• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


downzy last won the day on March 28

downzy had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

4,264 Excellent


About downzy

  • Rank
  • Birthday 04/12/1980

Previous Fields

  • Sex

Profile Information

  • Location
    Toronto, Canada
  • Interests
    Politics, photography, snowboarding, golf, weight lifting, current events, television, running.

Recent Profile Visitors

14,180 profile views
  1. Had a dream last night about the announcement. It was about a new song called something like I Will or Will Try and even made some of it up him head (it wasn't bad, if I can recall, lol). We can all dream
  2. I'd trust him as far as I could throw him. It sounds like Hannity is probably done at Fox News anyway.
  3. Sad to post that I lost one of my best friends this past Friday. Nick belonged to my wife when I first met him and live a good long life of 17 years (she had him for 11). He showed no real signs of duress and I found him lying on the floor looking out at the trees through the big bay windows (I had taken him up to my parents' place in the country the night before). I work at home and he was constantly sitting on me while I tried to get stuff done at my computer. He has been at my side or on me for almost every day for the past three and a half years since my wife and I moved in together. He loved to cuddle and be cradled like a baby. He'd take any attention he could get, from belly rubs to wrestling to being brushed to nuzzling up to either my wife of I while we slept. He was a great little animal who changed my attitude not only towards cats (was never a cat guy) but animals in general (I gave up beef and chicken last year after finally appreciate the love and personality behind animals). I built a custom coffin for him and dug a grave in my parents backyard in the far corner of the lot; besides a little pine tree. We found some nice stones and rocks to make a little memorial for him. He was buried with the little cat bed he loved to sleep in along with his two favourite toys. Nick was greatly loved and will be greatly missed.
  4. A terrible and pointless tragedy. This will not further anyone's cause. What an absolute shame.
  5. Fox News Retracts Article on Seth Rich Murder Investigation Fox News on Tuesday issued a public retraction of a controversial article it published last week on the investigation of DNC staffer Seth Rich’s murder. “On May 16, a story was posted on the Fox News website on the investigation into the 2016 murder of DNC Staffer Seth Rich,” Fox’s note read. “The article was not initially subjected to the high degree of editorial scrutiny we require for all our reporting. Upon appropriate review, the article was found not to meet those standards and has since been removed.” The original article had claimed that “sources in FBI” suggested they’d seen Rich’s computer containing evidence of him corresponding with WikiLeaks prior to his murder. However, it turns out, the FBI never had Rich’s computer. And yet the story has made its way to Fox’s air with primetime star Sean Hannity repeatedly covering the unfounded theory that DNC apparatchiks murdered Rich for possible ties to WikiLeaks. Despite the Rich family’s outrage—and multiple Fox reporters telling The Daily Beast that such coverage “embarrasses” the network—Hannity has persisted.
  6. Also being reported that Flynn's legal team is refusing to honour Senate subpoenas.
  7. This sucks.
  8. This is probably the best course of action for everyone involved. It gets the Russia investigation off the backs of Republican Senators and House members. The Democrats get reassurance that the investigation is being led by a man they wholly trust and admire. And this gives more wiggle room for Trump in the short term since the anxieties of his critics will be appeased. But the man is such a whinny bitch I don't think he can get out of his own way. Already complaining about being treated unfairly. FFS. Perhaps his administration should have turned over requested documents the House and Senate investigations have been asking for since March. Ultimately, I think the worst they'll discover is that some members of the Trump campaign were given advanced notice from the Russians as to the contents and date of the leak during the campaign. This would have provided the Trump campaign an opportunity to craft responses and shape their messaging as the Russians through wikipedia and other outlets leaked emails from the Clinton campaign. I don't know how much coordination or assistance the Trump campaign could have provided Russian agents. I think through all of this there wasn't much expectation by the Russians or the Trump campaign that Trump was actually going to win. Perhaps it will be revealed that Trump went along with Russia's attempt to undermine the Clinton campaign for some shady monetary gain in the form of absolving previous or future loan/debt obligations Trump may have to Russia. I still haven't heard a plausible explanation on how Roger Stone knew and boasted about the Podesta email hacks well before them being released. I also recall the Trump campaign having almost an immediate response to the leaks that suggests they had advanced notice. So in the short term having a special counsel appointed is a win for everyone involved. But if Trump is guilty of something, I would expect we'll know about it before his re-election campaign should he get that far. I thought about it but he struck me as the kind of guy who made a deal with the devil. Guess that deal ran out after being let go at Fox News. At least that golden parachute he got after his termination from Fox News for being an overall creep will be enjoyed by his poor wife and kids.
  9. The element of corruption could also be derived from other aspects of the active investigation between the Trump campaign, Flynn, and Russian intervention in the US election. It's being suggested that this could explain why Comey did not immediately come forward with what transpired between Trump and himself. Comey's memo, in addition to any tangible and concrete evidence produced by the FBI investigation, would paint a picture of a President who had material benefits in seeing the Russian investigation shut down.
  10. This. Del provides images behind the scenes that many fans, including myself, are interested in seeing. We might look at removing him during non-touring stretches, but since the band is only a week or two away from hitting the road again he's here to stay until at least September.
  11. I'm reading the opposite. Many reports and legal opinions I'm coming across suggest that Trump is guilty of obstruction if the speculation proves to be true. Granted, Comey's memo still needs to be seen and perhaps Trump's words are misconstrued or taken out of context. But if what's being reported is true, any involvement or effort by a sitting President to influence or suppress an ongoing criminal investigation that would provide material benefit to one of his cabinet members, and thus by proxy himself, is guilty of obstruction. I don't believe the traditional sense of coercion is necessary here, but if needed, one could simply reference Trump's demand for personal loyalty from Comey. "If President Trump asked then-FBI Director James Comey to drop the criminal investigation of General Michael Flynn, this would constitute obstruction of justice under 18 U.S.C. section 1505. Section 1505 makes it a crime to "endeavor to influence, obstruct, or impede" "any pending proceeding … before any department or agency of the United States." Obviously, Trump had knowledge that Flynn was the target of an FBI investigation. The FBI investigation was a "pending proceeding . . . before [a] department or agency of the United States." Further, if Trump had knowledge of a pending grand jury investigation targeting Flynn, his conduct would constitute an attempt to influence or obstruct a grand jury investigation. The FBI was an active participant in the grand jury investigation. Also, 18 U.S.C. 1512(c)(2) punishes "Whoever corruptly . . . obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so." A violation of section 1512 imposes a maximum sentence of 20 years."
  12. If Comey's letter turns out to be true and an accurate portrayal of what went down during the dinner, I don't see how any one explains Trump's actions as anything but obstruction of justice. The one question I have though is why Comey didn't come forward soon after Trump's request to shut down the investigation of Flynn? Why wait to let it be known until now? Not sure if irony is the word, but it's quite something that Comey might be central to bringing down both candidates from the 2016 election.
  13. Just because the President has the legal authority to do something doesn't make the act correct or prudent. Moreover, there is something very wrong with disclosing information that was provided to the US by another country. In that sense, it's not the President's place to disclose such information if it was provided by another nation on good faith that it would be handled appropriately. Where in the WaPo article does it state that Trump was claiming he had the best "intels?" If you want to accuse something or someone of something, you might want to know the facts yourself. The US has long hoped Russia would work with the US on eliminating the threat from ISIS. But Russia has only demonstrated a willingness to act when it supports their interest in Syria and their man Assad. They've never committed to defeating ISIS and this belief that they'd do more if only America shared more has no basis in precedent.
  14. You really think WaPo was sitting on this story waiting to distract from the "revelations" on Rich? Really? How are the articles I referenced unclear? They reveal that the source on Rich is neither reputable nor providing any first hand information to back up his claims. The second article states the Rich's family refutes the claim that Seth was connected with Wikileaks. The Trump meeting with the Russians happened last week and most reputable news sources don't run stories until they can verify it with two reputable sources. That takes time. But you want to see something more than just coincidence because the Rich story is likely or possible. Sorry, but from my perspective that's nonsense. If what the WaPo reported is true, then why call it a hit piece? Why do you attribute an anti-Trump agenda to those who leak information? If you were working in the White House and learned that the President was mishandling classified information by revealing it to Russian agents, wouldn't your duty to country override your loyalty to an incompetent President? If not, then President Nixon would have loved to have more men like yourself on staff. Podesta is an opinion columnist at WaPo. Last time i checked opinion columnists don't have much editorial discretion.
  15. But you understand that Presidents don't, even if it's within their legal authority, disclose information off the cuff. There's mechanisms and protocols that a President follows that protects the frontline of the intelligence collection community. The Seth Rich story is utter bullshit. There's a reason why no one is reporting on it: it's based on a private investigator that provides no proof and has a history of making up bullshit. "The report relies entirely on Rod Wheeler, a private investigator who is looking into Rich's death. Wheeler supposedly has "tangible" evidence that Rich has been in contact with Wikileaks. But as the Fox 5 story continues, the tangible evidence never appears. Wheeler says only that he "believes" the answer to his death is on Rich's computer, which is in the custody of authorities. The only piece of evidence Wheeler provides to Fox, other than his own belief, is an anonymous source in the police department who "looked at me straight in the eye and said, 'Rod, we were told to stand down on this case and I can't share any information with you.'" Essentially, the entirety of Fox 5 DC's bombshell story that Rich was murdered for leaking DNC emails relies on a private investigator's personal belief that a computer he has no access to contains damning information and that a source in the police department told him of a strange atmosphere surrounding the investigation. There's another problem with the story: the source. Wheeler, a Fox News contributor and President Trump supporter, is widely seen as a publicity hound with some major credibility issues. In his most infamous incident, he was ridiculed after going on "The O'Reilly Factor" in 2007 and claiming that approximately 150 pink pistol-packing lesbian gangs were raping young girls in the D.C. area, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center. Wheeler later issued a clarification and apology, saying he misspoke. O'Reilly also issued a clarification but stood by the core of the story." Rich's own family are saying the story is bullshit. It's this kind of nonsense and deflection that I'm growing less tolerant with. It's not suspicious that the Trump story broke at the same time the Rich "story" was revealed. How is the WaPo a hit piece when even Trump admits on twitter that he disclosed information and WH officials offer non-denials as a response?