The house has already subpoenaed their records along with Rick Perry's this morning.
Perry is accused of being complicit in the "arms for accusations" scheme by Trump and Guliani, actually Trump is trying to pin the scandal on Perry recently, but is also accused using his influence to appoint some Texas friends to head a Ukrainian state owned natural gas company. He has agreed to cooperate.
Ruh-Roe!

collusion
[kəˈlo͞oZHən]
NOUN

secret or illegal cooperation or conspiracy, especially in order to cheat or deceive others.

synonyms:
conspiracy · connivance · complicity · intrigue · plotting · secret understanding · collaboration · scheming

law
illegal cooperation or conspiracy, especially between ostensible opponents in a lawsuit.

-------------------------

Is asking another country for help to hurt a political opponent illegal?
See: https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-imposing-certain-sanctions-event-foreign-interference-united-states-election/

"any person acting as an agent of or on behalf of a foreign government, has acted with the intent or purpose of interfering in that election"

"to have directly or indirectly engaged in, sponsored, concealed, or otherwise been complicit in foreign interference in a United States election"

"the term “entity” means a partnership, association, trust, joint venture, corporation, group, subgroup, or other organization"

"the term “United States election” means any election for Federal office"

" the term “foreign interference,” with respect to an election, includes any covert, fraudulent, deceptive, or unlawful actions or attempted actions of a foreign government, or of any person acting as an agent of or on behalf of a foreign government, undertaken with the purpose or effect of influencing, undermining confidence in, or altering the result or reported result of, the election, or undermining public confidence in election processes or institutions"

Whatever you have to tell yourself, traitor.

Do you want elections to be decided because of direct foreign influence? Or do you want Americans to decide American elections?

Donald Trump as president issued that order making it illegal for anyone to petition a foreign government/entity to help win an election. If he's doing nothing wrong and all his actions were 'perfect' he would not have tried to cover it up.

I think we are seeing things very differently.

How important do you think fossil fuels are to modern society right now and over the last hundred years? Do you believe that they have been net negative or net positive influence on humanity in that time?

Free to own guns.
Free to say whatever you want, no matter how offensive, hateful, or wrong.
Free to sell products or run companies that literally kill other people.
Free to influence elections with your money.
But mow your fucking lawn or we'll eat you alive!

America, fuck yeah!

You mean like Vicente Fox going on every network against President Trump and for Hillary? The Steele Dossier? "China, if you’re listening, why don’t you get Trump’s tax returns?" - Hillary. Would be great to get that illegal server that somehow disappeared.

Not to mention ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, CNN, Comedy Central and all the newspapers... but that collusion doesn't count because it's not a foreign govt. Their influence is a-ok for you and President Carter.

I hope everyone sees he's making fun of the Redneck - bigot-influenced peoples out there.

Hate to be that guy again, but I can't help myself.

So, the accusation is that extracting underground water in high enough volume has ruined the water levels in the rivers. The video however, presents multiple anecdotes from locals as 'evidence'. Including even pointing at a high water mark by a bridge/culvert. You know, in a creek that rises and falls heavily between spring melt and fall.

The lack of any meaningful evidence really skews me to classing this as propaganda over documentary. No effort what so ever was made to prove the allegation that Nestle's operations are influencing creek/river water flow.

Oh Bob....you don't even know what the word "disproving" means, do you?

This twaddle only disproves the notion that you can discern actual information from snidely delivered propaganda.
He is right about one thing, he's not a scientist, he's a comedian who's jokes aren't funny, just like he says. He's not a journalist however, he's likely hoping he can be an internet opinion influencer.
America Uncovered....a spin off of the insane China Uncensored channel, dedicated to China bashing.

This new smattering of random right wing YouTube videos are not "proof" of anything but your bias and willingness to repeat nonsense you enjoy but don't understand.

Put your money where your mouth is, go buy some cheap ocean front property in Miami Dade or the Keys, and don't worry about the fact you can't get flood or hurricane insurance, those are leftie hoaxes and nothing to worry about. You're really going to show us! Odd that those properties are losing value with all those smart rich right wing investors fighting over them, isn't it?

A few points....
1) PBS

2)slant and outright zealous bias are different, if related. The level of falsehoods, the number of falsehoods, the importance of those falsehoods, the influence gained by those falsehoods, the destruction done to the U.S. by those falsehoods, by every measure Fox outpaces it's competition by > a factor of 10.

3)Fox is the leader in biased, hyper partisan opinion presented as news, always has been. They aren't playing catch up or follow the leader, they are the undeniable and clear leaders of propaganda as news, and have been since inception. The left leaning outlets are decades behind and still have this silly notion that outright lies are crossing the line, not so at Faux.

So yes, it exists on both sides, and the left is getting worse, but Fox/Rush/Beck/Jones and the right are driving this bus and have been in that seat for decades, please don't try to imply it's anywhere near equal, it simply isn't.

MSNBC viewers still gain actual factual information by watching, Fox viewers lose it....that's a verified and continuing fact.

I want to preface this comment by saying that I am a political independent, and something that might help convince you of that is that I didn't vote for Donald Trump. The reason I didn't vote for him is because I had serious reservations about him considering what I knew about his character. Now that he is president I support him because I respect the office of the President and I pray for him just as I did for President Obama. That doesn't mean I agree with a lot of what he does, or that I am under any illusions about his character. It just means that I know God is working in these circumstances for a greater good.

I know a lot of Christians voted for Donald Trump because they knew he would side with them in the culture wars. And he has, to a large part. But that isn't the issue with me. I do not fight the culture wars even though I find abortion abhorrent and I lament the deepening darkness that pervades our culture. It is moral and spiritual darkness which will eventually lead to the one world government of the Antichrist.

My issue has to do with the church waking up, and stop thinking the solution is in fixing the culture because the culture is influencing the church more than the church is the culture. The solution is to get right with God and show the love of Christ to a lost and dying world.

So, here is the comment:

It's obvious that the entirety of news media is corrupt; if 2016 didn't make that obvious I don't know what would. They pick winners and losers, as supporters of Bernie Sanders realized. They all have a political agenda and will write either negative or positive coverage based on that agenda. They will present a certain slant to every issue which is favorable to their political aspirations. It is patently obvious and I think most of the country realizes this.

So, this outrage over Fox doing what every other news media company has done in the past, is pretty lame. Maybe Fox is better at it than MSNBC but the point is, they both function as the arm of their respective parties, and manipulate their media coverage to brainwash people into believing their worldview.

this right here is what drives me absolutely bonkers.

you proceed from a false premise:
that "wealth" translates to being less corruptible.

blindly ignoring what wealth actual not only IS,but what it represents to the elite class in America.

power.

so could we please STOP with how much trump is actually worth,as if it has any inherent meaning in terms of power?


i do not understand wasting time with an ideologue,or dissecting his obviously conflicting comments as somehow expressing a clear and definable philosophy.these people play in the realm of cult of personality,spectacle and magical thinking.

their adoration for a particular public figure is cultish,and has very little to do with reality but more how their idol represents an ideal that they feel very strongly about.

so are we really surprised that bob will give Alexandria ocasio cortez a nod for exposing how easy it is to corrupt the system,but then conveniently excuse his idol and give him a pass based on the flimsiest of reasons:wealth.

when it was Alexandria ocasio cortez's lightning round that exposed how it is actually EASIER for the executive branch and the president to sell their influence for money.

but to bob,and how he sees things,the very idea that trump would ever engage in a breach of morality,and break his promise to the American people...is preposterous,...because trump already has money,why would he sell his integrity?

because BOB has integrity.
because BOB would never break a promise.
this is basic projection of ones morality onto a figure they admire.
we can apply the exact same metric to those who voted for Obama.same thing.same results.

you will never get bob to admonish his hero,because that hero represents the IDEA of what bob is projecting,not the actual reality.

fundamentalists engage in the exact same magical thinking.

so how can i get mad for bob,and the other trumpsters of the world?
i pity them.
because delusional dreams always crash on the shores of the real eventually.

and that is going to be a sad day for bob.

You are both saying the same thing.

The only difference is that the cynicism isn't consistently applied to everyone who warrants it.

(I heavily suspect that when the money doesn't add up - someone is making money on the side. And it just so happens that they are in the position to sell regulatory capture, so it is the most likely candidate.)




In this case AOC is on point (granted that Trump is wealthy prior to office).

If I were to criticize her, it would not be for this stuff.
(It would be for identitarianism [vs individualism])



The guilt so far is the sort of guilt everyone has. Not saying everything is kosher - just saying that everyone is guilty, malfeasance or not.

There is a saying, show me the man, I'll show you the crime.

I'm sure that the FBI can look closely enough to everyone related to trump and find something to convict everyone of. It may not be foreign influence related, but it will be something. They can even drag things out until the prez is out of office before going after the juicy targets.

-scheherazade

Yeah, any type of cherry picking in studies irks me badly. For instance, I recently got into an internet argument with one of the people who try to claim we didn't land on the moon.

They were using the results of a single study that tentatively said the Van Allen radiation outside of LEO possibly causes higher rates of cardio-vascular disease in astronauts. I then read the study and found out they picked 7 out of the 13 deceased astronauts vs a sample of 100 LEO astronauts, plus the general public's rates of CVD. That set off my alarm bells, so I then looked at the ages the people died at and their actual cause of death on the internet.

Three of the astronauts died at 56, 61, and 61. So basically about a decade early. The other 4 died in their 80's, basically a decade later than average. Out of those 4, they were suffering other conditions and illnesses that might have influenced the final cardiac failure. Sadly no one in the scientific community seems willing to challenge the study, so it stays valid, and the news media posted great big headlines about it when it came out.

Like I told the person I was arguing with, the median age of death of lunar astronauts is 87, even including the three that died early. Even if Van Allen radiation increases CVD likelihood, living to 80 something is pretty damn spectacular, so it really doesn't matter if you die from CVD, cancer, or a stroke.

I'm not even American and this makes me angry. This has to come from decades of big money influencing politics.