Author Topic: Sound The TRUMPets! A Thread for Presidential Pondering 2016-2020(?)  (Read 140090 times)

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline SimonNZ

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 3454
  • Location: Christchurch, NZ
Re: Sound The TRUMPets! A Thread for Presidential Pondering 2016-2020(?)
« Reply #4040 on: July 15, 2017, 04:27:43 PM »
Democrats call for Jared Kushner's security clearance to be revoked

Republicans Block Effort To Revoke Jared Kushner’s Security Clearance

"Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.), who chaired the Democratic National Committee during much of last year’s campaign cycle, proposed an amendment targeting Kushner during a House Appropriations Committee markup session Thursday. It was voted down, 22-30, along party lines.

The measure would have barred the government from issuing or maintaining a security clearance for any White House individual “under a criminal investigation by a Federal law enforcement agency for aiding a foreign government.”

Wasserman Schultz also attempted to introduce an amendment that would bar the government from issuing or maintaining a security clearance for White House staff who “deliberately fail” to disclose meetings with foreign nationals. It was voted down by the same margin
."

Offline Todd

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 13132
Re: Sound The TRUMPets! A Thread for Presidential Pondering 2016-2020(?)
« Reply #4041 on: July 15, 2017, 05:40:28 PM »
Do we want to be completely ignorant about it or do we feel some kind of responsibility?


Ignorant is not the right word at all.  Lots of people know what is happening, including important decision makers all over the world.
The universe is change; life is opinion.   Marcus Aurelius, Meditations

Offline 71 dB

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 5445
  • I free-think, therefore I am free
    • Soundcloud
  • Location: Helsinki, Finland
Re: Sound The TRUMPets! A Thread for Presidential Pondering 2016-2020(?)
« Reply #4042 on: July 16, 2017, 01:06:26 AM »

Ignorant is not the right word at all.

Asking if 2+2=5 doesn't mean 2+2=5. Asking if we want to be ignorant doesn't mean we are. The only claim I made in that post was that I think you were quite right.

Lots of people know what is happening, including important decision makers all over the world.

Yes. That is a very good thing. Things could be even better if ALL people knew what is happening.
Spatial distortion is a serious problem deteriorating headphone listening.
Crossfeeders reduce spatial distortion and make the sound more natural
and less tiresome in headphone listening.

My Sound Cloud page

Online drogulus

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 5388
  • Gypsy, 1970
Re: Sound The TRUMPets! A Thread for Presidential Pondering 2016-2020(?)
« Reply #4043 on: July 16, 2017, 06:44:02 AM »

     The Nihilism of Julian Assange

     Trump Targets Local Tax Write-Off, But May Hit House Republicans

     A huge tax increase designed to hit Dems will also hit Repubs, so maybe we won't get it.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:45.9) Gecko/20100101 Goanna/3.2 Firefox/45.9 PaleMoon/27.3.0
      
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:50.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/50.0

Offline Todd

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 13132
Re: Sound The TRUMPets! A Thread for Presidential Pondering 2016-2020(?)
« Reply #4044 on: July 16, 2017, 06:56:03 AM »
A huge tax increase designed to hit Dems will also hit Repubs, so maybe we won't get it.


Every tax expenditure has its defenders. 
The universe is change; life is opinion.   Marcus Aurelius, Meditations

Offline Todd

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 13132
The universe is change; life is opinion.   Marcus Aurelius, Meditations

Online drogulus

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 5388
  • Gypsy, 1970
Re: Sound The TRUMPets! A Thread for Presidential Pondering 2016-2020(?)
« Reply #4046 on: July 16, 2017, 07:30:07 AM »
     Yes, and lots of people know what is happening, like tax expenditures. Now they know more, like how the tax can be shaped in different ways and given different names. Does Trump want to cut "the tax"? Of course he does not. Do the Dems want to cut "it"? No, they don't. Does anyone want to cut the tax? I don't think anyone does, not anyone who knows anything.

     I've said before the tax will always come back, for any level of public investment and total spending there will be a tax coming back for it. What guarantees it will come back is the boundaries on both sides of a money system that requires that it be managed between inflation and deflation. The fun part, for me, is that this requirement is not imposed by where you are on an ideological spectrum. All the room for tinkering is inside the "too little, too much" outer limits.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:45.9) Gecko/20100101 Goanna/3.2 Firefox/45.9 PaleMoon/27.3.0
      
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:50.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/50.0

Offline Todd

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 13132
Re: Sound The TRUMPets! A Thread for Presidential Pondering 2016-2020(?)
« Reply #4047 on: July 16, 2017, 07:56:20 AM »
     Yes, and lots of people know what is happening, like tax expenditures. Now they know more, like how the tax can be shaped in different ways and given different names. Does Trump want to cut "the tax"? Of course he does not. Do the Dems want to cut "it"? No, they don't. Does anyone want to cut the tax? I don't think anyone does, not anyone who knows anything.

     I've said before the tax will always come back, for any level of public investment and total spending there will be a tax coming back for it. What guarantees it will come back is the boundaries on both sides of a money system that requires that it be managed between inflation and deflation. The fun part, for me, is that this requirement is not imposed by where you are on an ideological spectrum. All the room for tinkering is inside the "too little, too much" outer limits.


This reads like a Gabby Johnson quote.
The universe is change; life is opinion.   Marcus Aurelius, Meditations

Offline Jeffrey Smith

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 9992
    • Flickr photostream
  • Location: Florida

Online drogulus

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 5388
  • Gypsy, 1970
Re: Sound The TRUMPets! A Thread for Presidential Pondering 2016-2020(?)
« Reply #4049 on: July 16, 2017, 07:51:54 PM »
     Peer-Reviewed Study Proves All Recent Global Warming Fabricated by Climatologists?

Ultimately, the central argument of this study and its representation by Breitbart and others is one based on a willful misreading of data propelled by a study whose academic rigor has been misrepresented. As such, we rank the claim that climate scientists have created global warming entirely through corrections to raw data as false. While these corrections to raw historical data have shifted over time, the cumulative effect of all corrections applied to the raw data has been to reduce apparent global warming over the industrialized period, not the other way around.

“If scientists were actually cooking the books,” Hausfather told us “we’d be cooking them in the wrong directions.”


     A fuller picture, literally, is here.

     Resistance to human causation is supposed to be based on skepticism that mere organisms could change the composition of the atmosphere, and that human industrial processes could do it quickly. The first is so wrong it's hard to imagine how anyone could go 5 seconds without thinking that it's the presence of living creatures that made large amounts of free oxygen in an atmosphere possible. That's why the search for life on distant worlds includes looking for a blue planet. That's as pure and total a case of climate change as you could imagine.

     About the human factor, since we know CO2 was a natural warming agent, if natural here means not human induced, the objection against the rise of CO2 in the industrial era as a cause collapses as the denialist case would have to rest on a claim about CO2 that is false for all past climate processes. Denialists have to deny too much science for their own good. The reasons my objections don't count for much is because scientists will always prefer an empirical argument over the illogicality of an opponent position. Since I'm not a scientist I point out the inconsistency of how they argue and leave how wrong in detail their claims are to the people who know best.
« Last Edit: July 17, 2017, 05:31:51 AM by drogulus »
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:45.9) Gecko/20100101 Goanna/3.2 Firefox/45.9 PaleMoon/27.3.0
      
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:50.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/50.0

Offline eljr

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 294
  • The problem with listening...
  • Location: NYC
  • Currently Listening to:
    Baroque
Re: Sound The TRUMPets! A Thread for Presidential Pondering 2016-2020(?)
« Reply #4050 on: July 17, 2017, 05:30:57 AM »
     

     Resistance to human causation is supposed to be based on skepticism that mere organisms could change the composition of the atmosphere,

those simple in thought look out the window and see sky with no end

A sage realizes that this is an optical illusion. The atmosphere is effectively only 10 miles thick.

Take a desk sized globe and wrap it with a single layer of kitchen plastic wrap. The plastic wrap is thicker than is our atmosphere.

All of a sudden that illustration of this enormous space, unflappable by man's hand seems very vulnerable.

It's a way of thinking. Superficial thinking with "common sense" often the mantra vs reasoned and analytical. 
“You practice and you get better. It’s very simple.”
Philip Glass

Online drogulus

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 5388
  • Gypsy, 1970
Re: Sound The TRUMPets! A Thread for Presidential Pondering 2016-2020(?)
« Reply #4051 on: July 17, 2017, 07:48:10 AM »
     A trump lawyer speculates about the meeting between Trump Jr. and 317 unidentified Russians at Trump Tower. Let's see how good he is at it.

"I wonder why the Secret Service — if this was nefarious — why the Secret Service allowed these people in?" Sekulow told ABC News' Jon Karl. "The president had Secret Service protection at that point, and that raised a question with me." "

     Would you want your lawyer to speculate on why your minions assisted you in a meeting like this, if you wanted people to believe you didn't know there was a meeting? Would the Secret Service permit such a meeting if they had no instructions to do so? Trump was in the building, so they're protecting him. And there's this meeting, with Russians known to U.S. intelligence, and to the Secret Service. You have the Secret Service and someone controlling access to Trump Tower. Now you have a Trump lawyer who has a raised question. I have a question, too. Why is Trump so unlucky with the legal profession?
« Last Edit: July 17, 2017, 07:53:24 AM by drogulus »
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:45.9) Gecko/20100101 Goanna/3.2 Firefox/45.9 PaleMoon/27.3.0
      
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:50.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/50.0

Offline Jeffrey Smith

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 9992
    • Flickr photostream
  • Location: Florida
Re: Sound The TRUMPets! A Thread for Presidential Pondering 2016-2020(?)
« Reply #4052 on: July 17, 2017, 08:10:17 AM »
     A trump lawyer speculates about the meeting between Trump Jr. and 317 unidentified Russians at Trump Tower. Let's see how good he is at it.

"I wonder why the Secret Service — if this was nefarious — why the Secret Service allowed these people in?" Sekulow told ABC News' Jon Karl. "The president had Secret Service protection at that point, and that raised a question with me." "

     Would you want your lawyer to speculate on why your minions assisted you in a meeting like this, if you wanted people to believe you didn't know there was a meeting? Would the Secret Service permit such a meeting if they had no instructions to do so? Trump was in the building, so they're protecting him. And there's this meeting, with Russians known to U.S. intelligence, and to the Secret Service. You have the Secret Service and someone controlling access to Trump Tower. Now you have a Trump lawyer who has a raised question. I have a question, too. Why is Trump so unlucky with the legal profession?

It's a little more nuanced than that: Secret Service protection covers family members, meaning whoever meets with Donny Jr. and Jared would have been known to the Service.  Where Sekulow goes off base is in implying that the Service acts as a gatekeeper to keep away all scum, which it does not: it only keeps away scum that seem like a security threat to the President and his family.  The Russians did not seem ready to assault Donny Jr and Jared, so the Service would have no interest in keeping them out.

It is interesting that Trump's legal mouthpiece focuses on First Amendment issues and not criminal law. It's as if Trump couldn't find a lawyer who specializes in criminal law to represent him....

Edit made to reflect the fact that I was wrong about family members being protected by the Service in June 2016.
« Last Edit: July 17, 2017, 08:29:49 AM by Jeffrey Smith »

Offline Rinaldo

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 1523
  • Cara sposa, dove sei?
    • aaraaf.net
  • Location: Prague
Re: Sound The TRUMPets! A Thread for Presidential Pondering 2016-2020(?)
« Reply #4053 on: July 17, 2017, 08:17:23 AM »
U.S. Secret Service rejects suggestion it vetted Trump son's meeting

Quote
In an emailed response to questions about Sekulow's comments, Secret Service spokesman Mason Brayman said the younger Trump was not under Secret Service protection at the time of the meeting, which included Trump's son and two senior campaign officials.

"Donald Trump, Jr. was not a protectee of the USSS in June, 2016. Thus we would not have screened anyone he was meeting with at that time," the statement said.

So, what are the odds the lawyer slipped and actually hinted at Donald himself being there as well? In any case, it's piling up..

<a href="https://www.youtube.com/v/_q4U0f60TsM" target="_blank" class="new_win">https://www.youtube.com/v/_q4U0f60TsM</a>

Offline Todd

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 13132
Re: Sound The TRUMPets! A Thread for Presidential Pondering 2016-2020(?)
« Reply #4054 on: July 17, 2017, 08:25:05 AM »
So, what are the odds the lawyer slipped and actually hinted at Donald himself being there as well?


Very low.


In more important news, Cryin' Chuck Schumer and Goofy Elizabeth Warren are watching Kid Rock.

The universe is change; life is opinion.   Marcus Aurelius, Meditations

Offline Jeffrey Smith

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 9992
    • Flickr photostream
  • Location: Florida
Re: Sound The TRUMPets! A Thread for Presidential Pondering 2016-2020(?)
« Reply #4055 on: July 17, 2017, 08:28:09 AM »
U.S. Secret Service rejects suggestion it vetted Trump son's meeting

So, what are the odds the lawyer slipped and actually hinted at Donald himself being there as well? In any case, it's piling up..

<a href="https://www.youtube.com/v/_q4U0f60TsM" target="_blank" class="new_win">https://www.youtube.com/v/_q4U0f60TsM</a>

Greater odds are that Sekulow made the same mistake I just made about when Donny Jr and Jared started getting protection.  But his argument was premised on the fact that Trump Tower, as Trump Sr's residence had a Secret Service protection.  It ignores the fact that the Secret Service is only interested in people who want to kill the President, not people who want to bribe him.

Online drogulus

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 5388
  • Gypsy, 1970
Re: Sound The TRUMPets! A Thread for Presidential Pondering 2016-2020(?)
« Reply #4056 on: July 17, 2017, 08:56:00 AM »
     The Secret Service has no way of protecting the President that does not encompass monitoring what goes on in his immediate vicinity. They do not concern themselves only with people who express an intention to kill or carry weapons. It is not necessary to assume that they monitor comings and going to prevent criminal meetings from taking place, only that they monitor meetings because it's necessary for them to do their job. But this isn't about what Trump knew to the exclusion of what everyone else knew. The fact the meeting occurred means everyone involved assumed it was OK to have it. The point then becomes who is in a position to give the OK, which Russians would be concerned about even if Trump Jr. wasn't.

     
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:45.9) Gecko/20100101 Goanna/3.2 Firefox/45.9 PaleMoon/27.3.0
      
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:50.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/50.0

Offline Florestan

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 12880
  • Location: Bucharest, Romania
Re: Sound The TRUMPets! A Thread for Presidential Pondering 2016-2020(?)
« Reply #4057 on: July 17, 2017, 09:45:51 AM »
For fans of climate science

Spare your time, there are none here.  ;D
Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools. - Romans 1:22, KJV

Online k a rl h e nn i ng

  • Veteran member
  • *
  • Posts: 42020
  • Et quid amabo nisi quod ænigma est?
    • Henningmusick
  • Location: Boston, Mass.
  • Currently Listening to:
    Shostakovich, Frescobaldi, Stravinsky, JS Bach, Liszt, Chopin, Haydn, Henning
Re: Sound The TRUMPets! A Thread for Presidential Pondering 2016-2020(?)
« Reply #4058 on: July 17, 2017, 09:47:08 AM »
We serve all kinds here.
Karl Henning, Ph.D.
Composer & Clarinetist
Boston MA
http://www.karlhenning.com/
[Matisse] was interested neither in fending off opposition,
nor in competing for the favor of wayward friends.
His only competition was with himself. — Françoise Gilot


Buying Music From Amazon?
Please consider using these links. A small percentage of every sale using these links is passed on to GMG and helps keep this forum online.
Amazon US
Amazon Canada
Amazon UK