Random Politics & Religion #25

Pretty much my opinion too Saevel.

The FBI is well known for following every possible lead or trail.

Actually, they are well known of doing political favors for certain people, and tampering/destroying evidence when politically convenient.

Example being Comey not going after Clinton, all because of "she didn't intend to"

Then why are you posting click baity articles that say absolutely nothing while insinuating a lot.


If it wasn't Mueller then I'd agree. This guy has served under George Bush senior, Bill Clinton, George Bush Jr and then Obama. He is a legend in those circles for being non-partisan and apolitical. If he was directory during the last few years then he would of went after Hillary.

http://www.npr.org/2017/05/17/528855474/biographer-outlines-robert-muellers-12-years-as-fbi-director

https://www.bustle.com/p/is-robert-mueller-a-democrat-republican-his-appointment-was-lauded-by-both-parties-58693

From 2001

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2001/07/30/fbi-nominee-lauded-for-tenacity/e2012e09-379e-479f-8bd3-8c2aef36152a/?utm_term=.108b8a7ca52f

Out of all the possible people to lead such an investigation, this is probably the most neutral non-partisan person that could of been chosen. I believe he was chosen precisely because of his long reputation for not playing party politics or doing special favors.

Awhile back when we were talking about Comey's firing I mentioned how FBI directors usually get changed out after each administration and that Mueller was the exception. The reason he was an exception is that his legendary status for being above the petty trash talk and partisan manipulations both parties get into.

Because they are interesting and came on Sat.

Personally I see nothing wrong with a foreign envoy talking policy with an incoming administration.

Not reporting it? That's a nono. I don't remember? One wonders if he remembers how to tie shoelaces.

And in other news, illegals who have overstayed their ESTA think they should be allowed to stay because Obama didn't bother looking for them.

What happens when you have a good bad idea.

http://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/dream-inequality

A look at what Scaramucci is really like:

GOP Campaigns Recall a Self-Dealing Leaker in Scaramucci
President Trump demands loyalty. So why did he hire someone with a reputation for the opposite?
Daaily Beast

And for religion, some creationists do not believe in rendering unto Caesar.

To Avoid Taxes Creationists Sell Ark Park To Themselves For $10

There's more...

A hit piece on Day 1 of the job. Gee, I don't know why people believe the media is biased against Republicans.

The writer probably can't even name a Communications Director under President Obama (neither can you) nor did they ever write an article about one before.

The morning twitter tantrums continue! Another lost week inbound.

Read the opinion blog post, it's hyper biased and reads like something written by Vic.

If you bothered to read the history, basically a bunch of Christian people wanted to open a theme park for their religion. They were able to demonstrate that the park would be a boon to the local economy by drawing tourists and visitors so the local government granted them some tax benefits to help in raising capital for the construction. Immediately they were assaulted by various anti-religious progressive groups trying to get them shutdown. Fast forward and they are doing decent enough money wise, the local government decides to create a new "safety tax" designed to tax the parks revenue to step around the previous granted tax benefits. The parks owners then sold the park to their non-profit affiliate organization and thus render it eligible for non-profit status. The local folks are pissed because that means it would be exempt from their newly crafted tax.

Religious organizations are generally exempt from taxes anyway, provided they meet a list of requirements, chief of which being that they can't generate dividends or profit for the owners. This park originally was for-profit but hadn't yet paid off it's debts so technically it hasn't generated any real profit yet.

Now here is where things get really interesting. The reason for the safety tax is that the local town felt they had to hire a bunch more police and fire fighters because of the increased tourism in the area due to the parks opening and success. So they may very well have a valid reason for the money yet I feel they have went about this the wrong way. Instead of crafting a new "tax" they should of gone directly to the park and negotiated some sort of cost sharing or fee based agreement. In theory the boon to the local economy should of paid for that extra protection from various parking fee's and so forth, so this kinda seems like a cash grab. The property value also seems suspicious as ***. The original value of 18 mil was done on the value of the park, but then suddenly it's 48 mil by the people collecting the tax for the county. And seeing as the county is facing severe red ink, this seems like another cash grab.

So the transfer from for-profit to non-profit seems to be a way to avoid the sudden cash grab. Of course if it's a non-profit then the guys can't ever get any money out of it, but for some reason I don't think they ever expected to do so.

Day 1? Nah they had these made up before he came on the job, they did one on each of the potential people and just change a few words prior to running it.

There will be a lost week, but probably not the one you're thinking of. It will be a week of the media stretching an uneventful Kushner meeting like taffy trying to find something there that doesn't exist. Time for CNN to get a huge panel of people that all have something to say but nothing to show.

Agreed! Another week where libs lose is coming up!

You're thinking of YouTube videos.

Kushner's obstinate denial sure sounds like got bent over in the senate today. Right comrades?

The lib BTFO-ing has just begun.

Kid looks barely old enough to buy a pack of beer, pretty hard to envision him stealing US elections.

Saevel, I have been following the saga of Ken Ham’s Ark Park for a LONG time.

And yes, the piece came from an atheist site.

So fricking what? Ham believes in the bible to the letter. Except when it might cost him money. You have no idea how much leeway and how many tax breaks he has gotten for this pile of crap garbage.

I'm quite aware of exactly what he has gotten and not gotten, unlike yourself. The different is I read and research with a skeptical rational mind and never take emotionally laden language at face value. The 18 million you think he's gotten he hasn't actually gotten yet, it's a tax rebate, meaning the state will give him back the taxes on that parks revenue. They haven't actually done it and likely won't as him changing the parks status from For-Profit to Non-Profit violates the original conditions of the tax break.

And what do you mean "cost him money"? He hasn't actually made any money yet, it's not his money. The costs for building that place required him to take out bonds and loans, the site won't be financially green until those are taken care of.

But you don't care, it's just you practicing religious intolerance and spreading hate and acid.

No, I am against creationism. I am also appalled at the way he is treating the city, county, and state after the way they have bent over backward for him and his package of lies bible park.

Impartial ABC just casually throwing in a Russian flag in their reporting of Trumps tweets.

Yeah, sure. Putin's playing Trump, even though Putin had much more to gain from a Clinton administration.