The Muller Report has been available for several weeks but there remains confusion about what it contains, mostly on the part of Democrats.
The report was made available with redactions of sensitive sources, methods and grand jury data. These redactions were required by law. The congressional committee members have unredacted copies available to read at a secure facility. The first volume reportedly indicates that no collusion was found between the Trump campaign and Russia. Volume Two reportedly outlines the various obstruction of justice accusations and indicates that there is insufficient evidence to support an obstruction of justice charge.
Now the Democrat’s committees in the house are asking for documents from the distant past in order to oversee the executive branch but really, it is to harass this president to prevent him from reaching his objectives.
Chuck Schumer should reconsider the three things he knows (AVP editorial page May 19). First, that Putin wanted Trump to be president is doubtful; he already had Hillary in his pocket, with Uranium One and loose handling of US government emails.
The Intelligence report that says so was cooked up by top echelons of CIA, FBI and DIA, not from the normal investigatory processes typically executed by the rank and file in these organizations. Second, that the Trump administration was eager and enthusiastic to help the Russians sabotage the election is contrary to the findings in the Mueller Report.
Evidently Chuck can’t read. Third, that Trump did almost everything he could to get Mueller fired is laughable as he could have fired him with a stroke of a pen, as he could for anyone who worked for him, but did not.
The Democrats need to keep this issue alive, with lies if necessary, into the 2020 election season; they have nothing else to offer.
Is it true?
I have read the letter from Bill Homan (6/27/19) over and over. He states that there is a letter detailing the extent of undocumented immigrants using HUD public housing in Los Angeles. My thought is, is there such a letter and if so, what legal or political purpose does it serve? Also, is this not news and should the AV Press print it, if it is true?
That wouldn’t happen with Socialism
Although I agree with the thrust of the King Features Syndkate’s political cartoon of 6.29.19 - that many political reactionaries illogically oppose government programs that serve their interests, the cartoon’s intimation that Medicare is an indication of socialism was inaccurate.
Medicare does not begin to remove the profit motive from the healthcare system. Nor does it assure that hospitals, medical device firms, and pharmaceutical plants be owned by society and democratically administered by their workers. As such, Medicare has absolutely nothing to do with socialism.
Medicare, Social Security, and other such programs are concessions to the fact that the capitalist system is incapable of meeting the material needs of the mass of workers. Social Security, as an example, is predicated upon the fact that, throughout their working lives, workers are robbed - at the point of production - of the lion’s share of the economic wealth that their labor power or their intellectual power produces, thereby necessitating programs the likes of Social Security.
Within socialist society, there wouldn’t be a need for such programs because, while keeping the totality of the wealth they would produce, workers would be fully able to self-fund their retirements and so much more.
Consequently, such programs are expressions of the capitalist system - in that they serve as gatekeepers for that system just as they were intended to do by the various incarnations of the capitalist state that created them, e.g., the presidential administrations of Franklin Roosevelt and Lyndon Johnson.
Guy Marsh’s recent letter revealed much about his philosophy and thought process.
“I do not claim to be an intellectual, nor do not aspire to be an intellectual. I am a revolutionary.”
If you search synonyms for revolutionary you will find “radical” as the first option. Here a few of the names that appear when you search revolutionaries in history.
Of course, your beloved Karl Marx along with Engels thought to be the fathers of many failed Socialist and Communist regimes responsible for the deaths of hundreds of millions of people in the last century.
Names like Vladimir Lenin, Joseph Stalin, Mao Zedong, Il Sung, Fidel Castro and many other share your self-proclaimed title of “revolutionary.” Zedong is thought to be responsible for the deaths of 45 million people with his “giant Leap forward” policies.
Marsh, “My targeted audience respecting my Marxist perspectives consists of politically unaffiliated young people and disillusioned liberals.”
It has become obvious that this is what happened to you. As a youth you were fed this dangerous propaganda and still believe it to this day. Thankfully you are in no position to be harmful to the masses just a reliable source of entertainment.