Investigator of both sides | Arkansas news, politics, opinion, restaurants, music, movies and art

Investigator of both sides 
Member since Aug 25, 2016

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.


  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »


Recent Comments

Re: “Closer to the end

Absolutely, the Trump Foundation should be shut down. If for no other reason its support of Trump University - which scammed so many people. Absolutely. Trump is responsible for this.

Now, foundation-wise, Lyons should turn his attention to the Clinton Foundation - and the fact of the enormous drop-off in donations since Clinton lost the election. Wonder why .... But we all know in his adoration of everything Clinton, that will never get the scrutiny of Lyons' keen investigative eye. Comedic, if nothing else. Tra-la.

4 likes, 8 dislikes
Posted by Investigator of both sides on 12/20/2018 at 11:11 AM

Re: “Herd shifts

And I quote you, "Any company suspecting a data hack would hire a private security firm to determine what happened. Only then would they notify the Feds."

Are you kidding - if I am dealing from the bottom of the deck - you are the Joker (admittedly rather lame). Read this - again (Ho-Hum) from liberal Slate - about an event of international importance - political importance to the entire country!

"And if the DNC denied them that access for fear of being embarrassed by what they might find, or because they had more faith in CrowdStrike than the FBI, then it served only to undermine confidence in the ultimate results of the investigation and give the impression of having something shameful to hide. Neither the DNC nor the FBI should have been satisfied with an investigation that did not involve the FBI conducting a first-hand look at the compromised systems. And all of us should be concerned about the seeming acceptance of both parties to let a private company singlehandedly carry out an investigation with such significant political consequences."

The article by Thiessen appeared in the New York Times. I realize you feel NO questions should be asked - Lyons was a teacher - is that attitude one he taught his students - I bet not.

ALL of the images, etc. that Mueller got about the alleged hack - came from Crowdstrike. That doesn't bother you. Yeah, right.

And, yet again - why did the "donations" to the Clinton Foundation drastically drop after she lost the election - you never answer that - you are the one diverting from answering - classic maneuver.

All I am saying is to accept all this about the DNC is beyond gullibility - what is to be afraid of - transparency??

That is what I am asking for - and what I also want from the Trump presidency - to constantly refer to me as a rabid Trumper is ridiculous - and a red herring of monumental silliness. My stars - DONE.

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by Investigator of both sides on 12/16/2018 at 5:14 PM

Re: “No leash

Love this. So funny- so very hard to do.

2 likes, 0 dislikes
Posted by Investigator of both sides on 12/13/2018 at 12:26 PM

Re: “Herd shifts

Answer: The Russian hacking story was the basis for the whole "Russians are on Trump's side allegations" and then led to the collusion allegation. That is a POSSIBILITY of why the evidence was altered - but we will never know will we - just believe Crowdstrike. Always so truthful - ask the Ukranians.

And you never answered the question: Why would the DNC hire a private firm to see its servers and be in control of the images, etc.?

And, not that it matters to you - this whole Russian-Trump dealings - why no questioning on the following - from the New York Times, hardly on Trump's side:

"How many half-a-million-dollar speeches has Bill Clinton given to Kremlin-linked banks since Hillary Clinton was defeated? How much Russian money is flowing into the Clinton Foundation's coffers today? If Donald Trump had given a $500,000 speech paid for by a Kremlin bank, and his private foundation had accepted $145 million from Vladimir Putin-linked oligarchs and their Western business partners, do you think that his critics would be insisting there was nothing to see here?"

But you ignore this - ignore. How about answering that last question posed above instead of evading, evading.

Both sides - not just fanaticism about one. That is so dishonest.

But, yes, this is SO done. Tra-la.

Posted by Investigator of both sides on 12/12/2018 at 8:36 PM

Re: “Herd shifts

And I quote, "Actually, no, I can't think why anybody would suspect that the DNC would alter evidence of Russian hacking."

Oh, come on - I would suspect it - but I go farther - if this had been by the RNC - you bet I would suspect it. I never give Republicans a carte blanche - but you both never even question anything the Democrats do - gee - how unintelligent - never to question.

Even what Slate said - the liberal bastion - no, you absolutely dismiss the following:

"Instead, whether because they were denied access or simply never asked for it, the FBI instead used the analysis of the DNC breach conducted by security firm CrowdStrike as the basis for its investigation. Regardless of who is telling the truth about what really happened, perhaps the most astonishing thing about this probe is that a private firms investigation and attribution was deemed sufficient by both the DNC and the FBI."

Read that last sentence again. Not by a Trumpist - which I am most definitely not - but by a respected liberal organization - which is why I quoted it.

Why did the DNC hire a private firm? And one so involved in anti-Russian allegations of their own - remember the Ukraine allegations - which were subsequently proved false. THAT is the question here.

These were international security allegations - why not an impartial investigation -
- why would you both be against that - not even by the FBI, who frankly, I distrusted at that point - oh, read that last sentence by Slate again.

But it doesn't matter - does it - the end justifies the means - you both are intelligent - so that is what it comes down to. How sad - I despise blanket acceptance on BOTH SIDES - why is that wrong? I am not the one throwing up red herrings - and I am not a Trumpist - why name call - all I want is some vestige of impartiality - the basis of journalism. Gone from both sides now. Horrible. Tra-la.

Posted by Investigator of both sides on 12/12/2018 at 1:56 PM

Re: “Herd shifts

Dearest Mytwo: I am not a Republican - they are responsible for all the guns - I voted Democratic liberal all my voting life. Bill Clinton was a moral scumbag - didn't care - still think he was a good president.

But all I want is to look at both sides - and why you think vulgarity is necessary to make your point - that is what the far right is known for - how quickly you adopt their tactics. Tra-la.

Posted by Investigator of both sides on 12/10/2018 at 4:04 PM

Re: “Herd shifts

Oh my, my comment went bye - Al - from your quote, "Asking for direct access to a server wouldn't be necessary, Taddeo said, "unless there was a reason to think the victim was going to alter the evidence in some way.""

And you don't believe there COULD be a chance that the "victim" - the DNC - COULD have altered the evidence. They hired Crowdstrike. I know all about images - and the techie explanations - but the IMAGES, etc. were supplied by CROWDSTRIKE.

If this had been done by the RNC - saying they were hacked internationally and hiring their own private firm - you 'both would have been up in arms and you both know it, Al.

And that is what is so depressing to me - because I DO believe you both know this - but the means justifies the end. WE never did that - not US. And THAT is infinitely so depressing about you both. I despair.

Posted by Investigator of both sides on 12/10/2018 at 3:49 PM

All Comments »


© 2019 Arkansas Times | 201 East Markham, Suite 200, Little Rock, AR 72201
Powered by Foundation