one bit better than Trump, and I could argue that he’s worse. For one thing, he’s capable of focusing on what he wants—he’d keep his head down and go to work, as opposed to Trump’s obsessions with whining about persecution, tantrum-throwing, and self-aggrandizement.

      Absent game-changing new evidence, there is zero chance of Trump being convicted by the Senate. You daily parrot the official GOP line—Maybe Trump has done things that are inadvisable, but not criminal. We can argue about that all day long, but it’s not going to change the fact that Trump likely for certain will finish out his term.

      So why are the Democrats going forward (in the case of their leader Pelosi, very reluctantly) with the dead-end impeachment process? I have repeatedly asked you to come up with a reasonable alternative to this: Because they feel compelled to do so—it’s the right thing to do in the face of Trump’s actions, even if it’s going nowhere.

      And you have repeatedly ignored me, because you got nothin’.

      • Avatar Larry Winter says:

        Doug Cookthebooks could go pro. He’s got it down. Diversions, whataboutism, false premises, sweeping judgements categorizing the “left” as the borg that’s incapable of differences in opinion, repeating statements that we’ve already debunked but he ignores, pretending to not be a Trump supporter but will bend reason and logic to defend Trump’s actions because he thinks it’s “required” to “balance” these discussions.

        He has built a good resume on these pages to warrant a paycheck by those that spread confusion and doubt through online boards through methods described above.

        • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

          It’s like having an ANC Sean Hannity…and I don’t mean that in a good way. I rarely agree with Tim, but at least he constantly forces me to think, and occasionally alters my point of view. Arguing with Doug is like playing a game of wack-a-mole—it’s fun for one or two minutes before it gets tedious.

          I believe Doug is smart enough to engage in real debate rather than parroting, deflection, evasion, and whataboutism, but he appears to be constantly trying out for a gig on Fox News.

          • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

            And yeah, most wearying of all is the insulting pretense of not being a Trump sycophant, like we’re all stupid enough to believe that.

          • Avatar Doug Cook says:

            Nobody is forcing you to read my comments.

          • Hal Johnson Hal Johnson says:

            “I believe Doug is smart enough to engage in real debate rather than parroting, deflection, evasion, and whataboutism . . . ”

            Yeah, I determined that about Doug early on. As a somewhat liberal gun-humper (I got tired of calling myself a “half-assed libertarian”), I sometimes agree with Tim. More often, I disagree, but I think his posts are usually thoughtful, and not *too* condescending.

            Sometimes I read Doug’s shorter comments before I catch myself, but more often, I skip over them, and it ain’t because he’s a fixed-wing pilot. It’s a shame, because I think he’s a smart guy and capable of genuine discourse.

            “Nobody is forcing you to read my comments.”

            Yet.

        • Avatar Patrecia Barrett says:

          The most baseless pretense in Doug’s comments is his repeated claim that millions of people want Trump removed from office just because we don’t “like” him. Of course this ignores his treasonous blackmail schemes, his massive corruption, his endless lies, his admitted sex crimes, his many incitements to violence, his defense of white supremacists, the destruction of entire industries on his watch, his vast efforts to conceal his finances and business dealings, his ruination of America’s reputation on the international stage, his provable mental derangement etc. etc. etc. There has never been a president like this in my entire 81 years on this planet.

          And it wasn’t (as Doug claims) “the will of the people” that elected him, given that a substantial majority of the country voted for Clinton. The antiquated electoral college compromise (created before most of the country even existed) failed in the one thing it’s good for, which was to keep someone who is clearly mentally and morally unfit out of the presidency.

        • Avatar Doug Cook says:

          Larry, let me explain my support of President Trump. As a candidate I did not support the Trump candidacy Why? Because the was basically a Manhattan liberal most of his life. I was a Rubio guy. After the election, I was pleasenty surprised that the president governed much more conservatively than I thought he would. That gave me hope and so far I have agreed with most of his policies. So in 2020, I expect to proudly cast my vote for the incumbent. I still believe that Nikki Haley will he the new VP, which will set her up perfectly to be the first female president.

      • Avatar Candace says:

        Steve, the thought of a Pence presidency keeps me up at night. Horrifying thought.
        Doug, just in case (true to form) you’re itching to mock my use of the word “horrified” at the prospect of a Pence presidency, I’ll clarify my usage of the adjective for you. It scares the hell out of me for the exact reasons Steve stated. For those reasons alone, I find it a horrifying thought. (“Scares the hell out of me” = “horrified”.) If you weren’t planning on mocking or insulting me, well, that’d certainly be a welcome change.

        • Avatar Linda Cooper says:

          Ah, dear Candace. Please don’t even try to ask him for anything (like not mocking you). I recently made the mistake that I thought he could perhaps shift a little bit, and wrote the most stupid post recently. My attempt at trying to at least get him (pronouns deliberate, over and over again) to focus on process.

          Steve Tower’s point that the Democrats have proceeded at various risks to the party is well taken. This is the America I hear singing.

          My husband and I were pondering the “why” question of these blatant, right-wingers. (Gloves off here.) Husband came to the conclusion that some people are just stupid. This surprised me. He never uses “plain English” like that. However, I thought about the farmer’s in the mid-west who are suffering as a result of Trump, but by golly, they will vote for him again. Along with stupid, I would add racist. And it’s a subtle racism. By that I mean that some people want to return to the times when being white was more in control. The fear that something is being taken away from them. I thank Nancy Pelosi for taking one for the team. However, I have no reservations at times for feeling a deep hate for a pack of congressional gangsters who disrupt a hearing, take it over, and leave their pizza trash behind. I remember those guys from high school.

          Yeah, there’s an elephant in the room. And with another nod to Steve Towers. It’s boring. So sad for ANC. If we wanted to watch the boring show, we could turn to Faux News. I’ve been trying to stay away for this reason. I really don’t want to hate. To kind of quote Maya Angelou, “when someone first shows you who they are, believe it.” This individual is getting a lot of recognition here. He can’t get the same attention on a right-winger page, because they parrot and bore each other.

          I have no idea for a remedy, except to ignore the ignorance. That’s all.

          • Avatar Doug Cook says:

            “…Along with stupid, I would add racist. ”
            Wow, is that where the progressives are these days? Perhaps you can enlighten me on why you believe I am stupid and a racist?
            “… I really don’t want to hate…” But that is what you are doing, isn’t it? I guess you want ABC to be a progressive strong hold free from differing positions. So tell me Linda, why am I stupid because I gave a different political view than you?

        • Avatar Doug Cook says:

          Candace, I would actually agree that a Pence administration could be horrifying to me too. So we agree. But of course Trump will not be removed from office, we already know that.

          • Avatar Candace says:

            Well whadda you know, we actually agree on something (Pence) Doug Cook. Now if only I could get you to agree with me about Trump. Color me cautiously optimistic (or delusional). I’m guessing the latter.

          • Avatar Doug Cook says:

            My guess, Candace that if you got to know me you would realize that we probably have more in common than you think. As far as Trump, I also suffer from Trump fatigue and would vote Democrat if there was a viable candidate I could get behind. There just isn’t one, other than maybe Klobuchar. I even pondered supporting Biden because he would be a one term seat filler president that probably wouldn’t do a whole lot for 4 years. But you can’t argue with the good Trump had done, despite being ignored by the msm. In addition, there will more than likely be another vacancy in the Supreme Court in the next 4 years,band I would like to see that go to another moderate conservative.

      • Avatar Doug Cook says:

        I don’t understand your comment Steve. We both agree that Trump will not be removed from office. That has been my question to you all… what’s the point then? Why even bring up Pence? You want the impeachment because you believe it is ‘ the right thing to do’? Or is it because the Democrat party veered so far to the left that Pelosi can’t keep her caucus under control. Pelosi agreed to this fiasco because otherwise she would more than likely lose her speakership if she fought impeachment, the grown ups in Congress know this is a mistake. Congress isn’t going after Trump because it’s the ‘right thing to do’. They are going after him because that has been their goal since Jan 21, 2017. Russian collusion was a flop, obstruction was a flop, and this weak case is the best they could come up with. Even you seem to have some doubt if Trump’s actions were criminal. That isn’t enough to impeach a president over. The Democrats haven’t proven their case.

        • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

          What’s the point? I’ve explained that to you at least three times, and you’ve never responded to the point. I’m not going to bother explaining it again. It’s like arguing with a Russian bot.

          • Avatar Doug Cook says:

            Just because I disagree with your point doesn’t mean I am not responding to it. I have been very clear in stating my opinion on impeachment, the folly of it, and in my opinion the reason the Democrats are moving ahead with it. It is also my opinion that it will in the end hurt the Democrats in 2020. Your ‘point’ is that it is the right thing to do. That is your belief. It is my belief that it is not the right thing to do. I respect your opinion, even though I think you are mistaken, perhaps you should do the same with my opinion. Each of our opinions have half the country and Congress supporting it.

          • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

            No, Doug. If I’m exasperated, it’s because I’ve asked you repeatedly: If getting rid of Trump via impeachment is certain to fail in the Senate, why do it? Why risk energizing Trump’s base? And even if it wasn’t impossible, why make Mike Pence POTUS?

            I’ve said repeatedly that the Democrats are going forward with it because they have little choice—to not charge Trump with his crimes is to say that it’s okay to solicit foreign interference in our elections.

            Your counter-argument: No, they’re impeaching him because they don’t like him.

            Yeah? No $#!+, Sherlock. They don’t like him. But that doesn’t even come close to answering the question: Why do it? Do you really think Nancy Pelosi is such a naive, petty, unpolished, rash, inexperienced politician?

            Sorry, but that describes your guy Trump, not Pelosi.

          • Avatar Doug Cook says:

            The problem Steve is that you are making the leap that President Trump committed a crime. That had not been proven, I don’t think it is even close to being proven. That is the difference between the Clinton impeachment and this one. Clinton without a doubt committed a crime. There was no argument about that. Your opinion is that Trump committed a crime, but it is just your opinion , as well as most of the Democrats. So yes, the Democrats do in fact have a choice. They can prove their case, they can subpoena Rudy and Bolton, let the courts decide about executive priveledge like they did with Nixon and do this right. Or they can do what they are doing now and fast track it with little to no evidence for the sole purpose of damaging his chances for 2020. Don’t give me that crap about the Democrats taking the moral high ground, Russian collusion flopped so this is their only chance to take the president down

          • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

            You keep repeating that it’s “just my opinion” that Trump committed an impeachable offense. No, it is not just my opinion—there are smoking guns and witnesses all over the place. And not the least damning is the fact that Trump and his yes-men tried to cover up the Ukrainian scheme until it was well-exposed—upon which they immediately pulled the plug—and they continue to obfuscate. You’ll have to explain why they’ve acted guilty as sin if they’re so innocent.

            Impeachment is a political process. The standard of proof required for impeachment and conviction is left to the discretion of Congress. You seem to believe that impeachment trials are criminal proceedings, and therefore proof beyond a reasonable doubt should be the applicable standard. Others argue that a lower standard is appropriate, to better serve the purpose of defending the nation against abuses of power, since the defendant does not risk forfeiture of life, liberty, or property (for which the reasonable doubt standard was set).

            I will grant you that there should be little doubt of the offense and its injury to the nation if the POTUS is to be removed from office. Only a trial in the Senate—not your opinion, nor mine—will determine if Trump should be canned.

            And you still continue to evade the question: You and I agree that the impeachment process is doomed to fail. So why are the Democrats still pursuing it? Why energize Trump’s base? If you think it’s because Pelosi is naive and stupid, I have to disagree. Nearly every time she’s gone at it with Trump, she’s ended up with his head mounted on her office wall.

          • Avatar Doug Cook says:

            Steve, I have answered your query a number of times now, I will try one more time.
            So why are the Democrats still pursuing it (impeachment)?

            I never said that Pelosi was naive and stupid, on the contrary…Pelosi is a incredibly smart and effective politician, I wish the GOP had someone like her. Because she is a smart and savvy politician, she knew that impeachment was a mistake. She fought against it as long as she could, but the far left wing of the party led by AOC forced her hand. If she continued to fight her caucus…she would be in danger of losing her speakership. That is why she wants to fast track the impeachment, she knows that it will go nowhere, she knows that it will hurt the Democrats. She knows that Congress isn’t moving important legislation. She knows that support for the president is increasing in the important swing states. She wants to get this over with as quick as possible and hopefully the American voters will move on and forget about it in time for the 2020 election.
            Impeachment is simply Pelosi placating the far left wing of the party, a wing that has in essence taken over the party.

          • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

            So you’re saying Pelosi is smart and strong, but she caved to the far-left wing of her party in order to….make them happy? Even though there’s little upside, and possible catastrophe? That sounds stupid and weak.

            AOC and the other new kids didn’t force Pelosi’s hand. Trump did. He’s confessed twice to soliciting help from a foreign government to interfere in our election. During one of those confessions, he doubled down and asked China to interfere as well. Seventeen government officials testified before the foreign intelligence committee that everyone knew the Ukraine aid hold-up was a quid pro quo. The aid to Ukraine was released as soon as the whistleblower report was filed. Trump has since done everything in his power to stymie the congressional investigation, as people do when they’re guilty AF.

            Trump has called the people who talked to the whistleblower traitors—an offense punishable by death. He said that we should execute such traitors, “like in the good old days.” He is a dangerous demagogue who would like nothing more than to dismantle our system of checks and balances—a wanna-be dictator, like the leaders he most admires. That’s what you’re supporting.

            In order to believe Trump is innocent of impeachable offenses, you either have to be dumber than dog$#!+ or so far up your own hyper-partisan @$$ that you’ve come to believe the world is perennially dark.

          • Avatar Tim says:

            Option 3: You don’t think what Trump did was bad enough to warrant his removal from office and you think the best possible outcome right now is to keep an ineffectual leader as president.

          • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

            Tim — I would absolutely agree to Option 3 were it not for the severity of Trump’s offenses. If strong-arming a foreign government to interfere in our election by withholding congressionally approved military aid isn’t an impeachable crime, what is?

          • Avatar Tim says:

            I don’t see it as interfering in our election. Partisan gamesmanship? Sure. Kind of like the IRS targeting conservative 501c3s…

          • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

            :::boggle:::

            Military aid, duly authorized by Congress and desperately needed by a nascent democracy in its struggle against the first invasion of sovereign soil in Europe since WWII—an invasion by an anti-democratic autocracy and historic geopolitical foe. The aid withheld until the recipient nation agrees to try to dig up dirt on (at that time) the President’s most likely election foe. The aid released only when the scheme was revealed.

            If Obama had done that in ~2012, do you think you conservatives would have called it “partisan gamesmanship”? Can you and Doug say yes to that with straight faces? If the answer is yes, you’re both more delusional than I imagined was possible.

            Trump is a criminal and very possibly a Russian asset. Multiple close associates of his are in prison. More will be going to prison. By all rights, he’ll be going there as well. His best defense at the moment is that his offenses are so frequent and numerous, they’re dizzying.

          • Avatar Tim says:

            I honestly have zero interest in nation building or propping up corrupt governments who reward our oligarchs. If Europe thinks a Russian invasion is likely, they’ve got NATO and I’m sure we’d end up sending more than our fair share of troops & gear.

            Immigration law, duly authorized by congress, was set aside by Barack Obama so he could executive order his way to DACA. Marijuana laws too, by both Obama & Trump. This is nothing new or worthy of impeachment…

          • Avatar Doug Cook says:

            Steve, you left out the part that if Pelosi did not go along with impeachment, she would likely lose her speakership, which is vitally important to her. The left wing did in fact force her hand. The 2 terms of impeachment are incredibly weak. This whole affair will be dispatched quickly and forgotten about just as quickly. After Clinton got impeached, he still remained the voice of the Democrat party until Obama took over. Polls in the swing States are showing increased support for Trump. For every one of your experts that say what Trump did was impeachable, I can find one that says the opposite. You think it is a slam dunk…half the country says otherwise.

          • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

            Tim — The right of Presidents to prioritize enforcement of federal laws in keeping with their own policies is longstanding and SCOTUS-affirmed. You can still be charged with a crime in California if you get caught possessing marijuana on federal land or in a federal facility. In June the do-nothing House passed a bill to completely legalize marijuana at the federal level. It’s one of the hundreds of bills passed by the current “do-nothing” House that are stacked under the ass of Sen. Mitch McConnell, who is in increasing danger of sharing the ultimate fate of Yertle the Turtle.

            As for Immigration, Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) policy allowed people with unlawful presence in the United States after being brought to the country as children to receive a renewable two-year period of deferred action from deportation and become eligible for a work permit in the U.S. Trump suspended it in favor of his vanity wall and ramping up deportation, using racist rhetoric as the rationale.

            As I’ve said many times, I’m not for unfettered immigration for a host of reasons. But the primary draws of the United States are economic opportunity here and horrifically oppressive situations in Central America. The answers: Stiff penalties for American employers of illegal immigrants here and supporting Costa Rica-like democratic and economic reform in Central America, Trump has no interest in either.

          • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

            Doug — Impeachment *is* a slam dunk. Conviction in the Senate is anything but a slam dunk, though the Senate does remain slightly more deliberative than the House. You continue to point out poll numbers. While I acknowledge that they represent a split in the country, unlike you I don’t think they have squat to do with the President’s legal guilt or innocence,

            Pelosi isn’t bending to the will of the far-left members of the House. Every schoolboy knows, if they’re paying attention, that Pelosi has effectively muted AOC and her clan. That’s not to say that AOC has been completely muzzled (though to some extent AOC knocked herself several rungs down the influence ladder with her early summer remarks that moderate Democratic leaders are subtly racist, which didn’t play).

            It’s more the case that what the adults in the room (Pelosi, Schiff, Nader) are saying and doing is far more compelling and important. Pelosi’s hardest job will be to convince purple-state representatives who won two years ago in the Great Trump Rejection to stay in line. AOC and her ilk are zero threat to bolt.

          • Avatar Tim says:

            Steve: There is a world of difference between “we’re going to prioritize cracking down on meth” and “we are flat out not going to enforce these laws in these cases” – the later is literally legislating from the oval office.

          • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

            Tim — That’s true, but the federal government has never flat-out stopped enforcing marijuana laws. It’s just become far more selective.

            And I’ve always found it ironic when hard-core conservatives bitch about the feds ceding authority to the states in the case of criminalizing marijuana or not. It’s just more proof to me that the great majority of conservatives are authoritarian wolves, though many dress in libertarian sheep skins.

          • Avatar Tim says:

            Make no mistake, I’m merely giving examples of presidents flouting congress (not advocating policy).

    • Avatar Chad Magnuson says:

      I beg to differ of what constitutes being a constitutionalist.
      I have never questioned the results of the 2016 election. I have always been critical of trumps actions as commander in Chief. His repeated lies, bragging, race baiting talk, his disrespect of our countries intelligence agencies, and his use of the military for partisan purposes.
      It is clear trump has abused his power with his attempts to go after a political rival.
      It is clear he has obstructed a constitutional process. Bribery is obvious.
      Impeachment is our constitutional remedy.

  23. Avatar Larry Winter says:

    To quote Edward Snowden, “Whoa.”

    Sen. Bernie Sanders vowed, if elected president in 2020, to break with both the Trump and Obama administrations by refusing to use the repressive, century-old Espionage Act to prosecute whistleblowers, a stance that was applauded by press freedom advocates and former NSA contractor Edward Snowden.

    https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/10/23/whoa-says-edward-snowden-sanders-vows-end-prosecution-whistleblowers-under-espionage?fbclid=IwAR0V3VbuNnf28XzBw95GpNGPX_wGEqyW5c-EvbXf4UA7eaFcvPNAyP6tFQ4

  24. Avatar Karen Calanchini says:

    I love reading all the comments here and so admire the intelligent folks who have so much knowledge, opinions, on so many political subjects. However, where do you all find the time to do all of this? It is all I can do to keep up with my own life, taking care of my husband, paying bills, keeping up with family and friends, taking care of our home, yard, critters, my own health, and so much more.
    Happy holidays to all and keep up the good observations, it sure saves me a lot of time to drop in now and then and catch up!

  25. Avatar Bruce Vojtecky says:

    And in womens soccer, Megan Rapinoe was named Sports Illustrated Athlete of the year. She promptly blasted SI for it’s lack of diversity.

    • Avatar Candace says:

      Bruce, Yes! Go Rapinoe!!

    • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

      My only beef with SI is the cover shot—she’s wielding a huge sledge hammer. Being that she’s a NorCal girl who grew up in Palo Cedro, it should have been a Pulaski tool.

      Not that she still considers herself a NorCal girl, given the level of animosity toward her here in Shastanistan.

  26. Avatar Candace says:

    Doug, I ain’t no dude. Then again I suppose it’s very likely you don’t consider me as one of the “intelligent folk’ that Karen C. was referring to. That said, there are other intelligent female commenters on this site who are also not “dudes”. Just sayin’.

    • Avatar Doug Cook says:

      Lighten up…it was a little joke.

      • Avatar Candace says:

        Doug, ya, well, those “little jokes” add up when women have historically been left out of conversations that men deem as intelligent. Your telling me to “lighten up” fits that narrative to a T. I realize it can be difficult to look at something from another’s perspective but maybe try before you reflexively dismiss it
        as me overreacting. If you knew me at all (which of course you don’t) you’d know that having a sense of humor is probably one of the qualities I think is most important for one to have. That said, I’ll readily admit that its gotten me in trouble more than once. When that happens, when I’ve unintentionally offended someone? I apologize.

  27. Avatar Karen Calanchini says:

    LOL Candace…and why I made reference to “intelligent folks “! Really find the term
    “dude” rather annoying anyway.

  28. Avatar Candace says:

    Doug, guess I should add that I wasn’t actually offended by your joke, just annoyed. Not an “off with his head” annoyed, just annoyed because from my perspective, intentional or not, those “little jokes” get tiresome. That said, carry on.

  29. Avatar Common Sense says:

    They call it the “Paper Trail” but in Reality it’s the “Digital” trail. Russia Bankrolls The Ukraine Farce! When they squeeze Lev Parnas (and they will) he might just flip on the Orange guy and Rudy!

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-12-11/giuliani-associate-parnas-got-1-million-from-russia-u-s-says

  30. Avatar Larry Winter says:

    Hey Steve, you’ve mentioned that you had an environmental consulting firm. Do you understand the CEQA process? We’ve been working on a CEQA document for the Trinity County cannabis program through Ascent Environmental, Inc. There’s been controversy, to say the least, with a lot of people asking that the deir be thrown out and started all over again. I would like to ask a few questions to get a better understanding. The gist of my problem is understanding the process in evaluating a proposed project that is already in existence. I know this isn’t a normal condition for a CEQA evaluation but there seems to be a bit of twisting of logic to pull it off.

    • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

      Larry — I sold my interest in my consulting firm at the turn of the year and am just now thinking about getting back in the game. Ascent is a top-tier CEQA firm, and I would point you to a talk by Curtis Alling as a starting point on the topic of baseline condition for existing/ongoing programs that were never CEQA-approved or permitted (link below). It’s a contentious and (to me) somewhat counter-intuitive issue.

      Trinity County is in good hands with Ascent, and I would bet money that the DEIR would be legally defensible, but that doesn’t mean it won’t get sued over this gray area.

      https://www.ascentenvironmental.com/files/7313/7228/6152/Proper_CEQA_Baseline_Is_It_Always_Existing_Conditions.pdf

      • Avatar Larry Winter says:

        Thanks Steve, that helped. But boy, hard to wrap my head around it all.
        Here’s a link to a recent joint BOS and Planning Commission informational meeting where I ask my questions to the lead guy with Ascent. I start around the 12 minute mark if you are so inclined. If not, I don’t blame you.
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQtf4ddzWs0&feature=em-uploademail

        The gist of my questions are concerning “existing conditions” that includes the action of taking out the requirement our Ordinance demands in getting permitted through the State’s Water Board and Fish and Wildlife to mitigate potential environmental effects. I was told that to include those “mitigating measures” as part of the existing conditions at the time of the NOP isn’t “consistent with CEQA law”, even though they have a great impact on the existing conditions at the time of the NOP.

        From the information in the link you provided, it seems that they are going back in time from before the existing conditions to when only illegal grows were occurring that had no requirement to follow State environmental laws, which would be violating CEQA law.

      • Avatar Larry Winter says:

        And Steve, I’m not asking for more of your expertise on this. I’m talking with County staff but thought since you are thinking of getting back into the game, or a CEQA geek that’s falling off the wagon, I thought this stuff might be of interest to you.

  31. Avatar Doug Cook says:

    Look no further than Rep Nadler’s comment yesterday and why this impeachment is a scam,
    “…”We cannot rely on an election to solve our problems”
    That explains it all. The Democrats are certain that Trump will win reelection and this is their only shot to get him out.

    • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

      Congratulations, Doug. You’ve managed to craft a brief statement that is the perfect opposite of reality.

      What’s certain is that the impeachment process will fail in the Senate—there is no way in hell Republicans will vote to convict Trump. The next election, on the other hand, is very much in play. You can bet that whoever rises to the top among the Democrats won’t repeat Clinton’s mistake of ignoring the swing states down the stretch. (Get real—we all know that you won’t be jetting to Las Vegas next November to bet your entire fortune on a Trump win.)

      Nadler’s statement was to the point that serious crimes have been committed by Trump, and those crimes cannot be normalized. They must be formally repudiated.

      This is not a matter for an election to solve by voting someone out based on dissatisfaction with performance. Inviting foreign governments to interfere in our elections, coupled with a blanket refusal to acknowledge the House’s constitutional right and duty to investigate pursuant to an impeachment process, are existential threats to our form of government.

      • Avatar Doug Cook says:

        Serious crimes? If so…why don’t the articles of impeachment reflect that? Where are the bribery charges? The quid pro quo charges? No, Steve…all they could come up with is abuse of power and obstruction of Congress. That being the case, we could have easily impeached President Obama, correct? After all ..he solicited help from Russia to help his campaign, correct? Letting Putin know that if reelected, he would be more flexible about intermediate missle defense. Obstruction of Congress? Holder was held in contempt of Congress for obstructing the investigation in the Fast and Furious investigation. So don’t give me that garbage about serious crimes.
        Polls are showing that the swing states are against impeachment by significant numbers. Why do you think that Pelosi had been against Pelosi since the beginning of this charade? Be serious now, you actually believe Biden or Warren will be able to beat Trump? I don’t gamble at all. But I think I would be safe putting a few bucks on the incumbent.

        • Avatar Doug Cook says:

          “…Why do you think that Pelosi had been against Pelosi since the beginning of this charade?”
          That of course should have read “…had been against impeachment…”

        • Steve Towersw Steve Towersw says:

          Doug, are you purposefully being thick?

          The abuse of power charge is the charge of holding up aid to Ukraine in exchange for something of personal value—asking foreign governments to interfere in our election on his behalf. This is the less serious of the two charges—a cluster-#&<% move by an in-over-his-head boob that was sniffed out by at least 17 people and was abandoned as soon as daylight shone upon it.

          The obstruction charge is perhaps the most serious obstruction charge in US history—an absolute blanket refusal to recognize the constitutional role of the House to carry out impeachment investigations. Los Presidentes unilaterally throwing sections of constitutions overboard is what third-world banana republics are known for. To me, this is the more serious of the two charges.

          Your comparisons with Obama are feeble parroting of whataboutisms, and are not even worthy of a response.

          Again with Pelosi? Doug, she started out cautious—correctly so—and converted to "It's what we now have to do, regardless of the consequences" some time ago.

          You keep going back to poll numbers, as if those are the final arbiter of right and wrong. It's getting easy to think that's what you truly believe—there is no right and wrong, only winning and losing.

          • Avatar Doug Cook says:

            The fact that the Obama administration was guilty of obstruction of Congress is of course significant. If it wasn’t worthy of impeachment for them…why is it so serious with Trump? Because we like Obama better than Trump? If obstruction was such a big deal, why didn’t the committee go to the Supreme Court to rule on the administration refusing to cooperate? They didn’t seem to care very much, did they? Every modern President has to some extent or another resisted Congressional or special-counsel subpoenas. The Constitution stipulates co-equal branches that each have the right to defend their powers. The obstruction charge is a weak charge…and yes, poll numbers are important. After all, it was Pelosi, Schiff and Nadler that said impeachment should only happen if it is bi partisan. I guess they changed their mind. This impeachment is like a Harlem Globetrotters game..we all know the outcome

          • Avatar Tim says:

            The obstruction charge might carry some weight if the House’s investigation wasn’t so incredibly partisan with the Democrats unilaterally controlling witness lists and prioritizing testimony.

            Whataboutism: If the Republicans house majority had subpoenaed Obama to undergo a strip search on national tv and Obama refused, would you consider that obstruction?

          • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

            1. Eric Holder was held in contempt of Congress. Not Obama. Unlike the Trump administration, the Obama administration honored the longstanding tradition of the AG’s office acting independently so as to preserve some modicum of oversight and law enforcement. Trump decided to light that tradition on fire and piss it out.

            2. Every modern president has claimed executive privilege regarding specific subpoenas for specific information. No president in history has alleged that Congress has no authority to pursue an impeachment inquiry, because the president has unilaterally decided that the inquiry is “a hoax.” That’s a full, direct attack on the constitution’s separation of powers. The GOP assertion that the SCOTUS has to approve a HOR impeachment inquiry is a complete phantasm—that appears nowhere in the constitution, and only furthere violates separation of powers. If you’re incapable of understanding the difference, I can’t help you.

          • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

            Tim — I’ve said elsewhere that I wish the Democrats would show more patience. The notion that Republicans have been less partisan in the proceedings is a joke, though. They are fixated on exposing the whistleblower—a violation of federal law that would in effect make future whistleblowing a fool’s task. The concerns that the whistleblower brought to light were corroborated by 17 witnesses before the Intelligence Committee.

            I don’t understand your strip-search point. I don’t find fault with Trump claiming that specific lines of inquiry are off limits….those claims could be sorted out in court. Trump is guilty of obstruction because he claims that he is 100% immune from congressional oversight and can ignore every single subpoena without having to justify that on grounds of executive privilege. He is in effect saying that he alone gets to decide if an impeachment inquiry is legitimate.

            I know you’re smart enough to understand how that’s a significant difference in kind from contesting a congressional subpoena to be strip searched on national TV.

          • Avatar Tim says:

            The strip search point is just to establish that we both agree that there are certain outlandish conditions under which a president could rightfully ignore a congressional subpoena. From there it is merely a matter of degrees until we reach legitimacy.

            The president didn’t say he would ignore all congressional subpoenas, but he did say he’d ignore any coming from this particular inquiry. House Democrats could have allowed Republicans to call their own witnesses and ask whatever questions they wanted, but they chose instead to turn the inquiry into a partisan sham. The president was therefore within his rights to refuse to participate in *this* inquiry.

          • Avatar Doug Cook says:

            Steve..I went back and reviewed your posts about impeachment. In not one of them did you ever bring up obstruction of Congress, not once…but now you seem to think that it is the most serious charge. You kinda forgot about bribery, treason, quid pro quo. Now it is obstruction of Congress that gives you the vapors.

          • Avatar Doug Cook says:

            Steve says, “… They are fixated on exposing the whistleblower—a violation of federal law”
            Naming a whistleblower is NOT a violation of federal law.

          • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

            Yes, Doug, that’s right. I didn’t make a knee-jerk decision about the relative severity of Trump’s offenses until recently. Upon consideration, I decided that it’s denying the powers of the House as prescribed by the constitution. Imagine that.

            As for protection of whistleblowers, it depends on your definition of retaliation. Narrowly speaking, outing the whistleblower isn’t illegal. But we have a POTUS who is calling the whistleblowing treasonous, and suggesting that old-fashioned executions are in order. And some of his followers are the kinds of yahoos who would take him up on the call for retaliation (as they have in his rallies when he eggs them on). It’s not a stretch to say Trump’s behavior constitutes retaliation, which certainly IS illegal.

          • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

            Tim — Yes, of course we agree on that. So did Mr. Nadler, chair of the House judiciary committee, just a couple of days ago. But Trump
            isn’t just ignoring a subpoena. He’s saying that he alone gets to decide if the entire process is bogus. It’s f***ing dictatorial. No other POTUS facing impeachment has ever done it.

            Yes, the issue is Trump saying that HE gets to decide whether the entire Ukrainian affair is worthy of investigation, and if HE decides it’s not, it isn’t legitimate and he doesn’t even have to acknowledge it. That’s not a difference by degree. It’s basically saying that the US constitution is toilet paper.

          • Avatar Doug Cook says:

            So let me get this straight, Steve…so the most egregious of impeachment charges, according to you, occurred AFTER the impeachment hearing was initiated. The quid pro quo…the bribery…the treason…the obstruction of justice from the Mueller probe are all insignificant and not worthy of impeachment charges. So you want to impeach a president because he didn’t want to participate in a sham hearing, and wanted the SCOTUS to rule…something that Nadler apparently felt was not that important because he decided not to have the SCOTUS decide. When the Nixon tapes went to the SCOTUS, they ruled against him and he handed over the tapes.

  32. Avatar Bruce Vojtecky says:

    “Boris Johnson is winning in a landslide and that should be a warning to the far left of the Democratic party”, Joe Biden.
    This makes Brexit almost a certainty while Scotland, who overwhelming voted against Brexit, will seek independence from England. The United Kingdom is crumbling as it is as split as the US.

    • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

      The Boris Johnson win is definitely troubling. The UK is in the same boat as the USA—poorer, rural areas are driving their nationalism/isolationism. Anti-immigration sentiments are part of that. Areas of England that were Labour strongholds for generations have flipped conservative.

      I’ll be surprised if Scotland doesn’t bail. Heck, Northern Ireland might bail, too. Brexit puts them in a particularly bad spot.

      One of the ironies of Brexit is that for all UK’s unease about shared sovereignty and open borders of the EU, the UK is itself an experiment in shared sovereignty and open borders. Brexit puts both experiments in peril.

    • Avatar Larry Winter says:

      Of course Establishment Joe would say something like that. I also heard it on Morning Joe. Let’s put things in context. Great Britain already has universal healthcare called NHS. Under Tory rule the last ten years, they’ve been starving it, causing delays and overcrowding in the system. So, Boris promised in his campaign to strengthen the NHS by investing to retain 19,000 currently working nurses while adding 31,000 new nurses for a total of 50,000 nurses. Add to that, 40 new hospitals, 20 hospital upgrades and adding 6,000 more General Practitioners.

      https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-tories-new-nurses-promise-50000-31000-a9237676.html

      That just shows how comparing the two country’s right and left falls apart.

  33. Avatar Bruce Vojtecky says:

    And Megan Rapoine endorsed Elizabeth Warren, is a Kap endorsement coming?

  34. Avatar Common Sense says:

    A federal judge on Wednesday rejected the Trump administration’s attempt to toss out a lawsuit over missing notes documenting President Donald Trump’s face-to-face meetings with President Vladimir Putin of Russia.

    Kind of makes a person wonder why the taxes can’t be seen and why the notes/records with Putin can’t be seen??

    https://www.politico.com/news/2019/12/11/judge-putin-trump-notes-082600

  35. Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

    The Army-Navy game today wasn’t much of a game…dominated by Navy’s running QB and their D-line.

    Commander Shinsplints was in attendance. I’m fine with that, but the red MAGA campaign hat? Really? What a crass, clueless, classless, tone-deaf human being.

  36. Avatar Common Sense says:

    The Orange guy showed up at the game I hear? I also hear it was captured that many of the cadets where showing the white power signs to support the Traitor in Chief!

    Nothing like seeing a bunch of cadets throwing up the white power symbol on national television to support their favorite president.

    https://twitter.com/bruthamantho/status/1205883634378563584

  37. Avatar Sue says:

    As a new reader to this site; it seems it leans a tad to the left. 4 years ago media and celebrities loved Trump; what changed? He’s not a politician and he’s breaking up the establishment; change is good….really…you’re all going to be ok. This impeachment is doing Dems more harm than good; some of my Lib friends are done; how many of your conservative friends are turning liberal? There is a wave happening that can’t be denied; people are getting closer to God and family, and how can that be bad? Turn off MSM, yes even FOX (cept Greg). There does exists a true hatred for this man and am sorry for that because life right now is pretty good. Take time to smell the roses.

  38. Avatar Linda Cooper says:

    Well, Sister Sue, I have just spent an hour contemplating this post. Scary, I know. On so many levels. Just a question for you, Sue (who doesn’t post her last name), can you make it measurable with regarding “people are getting closer to God and family?” Which is your assumption. And if you can, include why the individual in question brings this to light with his numerous marriages and affairs, putting people in cages, lying, and having to pay fines for cheating with his so called non-profit and university, not disclosing his tax returns, that would be great. And if you live in the Redding area, another question for you, would be, during the Carr Fire, Trump did not support those suffering. Instead, he tweeted how California was screwed because of poor forestry management. So many were suffering, including me at the time. I would have appreciated some kind of nod. Additionally, if you could also describe how your life is “pretty good,” this would also be appreciated.

    • Avatar Candace says:

      Linda, To quote Sue: “Trump is a hard-ass pussy-grabbing man fighting (and winning winning winning) for us everyday. I love politics!!!” I think Sue may be confused and living vicariously through Charlie Sheen. You’d probably have been better served watching an hour of “Two and a Half Men” re-runs.

    • Avatar FeistyChic says:

      I lived through the Carr Fire too and I applauded Trump zeroing in on the real issue that is causing these infernos: forests that haven’t been properly managed in decades, thanks to CA politics and city-slicker environmentalist groups. Campaigning to “save the trees” while creating tomes of bureaucracy that prevent forest management will eventually cause said trees (and homes in close proximity) to get torched to oblivion by out-of-control firenados. Trump’s comments confronting CA politicians were way better than all the side-stepping and scapegoating that was and still is being done by leftist politicians in CA. It’s time to see some action taken on managing these forests instead of screaming at the sky and blaming climate change and suing PG&E for billions of dollars, which then drives utility prices up. If we didn’t have overgrowth in our forests, even the fires caused by faulty PG&E equipment would be easier to put out and much less likely to wipe out entire neighborhoods and cities.

      And also, Linda, are you aware that Obama put more people in “cages” than Trump? And that he made the exact same statements as Trump about needing to crack down on illegal immigration? And also, do you work at the border? The story from those working in the trenches at the border is quite different from the biased one peddled by CNN et al. And also, have you confirmed that all Democrat politicians have managed to remain married to their first wife and to stay free of all affairs? How about Bill Clinton? And are you aware that the Clinton Foundation exploited the Haitian people following a disaster? And regarding the claim about Trump cheating… since most of the mainstream news channels have been caught reporting lies about Trump and Trump supporters, how do you know that the claim about cheating is true?

      • Avatar Larry Winter says:

        FeistyChic, the number of acres of State forests that burned in the Carr fire is zero.
        Why would you repeat that California was to blame? It’s a flat out lie.

      • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

        Well, well, well. We have ourselves a new prophet of truthiness and priestess of whataboutism.

        • Avatar Beverly Stafford says:

          Yep. After reading a few of her posts, I’ll do as I do with a couple of the others: don’t waste time reading them. Bethel elders must love her.

    • Avatar Sue Crowe says:

      I’m going to try to respond to all your points; this post might seem disjointed.
      My family and 2 of our friends families have all gone back to church. That’s my assumption and it’s a small sampling. If it’s happening in my small circle, it’s happening elsewhere.
      I’ve had numerous marriages and that doesn’t make me a bad person. As far as affairs; I think those are just awful and damaging; that’s his sin…And hopefully he’s changed his ways (I think he has). But that doesn’t make him a bad leader.
      Cages was Obama. I’ll research that non-profit; I know nothing about that. Tax returns he doesn’t have to disclose per Supreme Court (thank RBG). He was a billionaire prior to politics; can Pelosi and Biden (etc) who became millionaires AFTER politics, show how that happened?
      Our house burned completely in Carr Fire and we blame Cal; long line of logging in my past. How is my life good? It’s great actually. Business has never been better, our new house is lovely, everyone is working. This will sound corney; we are all just happier with a more positive outlook on life.

      • Avatar Larry Winter says:

        Sue, sorry to hear about your loss in the Carr Fire. Even facing that fear every summer, it’s hard to imagine the full tragedy of losing one’s home and belongings.
        But that doesn’t explain why you blame California nor does your long line of logging in the past.

      • Avatar Linda Cooper says:

        Sue: I have tried to take my time with replying. And I don’t want to get into a compare mode. Everyone has their own reactions. You write that your House burned down. Well, so did mine. However, my first thought would have been my Memories burned.

        Everything. Manuscripts, diaries, photographs, family heirlooms, and our personal history. As someone told me, one loses their identity initially, or as my husband said, context. Thankfully, we are fairly grounded individuals, and maintained our center. This center has been hard fought, and I’m not in agreement with you about “a more positive outlook on life.” I am proud that we have reached centered. And acquiring a carrot peeler has been a big hit.

        It’s just your perspective, and choice of words that interested me. I flinched when my sister told me, “oh, what a great house,” when we landed in Chico. My sister looked on New House as being an improvement. Funky house (formerly of Shasta), transitioned into the burbs. I never took stock in owning a “lovely house,” I took comfort in my memories, the pines, and the seasonal creek. For twenty-six years. But anyway, that’s just me. If your new House is lovely, and that is important to you, that’s great.

        My point about Trump, and the Carr Fire, was that he could have waited to blame whomever he wanted to blame for the fire, after the dust had settled. Further, he could have offered solutions to work towards at a later date. Timing is important. Instead, while I was lucky enough to have a hotel room, and wait for news regarding our house, I listened to his so-called leadership attack California. While I was in that hotel, and fire fighters from around the world, and the United States, were in Redding, offering their assistance. It would have been “nice” to have heard the President of the United State offer some acknowledgement to those people. Not one peep. From him.

        We moved to Chico just before the Camp Fire. Here we were evacuated again. My idea of a positive outlook on life, was to leave a note on the door. It read, “welcome firefighters, the door is unlocked, come in and rest, we have nothing to lose.”

        Somebody must have told Trump to acknowledge the Camp Fire. He stayed for a half-hour, and gave a little TV speech. And while he got the name Paradise wrong, then Governor Jerry Brown quietly whispered to Trump, the correct name of the town.

        I see that our values are different. No way to agree on that. Is it a house, or is it a home? Is it America or is it the United States of America? It seems like in your life, business is good, everyone is working, etc. And this can be attained with a “more positive outlook on life.” That’s just not true for everyone. Unless you’re Trump. He would agree with you.

        • Avatar Candace says:

          Linda, the fact that you and your husband remain centered despite what has happened to you is nothing short of remarkable to me. Your description of your Shasta home sounds like it was indeed a peaceful and lovely place to live. When you write of it your sense of loss (and the myriad of emotions attached to that) comes through and is palpable in your words. I realize how hollow these words can sound from a virtual stranger but I am truly very sorry for your loss and heartbreak. I hope you and your husband are able to find some bits of joy here and there even if it’s in the form of acquiring a carrot peeler. Simple pleasures are often underrated. As far as Trump goes, I one-hundred percent agree with you, he’s a non empathetic shit heel.

          • Avatar Linda Cooper says:

            Candace, thank you for your understanding words. I was just feeling like a road to recovery is not so one-dimensional. Opening up too much on a public forum has been a down side! And I readily admit, that Trump can set me off. I had never personally experienced the importance the role that leadership can have on a community during a natural disaster. We do experience joy, and after deciding to buy our new house in three hours, we sure got lucky with the neighbors. Additionally, there has been humor. Our journey to recovery was, and still is, such a learning curve. Especially using a cell phone, which was necessary for dealing with the insurance company. One day the stove top started making clicking sounds. We had to call a service person. He explained the cause of the sounds, and after leaving, my husband (a retired teacher), looked at me and grinned, and said, “isn’t it FUN to learn new things?”

      • Avatar Common Sense says:

        No Sue a Bad Leader would be a Racist, A Cheat,A Cheater on his wives. A Money Launderer. A Habitual Liar and a Traitor. A bad leader would be in it for himself only.And last but not least a bad leader would have Stolen for two Charities one of which was supposed to be for VETERAN’S! Know anyone that fits this profile Sue?

        When you went back to Church there Sue, have you heard any Sermons on Love by
        chance? Do you feel the Orange guy loves other people Sue? Does he love the Mexicans and Blacks and Muslims Sue?….you know….like Jesus was trying to teach.

        Sue a person with NPD can not change…..It’s their Pathology. As Demonstrated by #45’s continuous Lies and Unhinged comments daily. He is Mentally UNstable.

        Very sorry for you loss in the Fire. I can not even image what that was like and hope you find closure with that and can get it behind you and will pray for you to do much better in the future.

  39. Avatar Bruce Vojtecky says:

    Sue, the reason ANC seems to be left leaning is because of the mostly right leaning trolls that comment on here. On Facebook these same articles have a more right leaning posts because one cannot hide their identity. On Facebook there is not the same repetitive sparring like on here.

    • Avatar Candace says:

      Hi Bruce, your FB experience is markedly different than mine. What I see is constant repetitive sparring and really ugly things being said, no holds barred, which is why it’s extremely rare for me to “argue” on FB. For that reason I prefer the “sparring” on ANC. In comparison to FB the discourse that goes in here is mostly thoughtful, intelligent and civil. You included!

      • Avatar Bruce Vojtecky says:

        Candace, I agree the no holds barred comments on Facebook get pretty bad at times but the repetitive sparring of posting the same arguments, often long winded, on ANC is pretty boring. I find most of these troll comments on ANC I quit reading, and apparently a lot of others do too. On ANC if someone posts a lie and you call them a liar your post is removed, on Facebook that doesn’t happen.

        • Barbara Rice Barbara Rice says:

          Leaping in here:

          It is possible here on ANC to call someone on a false statement without your post being removed. It’s all in how you phrase it. “You’re a liar” will be taken down. “That statement is incorrect and here’s why” will stand, and also be more conductive to civil discourse.

  40. Avatar Patrecia Barrett says:

    Sue,

    Trump is forcing the hate-filled Old Testament “god” the fundamentalist fanatics who make up his support base worship on the rest of the population through his endless appointments of God-in-government extremists to head nearly every federal agency and commission, and to serve on numerous federal courts.

    He and his cohorts have also managed to deprive entire groups of hard-won civil rights, with more attacks in the offing. They are even currently pushing through a law that would deprive gay people of housing, employment, medical care, and nearly every other basic right and service under the guise of “religious freedom”, and are forcing millions of children into existence no one can care for, only to suffer. The foster care system is loaded with disabled and minority children the religious fanatics who support him aren’t exactly standing in line to adopt.

    And now you Trump supporters have even succeeded in defunding the 97 percent of Planned Parenthood’s services that provide millions of low-income women with effective free and low-cost birth control and other basic medical services many of them can’t otherwise access.

    Your “god” doesn’t belong in my government. Our rights are a heck of a lot more important than your primitive superstitions and prejudices.

    • Avatar FeistyChic says:

      Without Christianity, the world would still be in the dark ages (yes, I know Christian history all the way back to the first century), freedom would not exist, black people would still be slaves, and totalitarian dictators would be ruling the world. In every human rights issue throughout history, you will find Christians tirelessly and sacrificially working to better the lives of other human beings.

      The dismemberment and suffocation of preborn humans is murder, nothing less. It has been documented that these infants feel pain while they are being torn limb from limb or left to die slow deaths. There are people who want to be foster or foster adoptive parents, but are prevented from it because of bias and discrimination against Christians. If that barrier was removed, perhaps more children would have homes. Also, we don’t need Planned Parenthood. We have plenty of other organizations that provide free and low-cost health care to women and children. Planned Parenthood is primarily an abortion-for-profit organization.

      • Avatar Patrecia Barrett says:

        FesityChic,

        Christianity has blocked nearly every advancement in scientific knowledge throughout history, and has committed endless mass atrocities. In addition to persecuting, torturing, and imprisoning many scientists like Galileo, the Church’s determination that black cats were the “familiars” of witches and must be exterminated was largely responsible for the plague that wiped out a third of Europe, since rats then exploded in numbers.

        And in actuality Christians used the bible to justify slavery, Jim Crow laws, racism in general, and segregation. That some number of northern Christians may have been involved in efforts to end slavery in no way off-sets the vast amount of harm caused by the majority bible-bangers.

        Also, according to every LEGITIMATE medical organization and agency, medical authority, and piece of research world-wide, 99 percent of abortions are performed at a stage of pregnancy when there isn’t the remotest possibility that the organism present can feel pain, or even experience awareness of what’s going on in its environment. The remaining one percent of so-called “late term abortions” often involve WANTED babies, and a dire medical emergency that makes abortion unavoidable.

        • Avatar Tim says:

          Christians have made massive contributions to science. Here is just a short list of Catholics:

          Alois Alzheimer – discovered Alzheimer’s disease
          André-Marie Ampère – pioneer of electromagnetism
          Amedeo Avogadro – molecular scientist (Avogadro’s number)
          Louis Braille – investor of the braille reading & writing system for the blind
          Rene Descartes – father of analytic geometry
          Christian Doppler – physicist behind the doppler effect
          Jean-Baptiste Dumas – pioneering chemist
          Pierre de Fermat – mathematician behind fermat’s last theorem
          Fibonacci – mathematician behind the Fibonacci sequence
          Galileo Galilei – astronomer
          Johannes Gutenberg – invented the printing press
          Joseph Louis Lagrange – mathematician behind Lagrangian mechanics
          Guglielmo Marconi – wireless communications pioneer
          Blaise Pascal – scientist/mathematician
          Louis Pasteur – scientist who brought us pasteurized milk
          John Rock – invented the birth control pill
          Adhémar Jean Claude Barré de Saint-Venant – Saint Venant’s theorem
          Leonardo da Vinci – Renaissance man
          Alessandro Volta – inventor of the battery

          • Avatar Doug Cook says:

            Don’t forget…President Obama was also a practicing Christian.

          • Avatar Patrecia Barrett says:

            Some of the so-called “Christians” on your list were actually persecuted by the church hierarchy for their beliefs and discoveries. There is also a vast difference between the beliefs of many people who identify as “Christian” and the official positions of many churches. The discoveries you listed were attributable to individuals – not to any church.

    • Avatar Sue says:

      It’s difficult for me to understand how people think God is a bad thing. How can the “love your neighbor” be a negative thing? Yes I realize I that a generic simple statement, but it’s a great place to start each and every morning.
      Yes our Foster Care/Group home is struggling. We recently took in a Victor Group home teen. But it’s been struggling long before Trump came to office.
      As a previous low-income single parent; I was able to find low income birth control and other basic services without going to PP.
      Trump is protecting our rights; 1st and 2nd amendments come to mind.

      • Avatar Patrecia Barrett says:

        Foster children are being denied loving permanent homes because religiously-affiliated foster care agencies refuse to consider qualified gay and lesbian couples as prospective parents.

        And what you practice in the confines of your church, home, and in other private venues to which you’ve been invited is no one’s business. However, when (as Trump is doing) you force God-in-government religious extremists on the rest of society by appointing them to head every available federal agency, commission, and court (and make religious dominionists like Bethel Church leaders your “advisors”, which is happening as we speak), then keeping your brutal right-wing Old Testament “god” out of our government becomes everyone’s business

        • Avatar Sue says:

          Each situation is scrutinized accordingly; I know of a same sex couples that recently adopted. There is more involved in placing children than religion alone. I personally love the fact that more Christians are being appointed; but again, each individual is appointed on their past merits….not solely for their beliefs. Let me clarify…I’m not Bethel affiliated. Right wing baby is where we are and you probably will never jump on the Trump Train, but you will benefit whether you want to admit it or not. He’s doing what he got elected to do…that’s a great thing!

      • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

        Sue — “Love your neighbor” is not the exclusive domain of Christians—I don’t think most religious scholars would put any of the three Abrahamic Middle Eastern religions at the top of the list of belief systems that most inspire tolerance, respect, and generosity. It’s pretty easy to argue that secular Europeans are a lot nicer to their neighbors than are Christian Americans.

        It’s also pretty easy to link the hateful rhetoric and actions of white nationalists with Christianity, as they make that link explicit themselves. It’s not surprising that many of the atrocities committed by white nationalists occur at synagogues, mosques, Sikh temples, and predominantly African-American churches. They conflate cultural/racial/religious war.

        It’s therefore somewhat counter to the expected pattern that the Norwegian white nationalist who murdered 77 mostly young people was first identified as a Christian white nationalist, apparently on the basis of “that’s what they do” speculation. Turned out he’s an Odinist, and is scornful if Jesus, who he’s called a weak, pathetic victim.

  41. Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

    Sure, and you list doesn’t include non-Catholics like Sir Isaac Newton, who was devoutly religious (though some of his views were heretical then and now).

    I have to point out that quite a few on your list were Christians when that was more or less mandatory. And at least a couple on your list were persecuted for contradicting Christian orthodoxies.

  42. Avatar Patrecia Barrett says:

    This comment has been removed by ANewsCafe admin.

  43. Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

    Trump—who regularly refers to the news media as “fake news” and worse, the enemy of the people—is protecting our 1st amendment rights?

    :::boggle:::

  44. Avatar Candace says:

    Sue, surely you can appreciate that folks who don’t believe in God are equally as capable as you of waking up each morning and making a conscious choice of “loving thy neighbor”. My parents also took in many teen foster kids and they were/aren’t religious. You’d be hard-pressed to find someone who didn’t think my mother was an extremely kind person. For me, personally, a non-believer, it’s not that I think God is “bad” (just don’t believe) or that I don’t think you have the right to believe however you choose. What I do have a problem with are things that have been and are still being done cloaked in the name of religious love that are in actuality anything but “loving thy neighbor” since love should include the championing of civil rights for all. That said, I don’t believe Trump has a kind bone in his body nor do I think he cares one whit about your God. I think he’s a narcissistic opportunist and right now he sees that opportunity lies with him climbing in bed with the religious right. The same religious right who would/are (among other things) championing the taking away of equal rights of gay, transgender, etc people. I’ve said it before on ANC; your morals are not my morals are not your morals. Practicing kindness is a worthy daily goal for all regardless of one’s religion or lack thereof.

    • Avatar Sue says:

      As a previous non-believer; I was very happy then, but I’m so much more content and satisfied now. I feel whole with God in my life, but that’s just me. I do believe Trump is kind and loving and I also believe he’s going to go down in history as the best President ever. He’s going to win again in 2020 (did I hear a possible 3rd term ?) and it’s going to be great for all Americans…regardless of party, sexual orientation, color, etc.

      • Avatar Sue says:

        Now before everyone jumps my sh*t about the possible 3rd term, it’s meant as a joke. But if the Senate acquits Trump does that mean it’s a possibility? Off to do research….

        • Avatar Doug Cook says:

          No, it’s not a possibility, Sue… even if he is aquitted. The 22 amendment spells that out.

        • Avatar Patrecia Barrett says:

          Sue,

          I find your comment above incredulous. Trump has openly and repeatedly incited violence, is a self-admitted (and gloating) serial sex criminal, has a long history of rabid racism, regularly defends Nazis and other hate groups, made kiddie concentration camps standard practice, is a thoroughly corrupt businessman who has victimized countless people, stole money from veterans through his “foundation”, ridicules disabled people and denigrates women, and is currently attempting to push through legislation that would deprive gay people of housing, employment, and every other basic right and service. In what way is any of that “kind and loving”?

          Trump will “go down in history” as the demented sociopath he is, who blackmailed a foreign president and potentially destabilized an entire region of the world for personal gain, and who escaped impeachment only because fellow Republicans were determined to ignore his crimes.

          • Avatar Sue says:

            Patrecia,
            And I find your comments incredulous. Time will tell and I’m confident (as I’m sure you are in your beliefs) that I’m 100% correct….more like 100000000% correct. It’s a great time to be alive and I hope your enjoying this fabulous economy as much as I. Headed out to enjoy this beautiful day; fresh air and sunshine. Have a great day

          • Avatar Patrecia Barrett says:

            Sue,

            The economy isn’t “fabulous” for farmers and small business owners who are struggling to survive as a result of Trump’s nutty nationalistic trade wars and immigration policies, or for the millions of workers who have seen their industries collapse (which Trump promised to save) and factory workers who have seen their jobs disappear and their wages fall – for the first time ever.

            Unemployment fell steadily throughout Obama’s terms, and has actually slowed under Trump. Prices of basic products and goods are rising by leaps and bounds. Despite the misleading markers Trump and his minions constantly call upon, millions of people are WORSE off than they were before Trump took over.

            I notice that you didn’t address any of the facts I mentioned in my comment above. It’s not a “great time to be alive” for gay people, women of child-bearing age, minorities, people who aren’t fundamentalist Christians, etc. etc.

      • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

        Sue — Is the sky paisley in your world? Trump is kind and loving when he looks in the mirror, and that’s it. His Twitter account is a daily venting of his deep-seated hatred and scorn.

        You can’t even give him much credit for his distrust of military intervention—that trait is based entirely on his perception that it doesn’t return a profit, so it’s a wasted investment. He’s incapable of recognizing our traditional rivalries with authoritarian powers, because he’s actually enamored with authoritarianism. For the wrong reasons, that reticence to use the military might be his most favorable attribute.

  45. Avatar Candace says:

    Sue , *weren’t/aren’t religious”

  46. Avatar Tim says:

    A couple earning minimum wage can afford to buy a $285,000 house; do we really have a home affordability crisis?

  47. Avatar Common Sense says:

    If people want to put the “Christ” back in Christmas they probably wouldn’t be acting the way they have. Start by helping the homeless and poor. Mother Teresa was a good example of that.

    Perhaps also look at your leader you voted for. Is he a good representation of what Jesus would do?

    Trump Took money from Charities,one of which was for Veterans! A phi·lan·der·er. A habitual Liar. Doesn’t respect the Constitution or laws if they don’t favor him. Is full of Hatred….if you didn’t vote for me you are the Enemy! If you don’t agree with me you are the Enemy.Any press that doesn’t worship me and write great things about me is the Enemy of the People. I could go on but it would take pages.

    “For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in.” Matthew 25:35

    “But when you give a banquet, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind.” Luke 14:13

    Without a LOT Of Hypocrisy at Play….how can Anyone that is a “True Christian” back,follow and vote for someone that is Opposite of what Jesus was trying to teach??

    • Avatar Tim says:

      Take the Christ out of Saturnalia I say…

      • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

        LOL. Put Saturn back Saturday and the sun back in Sunday, too.

        Common, you might want to take a look into Mother Teresa’s dark side. Many who observed her organization first-hand said that she was far less interested in helping the poor of Calcutta than in reveling in their wretchedness and suffering. She was also quite cozy with right-wing despots and financial grifter Charles Keating. (She was asked after his convictions if it mattered to her that the money he’d donated had been ripped off. She didn’t respond.)

  48. Avatar Candace says:

    Sue, although I whole-heartedly disagree with you in regard to your support of Trump, I, like Larry W. would like to say I’m sorry for your losses due to the Carr Fire. I wouldn’t wish that on anyone.

  49. Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

    I’m starting to agree with Doug that, considering all factors, Trump has a relatively easy path to a 2020 win. He probably won’t win the popular vote once more, but if his handlers can keep him on message during the debates, all he has to do is repeat ad nauseam that the Democrat will screw up the economy (if it hasn’t already gone south). Just don’t say/do anything stupid.

    Trump himself is the wildcard. He’s going to face withering criticism from the Democratic nominee. It’s doubtful that the thin-skinned narcissist will have the discipline to keep his $#!+ together.

    • Avatar Doug Cook says:

      All that Trump needs to do is be 1/3rd less Trumpian. Moderates like me wish he would stick more to his message about what the has done and leave the personal attacks behind. No..I don’t consider him to be a kind and loving man…I also don’t care if my president is kind and loving…no other president has had the will to negotiate a trade agreement with China. Phase 1 is complete, which is favorable to farmers and consumers.
      The problem is, President Trump will never get a fair break from the media. 90% of all stories about Trump are negative. Americans should be horrified about the IG report that came out about spying on the Trump campaign and the FISA application. It was amazing how the media spun this report. Here is one example I brought up before. The FBI used Carter Paige’s association with Russians as a reason to spy on him. Even though Carter went to the CIA and informed them that he thought he was approached by Russian Agents. The CIA made Mr Paige an ‘operational contact’. The FBI knew that, but ommited that fact to get authorization to spy on him. Which essentially ruined his life. I find it odd how little I have read about this report. Which is just a simple binary option…if it is favorable to the orange man…bad! Hurts the orange man… good! Liberals used to be against unfettered abuse by ‘the man’. Nowdays, if it helps Trump, they don’t care.
      But yes, Steve. I don’t see any obstacle with a Trump victory ad it stands now…but hey, Clinton is still in the wings

      • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

        Well, today there’s speculation that Trump won’t participate in debates—he’s criticizing the debate commission, which is seen as setting the table for opting out. It’s not a bad strategy—a way to lessen the odds of Trump shooting himself in the foot.

        • Avatar Doug Cook says:

          Debates, as they are held in today’s world are useless. And they haven’t been worthwhile in decades. As the Democrat debates have shown. So I don’t mind if they get cancelled. There are much better ways to get your message out.

      • Avatar Candace says:

        Being kind and loving means one is capable of having empathy as well as sympathy for one’s fellow woman/man. The fact that there are those that don’t care if the president of the United States possess even a modicum of those traits is greatly concerning to me. Economy/trade is good so human kindness/empathy be damned. That’s incredibly sad to me.

        • Avatar Doug Cook says:

          Candace, I believe President Trump had in fact shown his empathetic side. He stopped a US attack on Iran over concerns of the estimated 150 deaths it would cause. He had worked hard at getting American hostages released from tyrannical regimes, he commuted the sentence of Alice Johnson, a 63-year-old great grandmother who was convicted of cocaine trafficking in 1996. He championed prison reform laws, pushing for a family leave act. President Trump is empathetic to the middle class who have been forgotten by our politicians. Empathy, yes… sympathy?not so much

      • Avatar Larry Winter says:

        I watched the IG senate hearing and every democrat agreed that there needs to be reforms to prevent what happened in the renewal of the FISA warrant process. So to say that Liberals didn’t care isn’t true. The initial application was done properly.

      • Avatar Patrecia Barrett says:

        Doug Cook,

        American taxpayers are on the hook for $28 Billion in bail-outs to farmer because of Trump’s chest-beating trade wars, with more to come. The rest of the small business owners and other workers who have been harmed by his policies are just out of luck.

        And I don’t know about your ultra-right-wing propaganda above (I’ll leave that to someone else who feels up to taking it all apart), but I will say that Trump gets the media coverage he deserves. Do you really believe the media should just ignore the fact that the country has a raving, thoroughly corrupt lunatic as president?

    • Avatar Beverly Stafford says:

      Yep, I foresee four more years of this doofus. No a bit happy about that.

    • Avatar Candace says:

      Steve, I seem to be seeing and hearing a pattern of non-Trump supporters around me now suddenly saying he’ll more than likely win. That may very well be true (who knows at this point?) and I’m guessing some (most) would argue “realism” but it feels a bit to me like preemptive face-saving ( not by you personally, your comment just sparked what I’ve been thinking). I’m personally not willing to write off whoever ends up being the Dem candidate as ineffective so soon. I have no problem with Sanders, Warren or Booker. That said, at this point I’ll support any Dem over Trump. I fervently hope you, Doug, and others are proven wrong regarding Trump’s re-election as I know you are hoping as well. ( sidebar – you’re the first person in my “circle” other than my son that I’ve heard voice the same criticism of Mother Teresa. I’ve not dared bring it up as it’s typically treated as a third rail topic by most.)

      • Avatar Beverly Stafford says:

        Yeah, Candace, I’m also one who now feels that the voters with blinders in place will fill in the dot by Trump’s name. I’m completing the form that was sent indicating that as an Independent, I can choose a party in order to vote for president in the primary. I’m a little torn: do I check the Dem box to help the front runner, or do I select Rep in order to vote against His Tweetness? Between Bethel followers and some of the new commenters on ANC, it’s a given how Shasta County will vote. But seeing all the deluded rah-rah fans at The Trumpet’s rallies makes me inclined to think he’ll pull of another four years.

        • Avatar Doug Cook says:

          Beverly, as an Independent you can only vote in the Democrat primary, not the Republican.
          Why do you say that Trump voters have blinders on? Maybe it is that we agree with his policies more than the Democrat candidates. That we support his nomination of judges, that we enjoy a vibrant economy. That we don’t pay attention to hyperbolic names the left calls him, That we want the president to work on our broken immigration system.
          Yes, this county leans right and normally supports the GOP candidate. But that isn’t unusual. In 2016, Trump won 2,626 counties compared to 487 for Clinton. So Shasta was not an outlier.

          • Avatar Candace says:

            Doug, Wait. I thought you’ve said all along that you weren’t simply a “Trump voter”. That you would in fact support a moderate Democrat if they were say, a Klobuchar or a Gabbard. I must have completely misunderstood you(?). Admittedly not the first time I’ve misunderstood someone.

          • Avatar Doug Cook says:

            Yes, I would gladly support a moderate Democrat. The problem is that one won’t win the nomination. Unfortunately, the Democrat party has veered way to the left for me. I have voted for a number of Democrats, such as Sen Feinstein. But I expect to cast my vote for President Trump. Just look at this week and what he has accomplished just this week.

      • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

        Candice — if I wanted to preserve face in this community, I’d immediately stop $#!+-mouthing Trump on ANC on a daily basis.

        If it seems I’m growing more cynical, it’s because I am. No matter what Trump does—no matter how corrupt, immoral, cruel, hateful, despicable and self-serving—his support among his
        base support is not eroding.

        Doug wants you too believe that guys like him merely put up with Trump being a human dumpster fire, but if you spend any time out and about, you know that’s not the truth. His base revels in his grotesque behavior. They love it—it’s a big part of the attraction. Half of America is addicted to watching low-brow, new-rich nitwits act like jerks on reality TV—and they *admire* the jerkiest of the jerks. Most of them want to be one of the jerks on TV.

  50. Avatar Sue says:

    Pat..to your above post asking why I didn’t address your facts; cause I didn’t read any facts.

    • Avatar Patrecia Barrett says:

      Sue,

      Everything I wrote was a provable fact – caught on video and/or in writing, and typically witnessed by millions of people. A person would have to be pretty disconnected from reality to ignore all that.

  51. Avatar Bruce Vojtecky says:

    Trump will win reelection because the Democrats can’t field a candidate. Which ever one leads the pack is attacked by the others. And Bloomberg is trying to buy the nomination.
    The Democrats are putting all their hopes on impeachment, which even an uneducated knuckle dragging red neck like me can see won’t happen. What will happen is the Dems will lose all their down ballot 2018 wins.

  52. Avatar Patrecia Barrett says:

    Amazingly the Supreme Court has refused to hear – and overturn – the 9th Circuit Court’s ruling that cities can’t arrest and otherwise criminalize homeless people who have no choice but to sleep on the streets because there is nowhere else for them to go (which is certainly true in Shasta County, with its single, vastly over-crowded, hellfire-and-brimstone homeless shelter). Perhaps now cities will be forced to provide practical and humane solutions that actually work.

  53. Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

    Posted today by Katie under RV’s 10-December article: https://www.rightwingwatch.org/post/god-is-angry-and-will-put-an-end-to-impeachment-says-bethel-pastor/?fbclid=IwAR0RWuGQpquycruZCJcRWlp_CHAdFaaL_FSeRdVwNoyL1X0LIKm9lagKC6w

    I gotta admit Kris Vallotton is one heckuva prophet, but he’s not alone. Durning my afternoon nap, the Flying Spaghetti Monster (FSM) told me in a vision that the Trump impeachment process will fail in the Senate. I know you’re all shocked by this revelation, but we prophets are on the same page on this one—it’s going down in flames. Mark my words: Failure by the Senate to convict, as revealed by both the Lord and the FSM.

    Not only that, but the FSM revealed more to me than the Lord apparently revealed to Vallotton. FSM told me in the same nap-time vision that—hold onto your horses, ’cause this is a real shocker—the Senate will fail to convict Trump largely along party lines! Read it now, and believe me later.

    I know you’re all wondering. No, unlike the Lord through the Prophet Vallotton, FSM didn’t guarantee a Trump win next November. I asked the question during my lucid nap-time vision, and FSM responded: “I don’t see a clear outcome. But yeah, all the deities are curious to see if you idiots double down. What’s *your* guess?” I answered, “Nah, I don’t think Trump gets re-elected.”

    So there you have it. I’ll be one prophesy up on Kris if the vote to convict in the Senate fails largely on party lines, and we went in opposite directions on Trump’s re-election, so our predictions will either end 3-1 in my favor next November, or Kris can tie me. True, Kris has his deity backing his last prediction, and I’m on my own because my deity calls it a coin toss, but I still like my chances.

    May you be touched by his noodly appendage!

    • Avatar Patrecia Barrett says:

      LOL! Thanks Steve – what an incredible link.

    • Avatar Common Sense says:

      Was your FSM in an Alfredo Cape or a Red Sauce Cape? Just when I was beginning to think not many in P.C had a sense of Humor! Bravo! I about tipped my easy chair over on this read.

    • Avatar Candace says:

      Steve, R’amen!

    • Avatar Bruce Vojtecky says:

      Steve, I know you mentioned this once. If Trump is impeached then we will have President Pence, a real God-in-Government promoter, but without the loose cannon tweeting of Trump. Many Republicans support Trump openly but grimace every time he opens his mouth and quietly might not vote for him. A President Pence could draw those fence sitting Republicans into his camp.

      • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

        Yes, and as I’ve repeated ad nauseam to Doug, the prospect of President Pence almost dictates the strong inference that Democrats are impeaching Trump only because of the seriousness of his crimes, not because it’s politically prudent.

        But as we all know, you can argue with Tim, but you can’t argue with Doug. He’ll just repeat that the polls say this or that, or he’ll repeat that the Democrats are impeaching Trump because it’s their only chance to get him given that they know they can’t beat him in 2020. (Absolute nonsense. They still have a chance to beat him in 2020, but they surely know they can’t convict him in the Senate.) Or, faced with an argument he doesn’t want to address or even acknowledge, he’ll just move the goalposts……again.

        • Avatar Doug Cook says:

          I move the goalposts?? That’s a good one. Which one of us is moving the goalposts? I submit that it is you. Your reasons that Trump should be impeached keep moving. You now think that Obstruction of Congress is so serious, that it deserves a president being impeached over. You moved the goalpost when Russian collusion didn’t work out for you, the supposed 10 incidents of obstruction of Justice didn’t work out for you, Bribery, Treason… didn’t work out for you. So you settled on Obstruction of Congress.
          I don’t know why you are bringing up a President Pence. The likelihood of that is about the same as you being president. You honestly believe that Democrats are wringing their hands over a possibility of a President Pence? Sorry, It doesn’t even cross their minds because they knew at the beginning of this affair that Trump won’t be removed from office. Your reasoning that because the Democrats are so afraid of a President Pence they must be supporting impeachment for noble reasons is nonsense. You probably also believe that Pelosi is saddened over this.
          The Democrats have been talking about impeaching the President since day one of his term. So again, I’m not buying your assertion. Rep Tlaid ran her campaign on ” We have to impeach the EmEffer”
          It is easier for Democrats to project and try to damage President Trump politically by putting an asterisk next to his name where one does not belong. Otherwise, Democrats would have to listen to the American people. They may have refused to get the message the first time…but they will hear it loud and clear in Nov

          • Avatar Sue says:

            Just during this impeachment scam; Republicans have added 600,000 NEW donors and raised $10m dollars. How much have the Democrats raised? Are they gaining new members to their party? We’ve heard of impeachment hours after his inauguration; and this Obs of Congress is the best they got? 3 years and after spending $40m on the joke of the Mueller Report they get nothing. This whole Ukraine mess will also backfire onto Dems.

          • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

            Doug, it’s YOU who said that the Demos are impeaching Trump solely because it’s the only way they think they can get rid of him, as they know they can’t defeat him in November.

            Now you say that no Democrat fears the prospect of a President Pence, because they all know damned well that the trial in the Senate will fail to get rid of Trump.

            The one cancels the other—they’re literally opposites—yet you hold both to be true.

            We can call that moving the goalposts, or flip-flopping, or a “tu quoque fallacy” (You move the goalposts, not me!), or whatever, but it’s a great example of how you’re all over the map, all the time, and it’s crazy-making. It boggles the mind. There’s nothing to pin down, ever.

            Other favorite fallacies of yours:

            The Bandwagon Fallacy: “It’s true, because all the polls say…..”

            The Red Herring Fallacy: “Okay, so why weren’t you outraged when Eric Holder blah blah blah…..” (a.k.a., whateboutism.)

            The Appeal-to-Ignorance Fallacy: “Nobody has proved to ME that there was a quid-pro-quo strategy of withholding aid until Ukraine agreed to announce an investigation of Biden. And if I can’t see it, no quid pro quo existed.”

            The Straw Man Fallacy: You say I’m moving the goalposts because I keep changing my mind about Trump’s impeachable offenses. Wrong. I’ve merely stated that I think, of the two pending charges, the obstruction charge is stronger. I never said anywhere that Russian collusion doesn’t work for me. Just because A.G. Barr says that the Mueller report clears Trump of collusion (and you buy that BS!) doesn’t make it so. So said Mueller himself. Further there is the likelihood that other serious charges might have been filed had Trump not absolutely refused to acknowledge the HOR’s constitutional right and obligation to investigate. Those charges might have also arisen independently in the Senate once Trump staff are called as witnesses, were Mitch McConnell not so dedicated to quashing a valid trial that examines all the available evidence.

          • Avatar Steve Towers says:

            Sue — Here’s the Mueller witch-hunt “they got nothing” scorecard: Eight felony convictions (most in prison, the rest waiting for sentencing), 29 individual indictments, and 3 corporate indictments.

            As to cost of the investigation, the CBO put direct spending at $12.3 million and indirect spending $12.9 million, totaling $25.2 million. Paul Manafort’s fine alone payed for that. Also for comparison, Trump’s golf trips have cost taxpayers $115 million so far. Forbes projects well over a third of a billion dollars total cost to taxpayers if he’s re-elected and continues to play at his current pace.

            Obama scorecard: Zero people indicted. Zero people convicted. Zero people imprisoned. A fraction of the golf trips.

          • Avatar Doug Cook says:

            “… it’s YOU who said that the Demos are impeaching Trump solely because it’s the only way they think they can get rid of him”

            Not because he will be removed from office, but it is their goal to damage the president enough that will give the Democrats a fighting chance to beat him in 2020. So no, the two statements do not cancel each other.

            I never said, “It’s true, because all the polls say…..” What I said is that Pelosi and Nadler both said that impeachment should move forward ONLY if it has bi partisan support. Which it does not. Congress is divided on impeachment, as well as the American public.

            The Appeal-to-Ignorance Fallacy…It is your opinion that the Democrats proved their case…it is my opinion that they did not. Both opinions are equally valid. If your opinion is so rooted in fact, and so egregious…the Senate will have no problem with removing the president from office as they would have if the Nixon did not resign.

            If you and the Democrats are so certain about Russian collusion…then why aren’t they in the impeachment charges? I’m sure you would agree that colluding with Russia is far and above the most serious of charges…if true. It’s not, that is why it was left on the table.

            “… Those charges might have also arisen independently in the Senate once Trump staff are called as witnesses”

            It was up to the House to prove their case and call witnesses, not the Senate’s job, “…The Senate is meant to act as judge and jury to hear a trial, not to rerun the entire fact-finding investigation because angry partisans rushed sloppily through it,” McConnell said.

          • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

            Doug — I’ll only address one of your counter-points, because the rest is hummina hummina hummina hummina hummina….

            It was the role of the House to investigate, but the POTUS ordered everyone connected to him to ignore House subpoenas, and most of his higher-ups complied. He didn’t declare executive privilege regarding certain House requests that could have been mediated by the courts. He instead issued a blanket refusal to acknowledge the constitutional role of the House, acting out the bizarre legal theory that he could unilaterally declare an impeachment investigation bogus.

            Only a numbskull would fail to realize that Trump has no such constitutional right, and only a numbskull would fail to realize what an affront to the rule of constitutional law that entails. Are you that numbskull, Doug?

            The House investigation is indeed now closed. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that the entire investigation has thus ended. The Senate, during the trial, has the right *and duty* to call witnesses. It can, if it chooses, call all the witnesses who failed to testify before the House on Trump’s orders. Trump could then double down on, claiming that the trial is also illegitimate. The Senate should then be compelled to vote to convict him on the second count a minimum—obstruction.

            That’s exactly what *would* happen if this was going to be a legitimate trial. But Republicans, led by Mitch McConnell, have zero interest in legitimacy.

          • Avatar Doug Cook says:

            Well, Steve…I disagree with about everything you said here. Of course the president has the right to claim executive priveledge. That is what the SCOTUS is for. They would be the final arbitrator. When the Obama administration obstructed Congress. They didn’t impeach the president, they held his AG in contempt of Congress…and if you don’t think Holder was acting on behalf of President Obama, you are woefully naive. Obama did a better job of shielding himself. The Democrats could have easily appealed to the SCOTUS, but apparently they didn’t find it necessary. They got their impeachment vote, didn’t they? Now it will be dismissed in the Senate…the American citizens will move on and forget it ever happened. The Democrat party will be further damaged and as everyone is agreeing with, President Trump will get 4 more years. Yeah.. good plan Democrats. But hey, at least AOC is happy. That’s what is important, right?

          • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

            Doug — I’m tempted to let you get away with yet another bald-faced lie, but I can’t.

            I have already repeatedly acknowledged that Trump has the right to claim executive privilege regarding specific avenues of the HOR’s inquiry, and that those could be mediated in the federal courts if necessary. That has precedent going back to George Washington, including all three previous impeachment inquiries.

            But in spite of your repeated lie to the contrary, THAT’S NOT WHAT F***ING HAPPENED!!!

            Trump never invoked executive privilege regarding the House inquiry. Instead, he simply refused to acknowledge that the House had any right to conduct the impeachment inquiry at all, calling it “illegitimate” and “constitutionally invalid.” He held himself to be outside of the realm of congressional oversight. On that matter, he took the position the U.S. Constitution says can take a flying f*** at a rolling donut.

            I’m not going to explain that to you again, and I’m not going to respond to your feeble Obama whataboutisms that followed. It’s like talking to a red brick mounted on a neck. Buh bye.

    • Joanne Snyder Joanne Snyder says:

      Thanks for that link Steve. I am so heartbroken for the parents of this “prayer experiment” child. I can only image that religious fervor and belief will only exacerbate the family’s grief…they didn’t pray hard enough, they aren’t worthly of a miracle….

      • Avatar Patrecia Barrett says:

        Also outrageous is the fact that Bethel has set up a GoFundMe account to exploit this tragedy, with the goal of raising $100,000.00 (it’s now halfway to that goal). No one is clear about where this vast amount of money will go. The little girl passed away suddenly at home – there was no lengthy illness, no large hospitals bills, etc. I hope this isn’t just a scheme to pad church coffers, which (in my opinion) would be criminal.

  54. Avatar Tim says:

    Vice Presidential Trivia: 9 of our 45 Presidents assumed office from the Vice Presidency (4 after assassination, 4 after natural death, & 1 after resignation) and an additional 5 were subsequently elected. Since there have been 48 vice presidents, each had a ~19% chance of assuming office during their president’s term and a ~29% chance in total of becoming president.

    • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

      Only one person served as both President and Vice President without ever being elected to either office.

      (I know that’s a pretty easy one for you, Tim.)

  55. Avatar Sue says:

    Steve,
    No Obstruction No Collusion! Arrests like Flynn and Roger Stone? HA! Obama scorecard is still out; his administration is being investigated, I’m comfortable waiting for Barr/Durham reports. But here are just a few of Obamas failures…Benghazi, fast & furious, using IRS against Americans; spying on Americans and journalists, Solyndra; ransom cash to Iran, Obamacare, Bowe Bergdahl…
    As far as Presidential vacations; don’t think the trips to Hawaii with all 22 of MO personal assistants, come too cheap.

  56. Avatar Tim says:

    Despite 8 years of generally declining enrollments, California is once again looking to open a new CSU campus. Unfortunately the “far north” – as they call us – is unlikely to get its first new university in over 100 years; Newsom is pushing for Stockton because it is too difficult for Stocktonites to commute the 45 miles to Sac State or CSU Stanislaus.

    https://edsource.org/2019/california-considers-building-new-csu-campus/621270

    • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

      Redding would be a tough sell, given that CSU Chico’s enrollment is one of those on the decline. The administration was trying to blame the Camp fire for last year’s decline, but that argument was quickly extinguished. As I recall, one of the top administrators resigned earlier this year following accusations that he was fudging enrollment numbers.

      • Avatar Tim says:

        Undergrad enrollment is pretty much down across the board, but that is normal during low unemployment so hopefully the state is planning long term. And I’ve always thought Dunsmuir would be a perfect college town. Not too far, not too close, and a train ride away for those from across the state.

        But really I’d settle for a revamp of Shasta College’s offerings. They have 1 in house baccalaureate in… Health Information Management??? And their trade programs have been withering to irrelevance – last time I saw their auto shop the newest car was like 20 years old. And with Electricians & HVAC technicians in such high demand, why aren’t there more building trade programs?

        The CSUs need their own revamp. The average Humboldt degree barely pays minimum wage and Chico isn’t a whole lot better. Unofficial CSU diversity quotas for colleges in vanilla white counties combined with a push for ever increasing enrollment have resulted in a corrupted system that makes for profit colleges look good. They’re not quite diploma mills – I’m sure it takes actual work for that “intersectional Chicanx & LatinX studies” degree – but I don’t hear any local/regional employers clamoring for that knowledge base.

  57. Avatar Common Sense says:

    Article II, section 2 of the Constitution says “The President … shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment” [italics added]. In other words, because Trump is, after Andrew Johnson and William Jefferson Clinton, the third president to be impeached, he is now and for all time ineligible for a presidential pardon.

    He could have resigned and cut a deal…..but the Pathology wouldn’t have allowed that. Do the crime, do the time. The time is coming whether it’s in a year or 5, that is the question.

    Pelosi is playing 4 dimensional Chess and the Orange guy is trying to find his remaining checkers!

    Let us all not forget. He can’t pardon himself,family or friends on any State Charges! The New York Grand Jury has plenty of charges they will drop the day he leaves office.

  58. Avatar Common Sense says:

    This is called holding 4 Aces in your hand in Poker! Will she hold and continue to gather info and have witness’ testify or will she just turn it all over knowing full well the Senate will hold a 1 week, nothing to see here and exonerated trial?

    I wouldn’t bet on her not ADDING more Articles after the new year once the Obstruction is over and the courts rule the witnesses must testify. We still have a full Mueller Report to see and some key Witnesses come forward to share what happened.

    https://www.politico.com/news/2019/12/18/trump-impeachment-trial-steny-hoyer-087319

  59. Avatar common sense says:

    Indeed it’s gotten this bad. Even the Christian Times is calling it all out.

    https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2019/december-web-only/trump-should-be-removed-from-office.html

    I am curious if any of the Evangelicals want to comment on this one? Should be interesting…..

  60. Avatar Bob says:

    Bill Johnson your cult is now on the front page news around the world. Could this be the beginning of the end for Bethel ? You made yourself and Redding look foolish. The Good Book did warn
    Us believer’s about people like you.

    • Avatar Beverly Stafford says:

      Johnson’s sincere comments remind me of a “doctor” some years back who was absolutely giddy while endorsing a group who had supposedly cloned a sheep. So where is the child who is being resurrected? Is she lying in state at the mega church? I take it she hasn’t been laid to rest or embalmed. And I suppose if Bethel isn’t successful in this resurrection, those who have done the praying will be accused of not being godly enough or haven’t given enough coin to the “prophets” – or should that be “profits?”

  61. Avatar Bob says:

    The world is becoming aware of what is going on at Bethel now. No way would I let my loves ones attend your brain washing cult BSSM scam show. Parents aren’t going to pay or let their young adults move to Redding to join your crazy magical cult anymore.

  62. Avatar Chris Solberg says:

    One must understand what Bethel Church is asking of God. Not only do they believe God can raise the dead from some cold storage at the Shasta County Coroners room but that poor child would have to be “teleported” to the arms of their loved ones because nobody is standing in faith at the Shasta County Coroner’s office in faithful anticipation of Jesus rolling away the doors and that little child come walking out.

    Bethel Church members are praying for two miracles to happen with this poor child …

    • Avatar Tim says:

      If you call yourself a Christian you already believe God can raise the dead and move boulders away from the entrance of tombs so why would you assume God would be tripped up by a coroner’s cabinet?

      I mean it all seems like half alien zombie cannibalism to me, but 65% of Americans identify as Christian and Bethel at least seems to enthusiastically embrace their beliefs, rather than assuming they are basically living in some ant farm in which God lost interest 2,000 years ago.

      • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

        Yep. It feels like I’m in Bizarro World when I read Christians painting Bethel’s beliefs as beyond-the-fringe crazy. Compared to what? As I’ve said elsewhere, they ramp it up 5%, tops. There’s another local Christian “cult” that believes each family gets its own planet somewhere in outer space. Crazy? Again, 5% crazier at most.

        And I agree—if you throw your faith to the Christian God, how is it nuts to believe God continues to intervene in human affairs? How is that stranger than believing that God went dark on us a couple millennia back? If it’s delusional to believe in modern-day miracles (even if there’s certainly a dearth of recent evidence), at least the belief has a certain internal logic. No need to explain why we’re getting the silent treatment.

        I’d defend the belief of Bethelites in prophecies, too—they might as well go all-in. I just can’t defend the lameness of Vallotton’s prophecies, which are akin to me prophesying that the Sun will come up tomorrow, Trump will soon tweet something really dumb and belligerent, and the bereaved family of the dead toddler will be reminded that their GoFundMe monies are technically an increase, and God gets his cut.

    • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

      He was facing a maximum 5 years for the most serious offense. His status as a repeat offender is what got him 16. That seems excessive, but I can imagine people getting to the point where they’re just sick and tired of a guy who seems dedicated to making other people miserable.

  63. Avatar Common Sense says:

    The gifts that just keep on giving. The media has come up with some more proof concerning the fiasco.

    https://www.rawstory.com/2019/12/white-house-ordered-pentagon-to-withhold-ukraine-aid-two-hours-after-trump-got-off-the-phone-with-zelensky-report/

  64. Avatar Bruce Vojtecky says:

    The House voted to impeach Trump. The consensus on here seems to be the Senate will not vote for impeachment, but, Collins and Romney, no friends of Trump, are still on the fence. And in Wyoming, that everyone on here blasts for having too much power for it’s size, the feeling is that retiring Mike Enzi will vote for impeachment. Others could follow. In places that still believe in God the impeachment is the moral thing to do.

    • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

      Bruce — Zero in the House defected—not one single steered-by-Christian-morality Republican in the lot got steered to abandon the vile, amoral, criminal POTUS.

      Twenty GOP senators would need to defect. That’s not going to happen unless the pee tapes or worse surface soon, and even then I doubt that more than a few would flip.

      Party before virtue. Party before God. Party before country.

  65. Avatar Doug Cook says:

    No Republican Senator will defect. Not even Romney. Why? Because of the weak impeachment charges put forth, and unlike the Democrats, the GOP are holding strong. Sorry Steve, despite what you believe…these charges are a joke…they are not these ominous serious charges you claim. , they will be quickly dismissed in the Senate. That is of course if Pelosi even sends it to the Senate. The Democrats completely failed in proving their case, and have screwed themselves.

    • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

      Broken record.

    • Avatar Gary Tull says:

      Sorry, there is a falsehood in every one of your sentences above.
      The incriminating evidence already against Trump would be easily substantiated in any State or Federal Court. Unfortunately, trump-installed A.G. Barr insists this sitting president is above the law and cannot be charged.

      The notion of a Senate trial directed by the defendant and turtle man… with no witnesses or documentation is insane. Is that what you would like to see, Doug?

      • Avatar Doug Cook says:

        The House had their chance to prove their case…they did not. It is not the job of the GOP controlled Senate to do Schiffs’s and Nadler’s work for them. What I would like to see is the Senate spend about 4 minutes on this trial, get to a vote and put this charade behind us….then watch the Dems go down in flames. Look at the evidence, the Judiciary Committee backed off the theory that Trump had committed bribery, presumably because the evidence of a quid pro quo proved so thin, and then abandoned the possible obstruction-of-justice charges suggested in the Mueller’s Report.

        Presidents of both parties have refused to comply with congressional demands…even if it might have been politically expedient to comply…because they didn’t want to establish precedents that would further erode the separation of powers, and it is the job of any White House counsel to advise the president to refuse any such demand. Sorry, Gary…The House has failed to convince anyone who wasn’t already in their camp.

        • Avatar Anita Lynn Brady says:

          Well, this is pathetic. Trump blocked many important witnesses and most documents and ignored subpoenas. The people of this country deserve the whole sordid affair laid out in glorious detail. After all, they got Monica’s whole story.

          • Avatar Doug Cook says:

            Anita, That is how our Constitution works. There are 3 co-equal branches of government, none has any more power than the other branches. If the Executive Branch disagrees with a demand from the Legislative Branch…then we let the Courts decide. Just as what happened with the Obama administration regarding the Fast and Furious investigation. The Obama administration refused to turn over documents to the Oversight Committee until the SCOTUS ruled otherwise. So tell me Anita, was that worthy of impeaching President Obama over? Will you be consistent in your outrage?
            Nadler and Schiff could have easily gone to the courts to have them rule on the subpoenas…but apparently they decided it wasn’t that important.

  66. Avatar Sue says:

    Nancy is in a lose/lose position; this impeachment has done nothing but strengthen and unite the GOP. Personally I’m glad the Dem majority in House finally voted to impeach Trump; it’s been a threat for years. Now what? Hold onto the articles or send to Senate, results will be same…Trump will still be our President. Impeachment is now just white noise to me and others, like crying wolf.
    Bottom line: Dems will not be able to rely on impeachment to rally their base nor their candidates to unite their base. Elections do matter.

    • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

      Sue — It’s telling how, over and over, you Republicans are puzzled by the Democrats betting on an obvious losing hand. It’s as if you can’t imagine taking a stand simply because it’s the right thing to do, putting country before party.

      There were some vulnerable Democrats in the House—mostly newbies who flipped red districts—who voted to impeach Trump. They did so for ethical reasons and a sense of duty, knowing it likely will gravely harm their chances for re-election. One of the two guys who voted to acquit promptly became a Republican—where he belongs, as he lacks honor and honesty and is only interested in self-preservation.

      That you can’t imagine doing something simply because you are ethically compelled says it all.

      • Avatar Doug Cook says:

        That’s a good one. You really believe the Democrats are putting country before party? You keep invoking that the Democrats did this, “…simply because it’s the right thing to do” Which is of course utter nonsense. Democrats have been looking for ways to drag Trump from office, even raising the possibility of invoking the 25th Amendment. We’ve seen Democrat after Democrat call for impeachment for a variety of Trumpian sins, and also call for the abolishment of the Electoral College. Impeachment was always about getting under Trump’s skin, if not defeating him in the 2020 election. Despite your broken record, it has nothing to do with ‘doing the right thing’. It is simply a political ploy.

        • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

          Doug — You always want it both ways:

          (A) The Demos know Trump won’t get convicted in the Senate—they just wan to wound him for 2020. (B) The impeachment will only rally the Repubs in 2020, and he’ll win in a landslide.

          It’s not much of a political ploy if it’s doomed to fail across the board. Pelosi, who knows that, reluctantly proceeded with impeachment because Trump gave her no choice.

          Raising the 25th amendment? What a joke. The Demos don’t have anything to do with that. It takes the VP and a majority of the cabinet to invoke the 25th. Trump has systematically rid his administration of everyone save sycophantic trained seals.

          • Avatar Doug Cook says:

            Wrong, Steve…Congress does in fact have something to do with the 25th Amendment. In 2017, Rep Jamie Raskin, with 50 co-sponsors introduced a bill… ‘Oversight Commission on Presidential Capacity Act’.
            “…“Since January, President Trump has thrown our country into chaos at every turn, For the security of our people and the safety of the Republic, we need to set up the ‘body’ called for in the 25th Amendment. The President can fire his entire Cabinet for asking the same question tens of millions of Americans are asking at their dinner tables, but he cannot fire Congress or the expert body we set up under the Constitution. At a moment of unprecedented presidential chaos, the Oversight Commission on Presidential Capacity is essential, urgently needed and indispensable.”

            Democrats can’t wrap their head around why anyone would vote for Trump. So yes, they believed an impeachment would hurt him. My guess is Pelosi and the rest of the Democrats are shocked by the increase in support for the president. They gambled and lost. You still going with the naive idea that Pelosi and the Democrats are doing this because it is the noble thing to do. Hah! It is nothing but a political ploy that is backfiring.

          • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

            Doug — That bill was introduced nearly three years ago and went nowhere. For it to become law, the both the House and Senate would have to pass it and Trump would have to sign it. It was a symbolic gesture.

            As it remains, Congress still has nothing to do with implementing the 25th.

            So you’re right, and I was wrong. Merry Christmas.

  67. Avatar Common Sense says:

    Impotus the 3rd. We will see more articles of Impeachment in the near future. The ongoing fact gathering will reveal many more crimes. The most pressing is the “Conspiracy against the United States of America”. Working with a Hostile Foreign Nation is the greatest of his crimes to date.

    He is a compromised. A willing or unwilling foreign agent. Obstruction of Justice and Obstruction of Congress,right before your eyes. If you can see.

    The Witch Hunt has been productive thus far-
    * Roger Stone, a longtime Trump adviser and confidant, has been convinced on multiple counts.

    * Michael Cohen, Trump’s former lawyer and business associate, is in prison.

    * Paul Manafort, Trump’s former campaign chairman, is in prison.

    * Rick Gates, Trump’s former campaign vice chair, will soon spend time behind bars.

    * Michael Flynn, Trump’s former White House national security adviser, has been convicted and is awaiting sentencing.

    * George Papadopoulos, Trump’s former campaign adviser on foreign policy, has already served his prison sentence.

    * Alex van der Zwaan, a lawyer who worked with Manafort and Gates. has already served his prison sentence.

    Many more to come once he leaves office.

  68. Avatar Bruce Vojtecky says:

    I know it is hard for those who live in the ethnic desert of Shasta County but the largest group that is growing and will be a majority are Hispanics. Here in Arizona Spanish is not a second language but a first language. Hispanics are extremely religious and most are Democrats. Fence sitting Democrats in the House did the moral thing, many risking their political careers, and voted for impeachment. They showed integrity, is it so hard to believe that Republicans in the Senate won’t do the same. It has nothing to do with fake/unfake charges and everything to do with an immoral president. The fact is, though they deny it, the group most shrinking are White Anti-God Democrats.

    • Avatar Miguel says:

      Bruce –
      Thing is, we’ve seen absolutely zero evidence of any such “adherence to morals” currently on display — or any hint at all that such a sea change is forthcoming. Optimism is a fine quality indeed, but there just doesn’t seem to be any REASON for it at this point.

      I’ll repeat, “ZERO votes in the House.” No apparent moral qualms at all.

      • Avatar Bruce Vojtecky says:

        Miguel, if you are not seeing any “hints” then you are not paying attention. Evangelists, as even reported on here, are calling out Trump on morality.

      • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

        Miguel — Yeah, I agree. I think there’s a parallel with gun control. Even in red states, majorities of voters support background checks, checks on military-style weapons, etc. But GOP politicians don’t dare part company with the NRA their rabid hair-on-fire constituents.

        And as for the morality of that mental calculus? Forget about it.

        • Avatar Bruce Vojtecky says:

          And today “hint” some evangelists are calling most Trump support as the lesser of two evils. Whether it is Republican President Trump or Democrat President Clinton many are tired of immoral presidents even while they approve of their performance.

  69. Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

    My prediction: 2 Republican senators defect (+ or – 2), and 1 Democratic senator defects (+ or – 1).

    Those are hard predictions with minimal wiggle room.

  70. Avatar Common Sense says:

    We are just getting warmed up in this Carnival. I keep hearing “the President didn’t get impeached because”….blah blah blah. Clearly Clueless on any semblance of “Reality”. He is and has been Impeached. Done deal folks. IMPOTUS the 3rd now. In the History books.

    NOW…..it will up to the Republicans to have a Trial in the Senate, When….. they actually…. Get, the Impeachment Articles and Evidence.

    There WILL be More Impeachable Offences coming up. You can’t do 10 + Crimes and think you are getting off on only two Articles of Impeachment with a loaded Senate!

    We still have testimony to hear (Bolton/Don McGahn) etc. We still have a FULL Mueller Report to review etc. This is the 1st quarter of the ball game folks!

    Re stock that Popcorn and Coke…..we got a year left of the Drama!

    Now we are seeing the Christians with a Conscience start to throw the IMPOTUS off the Trumptanic. What would Jesus do is a great question to take into the room when discussing this IMPOTUS.

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/christianity-today-trump-impeachment-evangelicals-church-editorial-latest-a9259116.html

  71. Avatar Bruce Vojtecky says:

    Another “hint” on the CBS news tonight. Red state Utah, controlled by a church cult, has thrown out the open mat of welcome to refugees which are mostly Muslims. Utah told Trump that they cannot be partisan when it isn’t the right thing to do.

  72. Merry Christmas! I’m so glad you’re here; WE’RE here! What a wild and wonderful place we’ve created together.

    I wish you a peaceful, joyful day, and a happy, healthy, love-filled and prosperous 2020.

    Love, Doni

  73. Avatar Bruce Vojtecky says:

    Another “hint”, Senator Murkowski of Alaska is disturbed with McConnell’s comments to take over Senate trial.

  74. Hal Johnson Hal Johnson says:

    Take heart, everyone: 2020 is a leap year, so there are still 365 shopping days until Christmas.

  75. Avatar Beverly Stafford says:

    Completely off any topic, but here’s a head-shaker for us all. On December 16, I mailed – USPS – a package in Redding to Arroyo Grande, California, a distance of approximately 480 miles. I’ve been tracking it daily. It arrived in Sacramento on December 17, remained there until December 24, arrived in Evansville, Indiana on December 27, and supposedly “this item is currently in transit to the destination.” I’m wondering what “the destination” means. I believe I’ll stick with UPS henceforth.

    • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

      For business, when a proposal absolutely had to get there before a drop-dead date and time, it’s all about FedEx.

      • Avatar Beverly Stafford says:

        In the ’80’s, FedEx put a hub in Anchorage. The organization I worked for invited the president of FedEx to speak to the membership. We put out a newsletter prior to each forum with a short bio and photo of each speaker. It was necessary to have the bio and pic in hand in time to get it to the printer, get the newsletter back from the printer, and mail it t the membership. At that time, FedEx’s slogan was something like, when you absolutely, positively need it . . . Even after a couple of calls to his secretary and saying it was absolutely, positively necessary to have the pic and bio, neither was forthcoming.

        But on a positive FedEx note, a friend was a pilot for FedEx in the early days and relayed this story. A woman was sending a lemon meringue pie via FedEx. It wasn’t packed particularly well; so my pilot friend carried it most of the trip on his lap in the cockpit. Since the recipient lived nearby, he also delivered it — intact and untasted.

      • Avatar Tim says:

        I’ve personally had good experience with FedEx Express, but FedEx in general has had a marked decline in on time performance in 2019 – to the point Amazon stopped using them altogether and recently went further and banned 3rd party sellers from using FedEx Ground. Since Thanksgiving, FedEx’s on time performance is 68% (down from 77% last year) against UPS’s 80% (down from 88% last year).

        Amazon’s rapidly growing internal delivery service, which recently bought 20,000 delivery vans & ordered 100,000 more, averaged 90% on time. Amazon has also invested $1.5 billion into an international air terminal in Kentucky and maintains a fleet of 70 767s.

        • Avatar Bruce Vojtecky says:

          A video making the news showed an Amazon driver deliver a package to a house, took a picture of the package, than picked up the package and left. When the homeowner called police Amazon would not identify the deliver person identity to the police. All the items ordered online have created a delivery tsunami that none of the companies can handle yet.

  76. Avatar Common Sense says:

    Will Nancy Pelosi play her hand with a forced evaluation or will she not? That is the question.

    https://www.salon.com/2019/12/27/pelosi-has-the-right-to-submit-trump-to-an-involuntary-evaluation-yale-psychiatrist-bandy-lee/

    • Avatar Miguel says:

      Any chance in (ummm .. hades?) of this actually coming about? Anyone else think there is a real “hand” to be played here? Common Sense, appreciate that your heart is probably in the right place, but …

  77. Avatar Common Sense says:

    Shared Psychosis, that’s what the Shrinks say. Does that mean that the average Rabid Trump Supporter suffers from that also or just the Politicians that support him?

    https://www.salon.com/2019/12/05/yale-psychiatrist-bandy-lee-impeachment-hearings-must-include-analysis-of-trumps-mental-health/

  78. Avatar Beverly Stafford says:

    The news tonight said both Madayne locations are closing. We ate there only once which was enough. Waiting 45 minutes for a to-go order seemed excessive.

    • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

      I went to the Madayne’s on Hilltop a few times. I never felt wholly comfortable there—I sometimes felt that I was simultaneously crashing confessionals, healings, prayer sessions, and weaksauce sophomoric theological discussions all around me.

      Madayne was instrumental, however, in popularizing the term, “The Bethel Effect.” I’ve admitted before that one of the reasons I more or less detest Kris Vallotton is that he claimed a year or so later that he’d coined both the term and the definition. One of the sure marks of a charlitain—ripping off someone else’s ideas and shamelessly claiming them as your own.

      https://www.yelp.com/biz/madayne-eatery-and-espresso-redding?hrid=5Xell0AcAuzGC-Pv9vCCaw&utm_campaign=www_review_share_popup&utm_medium=copy_link&utm_source=(direct)

      • Avatar Beverly Stafford says:

        Yeah, Buzz F., along with our 45-minute wait, I felt we should be bowing our heads or at least giving an Amen.

      • Avatar Candace says:

        Steve, there are a few restaurants like that in town. My “2o something” daughter says when she visits that she doesn’t want to listen to people her age and younger trying to “out Jesus” each other while she eats at a restaurant.

        • Avatar Beverly Stafford says:

          Any idea why both locations closed? They appeared busy; so Bethel’s coffers didn’t seem to suffer. Maybe non-Bethelites objected to finding feathers and glitter in their burritos.

          • Hal Johnson Hal Johnson says:

            My understanding is that the owners felt they needed to sell to take advantage of another business opportunity.

      • Avatar Patrecia Barrett says:

        I looked at a few reviews of this place and noticed that most people are missing the bigger picture. They seem to think that the Bethel take-over is a good thing just because young cult followers are “cheery” and polite. The followers of EVERY cult are cheery and polite – it’s hammered into them as a recruiting gimmick. Join the cult and you’ll be happy (more like deluded and brainwashed) all the time.

  79. Avatar Gary Tull says:

    The Trump administration has diminished the role of science in policy-making while disrupting research projects nationwide. The effects of this transformation of the federal government could be felt for years as hundreds of scientists depart and programs are curtailed.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/28/climate/trump-administration-war-on-science.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage

  80. Avatar Bruce Vojtecky says:

    Trump will be impeached and removed.
    President Pence will pardon Trump.
    Trump will then run for president in 2020 and say he is allowed two terms because he was removed from his first term.
    Democrats need to find a viable presidential candidate for 2028.
    Anything is possible in a country that is as divided as America.
    Nickie Halley against AOC in 2028.

    • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

      Bold stuff, Bruce. I’m sticking with my safe predictions: 2 Republican senators defect (+ or – 2), and 1 Democratic senator defects (+ or – 1).

      Pence can pardon Trump for any underlying federal crimes he committed, but not for being thrown out of office. Interestingly, a pardon must be accepted (they can be refused, and have been in the past). One reason for refusing them is that they are equivalent to an admission of guilt. Thus, the war criminals recently pardoned by Trump in effect admitted that they are war criminals when they accepted the pardons.

      • Avatar Bruce Vojtecky says:

        Steve, not bold stuff just an idiotic maybe like the others being posted everywhere.

        • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

          LOL. When craziness and chaos become the norm, idiotic maybes also become the norm.

          • Avatar Gary Tull says:

            My ideal prediction: Four Republican senators will overrule turtle man and a fair-trial vote will proceed. Documents and witnesses will be allowed, Mulvaney, Bolton, Pompeo and William Barr will be called to appear under oath. The Mueller report will be reintroduced, redactions will be lifted and McGann will testify as well.
            Enough (R) senators who are up for re-election in November will do the right thing to retain their jobs. Trump will be frog-marched out of office and Pence will be publicly pressured not to pardon the most unfit, obnoxious and corrupt president ever.

          • Avatar Bruce Vojtecky says:

            Gary, Murkowski, is almost assured to overrule Trump, with Collins and Romney distinct possibilities and with Enzi a strong maybe you have your four R’s doing the right thing. The environment is high on Colorado’s list, the state formed an outdoor lobbyist group in DC and have already stopped the BLM in Wyoming and after the BLM in Utah over environment approvals on their Trump leases. Count Gardner as a possible fifth as the Colorado groups are already after him on environmental issues. Here in Arizona, McSally faces heavy opposition if she continues her support of Trump though she did speak out against him on immigration policies.
            I think more than a handful of GOP Senators will go for impeachment. They would probably rather have Pence as the face of the Republican party at election time. Pence would be a staunch God in Government president but as far as I can see more of a moral president along the lines of Romney.

          • Avatar Doug Cook says:

            Unicorn dreams and rainbow wishes Gary…The only scenario is this. The GOP hangs together. No Senator flips, not even Romney. The trial is dispatched quickly and the country moves on from this farce. The Democrats continue to fracture and divide. with them losing the House in 2020. Trump easily wins reelection. Not the best scenario for Democrats.

      • Avatar Tim says:

        The Bidens will be called to testify under oath before the Senate and every possible embarrassing question will be thrown at them, both to justify Trump’s request for a Ukrainian investigation and to sully Joe Biden in the middle of the primaries.

        The Democrats will then be forced to pick someone more radical which will further alientate Trump Country voters. Trump won’t be convicted and will go on to win the 2020 electoral college against something like a Warren/Buttigieg ticket. The Democrats will cry foul over their inability to convert popular vote to electoral victory and the PoundMeToo & Resist movements will be reenergized, leading to the passage of many radical new laws on the state level – most of which will eventually be overturned by Trump-appointed judges.

        • Avatar Bruce Vojtecky says:

          Tim, Biden has already stated he won’t testify, probably take the fifth. Warren/Buttigieg won’t happen, they are already at each others throats. A more likely ticket is Sanders/AOC.

          • Avatar Tim says:

            Biden already flip flopped and said he would testify, but TV ads of him taking the 5th would probably be just as effective at sinking his campaign. And AOC is constitutionally unfit for the ticket – she won’t be 35 until 2024.

        • Avatar Gary Tull says:

          Bruce, I appreciate the encouragement.

        • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

          I’m disappointed in Biden’s statement that he won’t testify. He’s right—the Repubs will subpoena him only because the game plan all along has been to run misdirection plays. Nothing the Bidens did justifies the wrongdoings of Trump and his merry band of imbeciles.

          It’s well established that all of Team Trump’s counter-narratives are manufactured out of thin air. Biden did not interfere with Ukrainian attempts to investigate and fight corruption—the opposite occurred. Ukraine did not interfere with the 2016 election and make it look like it was Russia, to make Russia and Trump look bad. It was just Russia, on behalf of Trump. Biden’s correct—Trump is the one charged with high crimes and misdemeanors, and the GOP wants to turn Trump’s trial into a trial of the Bidens, just to obfuscate.

          But still, Biden’s statement gives comfort to Trump’s argument that Congressional subpoena’s can be ignored. No, no, hell no, Joe.

          Corporate boards often have board members who have no expertise in the business of the corporation—they’re there because they have business expertise and/or influence. Hunter Biden has neither. If Joe Biden ends up looking bad because he and his son can’t really explain why Hunter sat on the board of a Ukrainian energy company—save he’s the spawn of the VEEP—tough shit. As Bill Maher put it: “Why don’t these people tell their kids to get a f***ing job?”

        • Avatar Gary Tull says:

          Steve quite eloquently states, (and it’s worth repeating) “Nothing the Bidens did justifies the wrongdoings of Trump and his merry band of imbeciles.”
          Tim, are you listening?

    • Avatar Common Sense says:

      Bruce you are forgetting about the “State Charges”. If he is impeached and removed the state charges will hit him like a speeding car. There has been a grand jury in place and indictments for quite a while now.

      The other parts of your thesis are interesting and show some well thought out strategy on behalf of the orange guy I must say!

      And yes the Dem’s need to have have a strong candidate to get to the finish line.

  81. Avatar Common Sense says:

    By George T. Conway III, Steve Schmidt, John Weaver and Rick Wilson-Time for a Change!

    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/17/opinion/lincoln-project.html

    Anyone else find it a bit Ironic that George Continues to call out Trumps B.S and his Wife Continues to lie for the guy weekly?

    Gives me a bit more Respect for Attorneys when a prominent does the right thing for our Country!

    • Avatar Beverly Stafford says:

      Kinda makes you wonder what their home life is like.

      • Avatar Common Sense says:

        Oh Beverly, home life is assuming they even talk to each other. I would bet a $1000 they have separate bedrooms if nothing else! That’s Your half of the home over there. Mine is here and let me know when you will be in the kitchen with a text!

        • Avatar Beverly Stafford says:

          Reminds me of a probably not-true story: husband and wife had a spat then were not speaking. He needed to catch an early plane next morning; so he put a note on her pillow which read, “Wake me at 5:00 AM.” He woke up around 6:30 then saw a note next to his saying, “It’s 5:00; get up.”

  82. Avatar Common Sense says:

    Half the Military members are not quite loving the Orange guy. Imagine that! I wonder if it has to do with interfering and getting a criminal off the hook only to have him as a spokes person on the 2020 Campaign trail?

    What’s next, congratulating Putin on being AHEAD of us now on Weapons?

    https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2019/12/17/half-of-active-duty-service-members-are-unhappy-with-trump-new-military-times-poll-shows/

  83. Avatar Tim says:

    I never thought I’d see the day anewscafe went full Breitbart, eagerly distorting the truth to fit preconceived narratives and justifying it as opinion. These days the only factual reporting on the site comes in the form of copy & pasted press releases – news releases your writers then attack as biased. You even shrug off your own writer’s casual admission of DUI as he blasphemes Baby Jesus on Christmas Eve just to ridicule a local religious minority — your version of a cartoon Muhammed contest.

    It is one thing to seek out different views, but it is quite another to submerge yourself into unnecessarily toxic waters. Anewscafe has become the later so I guess I know what I’ll be giving up for New Year’s.

    • Avatar Patrecia Barrett says:

      What “religious minority” is that? Right-wing Trump-supporting “Christians” are in the MAJORITY in Shasta County.

      And it’s better than death threats against non-Trump supporters using God as a weapon.

    • Steve Towers Steve Towers says:

      Just curious, before you leave (and truly sorry if you follow through on that): What truth was distorted?

      I agree that most of us could resolve to engage with more civility in 2020 (with the exception of Larry and a few others who are always civil.)

    • Avatar Gary Tull says:

      Aloha Tim. May we meet in less divisive times.

    • Hal Johnson Hal Johnson says:

      Tim, I often disagree with you. Sometimes I agree with you. Sometimes you piss me off. Sometimes you leave me scratching my head.

      I hope you’ll reconsider. Don’t leave.

    • Avatar Larry Winter says:

      Mustn’t drink the toxic waters!

      Oh dear Baby Jesus, please turn these toxic waters into Ripple Wine.

      And Baby Jesus saith unto him, Jeez Tim, light one up and pass it to RV. It’s all good!

  84. Avatar Common Sense says:

    Gansta in the House! What can we expect in 2020 you might be asking? Well for one we will see MORE articles of Impeachment! I got a $1000 bill on that one. Sooner or later it will be too much for the feckless GOP to keep supporting a Gangsta in the big old house. There will be a careful consideration of dump the trump to save the bacon time.

    The real Question for the Republican’s will be…..do you want to be on the Right side of HISTORY? Do you want to get re elected or Go Down with the Trumptanic??

    The year 2020 should provide some more fruits of the Crimes committed. Once a Gangsta,always a Gangsta….

    Know the Truth and the Truth shall set you free. Not much at stake here….just Integrity, the Truth, A Constitution and some Laws and Rules.You know the stuff this Country was founded on.

    On Tuesday Lev Parnas will be sharing the REST of the seized materials and electronic communication with the white house and Prez that he had,that was confiscated by the Fed’s. Adam Schiff will have that…..should be a real BANG to start 2020 with!

    Happy New Year to ALL….may the Truth come out in a Plentiful Way for All to see! May Alternative facts and Alternative Realities be smashed.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *