Placeholder It's Your Call

Recognize them

About the editorial on Tuesday’s opinion page, I agree all schools should list the top high school students in order of rank. They did the work, they need the recognition.

Call and call

Is there a law to prevent dirt bikes, three- and four-wheelers and so forth from being on the streets? I don’t think it’s safe for the kids and traffic is detained, also. I live in St. Joseph and I’ve called the proper authorities several times and nothing has been done here. Why can’t laws be enforced?

Goose chase

Somebody mentioned the money they wasted on this wild goose chase of this so-called Russian connection with Trump. And the caller is right.

Rural socialism

I’m angry about Trump’s $16 billion bailout for farmers. I’ll tell you what I call it: A great example of farm bill socialism. It’s welfare for the rich paid for by the taxpayers. The rest of us don’t get socialism, but the farmers sure do, and the wealthy.

Muffled response

I’m not too concerned about the helmet law, whether they wear one or not. What I’m concerned about is how they pass an inspection with straight pipes when we got to have mufflers on our pickups and cars? You tell me, somebody give me the answer.

All wet

This didn’t have to happen with all the flooding that is going on at Heritage ball field or at the soccer fields on Riverside. The city had a chance to buy the property on Karnes Road. There was lots of property there to buy. If the city would have bought that property and used our head we could have saved a lot of money. And now look at us, here we are wet again for the second time in months.

Editor’s note: The city doesn’t own the soccer fields on Riverside Road.

Shocking read

Instead of relying on others to do the reading for you, please take the time to read the Mueller report. If you don’t have time or are not inclined to read the entire report (although I strongly advocate that you do) please at least read the summaries of both volumes one and two. You will be shocked and will understand why we should be taking steps to protect our elections from foreign interference and to start impeachment proceedings against the president.

Olympic sport

I was just wondering if they’re going to put another $600,000 into the ball field down by the river? Or better yet, since it’s filled with sand now, why don’t we just save ourselves and make it a volleyball court? There you go.

(87) comments

aj0201

President Trump: "We have the cleanest air in the world, in the United States, and it's gotten better since I'm president." — Stable Genius.

WakeUpUS

The fake 'climate change' fear-mongering 'nagging' has gotten better since Trump was elected president, too." [cool][thumbup]

aj0201

Except we don’t have the cleanest air. He’s just lying.

JohnQTaxpayer

All those 'carbon-indulgencies' paid for all those years, & that pollution from EPA-free slave-labor countries just circles the globe right over to the USA anyway... A zero-sum game... [whistling][huh]

WakeUpUS

Better, meaning the LIES are being 'taken less serious'.[thumbup]

aj0201

For all of the money we are spending, NASA should NOT be talking about going to the Moon - We did that 50 years ago. They should be focused on the much bigger things we are doing, including Mars (of which the Moon is a part), Defense and Science! —President Donald J. Trump, Stable Genius.

beelog

Mueller investigation----Attorney General Barr is in the midst of a "real" investigation--and I think the results are going to be an indictment of several on several of those who "invented" the Trump investigation. The Democrats are frightened which is why they are fighting so fiercely.

aj0201

Who invented the investigation and how did they invent it?

WakeUpUS

Who invented the fake 'Collusion' investigation and how did they invent it?

aj0201

There wasn’t a fake collusion investigation. Try again. Trump and his team created the legal investigation by their involvement with Russians to impact the election.

WakeUpUS

[beam][wink] Keep on telling yourself that, snowflake..! [cool]

James Bond1

Whoops...…..you blew it...………...there has been no, absolutely ZILCH....ZERO.....NON......Russian involvement with Trump. Less than that. The nearest it comes is out your mouth...…..VILE.

beelog

Parenting---took a grandchild to a library program recently. Lots of children present. Parents and/or grandparents were proudly watching. The program is free, but sadly the children who could benefit the most were largely absent.

munchman

How do you ever find pants to cover the giant assumptions you proclamate?

Thecalvin

You didn't benefit from the program?

beelog

Most of us cannot even visualize the inside condition of many homes in the area. They are filthy, littered with trash, including food, and overran with roaches and other insects. The tragedy is that mom and dad are so strung out on illegal drugs, and too lacking in basic education, that they are incapable of even recognizing the problem---and they are raising multiple children in these conditions. When the children are placed with relatives, the first question is "how much money am I going to get". Sad.

beelog

Call and call---Let's just hope it doesn't take a tragedy.

beelog

Shocking read--(Mueller report)---revelation: No one is disputing that the Russians attempted to interfere with the election (Republicans and Democrats agree)---but the point is, there was no collusion between the Trump Administration and the Russians. Period.

munchman

The t rump ghetto tower meeting was collusion! If it wasn't then why all the obstruction of Justice from t rump like the writing memo that was a lie about the meeting. Explain that Grasshopper. What would you call a meeting between t rump campaign officials and intelligence agents of the Russian Government to discuss "Dirt" on Hillary. and why was t rump jr. so orgasmic in his email describing it "I Love it".

WakeUpUS

Who invented the fake Trump 'Collusion' investigation and how did they invent it?

beelog

Goose chase---Lots of good money wasted. Sad how the Democrats can't accept the result. They are desperate people.

munchman

Which result? The result one can see from reading the report or the lies from t rump and Barr's 4 pages of B.S.? Read the GD report or STFU.

Thecalvin

Benghazi, Whitewater, IRS? Got it.

beelog

Rural socialism--(farmers bailout)--First, your "victim mentality" is showing. Secondly, it is to everyone's benefit that farmers survive---we all like to eat.

munchman

When you bemoan the fact that there are people you don't think in you myopic point of view are worthy of government assistance is that a "victim mentality"?

WakeUpUS

"Victim mentality" is a Democrat trait.

James Bond1

MUFFLED RESPONSE...…………….you are quite right. The muffler should be on two wheels as quick as four. As it is,, we have a disgusting irritation on the street.

beelog

Recognize them---top seniors--They set examples and goals for others to strive for and should be recognized. If the fear is damaging someone's fragile ego, that student has some "real" problems.

James Bond1

RECOGNIZE THEM...……………….that is hardly the factor.

munchman

The comment from Goose Chase is a prime example of the problem with the intellectually challenged of the right. They think that the primary reason the Acting Attorney General setup the Mueller prosecution team was to investigate t rump and his campaign. Wrong grasshopper! It was set up to investigate whether or not Russia hacked and interfered with our sovereign election in 2016. Where the focus on t rump came from was the reports of almost all ally intelligence agencies that they feared that t rump is unduly influenced by Russia and most likely was compromised. as well as the presentation of the Steele Dossier to the committee. If the Dossier was the product produced for the DNC so what. It's validity has not been proven wrong . Asking a intelligence source to investigate someone is a far cry from the traitorous words that came out of t rump's mouth "Hey Russia how about finding Hillary's emails". And you worry about money spent by the t rump administration for the investigation is a laugh. The democrats did not order the investigation it was a member of t rump's Justice department. And then we get to the meat of the problem from the caller who said you are an idiot to expound on the report if you haven't read it or at least the summaries of the two books and not the lying summary that t rump's sycophant Barr put out to Gin up the false scenario that the right clings to like calvary to save their cognitive dissonance that t rump is not guilty of the crimes of obstruction of justice. Why do you think t rump wants to restrict McGann's words to a redacted report rather then brought to full transparency in televised committee hearings. When someone has been documented as lying more that 10,000 times it takes Big Brass Nads to defend him as being for anybody other then himself. To paraphrase some mythical book "What good does it do to have 2 or 3 point lower employment figures or show the continual growth of the Obama economy, and lose our Democracy"

popski

Actually, munchman, I agree that there may have been interference in our election...but it's not the first time...and won't be the last. What the Mueller report has done is show that the President wasn't involved. In fact, if there was clear evidence, the Democrats would have already done something...as well as many Republicans. The fact is, and even YOU can't dispute this...there IS ZERO EVIDENCE Donald Trump colluded or conspired with the Russians to win the election. Did the Russians leak information about Hillary that hurt her in the election? Yeah...maybe...but who cares. If she did something wrong, I don't really CARE who put it out for the public to see. Fact is, the Mueller report does not indict the President...fact.

zzsnot303

personally i'd like to see Hillary jailed, such a contemptable woman

WakeUpUS

In past decades, she'd get the firing squad she deserves.

aj0201

Cmon popski, you're smarter than that as well. Mueller didn't indict and he stated why. He didn't indict because of DOJ policy. He did not say that he couldn't indict but did specifically say why he couldn't indict or even make a recommendation to indict. But he also took pains to say that if they thought the President had not committed crimes, they would say so. He is telling you to read between the lines. There was no definitive statement that the president didn't commit a crime. If it was clear to them that he did not do so, the Mueller team would have made that positive statement. Their silence indicates that, at the bare minimum, a crime may have been committed. Collusion:secret or illegal cooperation or conspiracy, especially in order to cheat or deceive others. The report makes it clear that members of the Trump campaign did collude with the Russians. They held secret meetings to obtain "dirt" on Hillary. That dirt was, in large part, obtained by emails that were hacked, not given to, by various Russian sources. That is collusion. Not a crime, but it is what it is. The fact remains that the Trump campaign sought help in this election from the Russians. The Report also makes it clear that Trump or members of his team ENDEAVORED to influence the resulting investigation. That, by definition, is obstruction.

popski

Again...if Mueller's report had contained anything at all that pointed to culpability on the part of the President, we would have already seen him impeached. The Democrats cannot impeach without cause...and that's why they are talking about it, but doing nothing. They CAN'T impeach, based on what is in the report. Frankly, you're smart enough to realize that if there was even a smattering of evidence showing the President did something illegal, he'd already be gone. Sorry...I hate to burst the bubble of all those who have distaste for our President...but it's a fact that cannot be denied.

Thecalvin

Let's see, we impeach Clinton for a private act that was terrible but really was between him, his wife, and Monica. But trump asking people to lie, asking McGahn to publicly lie and to write a false memo is fine? That's just one of many examples of corruption. At least he didn't wear a tan suit.

aj0201

The Democrats are doing what current politicians do. They’re abdicating their responsibility to ensure they keep votes. They’re afraid that if they’re wrong, they’ll lose power. The thing is, they’re not wrong. I believe that if the case were made and the Senate republicans fail to remove from office, they have more to answer for.

popski

Thecalvin, Bill Clinton wasn't impeached for having sex with an intern...he was impeached for lying under oath.

aj0201

Is lying under oath worse than lying directly to the public via the press?

JohnQTaxpayer

Lying directly to the public via the press is what you do on IYC every day, Aj... [tongue_smile]

beelog

popski---the Democrats need "something" to cling to, even if there is clearly nothing in the report of consequence. How can someone obstruct an investigation which found them innocent?

aj0201

Bee I’m sure you’re being deliberately obtuse about that question. You cannot obstruct a legal investigation, even one that fails to indict. Notice, I don’t say innocent? The Mueller Report said the exact opposite of Trump being innocent. “If we were sure that the President had not committed a crime, we would so state...â€

Thecalvin

No he wasn't pop, but the question had nothing to do with Whitewater. It was a ploy just to embarrass him. Compare that to what trump has done. I hear people hear say it wasn't presidental but act as if trump has done nothing. "Individual number one."

munchman

From David Corn: "Mueller Reminds the Nation That Trump Betrayed the USA" When Robert Mueller held his surprise press conference, he made it clear that there was no Russian "hoax," that this wasn’t a "Deep State" concoction cooked up to undermine Trump's campaign or his presidency. Moscow’s attack on a US election was real and consequential. “Sweeping and systematic,†Mueller’s report said. There was a compelling need to investigateâ€â€and to keep investigating. Whether or not there was a criminal conspiracy, we know that Trump sided with a foreign adversary that attacked the American political systemâ€â€and that he attempted to obstruct the subsequent investigation. He put his own interests ahead of the interests of the nation, and that's textbook corruption. After all, Trump aided and abetted the subversion of a presidential election. He helped an assault on the foundation of American democracy and the popular will. Nothing is more corrupt than that. You can read more in the full column, but here's a d amning summary of some of the key facts that show how Trump and his lieutenants have denied the Russian attack was underway because they have stood to gain from it: As soon as the Democratic National Committee announced its servers had been penetrated by Russian hackers, the Trump campaign claimed this was a "hoax" devised by the DNC itself. Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner, and then campaign chairperson Paul Manafort met in Trump Tower in June 2016 with a Russian emissary to obtain "dirt" on Hillary Clinton as part of a secret Kremlin scheme to help the Trump campaign. Don Jr. emailed that he "loved it.†The meeting sent a signal from the Trump campaign to Moscow: We don’t mind if you mess in our election to help Trump. Later in the summer, when the stolen DNC emails were dumped by WikiLeaks, Trump Jr. and Manafort took to the news shows and denied this had anything to do with the Russians. While the Russian attack was underway, George Papadopoulous, a foreign policy adviser to the Trump campaign, was trying to set up a back-channel with Putin's office. And Manafort was passing inside campaign information to a Russian-Ukrainian business colleague who was associated with Russian intelligence. In August 2016, the intelligence committee briefed Trump that Moscow was indeed behind the hack-and-dump operation. Yet Trump and his allies continued to echo and amplify the Kremlin’s own denials and say there was no reason to blame the Russians. Recall the first presidential debate when Trump exclaimed, "I don't think anybody knows if it was Russia that broke into the DNC...It could also be lots of other people. It also could be somebody sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds, okay?" As Trump campaigned for president, he also secretly negotiating to develop a tower project in Moscow that could reap him hundreds of millions of dollarsâ€â€while falsely telling voters that he had no business interests in Russia. (His fixer Michael Cohen even privately communicated with Putin’s office and requested its assistance in getting this venture going.) Special counsel Robert Mueller’s final report notes that even as the Trump campaign denied Russia was attacking the US election, Trump and his crew sought to benefit from Moscow’s covert operation. This included pushing Roger Stone, Trump’s longtime adviser (now charged with lying to Congress and obstruction of justice) to be the campaign’s intermediary with WikiLeaks. And the lying hasn’t stopped. Last week, Brad Parscale, Trump’s 2020 campaign manager, issued a statement full of falsehoods: "Mueller's remarks today confirmed what we already knew: There was no collusion between the Russians and the Trump campaign, and there was no case for obstruction. President Trump has been fully and completely exonerated. Now it's time to turn to the origins of the Russia hoax." None of that was true. There was no exoneration. There was no conclusion about collusion. They're sticking with hoax. This is total gaslighting. Trump and his minions are still covering for Putin. They're acting the victim. They're playing the media whose job it is to hold them accountable, and they’re conning the public. (All while Mitch McConnell refuses to allow a vote on legislation that would enhance election security and make it harder for Russia or any other foreign power to intervene in 2020.) This is a scandal. And it’s not going away. Despite what Trump’s handmaids on Capitol Hill and in the conservative media say, it is not time to move on." I would ask you Connie's to quote chapter and verse from the mueller report where this is not true.

Marty_Chuzzlewit

Quotes from Mueller Report: Part One, p. 10 “The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.†Part Two, p. 157 “The evidence does not establish that the President was involved in an underlying crime related to Russian election interference†Conclusion: No collusion, no intent to obstruct

aj0201

You’re smarter than that. There doesn’t have to be an underlying crime for someone to obstruct a legal investigation. Also , you conflate collusion and conspiracy and coordination. The reports specifically says they didn’t consider collusion as an issue because it isn’t a legal issue. It states that no conspiracy or coordination happened. But it clearly describes collusion starting with Papadopoulos. Once the collusion is established in the report, it is clear as a bell that Trump and/or members of his team ENDEAVORED to influence the investigation. That by its very definition is obstruction.

Marty_Chuzzlewit

The "Papadopoulos event" was a sting operation set up by the FBI in coordination with Brit intel operatives. Doubtful the Supreme Court would find any justiciable value to that issue if the House Judiciary Committee included it in Articles of Impeachment and the President challenged, as would be his right.

aj0201

Sting? No. Joseph Mifsud was not a "Brit intel operative."

Marty_Chuzzlewit

The "Papadopoulos episode" has been found not only to have been an FBI sting, but that the FBI withheld exculpatory evidence in pressing the perjury charge against him. If interested in non-partisan details of this shoddy event the reader can search Google using the search term: Real Clear Politics Papadopoulos and go to the "News" section. Many relevant articles may be examined including statements by Papadopoulos himself. An article this week by a political science professor includes this information: "How do these issues affect Mueller’s reputation? First, his entire investigation was based on two fragile pillars, which Mueller never questioned. If they collapse, Mueller is buried in the rubble. The first pillar is the FBI’s dubious “origin story.†The bureau states, and Mueller explicitly accepts, that its Trump investigation began in late-July 2016 after a low-level campaign volunteer, George Papadopoulos, spoke about Russia to an Australian diplomat in a London bar. Apparently, Papadopoulos also made exculpatory comments, which were not included (as legally required) in a subsequent search-warrant application." "But there is mounting evidence that Papadopoulos was not the first target and July 2016 was not the real starting date. Counter-intelligence investigations of Trump and his associates apparently began earlier and were never disclosed. Neither was widespread illegal spying on Americans by intelligence agencies and their private contractors. Still more surveillance was outsourced to friendly foreign intelligence agencies, which relayed their findings to Washington. Mueller never mentioned these problems — and possible crimes." But, all that aside, the House Judiciary Committee can't just throw out frivolous allegations and call them "High Crimes and Misdemeanors." It is already established the President has standing to challenge such "articles" in the Supreme Court.

popski

The President did not obstruct anything. As the President, he had the power to even dismiss Mueller and stop the whole thing. He didn't. Bottom line...you're grasping at nonexistent straws, aj.

beelog

If you KNEW you were innocent, wouldn't you fight back? The liberal press was making daily accusations (false accusations). Trump knew they were false and he merely tried to defend himself from something that he knew wasn't true. Do you not feel he had a right to defend himself??

aj0201

If I knew I was innocent I would throw open the doors and let everyone look. Popski, that he was unsuccessful in obstructing, doesn’t mean he didn’t ENDEAVOR†to obstruct.

WakeUpUS

Aj0201 is to President Trump what Goldfish is to 'Joseph Whoever' from the Highway Department of Missouri... Strange & obsessively petty. [whistling][huh][tongue_smile]

aj0201

Marty, your assertion on the Presidents standing to challenge would go to the definition of “high crimes and misdemeanors.†Alan Dershowitz makes reference to “crimes†as in criminal. The Founders used the term in reference to breaking the public trust. A quick read of Federalist 65 proves that. It’ll be interesting if it happens to see where these “originalists†land on this issue.

Marty_Chuzzlewit

The President's right to challenge articles of impeachment in the Supreme Court was established in the Judge Nixon v. US decision. You might find it an interesting read.

munchman

Question Fuzz Nutts if a person commits a crime during a law enforcement sting is it not still a crime? I guess not so much if you are a Connie.

aj0201

What part of Nixon v US 1993 says that? Seems to me to be quite the opposite. But I’ve just glanced at it.

aj0201

The Court listed “reasons why the Judiciary, and the Supreme Court in particular, were not chosen to have any role in impeachments,†and elsewhere agreed with the appeals court that “opening the door of judicial review to the procedures used by the Senate in trying impeachments would expose the political life of the country to months, or perhaps years, of chaos.†506 U.S. at 234, 236

Marty_Chuzzlewit

Read the opinions written by Justices White and Souter which caution against ruling out judicial review in future impeachment proceedings

aj0201

Hahaha! Their concerns don’t establish a Presidential right to challenge articles of impeachment. This was a unanimous decision and they expressed concern that the Court couldn’t check the Congress over proceedings that were carried out in a frivolous manner. What they base their articles on is not up for judicial review. How they conduct the proceedings appear to be.

Marty_Chuzzlewit

But it also doesn't preclude the Court granting a future President the right to challenge articles of impeachment or at the very least to ask the Chief Justice to dismiss the charges. At any rate, the Democrats find themselves between the proverbial rock and hard place having gone so far down the impeachment path. If they fail to impeach the President will rightfully claim he is further exonerated. If they proceed with impeachment it will almost surely cost them huge election losses in 2020, including the presidency itself.

aj0201

Ummm, you didn’t read the finding of the Court if you believe this. In fact, the specify why they don’t have standing to dismiss charges in articles of impeachment. Care to guess their reasoning?

Marty_Chuzzlewit

The Court could certainly on examination of articles of impeachment brought under the Article 1 powers of the Legislature find the article(s) to be so fallacious, so frivolous as to fail to meet the Article 2 requirements of treason, bribery, high crimes and misdemeanors and dismiss the articles of impeachment. Nothing in the Constitution precludes such a scenario and three Justices actually foresaw such a circumstance in their Nixon opinions.

aj0201

No. Wrong.

aj0201

Three justices had concerns about coin flips and “bad guy†charges. But the majority opinion saw that the Court is itself subject to impeachment and judicial review of congressional impeachment proceedings is a distinct conflict of interest. No matter, a unanimous decision does NOT give the executive the right to bring articles of impeachment against him to the Court for relief. He can always try, but it’ll not be heard given the clear language of Nixon.

Marty_Chuzzlewit

We won't know until the situation presents itself. The Constitution does not preclude the Court from making a "pre-trial" decision on the judicial validity of the articles. It might or it might not, we won't know until such a situation is presented. The Court has ruled on innumerable disputes between the Article 1 and the Article 2 branches of government, perhaps this would be the ultimate test.

aj0201

Today you’ve gone from the Court has established to we’ll have to wait and see. The whole time you’ve missed the point of Nixon and don’t understand that ruling paid attention to the fact that the word “sole†happens twice in the Constitution, both times referring to who has the responsibility to impeach. The Court doesn’t have much if any standing since they’re checked by impeachment.

zzsnot303

OMG munch... your mumbo jumbo gets worse day by day and the length of it is only an exercise in your typing skills. give it a rest

munchman

Truth can be s0 disturbing can't it ZZ Con.

munchman

Sing a line or two from >Everybody's Crazy Bout A Truthful Man".

Thecalvin

Truth causes you problems? Or is it reading that gets you?

zzsnot303

i am sick of the Mueller report.. move on !!

munchman

It really makes it hard to maintain your cognitive dissonance doesn't it ZZ Con?

Thecalvin

To what? Emails I suppose.

James Bond1

Whewwwwwwwww, MUNCHIE...………….do you really think so...……….? Gosh, you got more baloney in one paragraph than I've seen in quite awhile. Take a deep breath but don't look in the mirror...…..it would spoil your day.

Thecalvin

How large is your file of conspiracies now James? Still needing to feel special?

beelog

Munchman---much of the fuel came from extremely biased media sources who cared little about the truth in making false accusations---which turned out to be unfounded.

munchman

Straighten us out about all of those unsubstantiated innuendos you just made. Name these mythical false accusations unfounded in fact. Once again for the gullible on th right facts and truth can not and will never be biased. Editorialized news report most often are. Prime example Fox and Fools.

Thecalvin

That's a lie. But all that talk on Fox has you confused. Did you see Hannity saying that Pelosi was trying to turn us into a banana republic. But not trump, wanting to prosecute everybody that disagrees with him, or shows how stupid he is? Sounds like Germany in the 40's.

WakeUpUS

"Rural Socialism' A social program in a 'Capitalist Nation' is NOT the same as a 'Socialist Government', as one rural socialist we know regularly attempts to equate it, in a Leftist false narrative. The Truth is, Socialists historically ALWAYS seek to sway public opinion against a country's farmers. It's important for them to DO so as part of their agenda to seize control over that facet of production. [whistling][huh]

munchman

Pip you are definitely one goofy individual with a view of history that looks like you are looking through the bottom of a coke bottle. True Socialist governments like Cuba and Russia and North Korea and primarily agrarian societies. But you keep muddling along Pip and HERE'S YOUR SIGN.

beelog

And they are all so very successful! Not.

James Bond1

Lets take two words...………...Collusion / Obstruction...……….off the page. It would change the world.

Thecalvin

Both of which trump is guilty.

aj0201

It is nice to see that you finally seem to understand that social programs aren’t socialism.

WakeUpUS

You seem to be a master at attempted intentional misdirection. Unfortunately, the only person who buys your pablum is yourself.

aj0201

By using your own words? Hahahaha!

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist, sexually-oriented language or name calling.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person. This includes name calling.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article, but please do not copy and paste from other websites.