-=> On 05-23-19  07:30,  Gregory Deyss <=-
 -=> spoke to Dale Shipp about Re: Well said, Mr. Presid <=-


 DS> Actually most of them were either non political or republicans.

 GD> Yeah sure, non-political I do not believe that. If there is to be any
 GD> truth to what your suggesting, then why did these folks made campaign
 GD> donations to Hillary.. Which means they were political.

Some may have made campaign donations -- to either party.  That does not
mean that they were democrats, nor that whatever political affiliation
they had impacted their work ( and the Justice Department IG said
exactly that about the two who were removed because of some tweets).
Plus, Robert Mueller is a Republican/
 
 DS> DS> GD> I do not blame the man, for pulling back slightly from
 GD> infrastructure. DS> 

 DS> He did not pull back slightly -- he stomped out and said -- play my way
 DS> or I won't participate.

 GD> The truth of the matter is was agreed upon that they would meet, as
 GD> they did have this meeting pre-planned.

The meeting was planned, but he did not even bother to sit down before
leaving and giving his Rose Garden speech dinigrating the Democrats.
The Democrats were there to work on the infrastructure deal -- he was
not.

 GD> However what is also true is that  Nancy Pelosi called a meeting of
 GD> her own before she lerch (Charles Schummer) were to meet the President.

Your point is?  Pelosi is a busy woman and can multi task on items.

 GD> It was at this tea party of a meeting that Nancy was calling for the
 GD> Presidents head and still harping and scheming to impeach the
 GD> President.  If someone does that, before a meeting that talks about
 GD> infrastructure, does that sound like someone that is serious wanting to
 GD> make a impact on the matter. 

Pelosi had to convince her caucus *not* to call for impeachment at this
time.  She was not "calling for his head".

 GD> What this shows and is clear, is that Nancy Pelosi wants to undermine
 GD> the President and try not to allow the President or his administration
 GD> to be successful.
 
She will not allow him to get away with the shenangands he has been
pulling.


 DS> DS> GD> They tried to get him with phony dossiers.
 DS> DS> Do you mean that dossier that has been mostly substatiated, and which
 DS> has non of its claims dis-proven?

 GD> It has been known for quite quite sometime now that the dossier was
 GD> totally and completely made up.  None of it is remotely true, not even
 GD> slightly.  

WRONG.  Members of the intelligence community have testified that parts
of it have been substatiated.

 DS>  GD> years of wasted time and money it was determined that there was NO
 DS>  GD> Collusion and NO Obstruction, and yet they will not yield, for their
 
 DS> It was not determined that there was no obstruction -- Mueller's report
 DS> documented evidence of at least ten instances for which Trump would have
 DS> been charged if he were not a sitting President.

 GD> It also says within the 400+ pages there was
 GD> No Collusion and No Obstruction - perhaps you read it. 

Yes I did read it.  It seems that you are accepting Barr's synopsis of
it without judging for yourself.  Nearly a thousand former federal
attorneys and other legal experts have signed a statement that what is
laid out in Mueller's report would be grounds for inditment except for
Justice policy which says that a sitting president cannot be indited for
a criminal offense *while in office*.
 
 DS> They will work with him when he comes back to the table, instead of
 DS> sulking out to the Rose Garden to deliver a political speech.

 GD> Did you watch his speech? 
 GD> His remarks where to the point and clear. 

And slanted, and self serving.

                               Dale Shipp
                  fido_261_1466 (at) verizon (dot) net
                              (1:261/1466)


... Shipwrecked on Hesperus in Columbia, Maryland. 01:44:01, 24 May 2019
___ Blue Wave/DOS v2.30

--- Maximus/NT 3.01
 * Origin: Owl's Anchor (1:261/1466)