National Stew

  After reading the report: 1. Did not exonerate Trump. 1. Did not exonerate Trump. 2. Made no suggestion for criminal charges beyond the ones made in an earlier iteration and noted below. 3. Durham found no reason for opening a full investigation into Trump/Russian collaboration at that time. 4. Suggested that the FBI should have opened a preliminary investigation. The implication being that a preliminary investigation would have led to a full investigation. 5. Durham said that it was possible that the FBI needed to put some reforms in place. In addition, the investigation as a whole did see an earlier iteration that made 3 criminal charges: One plead guilty, the 2 others were tried and acquitted. I am awaiting the Durham appearance before congress to do a full report. I have an inescapable sense that there is something else going on here. Similarities between this report and the Müller report like something is being left out of the story by both. Somewhere in my reading, I ran across

  There was a period of reverse immigration! That is, more people headed south than north, between 2008 and 2016. The Republicans began running on border security in spite of this fact. What do you think happened? The “Quick, let's get in before the opportunity closes!” idea kicked in! We saw a resurgence of immigration not seen in decades! It goes like this: Before Trump: reverse immigration.  Trump lies and threats: massive migration.  Trump regulations: Four years of border backup.  I t's Biden's fault  Today: Biden resets after ending Trump regulation: System working legally and properly with backup gone and new people processed by sending those with no credible claim home and the 1 to 2 percent of credible claims through!  Republicans: But, but, but, where's Hunter? Inflation We all agree that too much money chasing too few goods caused inflation, so what is the solution? Raising interest is not it! Producing more goods is! Why do we have a shortage of goods?  Sim

  In this case take her Literarily, not Literally.  That is my editorial paraphrase of what the judge said in an exchange in the E. Jean Carroll case as seen below: Take Her Literarily, Not Literally