Looks like Flynn has flipped....

[DvlDog4WVU]

Valid. But a lot of what you think is “nuts”, I honestly see as vital. Environmental policy is the area I’m thinking about here. We need radical changes, that will negatively effect business and the economy. It’s an area I thought Obama made good attempts in, and the biggest reason Hillary got my vote. Trump might be anti-establishment when it comes to Washington, but he’s entrenched in the business power structure that has its hands all over the Washington controls.

Lunacy? Sure, I understand balance. But when looking at things like our defense industry, our healthcare system, insurance, energy, or regulatory practices of the past.....I’m all for the “lunacy” you despise so much.

Where I would love to see change is in campaign finance. Lobby firms ran out of DC. Entrenched incumbents sent packing. We just differ on who we want to see in their seats. Trump? No. The devil you know beats......

Regarding the environment, that’s fine to think but it’s absolutely that kind of thinking that I find ridiculous from a logic standpoint. Here is the kicker, I agree that we need some radical change in protecting the environment. However, when I weigh that against realistic possibility via existing technology, realistic impact by the US vs the world, and the resulting impacts against the ability for people to create goods and services needed for survival, I prefer a natural evolution of the positive changes needed.

I don’t think I’m some establishment crony influenced by business. I think I’m entrenched in logic. Trump I think is the same in this regard. Is it possible that you are the one entrenched in ideaology environmental dogma and abandoning logic and reason while demonizing those who disagree with your position? I’ve read your every thought on the environment and playing your string of logic out isn’t sustainable, it’s akin to throwing out the baby with the bath water.

I’m not sure why you think I’m in opposition to the rest of what you’re talking about. I’d love to scale back the defense industry. Let’s do it. How, considering the state of the world today? Obama I think we can all agree was an abysmal foreign policy President almost precisely because he tried pulling out and going the route you suggest. We saw how that played out. It caused a genocide in the Middle East. You ok with that approach and cost? Idealism vs logic, again.

You can argue we shouldn’t be where we are, but how? There was a war being fought against us for 20 years before most in the US ever acknowledged it, it doesn’t start with 9/11. Back it up, USS Cole, Embassy Bombings, WTC, Lockerbie and many other hijackings, Lebanon, hell, add in the wars with Israel, etc. it’s all connected. We have a war to fight and win, first. How do we scale back defense lest we sacrifice victory, or are you ok with losing and or compromising the tenets of what you hold true (compromise, love, compassion, etc.) for the more radical and uncompromising beliefs of Islam? Merely choosing to not fight doesn’t mean the war of ideaology stops.

Healthcare? I’ve said all along I think the only possible way to achieve universal healthcare is through single payer. How do you achieve that? You kill an entire industry and create a massive Govt agency. Killing industry for bigger govt........extrapolating this COA, we’ve seen this model fail and fail again. Ideology vs logic and reason.

Honestly, what I see you desiring are the principles of Socialism and effectively Marxism which inherently creates a massive state and ruling class of government aristocrats. It doesn’t work. It eliminates individuality, it eliminates the very culture and principles you cherish for the sake of the core. I don’t understand how someone as seemingly intelligent as you can observe history and think what you want is possible. If you could point to one time in the history of the world where what you advocate for is either sustainable or actually better for the masses then I’d be more open to the ideas. The reality is there will always be the less fortunate, and the best we can do is to ensure people have a chance for betterment and not artificially limited. That’s where we are now. Everyone in the country has an equal chance under the law, but it’s up to the individual to make the correct often extremely difficult choices and decisions.

 

[wvu2007]

1) who says I didn’t?
2) my family and I take as many measures as we can, do you?

1. Does it matter? If you did then your vote didn't count.
2. As many measures as you can? What exactly do you do?

 

[Boomboom521]

1. Does it matter? If you did then your vote didn't count.
2. As many measures as you can? What exactly do you do?

One car. I bike as much as possible. Conserve food, waste, and gas as much as possible. Don’t rake leaves, use electric mower/trimmer, wrapped my water heater, upgraded our HVAC system/ thermostat, never use plastic water bottles, Luke warm baths, replaced all lights with CFL bulbs, me and my daughter plant a tree every spring, I carpool for every school event, my family is mostly vergetarian (I’m the only one that goes meat, and I cut down on my intake), I recycle and help others recycle, I have initiated a neighborhood recycling program as well, I spread awareness about conservation and climate change, and.....I vote Democrat.

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

One car. I bike as much as possible. Conserve food, waste, and gas as much as possible. Don’t rake leaves, use electric mower/trimmer, wrapped my water heater, upgraded our HVAC system/ thermostat, never use plastic water bottles, Luke warm baths, replaced all lights with CFL bulbs, me and my daughter plant a tree every spring, I carpool for every school event, my family is mostly vergetarian (I’m the only one that goes meat, and I cut down on my intake), I recycle and help others recycle, I have initiated a neighborhood recycling program as well, I spread awareness about conservation and climate change, and.....I vote Democrat.

I’m sure you’d love living near me....hahahhaha

 

[wvu2007]

One car. I bike as much as possible. Conserve food, waste, and gas as much as possible. Don’t rake leaves, use electric mower/trimmer, wrapped my water heater, upgraded our HVAC system/ thermostat, never use plastic water bottles, Luke warm baths, replaced all lights with CFL bulbs, me and my daughter plant a tree every spring, I carpool for every school event, my family is mostly vergetarian (I’m the only one that goes meat, and I cut down on my intake), I recycle and help others recycle, I have initiated a neighborhood recycling program as well, I spread awareness about conservation and climate change, and.....I vote Democrat.

Lol good for you! At least you practice what you preach. I eat cheeseburgers so I am helping out.

 

[Boomboom521]

Regarding the environment, that’s fine to think but it’s absolutely that kind of thinking that I find ridiculous from a logic standpoint. Here is the kicker, I agree that we need some radical change in protecting the environment. However, when I weigh that against realistic possibility via existing technology, realistic impact by the US vs the world, and the resulting impacts against the ability for people to create goods and services needed for survival, I prefer a natural evolution of the positive changes needed.

I don’t think I’m some establishment crony influenced by business. I think I’m entrenched in logic. Trump I think is the same in this regard. Is it possible that you are the one entrenched in ideaology environmental dogma and abandoning logic and reason while demonizing those who disagree with your position? I’ve read your every thought on the environment and playing your string of logic out isn’t sustainable, it’s akin to throwing out the baby with the bath water.

I’m not sure why you think I’m in opposition to the rest of what you’re talking about. I’d love to scale back the defense industry. Let’s do it. How, considering the state of the world today? Obama I think we can all agree was an abysmal foreign policy President almost precisely because he tried pulling out and going the route you suggest. We saw how that played out. It caused a genocide in the Middle East. You ok with that approach and cost? Idealism vs logic, again.

You can argue we shouldn’t be where we are, but how? There was a war being fought against us for 20 years before most in the US ever acknowledged it, it doesn’t start with 9/11. Back it up, USS Cole, Embassy Bombings, WTC, Lockerbie and many other hijackings, Lebanon, hell, add in the wars with Israel, etc. it’s all connected. We have a war to fight and win, first. How do we scale back defense lest we sacrifice victory, or are you ok with losing and or compromising the tenets of what you hold true (compromise, love, compassion, etc.) for the more radical and uncompromising beliefs of Islam? Merely choosing to not fight doesn’t mean the war of ideaology stops.

Healthcare? I’ve said all along I think the only possible way to achieve universal healthcare is through single payer. How do you achieve that? You kill an entire industry and create a massive Govt agency. Killing industry for bigger govt........extrapolating this COA, we’ve seen this model fail and fail again. Ideology vs logic and reason.

Honestly, what I see you desiring are the principles of Socialism and effectively Marxism which inherently creates a massive state and ruling class of government aristocrats. It doesn’t work. It eliminates individuality, it eliminates the very culture and principles you cherish for the sake of the core. I don’t understand how someone as seemingly intelligent as you can observe history and think what you want is possible. If you could point to one time in the history of the world where what you advocate for is either sustainable or actually better for the masses then I’d be more open to the ideas. The reality is there will always be the less fortunate, and the best we can do is to ensure people have a chance for betterment and not artificially limited. That’s where we are now. Everyone in the country has an equal chance under the law, but it’s up to the individual to make the correct often extremely difficult choices and decisions.

Environmentalism needs to exist on a small scale individually in order for it to have the effect on the large scale. Consumers need to drive the market. This is the area in which the government needs to help. Information, effects (clear and definitive effects) of climate change need to be relayed to the public, in terms that make very clear the potential longterm devastation. This is going the opposite direction currently, as denial science (and the manipulation of facts) are encouraged over clear evidence. This allows the general public (ie the consumer) to fall back into a sense of comfort with the current consumer market and not allow urgency (that is warranted) to drive those natural forces that will make the market change. Besides, the government can help these markets, it can help the industries, it can help in studying and finding solutions....much more than it is now.

Much the same....with regards to idealism as applied to relations in the ME and throughout the world....our approach (IMO) towards environmental policy as well as foreign policy needs to be backed by serious commitments to supporting policy. What I mean by that is....Paris is a good step (if just for the symbolic commitment), but without policies designed at helping our domestic consumer ideology and foreign production methods change for good, the change will not be sustainable. For example, labeling foods was a good step, but teaching the consumer to read those labels properly needed to happen in order for the step to have the effectiveness it was designed to have.

Foreign policy needs this same type of supportive policy. Idealism backed by Peace Corp type actions. This is an area that my idealism is overshadowed by my lack of knowledge about the region - of which I’m well aware- but I’ll never value war over much anyway.

I’m not sure universal healthcare is the answer. But I do think it costs way too much for people to recieve proper care. I think our way of life, as well, leads us into a system of sickness and needed care and that needs to be addressed. Our insurance system is something o think should be reevaluated and changes made - and maybe your boy can help along those lines. But healthcare is becoming more and more a pressing issue. Care for the elderly is ridiculous. The cost to care for loved ones is completely destroying middle class and upper middle class inheritance. Something needs done. Universal or not.....we need drastic changes.

We’ve had various aspects of socialism in our government since the beginning. I in no way advocate for a socialist system. I believe in tenets of the capitalist, market driven system. I just think the approach to these approaches needs to change substantially. That might seem like bs.....but how we evaluate products to purchase as consumers, and how we evaluate profit and costs needs to change.

 

[TarHeelEer]

That might seem like bs

Wait, what? Which part?

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

oreign policy needs this same type of supportive policy. Idealism backed by Peace Corp type actions. This is an area that my idealism is overshadowed by my lack of knowledge about the region - of which I’m well aware- but I’ll never value war over much anyway.

I want to be clear, I don’t advocate war. I hate it and I wish it wasn’t necessary. However, we are facing a real threat. I’d strongly advocate shifting defense dollars into Peace Corps initiatives if the rest of the world played ball. It isn’t and it won’t, at least until there is a drastic worldwide accountability held towards Islam and a forced modernization of it and abandonment of its extremist tenets. However, that requires a drastic rewriting of it’s reality. And I hate to sound pessimistic, but the liberals aren’t helping in this by being apologists and even ignorant towards what it is using their relationships with Muslims in a modernized America as a barometer of understanding and extrapolating it against a world decades if not centuries in some cases behind their baseline exposure and experience.

 

[Boomboom521]

Wait, what? Which part?

Funny

 

[Boomboom521]

I want to be clear, I don’t advocate war. I hate it and I wish it wasn’t necessary. However, we are facing a real threat. I’d strongly advocate shifting defense dollars into Peace Corps initiatives if the rest of the world played ball. It isn’t and it won’t, at least until there is a drastic worldwide accountability held towards Islam and a forced modernization of it and abandonment of its extremist tenets. However, that requires a drastic rewriting of it’s reality. And I hate to sound pessimistic, but the liberals aren’t helping in this by being apologists and even ignorant towards what it is using their relationships with Muslims in a modernized America as a barometer of understanding and extrapolating it against a world decades if not centuries in some cases behind their baseline exposure and experience.

I hear you.

 

[dave]

Took out the part about the environment, did you? Selective truth. The costs of the changing environment will be more than most think over the long term.

Anyone touting changing the environment at the cost of business is crazy fuking nuts stupid. So congrats.

 

[atlkvb]

One car. I bike as much as possible. Conserve food, waste, and gas as much as possible. Don’t rake leaves, use electric mower/trimmer, wrapped my water heater, upgraded our HVAC system/ thermostat, never use plastic water bottles, Luke warm baths, replaced all lights with CFL bulbs, me and my daughter plant a tree every spring, I carpool for every school event, my family is mostly vergetarian (I’m the only one that goes meat, and I cut down on my intake), I recycle and help others recycle, I have initiated a neighborhood recycling program as well, I spread awareness about conservation and climate change, and.....I vote Democrat.

All that and yet we had one of the coldest Winter's on record this past year, and this past Summer record highs. Nothing you or anyone else can do adjusts Earth's thermostat or controls our distance from the Sun which is the most direct control over our global temperatures...you don't have that type of power and you never will.

 

[atlkvb]

That might seem like bs.....but how we evaluate products to purchase as consumers, and how we evaluate profit and costs needs to change.

Explain boom. Change how? Just explain it in terms of how individuals approach their everyday economic decisions and how people who provide goods and services do the same?

 

[countryroads89]

Anyone touting changing the environment at the cost of business is crazy fuking nuts stupid. So congrats.

Pot, meet kettle.

Yeah, clean air and water are overrated.

Dumbass.

 

[bamaEER]

Pot, meet kettle.

Yeah, clean air and water are overrated.

Dumbass.

Same crowd who said to terminate EPA. Numbnuts.

 

[Boomboom521]

Anyone touting changing the environment at the cost of business is crazy fuking nuts stupid. So congrats.

Same thing was said about slavery at one time

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

Same thing was said about slavery at one time

Hahahaha, and now you step into the absurd.

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

Pot, meet kettle.

Yeah, clean air and water are overrated.

Dumbass.

You’re like a character, right? This act can’t be the real you.

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

Same crowd who said to terminate EPA. Numbnuts.

Terminating what they’ve evolved into, sure. They’ve far exceeded their intended purpose. Imagine that, a Govt agency growing beyond intent. That never happens. No siree bob.

 

[countryroads89]

Companies cost themselves money every single day complying with environmental regulations. It is a fact of life. You and dumb dave acting like it shouldn't happen at all, two dumbasses.

 

[atlkvb]

Honestly, what I see you desiring are the principles of Socialism and effectively Marxism which inherently creates a massive state and ruling class of government aristocrats. It doesn’t work. It eliminates individuality, it eliminates the very culture and principles you cherish for the sake of the core. I don’t understand how someone as seemingly intelligent as you can observe history and think what you want is possible. If you could point to one time in the history of the world where what you advocate for is either sustainable or actually better for the masses then I’d be more open to the ideas. The reality is there will always be the less fortunate, and the best we can do is to ensure people have a chance for betterment and not artificially limited. That’s where we are now. Everyone in the country has an equal chance under the law, but it’s up to the individual to make the correct often extremely difficult choices and decisions.

The ultimate challenge to Socialists, and the ultimate question they refuse to answer. However voters do, and when they balance all you've outlined vs boomer's idealism expressed in his post(s)...voters choose Freedom. Voters don't trust Government to be an unbiased part of this equation because Government's first obligation is to perpetuate it's own existence and power (the folks who run it) while individuals are obviously more concerned about their specific priorites. Government can be and should be an unbiased mediator so no one has unfair advantages of their priorities over another's...but Government can't and shouldn't dictate outcomes which is what Socialists believe is the only way to make it fair.

Wrong.

Very well stated DvlDog4WVU!

 

[atlkvb]

That is nuts, and you are fringe, in that aspect.

boomer places larger than Life egalitarian ideals out there that sound good in classroom theory, but in the real world where hard choices are made on cost vs quality they are unworkable. Used cars exist because not everyone needs or wants a new one. Dirty air and water exist because people have to live. You can't eliminate all bad things, some you just have to consider part of living and just like there will never be no autobile crashes so you need insurance...there will never be a 100% pristine environment as long people have to lower costs of things in order to survive.

This is why radical environmentalism can never work...it costs too much and people can't pay its price and survive. So they won't.

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

Companies cost themselves money every single day complying with environmental regulations. It is a fact of life. You and dumb dave acting like it shouldn't happen at all, two dumbasses.

I’ll just chalk this response up to another low intellectual understanding of the discussion. Of course what you stated is correct, that wasn’t under debate. What was under debate however, was further increasing regulations at the expense of businesses and jobs.

Basic scenario question here to help you get up to the level of the discussion. How much ROI towards an environmentally driven initiative is acceptable to cost American jobs? For instance, who do you think is impacted first when a corporation faces increased costs associated with more stringent environmental regulations? I can tell you, reducing salaries and bonuses usually doesn’t happen, reduced NOP isn’t even a discussion topic, so it does cost jobs. And how much return on said regulations actually impacts the environment or would need to impact the environment to kill say 10000 American jobs? Does it even matter to you or is the environmental question too much of a sacrosanct issue that any advances towards betterment is worth the jobs and lives of real people? I’m curious, how much squeeze is necessary for the juice?

It’s hard to have these discussions with some of you guys, because you all are like little pigs suckling at the teets of Gov’t. You aren’t actually experiencing real life like people in industry. It’s a completely alternate reality you live in. Until Trump, none of you had to have any concerns about longevity in a career. There aren’t any real performance metrics you have to concern yourself with. Basically, the requirement to not get fired is to show up on time (that’s even debatable) don’t sexually harass anyone, and have something to write with. It takes an act of god to fire someone regardless of performance.

 

[atlkvb]

I’ll just chalk this response up to another low intellectual understanding of the discussion. Of course what you stated is correct, that wasn’t under debate. What was under debate however, was further increasing regulations at the expense of businesses and jobs.

Basic scenario question here to help you get up to the level of the discussion. How much ROI towards an environmentally driven initiative is acceptable to cost American jobs? For instance, who do you think is impacted first when a corporation faces increased costs associated with more stringent environmental regulations? I can tell you, reducing salaries and bonuses usually doesn’t happen, reduced NOP isn’t even a discussion topic, so it does cost jobs. And how much return on said regulations actually impacts the environment or would need to impact the environment to kill say 10000 American jobs? Does it even matter to you or is the environmental question too much of a sacrosanct issue that any advances towards betterment is worth the jobs and lives of real people? I’m curious, how much squeeze is necessary for the juice?

It’s hard to have these discussions with some of you guys, because you all are like little pigs suckling at the teets of Gov’t. You aren’t actually experiencing real life like people in industry. It’s a completely alternate reality you live in. Until Trump, none of you had to have any concerns about longevity in a career. There aren’t any real performance metrics you have to concern yourself with. Basically, the requirement to not get fired is to show up on time (that’s even debatable) don’t sexually harass anyone, and have something to write with. It takes an act of god to fire someone regardless of performance.

Socialists and bureaucrats don't like being reminded what cushy jobs they have or what low performance metrics are required to keep them. They get violently angry at anyone who points that out or suggests they don't have real jobs based on true competition or needing to turn a profit for their employer. I'm glad you pointed that out to this particular poster who has a latent desire to label anyone who disagrees as "stupid".

Seems this poster is very comfortable with that depiction in others. Perhaps it's easily understood by the poster's personal experience?

 

[dave]

Regarding the environment, that’s fine to think but it’s absolutely that kind of thinking that I find ridiculous from a logic standpoint. Here is the kicker, I agree that we need some radical change in protecting the environment. However, when I weigh that against realistic possibility via existing technology, realistic impact by the US vs the world, and the resulting impacts against the ability for people to create goods and services needed for survival, I prefer a natural evolution of the positive changes needed.

I don’t think I’m some establishment crony influenced by business. I think I’m entrenched in logic. Trump I think is the same in this regard. Is it possible that you are the one entrenched in ideaology environmental dogma and abandoning logic and reason while demonizing those who disagree with your position? I’ve read your every thought on the environment and playing your string of logic out isn’t sustainable, it’s akin to throwing out the baby with the bath water.

I’m not sure why you think I’m in opposition to the rest of what you’re talking about. I’d love to scale back the defense industry. Let’s do it. How, considering the state of the world today? Obama I think we can all agree was an abysmal foreign policy President almost precisely because he tried pulling out and going the route you suggest. We saw how that played out. It caused a genocide in the Middle East. You ok with that approach and cost? Idealism vs logic, again.

You can argue we shouldn’t be where we are, but how? There was a war being fought against us for 20 years before most in the US ever acknowledged it, it doesn’t start with 9/11. Back it up, USS Cole, Embassy Bombings, WTC, Lockerbie and many other hijackings, Lebanon, hell, add in the wars with Israel, etc. it’s all connected. We have a war to fight and win, first. How do we scale back defense lest we sacrifice victory, or are you ok with losing and or compromising the tenets of what you hold true (compromise, love, compassion, etc.) for the more radical and uncompromising beliefs of Islam? Merely choosing to not fight doesn’t mean the war of ideaology stops.

Healthcare? I’ve said all along I think the only possible way to achieve universal healthcare is through single payer. How do you achieve that? You kill an entire industry and create a massive Govt agency. Killing industry for bigger govt........extrapolating this COA, we’ve seen this model fail and fail again. Ideology vs logic and reason.

Honestly, what I see you desiring are the principles of Socialism and effectively Marxism which inherently creates a massive state and ruling class of government aristocrats. It doesn’t work. It eliminates individuality, it eliminates the very culture and principles you cherish for the sake of the core. I don’t understand how someone as seemingly intelligent as you can observe history and think what you want is possible. If you could point to one time in the history of the world where what you advocate for is either sustainable or actually better for the masses then I’d be more open to the ideas. The reality is there will always be the less fortunate, and the best we can do is to ensure people have a chance for betterment and not artificially limited. That’s where we are now. Everyone in the country has an equal chance under the law, but it’s up to the individual to make the correct often extremely difficult choices and decisions.

I dont think we need radical change. We have good environmental laws on the books.

 

[countryroads89]

Doc. Connecting dots only to be wrong for 20 years. Peel another onion moron.

It is all speculation. You really should learn the meaning of the words you use.

LMAO.

You make this too easy.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/mich...mbers-special-counsels-team/story?id=51412187

 

[dave]

LMAO.

You make this too easy.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/mich...mbers-special-counsels-team/story?id=51412187

I am not sure why you think that story helps your point. I said a long time ago when the turkey stuff hit the news he would get indicted. They didnt need a special counsel to indict him but Mueller needs indictments to justify expenditures

 

[countryroads89]

I am not sure why you think that story helps your point.

dumb dave strikes again

 

[Boomboom521]

dumb dave strikes again

Would have been better if he was on his phone

 

[dave]

dumb dave strikes again

Odd you have a photo from inside a mens room and you tell odd stories of random copulation. I hope this thread doesnt break anyones gaydar.

 

[WVU82]

good stuff...

keep it up...

 

[countryroads89]

Awesome thread!!!!

 

[dave]

Awesome thread!!!!

I know. Its hard to find a thread on this forum where you look like an idiot.

Oh wait. I meant the opposite of that.

 

[TarHeelEer]

Please. Politics and nasty play within the DNC is nowhere near the level of a foreign state aggressively seeking to influence.

I call bull

 

[TarHeelEer]

I don’t agree that the information came solely from the KGB.

That was never a belief. Some even came from our own IC, and it was still wrong.

I don’t agree that it was the reason FISA was approved.

Wrong

I don’t agree it is the reason a SP was appointed.

Wrong

Hillary paid for it.
I think a Republican started the ball rolling.

Wrong

 

[Boomboom521]

That was never a belief. Some even came from our own IC, and it was still wrong.



Wrong



Wrong



Wrong

Pretty cocky today....care to link me to any fvcking proof of anything at all.

Oh wait, I know: the proof of all of those sassy “wrongs” lay within the shadowy game of chess being played through interpreting redactions, partisan memos, reporter tweets, random jags cryptic assertions, and what certain firings mean right? You know, adult chess. We’re just waiting for the DOJ to process it.....no wait.....midterms......no wait.....the Mueller report......??? Soon?

 

[Boomboom521]

And I’m even saying I’m not wrong....I’m just not as cocky as you I guess. Hope the truth gets out at some fvcking point. But nothing you reposted of mine has changed in my mind

 

[DvlDog4WVU]

And I’m even saying I’m not wrong....I’m just not as cocky as you I guess. Hope the truth gets out at some fvcking point. But nothing you reposted of mine has changed in my mind

The truth is, the entirety of the FBI’s head shed is no longer there due to firings, resignations, and “retirements”. That’s totally normal, right?

 

[Boomboom521]

The truth is, the entirety of the FBI’s head shed is no longer there due to firings, resignations, and “retirements”. That’s totally normal, right?

I guess it’s normal for FBI brass to conduct highly corrupt and illegal actions and only be forced to retire or be fired, and not prosecuted?

 

[MountaineerWV]

I guess it’s normal for FBI brass to conduct highly corrupt and illegal actions and only be forced to retire or be fired, and not prosecuted?

Must mean that Trump is part of this "Deep State" since he cannot get anyone (other than his own people) prosecuted.