Taro T

This portion of the report covers (in part) the FBI's and the DOJ's handling of the Clinton e-mails. Horowitz is the IG for the DOJ and is only reviewing the activities of those civil servants that work in that department. Secretary of State Clinton headed the State Department. There is a separate IG that reviews policies and employee adherence to those policies in the State Department. The next DOJ IG report to come out will cover the FISA applications and (potential) abuses thereof by the DOJ & FBI.

Interesting thought. Expect that it is only solving a portion of the problem, as it seems that only a portion (less than 50% - based on piecing together info from various articles) of the children in the detention centers that have been apprehended were brought into the system along with an adult/adults. And as, again piecing together from various articles, it appears that asking for asylum at a border check point rather doesn't result in the adults & children getting separated, it would seem that the most efficient route to allow the families to stay together would be to have them come into the system there. Could probably increase the resources available at the check points more efficiently than adding the DNA collection. (The DNA collection itself rendering issues as 1st time illegal immigration violations are only misdemeanor offenses, but my understanding is that typically only those charged with felonies are required to provide samples in most states. I'd expect the ACLU would take significant issue with it.) Would require a change to the law to happen, so it won't happen. Cool that you are trying to "think outside the box" and find a reasonable solution. Expect that the true solution will necessarily include GG's point that we'd be better served by helping Central & Southern American countries improve their own domestic conditions and that when they improve, so will our illegal immigration problem. And the final thought on this, for this post anyway, is that we don't know what percentage of the asylum seekers (that are actually families looking for a better life) are truly displaced due to persecution / fear of death staying in their native lands and what percentage are merely seeking a better life. If we default to letting people claiming without proof that they are asylum seekers jump the line, so to speak, we will greatly increase the number of asylum seekers at our southern border. We REALLY need to fix the entire system and have needed to do so since at minimum the early '00's. Sorry for this rambling a bit.

We are allowed to want & should want both. But given only 1 or the other, results please.

The incentive moving forward would likely be in large part whatever it was that had China, Russia, & Japan all very much publicly off on the sidelines letting this baby step move forward. Whatever drove China especially and Russia to have this move forward likely hasn't changed in the last 48 hours. The removal of sanctions is another huge incentive (maybe even bigger than the other, though I'd doubt that) and I'd expect that the US negotiating team realizes this and that it is the prize for NK. I doubt that they'd give it up before they've gotten our prize (non-nuke NK). The other potential big prize would be eventual reunification of the peninsula. Maybe that's been taken off the table behind closed doors for China's benefit and why their request for lifting sanctions now is merely posturing. (Absolute conjecture here and VERY likely wrong.) But at any rate, it SEEMS both different and positive.

Why would 45 seemingly contradict himself only a day after saying something else? Could it be because it is another day ending in "day?" That is what he does. He bloviates, contradicts himself, and enjoys rolling in the mud with his detractors. And there is likely more to the statement (like has proven out many times in the past 18 months) that NK is no longer a nuclear threat than meets the eye. (Haven't seen the quote directly, so it is difficult to speculate specifically about it.) It probably means that unlike in the past when NK tacitly had the approval of China to carry out its exercises/failed launches that China behind the scenes has told Kim to reign it in. Yes, the hostages were home before the summit (and the silo &test site destroyed as well), but do you really believe that those weren't preconditions to get the summit to happen? The details of the meeting between Kim and Trump were the cherry on top of many months of earlier work. IMHO, this SEEMS to be happening far more like the Reagan/Gorbachev meetings than any other between the US & NK (or the US & Iran for that matter as well). Those meetings happened over several years with a lot of behind the scenes work leading up to what eventually (in meetings 3&4) became some serious arms limitations and led to even more talks and a treaty w/ 41. And the 2nd meeting even appeared to be a "failure" at the time as Gorbachev demanded essentially a halt to SDI and Reagan refused. The 2 are talking and progress (limited though it was) was made. Considering where we were 6 months ago, I'll take that. And, as far as we can tell, Kim didn't walk out of the meeting with a few $B in walking around money that he keeps whether he follows through or not. Unlike some other recent international negotiations.

As long as the US inspectors are leading the process, the UN can ride at the back of the bus.

Though the inspections were agreed to on paper, they weren't allowed almost immediately, but we kept sending them fuel & everything else we bribed them with. I really would like to see US inspectors involved along w/ the UN. But regardless of how that ends up getting handled, AFAICS, the US at this point has given up nothing to NK. We agree that a framework to lift the sanctions is in place. We disagree as to the trigger to release them. I believe they won't be lifted until the nukes are gone & WE have verified that. You believe they'll be lifted sooner. We shall see. Either way, we should have a good idea of how it'll play out by the '20 election. And regardless of how it does play out, this one is different in that the US has actually gotten stuff already. In the past it was always NK getting stuff up front for promises to do stuff later. What have they gotten to date except a photo op?

They will push for the sanctions to be lifted, but how much of that is real & how much of it will be for show is yet to be seen. They HAD to have already gotten something behind the scenes to allow the negotiations to get to this point. (Our western European allies probably got something as well.) Which likely means they knew sanctions wouldn't be lifted until the nukes were gone. And if that is the case, their call for the sanctions lifting will be more kabuki than real. What happens next will let us know if this was as useless as the past 3 negotiations or if this is the start of something different. IMHO it seems different this time. (The f-t-f meeting, hostages being released w/out a ransom being paid, the already destroyed test site & launch site (realizing there are more there), are things that haven't happened in the past.) We haven't bent over on this one (yet, at least). That in itself is different. I'll remain hopeful until that proves out to be misguided. That you remain skeptical is understandable, hopefully that proves out to be misguided in the end.

The GOP could have / could do better. But if 60% of the things that seem to have happened in '15-'16 actually happened & 60% of the things that seem to be happening in our courts, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iran, & North Korea are happening, not really sure that we the people could've done better. NEVER would've seen an upside (other than not having another Clinton in the WH & not sure that even that wouldn't have been viewed as a wash back then) back in '15 of having the Cheeto dusted golem in the WH.

And the bolded is why this APPEARS to be far more Reagan/ Gorbachev series of negotiations than any of the prior negotiations w/ NK of the past ~25 years. Other than optics, the US hasn't given up anything to Kim. And the US got them also as well as everything else you've mentioned. As several have stated, thisis only step 1 and there may be backtracking from here. But this is the biggest legitimate 1st step towards a resolution in my lifetime.

So THAT's where the idea for the infamous "pee tape" originated. Interesting.

Not to speak for him, but pretty sure the answer's: no^2, yes, hell yes.

Based on the title, shouldn't this thread be about boobies?

1st thread on page 2 of this subforum. (Tried to link it for you, but my tablet is acting screwy. Sorry.)

He is one of the good ones. He will be missed.

You're a Habs fan? Figured your being in TO would make you a Loafs fan.

Sorry, hadn't seen this before posting in the other thread.

That WOULD BE an entirely different kettle of fish.

Well in fairness, Comey was the bad guy until he was fired like the establishment had wanted at which point he became the good guy. Give it time, depending on responses to the next responses, he'll cycle back to being a good guy again in their eyes. At least until it's expedient for him to be a bad guy again.

Butt hurt? Finding something you've said to be precious is about as far from "butt hurt" as it can get. And totally misunderstanding what Tom wrote truly is precious.

Aww, isn't that cute. Gator liked your post predicting he's just going to dig in harder to spout his drivel as more evidence comes out.

Would be perfect if he followed Snowden's lead & asked for it in Russia. (Pretty sure even Greg wouldn't have written a twist that bizarre 2 years ago. )

Oh, definitely. Forgot to add a couple of lines below the rest of the post. Has anybody taken his passport yet? Can't see him not wanting a vacation to a foreign land REAL soon unless he's really not very bright.

You've floated that theory before that Comey wasn't involved in this. Hadn't given that theory much credence before, but it COULD explain some things that don't add up (from this far away). 1st, it could explain why Comey's behavior seemed so strange around and after the election. Things he thought he knew might not have been so. It isn't a good look for him: being unaware of what's going on around him, but at least that isn't treasonous. 2nd, it could help explain why it looks on the surface like Mueller should be going hard after 45 because of the way his friend Comey was treated and the way the FBI (or elements of it) are getting dragged through the mud. But if he is more targeting the people that made his friend into a bit of a dupe and tarnished the department, that would make a lot of the things (indictments and leaks) that have come out about his investigation so far make more sense. Going after Manafort for his stuff that happened while he was tied into the Podesta Group rather than when he was in 45's campaign being one example. Still not sure that the theory is correct, but it is showing plausibility. And pretty sure nobody would ever buy this whole story if it weren't actually happening.

For him to play a more central role, wouldn't he need to be the ringleader?