My reply to a reader comment

The reader’s comment is in dark letters, my response is in blue:

I love your mission statement, which promises to track issues and stories of the day for those who sincerely want to think and judge for themselves. To do that well, we need not both fact and context within which fact can be assessed. Lacking or disregarding either fact or context harms judgment.

–> I think I follow what you’re saying here, but not completely sure.

I admire your “Trump timeline…(ongoing)” by Steven Harper as a consolidated source of topical information that is not generally organized usefully or available in one place. By itself, however, your timeline does not allow the nonpartisan thinker to fairly consider whether Russia and Trump are excessively, too secretly and/or improperly bound, as the partisan — essentially Clinton — interests who advance that hypothesis would have it.

–> Thanks.  I regard myself as a non-partisan person who votes for the PERSON, not the PARTY.  So, for me it’s a case-by-case basis.  Before Trump was elected I was quite apolitical and didn’t pay much attention to politics one way or another but generally disliked politics and politicians very much.  Could you or I run for POTUS?  No.  Are you a millionaire or billionaire?  Me either.  I’m not pro-Clinton; I’m not anti-Trump . . . however, I’m in favor of, to a large degree, the antithesis of what Trump seems to stand for and be all about.  I’ve never seen a bigger jerk with the world’s biggest ego and world’s largest hubris.  If/when Trump does something to applaud, I will applaud . . . until then I will condemn much of what he does, because much of it would not be tolerated by a GRADE SCHOOL PRINCIPAL or any ‘normal’ parent.

Your Trump/Russia compilation does not provide or cite the facts/context of relations among Russian interests and other prominent American political actors, such as Mr and Mrs Clinton and allied interests such as their foundation, staff and officials like John Brennan, whom you quote affectingly. Only in and with that context can one assess the merit and the meaning of Trump/Russian associations.

–> Trump said on national TV he fired Comey b/c he wanted the ‘Russia thing’ to end.  He asked Pence and Sessions to leave the room so he could talk to Comey alone and then Trump pressured Comey to let Flynn off the hook.  I believe Comey over Trump.  There’s soooooo much stuff there with respect to Trump and Russia that I will be AMAZED if he gets through this unscathed.  The main reason he was elected is because he successfully duped millions of people into believing he would bring bygone jobs back . . . like coal . . . like factories.  It ain’t gonna happen and eventually his base will turn on him — but how much damage will he accomplish first?  I started out being much more neutral but since November every new day makes me like the present POTUS less and less and to regard him as perhaps the biggest present and ongoing menace to mankind we’ve ever seen. Hitler didn’t have nuclear weapons.  Trump is Barnum and Bailey, rolled into one.  I believe history will eventually bear this out.  I believe what some pundits have said, “If only Trump had a father that showed him love he would not be like he is.”

To correct this oversight, you could fact-track, fact-check and update each of the Clinton/Russia associations that Liz Wheeler notes in her “News Anchor Uncovers Definite Evidence of Collusion With Russia,” which appears at

–> I do seek to fact-check and thought I’ve been doing that.  If you fact-check Trump, the fact checkers are saying about 4% of what he says is ‘true.’  Trump is a lying skunk . . . just watch the news and you’ll draw the same conclusion, in short order. I hate that there seems to be very little in the way of completely neutral and unbiased reporting . . . there’s FOX and all the others, which do lean a little or a lot LEFT.  I don’t like that — but Trump is his own worst enemy.  Can you believe he openly admitted he fired Comey to get rid of the Russia investigation?  In his arrogance he must think he’s above the law and can do what he wants and will ultimately get away with anything he wants to do.  Nixon said, “When the President does it, it’s not against the law.”  It seems that Trump feels the same.

Ms Wheeler humorously presents the deadly serious case that, as matters stand now, you short-change your stated mission. I hope you will correct that oversight because I happen to believe with John Brennan that the underlying importance of unseen Russian influence in US politics matters a great deal. I also believe it deserves the truly nonpartisan examination that and assessment that you purport but fail to present.

–> I am not a Republican . . . I am not a Democrat . . . I hate politics and think the Constitution needs a major overall.  What’s to stop a ‘Stalin’ from being elected or someone who is seriously mentally ill (like the experts say Trump IS)?  The founders were against PARTIES and FACTIONS and THAT has escalated into a big-time mess that has this country very F’d up (IMHO).  Everyone is a fallible human being and will make mistakes, but this guy is sooooooooo flawed and soooooooo UNPRESIDENTIAL that, for a thinking/feeling (and perceptive) person it is VERY HARD TO TAKE.

Failing that, I will consider you nonpartisan in name only and in fact a closet leftist seeking more marketable cover in changing times.

–> I’m not a leftist (any way shape or form), but I do believe Trump is perhaps the most evil thing this country has ever seen and the sooner he gets gone, the better.  


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s